Archive for category History

Cool Stuff: Hagel, Biden And Kerry Rescued By Security Contractors In Afghanistan, 2008

Feb 28

Posted by Matt in Aviation, Cool Stuff, History, Photo | 15 Comments

This is awesome. A big hat tip to Will for putting this one up on his site. In this photo below, it shows Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Vice President Joe Biden and on the far right, Secretary of State John Kerry, which back then they were all Senators. The back story of this photo is that all three of these men were in a helicopter in Afghanistan during winter. During the flight, the snow got really bad and the helicopters were forced to land on some mountain top in Afghanistan.

They put out a distress call and the military was not in a position to rescue them. So security contractors or what I assume were WPS folks were called in, and they came over land to rescue them. Here is the quote in the article.

With the rapidly worsening weather, there was no way to evacuate the senators to safety by air. The U.S. military didn’t have the necessary people and vehicles nearby to rescue the senators via ground transport before the storm hit.

So the U.S. Embassy asked the men of Blackwater USA to go in by land and evacuate them to Bagram. They did the job, and the senators knew who came to their rescue mountainside when the military could not.

Here is a photo of the conditions and the helicopters.

One of the points of Will’s post is that none of these men would acknowledge that they were rescued by contractors, or they outright lied and said it was American troops that rescued them. Here is what then Senator Kerry had to say.

“After several hours, the senators were evacuated by American troops and returned overland to Bagram Air Base, and left for their next scheduled stop in Ankara, Turkey,” a statement from Kerry’s office said. “Sen. Kerry thanks the American troops, who were terrific as always and who continue to do an incredible job in Afghanistan.”

Nope, you were not rescued by American troops– you were rescued by civilians or security contractors…..

Oh well, but at least I can help to correct the record on this blog and give it some more attention. This is just one example of many, where security contractors were the ‘cavalry’ and yet their actions were ignored or barely given a mention. If folks have any photos of the convoy that rolled up to rescue them, I would gladly make the edit and add it to this post. Good job to that team for making this rescue! -Matt

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Building Snowmobiles: General Hermann Balck, The German That Inspired Boyd

Oct 15

Posted by Matt in Building Snowmobiles, History, Strategy | No Comments

The other day, Chet Richards posted his opening presentation to the Boyd And Beyond 2012 conference, and it was fascinating. It was pure building snowmobiles, and it was filled with the various bits and pieces of what and who inspired Boyd in regards to creating novelty or innovations during the fight. (unfortunately, I did not attend this conference)

What was cool is that an individual was identified as being the origin of Boyd’s thoughts on this stuff. That individual is General Hermann Balck, and he was considered to be one of Germany’s best during WW 2. Here is one quote that gives you an idea.

“Balck has strong claims to be regarded as our finest field commander,” declared Maj. Gen. Friedrich-Wilhelm von Mellenthin. And he was in a position to know: as a general staff officer during the war, Mellenthin had worked at one point or another for virtually all of Germany’s greatest commanders—including such legends as Rommel and Heinz Guderian.

So that gives you an idea as to why Boyd would be interested in such a man. The other quote that identifies Balck as a person of interest to Boyd is identified in this quote from Chet’s paper.

Boyd’s appreciation for novelty grew as he mulled over the ingredients for success in conflicts. Boyd’s close associate, Pierre Sprey, credits Boyd’s conversations with General Balck (1979a & 1979b) as planting the seeds that led to Boyd’s fascination with innovation, novelty, and the importance of rapid, intuitive decision-making (Personal communication, September 23, 2012). Thus the elements of maneuver conflict that appear in the September 1981 edition of Patterns, for example, do not include the concept of novelty, but by 1986 it was there (p. 115). Perhaps it was not until he began to compose Conceptual Spiral, though, that Boyd realized how the term “novelty” encapsulated so much of his strategy.

So can we boil it down even further?  Well below, Balck gave an interview and he talked about the secrets to his success on the last page. Chet quoted from this translation and I thought it would be prudent to post the entire thing here, just to give you the essence of what this guy was all about. Here is the quote.

Never do the same thing twice. Even if something works well for you once, by the second time the enemy will have adapted. So you have to think up something new. -Balck, pg. 42

Chet also added this quote to back up what Balck mentioned. Note that Boyd was equally inspired by Sun Tzu in his famous Patterns of Conflict.

