Josh Eller, a military contractor stationed in Iraq in 2006, was driving through Balad Air Base when he spotted the wild dog. He wasn’t sure what was in its mouth—but when Eller saw two bones, he knew he was looking at a human arm. The dog had pulled the limb from an open-air “burn pit” on the base used to incinerate waste. Eller says it’s “one of the worst things I have seen.”

Since hearing Eller’s story, lawyer Elizabeth Burke has signed on 190 additional clients with complaints about burn pits at 18 military sites in Iraq and Afghanistan. By now, she says, all pits should have been replaced by pollution-controlled incinerators. She’s filed suits in 17 states against KBR, the company contracted to provide waste-disposal services at these bases, accusing it of negligence and harm. Burke was shocked to learn what her clients saw incinerated: Humvees, batteries, unexploded ordnance, gas cans, mattresses, rocket pods, and plastic and medical waste (including body parts, which may explain the arm). Fumes containing carcinogenic dioxins, heavy metals, and particulates, according to an Army–Air Force risk assessment, waft freely across bases.

Burke’s plaintiffs mostly suffer from chronic or unusual medical complications that they believe were caused by burn-pit exposure. Shawn Sheridan, who served two tours at Balad, says black smoke from the pit was so thick at times he couldn’t see through it with night–vision goggles. Sheridan, 26, was healthy when he enlisted six years ago. Now he has a kidney disease, chronic bronchitis, and a painful skin condition.

KBR won’t discuss burn pits while it reviews the suits. A spokeswoman e-mails that KBR isn’t responsible for the Balad pit (Burke alleges it is) and that “any burn pit operated in Iraq or Afghanistan is done pursuant to Army guidelines.” But Kevin Robbins, a former KBR employee who ran a pit near Al Kut, says he got no guidelines on what could be burned when he arrived.

The May 2008 risk assessment of the Balad pit suggested “as much as several hundred tons” of waste was burned each day, but CentCom tells NEWSWEEK it’s now down to about 54 tons. The report found allowable levels of toxins in its air samples. Still, two members of Congress have introduced a bill instructing the DOD to end the practice and monitor the health of service members exposed to fumes. “We certainly would not allow these burn pits in our own country,” says Rep. Tim Bishop.

[source: Newsweek]

Graham, McCain, and Independent Senator Joe Lieberman said they aimed to boost US-backed radio news broadcasts into Iran and help skirt Iranian restrictions on cellular phones and Internet access.

“We want the Iranian people to be able to stay one step ahead of the Iranian regime, getting access to information and safely exercising freedom of speech and freedom of assembly online,” said Lieberman.

McCain said the legislation aimed to boost funding to Radio FARDA, a part of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, to help the Farsi-language outlet battle Iranian jamming, and to make cellular telephone crackdowns more difficult.

“The fact is that the Iranian government is now illegitimate,” he charged.

Other goals include boosting Voice of America broadcasts in Farsi and helping Iranians preserve access to social networking Internet sites like Twitter and Facebook and the video-sharing site YouTube, which protestors used to organize and disseminate images of the government’s crackdown, said McCain.

“During the Cold War, we provided the Polish people and dissidents with printing presses. Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are the modern-day printing presses. They are the way to spread information and keep the hope of freedom alive amongst the Iranian people,” said McCain.

The bill, to be written over the congressional break for the July 4 US independence day celebration, would seek to give Iranians the tools “to evade the censorship and surveillance of the regime online,” he said.

And McCain vowed to investigate charges that non-Iranian firms helped Tehran monitor and block cellular and online traffic “and even track down sources of political content deemed off limits by the regime.”

All three lawmakers praised US President Barack Obama for making his toughest remarks yet on Iran during a press conference Tuesday, denouncing the crackdown and warning of worsening relations with the international community.

“I appreciate it,” said McCain, who had sharply criticized Obama’s previous remarks, while Graham declared: “I’m very proud of my president, about what he said.”

[source: raw story]

Assault rifle? Check.

Grenades? Check.

Cell phone? Check.

This scenario, or something like it, could be in the near future if technology now being evaluated in Suffolk by U.S. Joint Forces Command makes it onto the battlefield.

The tactical cellular phone, or TACTICELL, is one of 21 battlefield technologies being put through a series of rigorous tests as part of an international demonstration aimed at giving U.S. and NATO fighting forces an edge.

The super cell phone employs a roving van that acts like a mobile cell tower, and the special operations Soldier carries an off-the-shelf cell phone that handles voice, data and video.

But instead of sending text message to friends, he receives a video, shot from the sky, that shows the rear of a building he’s about to assault. The Soldier can spot traps and assess the enemy’s strength. With the van patrolling several miles away, it allows Soldiers to have a more complete picture of the battlefield as they venture away from base and into trouble.

The 10-day event, which ends today, is known as CWID, which stands for Coalition Warrior Interoperability Demonstration.

