Miscellaneous News

windsclouds2030

Senior Member
Registered Member
“It Failed Miserably” – What If the US Lost a War and Nobody Noticed?

By Byron W. King, 29 JULY 2021

“An aggressive red team that had been studying the United States for the last 20 years just ran rings around us,” he said. “They knew exactly what we're going to do before we did it.”

According to a Pentagon spokesperson, one key scenario of this wargame involved U.S. forces battling with China over Taiwan. From Hyten’s summary, U.S. forces became sitting ducks and were destroyed piecemeal and systematically.

Per Hyten, in last fall’s war game, “We basically attempted an information-dominance structure, where information was ubiquitous to our forces. Just like it was in the first Gulf War, just like it has been for the last 20 years, just like everybody in the world, including China and Russia, have watched us do for the last 30 years.”

But the so-called “blue team” (meaning U.S. and allied forces) lost access to communications and data networks almost immediately. Satellites went away. Seafloor cables were cut. Bandwidth died. In general, it was impossible to utilize the electromagnetic environment, and within moments nobody could talk with anybody.

And “what happens if right from the beginning that information is not available?” asked Hyten, rhetorically. “That’s the big problem that we faced.”

Pentagon Poised To Unveil, Demonstrate Classified Space Weapon

By THERESA HITCHENS | Breaking Defense on August 20, 2021

The system in question long has been cloaked in the blackest of black secrecy veils — developed as a so-called Special Access Program known only to a very few, very senior US government leaders. While exactly what capability could be unveiled is unclear, insiders say the reveal is likely to include a real-world demonstration of an active defense capability to degrade or destroy a target satellite and/or spacecraft.

Expert speculation on what could be used for the demonstration ranges from a terrestrially-based mobile laser used for blinding adversary reconnaissance sats to on-board, proximity triggered radio-frequency jammers on certain military satellites, to a high-powered microwave system that can zap electronics carried on maneuverable bodyguard satellites. However, experts and former officials interviewed by Breaking Defense say it probably does not involve a ground-based kinetic interceptor, a capability the US already demonstrated in the 2008 Burnt Frost satellite shoot-down.

Many military space leaders believe that Space Force and Space Command must publicly demonstrate to Moscow and Beijing not just an ability to take out any space-based counterspace systems they may be developing or deploying, but also to attack the satellites they, like the US, rely upon for communications, positioning, navigation and timing (PNT), and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR).

Notably, the second-in-command of the Space Force recently foreshadowed movement in the long-running debate about declassification of all things related to national security space — a multifaceted and complex debate which has pitted advocates against upholders of the traditional culture of secrecy within DoD and the Intelligence Community.

For years, Gen. John Hyten, the vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staf, has argued that it is impossible to deter adversaries with invisible weapons, and he has taken the lead in calling for space systems to be declassified at a more rapid pace than some traditionalists find comfortable.

“In space, we over-classify everything,” Hyten told the National Security Space Association (NSSA) on Jan. 22. “Deterrence does not happen in the classified world. Deterrence does not happen in the black; deterrence happens in the white.”

Further, Hyten, Chief of Space Operations Gen. Jay Raymond, and Space Command Commander Gen. Jim Dickinson all have asserted that OFFENSIVE SPACE WEAPONS are a necessary part of that deterrent.

“We need to take a very hard look at what capabilities we keep concealed, as in our, quote, ‘ace-in-the-hole’ capabilities, if you will, that we would only use in an actual conflict to ensure we maintain the military overmatch we would need to ensure victory, without allowing the enemy to devise ways to defeat that particular capability by having advance knowledge of it,” Matt Donovan, undersecretary of the Air Force under the Trump administration, said in a July 10 Mitchell Institute podcast.

“But what we would really like to do … is prevent that conflict from happening in the first place, by convincing the enemy that they cannot win in a conflict, that the costs of entering into a conflict would be so high to them they don’t start it to begin with; that is the essence of deterrence,” said Donovan, who now heads Mitchell’s Spacepower Advantage Research Center. “So, the problem with only having ‘ace-in-the-hole’ capabilities is they do nothing for deterrence.”

There are also a number of experts who believe that whatever decisions are made, the march of technology guarantees there soon will be no possible way to keep US satellites, or actions on the ground, secret.

Choosing what tools to use when, however, is where agreement breaks down.

This is particularly true with regard to China, which up to now has not had as great a military reliance on space as the US — and more importantly does not have a strategic view shaped by Cold War superpower nuclear deterrence theory (i.e. “mutually assured destruction.”) Following Beijing’s 2007 anti-satellite (ASAT) test, there have been oodles of studies inside and outside DoD specifically on deterring China in space, many of which come to the same conclusion, if not always the same solutions: it’s hard.