So a military force has no constant formation, water has no constant shape: the ability to gain victory by changing and adapting according to the opponent is called genius. -Sun Tzu, Art of War

Of course you could expand upon all of this by reading Balck’s book he wrote, if you know German, but at least with this translated interview, you will get a good introduction to the man.

I think what is equally interesting is that Balck was totally a prime example of the kind of officer that the famous German field manual promoted, called the Truppenführung. Here is a snippet.

Truppenführung (“unit command”) served as the basic manual for the German Army from 1934 until the end of World War II and laid the doctrinal groundwork for blitzkrieg and the early victories of Hitler’s armies. Reading it is as close to getting inside the minds behind the Third Reich’s war machine as you are likely to get.

So what kind of results did this kind of thinking produce? Why would folks put him at the top. Here is a quote about one of his accomplishments when his panzer division took on the Soviet 5th Tank Army. Pretty impressive if you ask me.

Balck, who ended the war as a General der Panzertruppe (equivalent to a three-star general in the U.S. Army), is today virtually unknown except to the most serious students of World War II. Yet in three short weeks his lone panzer division virtually destroyed the entire Soviet Fifth Tank Army. The odds he faced were scarcely short of incredible: the Soviets commanded a local superiority of 7:1 in tanks, 11:1 in infantry, and 20:1 in a local superiority of 7:1 in tanks, 11:1 in infantry, and 20:1 in artillery. But Balck, leading from the front, reacting instantly to each enemy thrust, repeatedly parried, surprised, and wiped out superior Soviet detachments. Over the next few months his division would rack up an astonishing one thousand enemy tank kills. For this and other achievements Balck would be one of only twenty-seven officers in the entire war—Erwin Rommel was another—to receive the Knight’s Cross with Oak Leaves, Swords, and Diamonds, the equivalent of an American receiving two, or even three, Medals of Honor.

Check out the interview below and let me know what you think? I personally thought Balck’s focus on leadership and taking care of his men, and constantly trying to figure out the true health and status of his army was pretty cool. His focus on the enemy and his psychology was interesting too. That and all the lessons learned from when he fought in WW 1. I really liked the focus on the offense as well.

The other quote that perked me up is Balck’s mention of the Prussian military tradition of ‘expressing yourself bluntly’ to your superiors. lol I love it, and in the quote below, Model was his boss and Balck was telling him how much he sucked at commanding.

Model listened to everything I said. We both expressed our opinions, shook hands and returned home. He never came to see me again. But every time I got a new assignment, he was one of the first to congratulate me.
That was one of the great Prussian military traditions: you expressed yourself bluntly but you were expected to never resent such blunt criticism.

 Boy, imagine if we had such a tradition in the US military? Or even in private industry? It also shows how smart the Prussians were about feedback and questioning authority. To actually have a tradition that forces folks to sit there and take criticism like a man…. I might have to explore this Prussian military tradition at a later point. Pretty cool and check this thing out. -Matt

 

 

Translation Of Taped Conversation With General Hermann Balck, April 1979

Tags: , , , , , , ,

History: Privateers Reenact Battle Of The War Of 1812 In Boston Harbor

Jul 4

Posted by Matt in History, Letter Of Marque | 2 Comments

Happy 4th of July and I thought this was a cool little deal to put out there. Private industry or privateers were very much a part of this country’s war for independence. It is great that we have such a strong military now, but it is equally great that private industry is able to contribute if need be…and our early days is proof of that. -Matt

 

Tags: , , ,

Books: The Privateering Stroke, By Capt. Michael Rustein

Jun 21

Posted by Matt in Books, History, Letter Of Marque | No Comments

Henry Adams stated flatly that “the privateers contributed more than the regular navy to bring about a disposition for peace in the British classes most responsible for the war.”

For those of you that have been following along with the blog’s focus on privateering, letter of marque and reprisal, and offense industry, then you will know why this book would interest me. I have not had a chance to check it out yet, but from the sounds of it, it was written by a privateering ‘maven‘.

The author has actually built a schooner called the Fame, based on the first privateering vessel to capture a prize during the War of 1812. He has written several books on the subject and even has a business that teaches the public the history and the workings of a privateer vessel. I would say that would be defined as pretty passionate about the subject. lol

Probably the most interesting aspect of this book from the description below, is the author’s focus on how important privateers really were during the war. This was the ultimate in old school privatized warfare and offense industry in overdrive.