Other technologies on display include a high-tech tracker that fits under the U.S. flag emblem of a uniform and allows commanders to pinpoint individuals and units, limiting the chance of death by friendly fire.

The “coalition” part of CWID certainly applies.

The Italian navy and Finland have fielded surveillance or communications tools, and demonstrations are being played out at several U.S. locations besides Suffolk, including the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren.

International participants are based in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom and Norway.

As the previous examples imply, CWID is not about testing tanks and missiles, but technology that increases battlefield awareness and allows different systems — and different countries — to communicate more effectively with each other.

The worldwide demonstrations played out in USJFCOM’s Joint Systems Integration Center, a short drive from Suffolk fast-food restaurants and shopping centers.

Among the players was Capt. Mario Marques of the Portuguese navy.

He was particularly interested in the Italian and Finnish projects, which performed a scenario that tracked vessels suspected of carrying weapons of mass destruction.

Navy Capt. Kirk Hornburg said the testers in CWID — all military personnel with battle experience — face a thought process similar to a civilian who buys a new home computer.

During those first few minutes in the store, a computer might seem like the perfect, do-it-all tool.

After a couple of weeks at home, you notice a few things that could be improved, or you find that it doesn’t run all of your favorite programs at once.

Over the course of CWID, testers have the chance to get over their fascination with the “newness” of a technology and push it to its limits, Hornburg said.

A communications tool might work well with five people, but not with 50. A surveillance program might require too many keystrokes to reach a certain point.

Only extended testing can spot those problems.

“We are not successful in CWID if things work,” he said.

[source: military.com]

There’s a great story in the New York Times about the Pentagon giving Gen. McChrystal a lot of leeway to put together his “dream team” of Afghan command.

It’s precisely what the doctor ordered and the kind of thing that folks like Nagl and the Kagans have been saying would be the key to success there. It’s the same kind of carte blanche control that GW Bush gave Petraeus — with great success in a very short time.

Also, it’s brilliant that McC wants these guys to stay on for three years instead of one year stints in their billets. They’ll become more invested in the success of the fight and have greater insight into the inner workings of Afghanistan.

The Times story says Gates and Mullen have impressed upon McChrystal that Afghanistan is the “main effort”…it’s about time from my perspective. And it’s a good thing that we have a steely-eyed special operator at the helm. He understands economy of force, unconventional warfare and rapid tasking — which is just the kind of mindset the conflict in Afghanistan needs.

Another interesting note…the Times piece mentions that McC asked Rear Adm. Greg Smith to be his chief of public affairs. Petraeus did the same thing when he asked Smith to come over to Iraq to assess the PA operation there and when Smith delivered his report said “OK, can you stay here and implement it for me?”

Smith was due to retire but has reportedly agreed to stay on with McC…true patriots all and we wish them the best of luck.

– Christian

Soldiers from 115th “Muleskinner” Brigade Support Battalion of the 1st Cavalry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team delivered five up-armored Ford F-350 trucks to the 11th Iraqi Army Division at Joint Security Station Rasheed here June 19.

The upgraded trucks offer significant protection and maneuverability for Iraqi Staff Maj. Gen. Mizher Shaher Lateef and his men to move about in his area of operations, said Army Capt. Peter Bogart, the brigade’s provost marshal. “It was a project that highlights the partnership we have with the [Iraqi army],” Army Maj. Michele Reid, the battalion’s executive officer, added.

Soldiers on Mizher’s personal security detachment will use the trucks to escort the general during his daily operations. The detachment’s officer in charge will be held responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the vehicles.

Soldiers from the 115th BSB’s B Company armored the trucks by increasing the amount of protective layers inside and outside the vehicles. After 37 days and about 60 work hours per truck, the trucks were complete and ready for delivery to Mizher.

“The soldiers in the service and recovery shop worked extremely hard on these trucks,” said Army Chief Warrant Officer Staceyann McNish, the battalion’s service and recovery chief. “They spent numerous manhours perfecting the construction of these turrets and gunner’s boxes. The end result was breathtaking.”

Other than determining the best way to complete the armor, the project went quite smoothly, Reid said. “We did have to consider the added weight of Kevlar and metal to how it would affect the trucks,” she explained, “along with considering road conditions.”

The beds of the trucks now contain a gunner’s box made of armor plating and Kevlar for maximum protection while on patrols. The seats are lined with Kevlar and were re-upholstered to cover it.

“We are very grateful to the United States military for all their help,” said 2nd Lt. Salem Ibrahim, a platoon leader for the 11th Iraqi Army Infantry Division. “It has been a great opportunity to work this closely with the coalition forces.”