The response of an offensive ASAT to a Chinese ASAT is not going to make them stop doing it,” one former government official said. “If you want to demonstrate a response, demonstrate … an unexpected maneuver or a LEO satellite that they had never seen before. But the fact that the response was, ‘well, I can shoot down satellites too,’ that doesn’t do shit about stopping them from shooting mine down.”

And even today, one concerned insider said, “A lot of the DoD work on space control ‘strategic messaging’ isn’t backed up by any real strategy, or red-teaming.”

(...)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Folks, what do you think of this rather bizarre piece? Is it something quite real, or just some kind of psywar?

Now I realize why I felt rather bizarre when I read this piece at first, after some time I remembered about the article written by Byron King in July 2021 that I posted earlier. If these two articles be read together, it looks like this article is a response to the King's one talking about the US vulnerability with all the wartime communications esp. the sats.... and in both Gen. John Hyten, is the central figure.

Another thing is like some establishment may worry China will take real actions over Taiwan. Thus they want to intimidate PLA by hinting that they have some new "assassin mace" in pocket, or in space precisely :p

Well, I leave it to more experienced members in this field to interpret this latest article :)
 

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Pentagon Poised To Unveil, Demonstrate Classified Space Weapon

By THERESA HITCHENS | Breaking Defense on August 20, 2021

The system in question long has been cloaked in the blackest of black secrecy veils — developed as a so-called Special Access Program known only to a very few, very senior US government leaders. While exactly what capability could be unveiled is unclear, insiders say the reveal is likely to include a real-world demonstration of an active defense capability to degrade or destroy a target satellite and/or spacecraft.

Expert speculation on what could be used for the demonstration ranges from a terrestrially-based mobile laser used for blinding adversary reconnaissance sats to on-board, proximity triggered radio-frequency jammers on certain military satellites, to a high-powered microwave system that can zap electronics carried on maneuverable bodyguard satellites. However, experts and former officials interviewed by Breaking Defense say it probably does not involve a ground-based kinetic interceptor, a capability the US already demonstrated in the 2008 Burnt Frost satellite shoot-down.

Many military space leaders believe that Space Force and Space Command must publicly demonstrate to Moscow and Beijing not just an ability to take out any space-based counterspace systems they may be developing or deploying, but also to attack the satellites they, like the US, rely upon for communications, positioning, navigation and timing (PNT), and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR).

Notably, the second-in-command of the Space Force recently foreshadowed movement in the long-running debate about declassification of all things related to national security space — a multifaceted and complex debate which has pitted advocates against upholders of the traditional culture of secrecy within DoD and the Intelligence Community.

For years, Gen. John Hyten, the vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staf, has argued that it is impossible to deter adversaries with invisible weapons, and he has taken the lead in calling for space systems to be declassified at a more rapid pace than some traditionalists find comfortable.

“In space, we over-classify everything,” Hyten told the National Security Space Association (NSSA) on Jan. 22. “Deterrence does not happen in the classified world. Deterrence does not happen in the black; deterrence happens in the white.”

Further, Hyten, Chief of Space Operations Gen. Jay Raymond, and Space Command Commander Gen. Jim Dickinson all have asserted that OFFENSIVE SPACE WEAPONS are a necessary part of that deterrent.

“We need to take a very hard look at what capabilities we keep concealed, as in our, quote, ‘ace-in-the-hole’ capabilities, if you will, that we would only use in an actual conflict to ensure we maintain the military overmatch we would need to ensure victory, without allowing the enemy to devise ways to defeat that particular capability by having advance knowledge of it,” Matt Donovan, undersecretary of the Air Force under the Trump administration, said in a July 10 Mitchell Institute podcast.

“But what we would really like to do … is prevent that conflict from happening in the first place, by convincing the enemy that they cannot win in a conflict, that the costs of entering into a conflict would be so high to them they don’t start it to begin with; that is the essence of deterrence,” said Donovan, who now heads Mitchell’s Spacepower Advantage Research Center. “So, the problem with only having ‘ace-in-the-hole’ capabilities is they do nothing for deterrence.”

There are also a number of experts who believe that whatever decisions are made, the march of technology guarantees there soon will be no possible way to keep US satellites, or actions on the ground, secret.

Choosing what tools to use when, however, is where agreement breaks down.

This is particularly true with regard to China, which up to now has not had as great a military reliance on space as the US — and more importantly does not have a strategic view shaped by Cold War superpower nuclear deterrence theory (i.e. “mutually assured destruction.”) Following Beijing’s 2007 anti-satellite (ASAT) test, there have been oodles of studies inside and outside DoD specifically on deterring China in space, many of which come to the same conclusion, if not always the same solutions: it’s hard.