An entire industry focused on attacking the weakness of an enemy, and Britain’s weakness was their commerce/trade. There is no way our navy and privateers could have taken on the Royal Navy directly, so instead we did like most small disadvantaged forces would do in that situation, and attacked their poorly defended commerce/trade. Check this quote out.

Deprived of customs duties, the United States government was in dire straits by the end of 1814. Had the conflict continued, the nation would have been incapable of defending itself without a central bank, new taxes, and conscription. Meanwhile, America’s privateers were waging a highly effective war against British trade. They captured an estimated 2,000 prizes worth $40 million, sent insurance rates to unprecedented levels, and drove up prices at a time when Britain’s economy was groaning under the strain of two decades of warfare. The British public was outraged; merchants bombarded the government with protests and appeals. With the United States incapable of maintaining the initiative in Canada, privateering became the nation’s last, best, and only offensive weapon. 

Pretty neat and this book would be another good one to check out. Especially if you are a student of ‘offense industry’ or are interested in the letter of marque concept. This would also be a good read for those of you interested in naval history and guerrilla warfare. -Matt

The Privateering Stroke

By Capt. Michael Rustein
Book Description
Publication Date: March 25, 2012
High school and even college textbooks oversimplify the War of 1812 — when they don’t ignore it completely. Popular histories emphasize the military as opposed to the economic and political aspects of the war. The U.S. Navy’s role has been written about ad nauseum. Meanwhile, we are still waiting for a definitive work on the equally important contributions of American privateers. While the Navy’s outstanding performance in single-ship engagements remains a source of national pride, those victories did not change the course of the war one iota. Had Constitution defeated a dozen British frigates, the thousand-ship Royal Navy would still have blockaded our coasts, strangled our commerce, bottled up our warships, and hunted down those that escaped. Even her former commander, Tyrone Martin, conceded that Constitution’s victories were “no more than pin pricks” that “had no direct effect on the course of the war.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , ,

Quotes: Secretary William L Marcy On The Paris Declaration And Privateering, 1856

May 25

Posted by Matt in History, Letter Of Marque, Maritime Security, Quotes | No Comments

Lately I have been delving into privateering history, and Secretary of State William L Marcy comes up now and again. Even John Arquilla was quoting stuff about Marcy in some of his work, so I thought it would be cool to do some digging.

I was able to find an old article written about Marcy’s mission to the Congress of Paris, and the debates he was having with the other members of that congress about the terms of the Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law. This of course is the treaty that banned privateering.

With that said, Secretary Marcy is the reason why the US is ‘not’ a signatory of this treaty.  His reasons were pretty simple as the quote below says.  Privateering is a tool of warfare that smaller sovereigns can use, that lack the resources for creating navies that can compete with the larger countries with more powerful navies. It was the great equalizer of the time, and the US was not about to give up that tool of warfare.

Privateering is also an ‘offense industry’ that creates an industry that attacks weakness with strength (Sun Tzu). That ‘weakness’ is a poorly defended and dispersed commerce (and logistics/source of wealth) of an enemy, and the ‘strength’ is an industry that only grows with each prize that it captures. (today’s piracy is a prime example)

The strength does not come from one vessel, but of thousands of vessels, all hunting and canvassing the seas, looking for their prey. And all of these vessels are competing with each other over enemy prizes. The successful privateers grow their fleets and expand upon their winning strategies, while the competitors of these successful privateers watch and learn and try to mimic what they are doing to be equally successful.

This system of free market warfare also works well with The New Rules of War that John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt put together.(watch this video about the concept) That privateers are the ‘small and many’, that go up against the enemy’s ‘large and few’.  Privateers also fit well within the concept of ‘swarming’, because privateers do not set out in large battle groups or flotillas–they attack from all and any directions in small groups, and at the time and choosing of each individual privateer. There is no large navy, for a large navy to attack….

Although under the swarming concept, this industry kind of shuns large companies to do this.  A swarm has to be cost effective, if it is to be done by a single privateer company. Most would prefer to go after low hanging fruit or easy prizes. But if the money was there, swarming could easily be cost effective. Today’s pirates are experimenting with swarming and the market will determine if this is a profitable venture.