[source: decencetalk]

No one knows how the escalating protests will play out, in the end. More broadly, regional worries over Iran have propelled a lucrative arms market, dominated by U.S. defense firms. While most countries cut back their military spending, due to the global recession, many of Iran’s neighbors are continuing years-long shopping sprees for high-tech arms, apparently aimed at building an iron wall around Iran. Egypt, Israel, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the UAE account for the majority of sales, projected to total $70 billion, this year. The bulk of the sales are for fighter jets and missile defenses.

The U.S. is careful not to single out Iran as the major factor in weapons sales. “This is about building a more secure world,” said Bruce Lemkin, a U.S. Air Force official who oversees many arms deals. But Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was less circumspect, when he told his political party that “the Persians are trying to devour the Arab states.” Forecast International is equally forthright, citing “worries over Iran” as the major driver of military investment by the Arab states and Israel.

Using weapons exports to shore up defenses against Iran is a calculated move by the Obama administration, experts say. Defense industry analyst Jim McAleese said the Pentagon is boosting subsidies to Middle East weapons buyers, using so-called “defense-wide” funds to shore up allies’ defenses. It’s cheaper in the long run to help other countries pay for the weapons they need to fight their own battles, than it is for the U.S. to deploy its forces, McAleese said.

[PHOTO: IDEX]

“'Whereas the Bush administration united Iran's disparate political factions against a common threat, Obama's overtures have accentuated the deep divisions and incongruities among Iran's political elites,'' said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. (from the BBC).

Could there be something to all the talk of an Obama effect, after all? A stealth effect, perhaps?
…
And in his Cairo address June 4, he accepted responsibility for America’s part in the enmity between the United States and Iran.
“In the middle of the cold war, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government,” Mr. Obama said — a reference to the 1953 coup in which an Iranian prime minister, under whom Iran had nationalized its oil industry, was overthrown and the now-despised Shah was restored to power. (from The New York Times).

So is there “an Obama effect” in Iran?

Short answer: No

Long answer: No

Why? Because the Clinton Administration made the same overtures. Here and here are links to stories from 2000 in which Madeleine Albright acknowledged the U.S. role in the 1953 coup in Iran. President Obama is saying little different from his last Democratic predecessor.

What has changed is Iran. Back in 2000 Iran was run by a so-called reformist who was running into opposition from the same forces that have recently showed just how dishonest Iran's system is. Today Iranians are on the streets in protest against that act of massive electoral fraud and the regime's violent response.

It is about them. It is not about us.

Naturally such a device would need to be built where the sun shines a lot. And, ideally, it wouldn’t take up space in a populated area or harm wildlife.

Hey, how about the Nevada desert? At a glance that makes sense, except once you start to move on the idea you realize that “Nevada desert” is synonymous with “Nellis Air Force Base Range Complex.”

And among military ranges, Nellis is as mysterious as they come, even for the military aviators who’ve flown around there. (”The Box” — rumored to be where nuke testing goes on — notoriously lurks adjacent to regular operating areas. Troll into it and you’ll lose your first-born not to mention your wings.)

So it’s little surprise that after originally warming to the idea, the Air Force has balked at having the project on home turf. After all, who wants a bunch of green-minded brainiacs from LA (where they worship the devil — very un-USAF) arcing around your ‘hood, even if your ‘hood is in the middle of nowhere?

Read the entire article here.

(Photo: SolarReserve artist’s rendering photo)

– Ward

Navy Adm. James Stavridis, arguably the sea service’s intellectual leader, is making the leap from Latin America’s U.S. Southern Command, to the top job at European Command. That means he’ll also be NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe, which puts him at the head of in the chain of command for the faltering NATO war effort in Afghanistan. (See here for an explanation of NATO’s complex command structure.)

So how has his experience in Latin America prepared him for waging war on a deeply entrenched insurgency, half a world away from his previous command? “The operations I’ve been most focused on in South America has been the insurgency in Colombia,” Stavridis told the Florida Times-Union, in a wide-ranging interview.

My experience there will translate well to my role as the NATO commander in Afghanistan, which is, let’s face it, an insurgency, drug-fueled, obviously 100 percent different in many ways. But, my experiences in understanding and learning counter-insurgency I think are up to the task.

This is one of the first times a senior U.S. commander has drawn a parallel between Colombia and Afghanistan. Stavridis explained the seemingly tenuous connection.

Both are insurgencies seeking to topple the government, both are drug-fueled. In Colombia it’s a political insurgency. In Afghanistan, it is a deeper, more cultural, religious-based insurgency.

Based on his experience in Colombia, Stavridis praised the elevation of commando Gen. Stan McChrystal, to lead U.S. and NATO forces, at the operational level, in Afghanistan. “I think he’s a perfect choice. He has deep, deep tactical experience in insurgency.”

Stavridis, the author of several widely read books, is no stranger to controversial claims. In March, he told Senators that Lebanese extremist group Hezbollah was involved in the Colombian drug trade. A retired Lebanese general fired back, saying there was no evidence of such involvement.

[PHOTO: Colombian drug-smuggling submersible, via Daylife]