The response of an offensive ASAT to a Chinese ASAT is not going to make them stop doing it,” one former government official said. “If you want to demonstrate a response, demonstrate … an unexpected maneuver or a LEO satellite that they had never seen before. But the fact that the response was, ‘well, I can shoot down satellites too,’ that doesn’t do shit about stopping them from shooting mine down.”

And even today, one concerned insider said, “A lot of the DoD work on space control ‘strategic messaging’ isn’t backed up by any real strategy, or red-teaming.”

(...)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Folks, what do you think of this rather bizarre piece? Is it something quite real, or just some kind of psywar?

Now I realize why I felt rather bizarre when I read this piece at first, after some time I remembered about the article written by Byron King in July 2021 that I posted earlier. If these two articles be read together, it looks like this article is a response to the King's one talking about the US vulnerability with all the wartime communications esp. the sats.... and in both Gen. John Hyten, is the central figure.

Another thing is like some establishment may worry China will take real actions over Taiwan. Thus they want to intimidate PLA by hinting that they have some new "assassin mace" in pocket, or in space precisely :p

Well, I leave it to more experienced members in this field to interpret this latest article :)
Wow are they going to really declassify a SAP weapon? This is going to be fun

As for your question, I doubt that this is fake news or "psywar".

I mean if you sit down and think it logically, the US military has for dozens of years being heavily funded by the Gov. I know that people here joke about the US Military wasting money but that doesn't happen often (grade A exception on the Navy's ship procurement...)

I fully believe that US has a lot of trump cards which has kept secret. That they are now going to make one of them public it should be because, it most probably has another one more advanced on this domain lol

Thats the same way the PLA operates. You dont see them taking out their most advanced equipment unless they already have another one, more advanced, ready (or at the end of its R&D phase)
 

Agnus

Junior Member
Registered Member
Key points:
- Bring back every American and Afghan ally
- Constant contact with Taliban
- Get every American to reach the airport
- Warn Taliban against interfering with US withdrawal
- talk with NATO to ensure terrorism doesn't resurface in Afghanistan (hot air)
- G7 meeting next week, coordinate approach on Afghanistan (hot air x2)
- Humanitarian aid for refugees on neighboring countries (hot air x3)
- NATO allies standing with the US (hot air x4)
- No question on US credibility around the world (hot air x5)
- Accomplished strategic objectives on Afghanistan. No more need to stay there.
- Cost of Afghanistan ranging from 1 to 2 trillion dollars
- We will retain Over The Horizon capability (doubt)
- Commitment to bring Afghan allies back
- Bring international pressure on Talibans, harsh conditions on them (hot air x6)

1\2
I don't think much of this is doable without heavy US presence on the ground. Someone prove me wrong.
 

emblem21

Major
Registered Member
I just can't get over the presenter. Too much plastic surgery or too little? I can't decide!
Just goes to show how little regard they take I. Regards to the current shot they are in. They honestly should treat this situation with far more gravity then what is shown right now as this situation has the potential to damage the USAs standing in the world so bad that their so called vaulted media cannot fix this over night
 

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Suicide bombing against Chinese nationals in Pakistan!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The suicide blast took place at the East Bay Road in the port city of Gwadar around 7 p.m. Chinese nationals sustained minor injuries, a police statement said.
Gwadar is in the southwestern province of Balochistan, where separatist militants have waged a long-running insurgency.
At least they are ok. Rest in Peace for the 2 children killed.

Pakistan keeps dropping the ball. If it cannot provide security how does it expect further development and CPEC to proceed smoothly?

Pakistani police, intelligence, and armed services are obviously not on par. Not inspiring confidence on their capabilities if every month, terrorist attacks keep happening.

China should reexamine CPEC if Pakistan doesn't start taking the matter seriously. The current Pakistani Administration is too soft with these terrorists. No country can accept having its citizens getting targeted every month
 

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
Suicide bombing against Chinese nationals in Pakistan!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


At least they are ok. Rest in Peace for the 2 children killed.

Pakistan keeps dropping the ball. If it cannot provide security how does it expect further development and CPEC to proceed smoothly?

Pakistani police, intelligence, and armed services are obviously not on par. Not inspiring confidence on their capabilities if every month, terrorist attacks keep happening.

China should reexamine CPEC if Pakistan doesn't start taking the matter seriously. The current Pakistani Administration is too soft with these terrorists. No country can accept having its citizens getting targeted every month
Pakistan has, has had, and will have, serious issues of political violence and instability. I’m sure the Chinese leadership is fully aware of this fact and its ramifications.
 
Top