On the other hand, an industry of thousands of privateers versus the commerce of an enemy totally presents itself as a swarm. No one controls it’s actions, it attacks when and where it wants. There is no admiral directing the attacks of all of these vessels, and that is what makes it a unique attack group. The only controls in this type of industry, are a simple Letter of Marque.

Most of all, the concept of ‘finding’ works really well with privateers, because each private vessel is purely focused on ‘finding’ prizes. Their livelihood depends upon it, and those captains that are best at finding prizes, wins. Investors hire them specifically because of their success rates, and they depend upon these captains for profit. An example would be commercial fishermen, and how important a good captain is for finding fish and to covering the costs of investment–both internal and external.

All of these attributes combined, is what makes privateering an asset for nations. Secretary Marcy knew this as well, and our leaders knew this when they decided not to be a signatory to the Paris Declaration.

Finally, I mentioned before that private industry was important during times of war, because this nation uses an All Volunteer Military system. The problem with this system is that during the post war era, a citizenry demands a peace dividend, and their politicians give it to them. The military is then reduced in size and cost, and everyone is happy–until another ’9/11′ happens.  And then we must go to war with the military we have, and not the one we wished we had.

Or during that war, it becomes unpopular for whatever reason–like it drags on and on, or there is an uptick in deaths, or the economy is doing well.  Finding volunteers during those times is tough. Or when a nation’s war plans becomes a victim of politics, with changing leadership or alliances crumbling because of issues in their home countries, and manpower issues arise during those time periods.

Man power requirements are always changing during a war, and war planners and politicians need tools to meet the needs of those changing man power requirements. Using privateers and private industry during times of war is a tool that gives our leaders the means to deal with the ups and downs, beginnings and ends of war or multiple wars. Private industry is what makes an All Volunteer Military work in this kind of environment, pure and simple. I think Secretary Marcy and others realized this back then about privateering, and today’s leaders realize how important private industry is for our current and future wars. -Matt

*For an excellent history about the Paris Declaration and why the US did not sign it, check out this downloadable book.  It is called “The Abolition of Privateering and the Declaration of Paris”, written in 1887 by Francis Raymond Stark.

 

 

They tell us, “reserving the right to make what havoc our overgrown navies may choose to inflict upon your tempting commerce, we demand that you exempt our commerce from the only means of retaliation you possess, the system of privateering.”
We reply, “The terms are unfair. Equalize them by declaring your public and our private armed vessels under the same prohibitory rule, and we are with you. Otherwise, we are constrained to deny that privateering is or ought to be abolished.”

 

- quote of Secretary William L. Marcy, about the Congress of Paris and terms of treaty, August 12, 1856.

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Quote: Hammurabi’s Code And Contracting

May 13

Posted by Matt in History, Industry Talk, Quotes | No Comments

This is a great quote and a pretty effective rule. lol It is a reminder that there was a time some 4,000 plus years ago, when kings actually understood the concept of creating ‘effective’ rules that held contractors responsible for their work.

It is also why I keep hounding on this idea that SAMI, the ICoC, and associations like the ISOA should all have enforcement mechanism or effective grievance processes in place to keep their members in line and to allow contractors and clients a way to get justice.

If there is a violation of the code/rules that these companies signed onto within these organizations, then there must be effective punishments for those violations. If there isn’t, then how could any client or contractor respect the company’s association with these groups? Where is the value of such an arrangement, other than some kind of perceived value to somehow attract more business for members with ‘the stamp’?

I say make that membership worth something, and enforce the codes and rules with fair and effective punishments. To actually kick out members or fine them, as opposed to looking the other way because of the money that those companies pay to be a member. (which right there shows the conflict of interest that can happen with these groups)

Because there is another problem associated with not enforcing codes and rules. If one member violates the organization’s rules/codes, and nothing is done about it, then what will the other members think?  Better yet, why would the other members even follow these rules/codes, if the organization has not effectively dealt with those companies that violated them? Food for thought…  -Matt

 

“If a builder builds a house for a man and does not make its construction firm, and the house which he has built collapses and causes the death of the owner of the house, that builder shall be put to death.” -Hammurabi

Link to code here.

 

 

Tags: , ,