Victory in Afghanistan? Not without US troops

During the Vietnam War, Sen. George Aiken, a Vermont Republican, was famous for suggesting that we declare victory and go home. (What he actually said is a little more nuanced, but that was the popular perception.)

President Obama seems to be pursuing a version of this strategy in Afghanistan. At least that is the inference one can draw from his claims of success at a news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai in which the two leaders unveiled an acceleration of the timetable for U.S. troops to step back from combat.

While Obama conceded that we had “probably not ... achieved everything that some might have imagined us achieving in the best of scenarios,” he nevertheless tried to put a smiley face on the war effort. “Did we achieve our central goal? And have we been able, I think, to shape a strong relationship with a responsible Afghan government that is willing to cooperate with us to make sure that it is not a launching pad for future attacks against the United States? We have achieved that goal. We are in the process of achieving that goal.”

There is actually an important difference between the last two sentences. Which is it: Have we achieved the goal or are we in the process? If the latter, then that would argue for a continued U.S. commitment to Afghanistan; if the former, then it suggests our mission is complete.

Troops Worry About Defense, Job Cuts

The soldiers of the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team have gone to war five times since 9/11, and 84 have been killed — including 13 during their current deployment to Afghanistan.But when members of the unit had a chance to ask Defense Secretary Leon Panetta questions Thursday, the top issue on their minds was jobs.

How would the impending budget cuts affect civilians at their post? And what will it all mean for their spouses and family members who work on the base?

Panetta had few answers, as Congress continues to struggle to reach an agreement that would avoid massive budget cuts. But as he looked out across the somber lines of battle-hardened troops, his condemnation of Capitol Hill reached new heights.

"You guys go out and you put your lives on the line, you take the worst risk of all — which is that somebody may shoot you and you may die," Panetta told the roughly 150 soldiers at the U.S. Army Garrison Vicenza. "All we're asking of our elected leaders is to take a small part of the risk," he said, that maybe they would make some constituents mad.

Making what is likely to be his last official visit to a military base to meet and lunch with troops, Panetta all but called lawmakers cowards and said that by not governing they would be undermining democracy and "the strength of everything that we hold dear."

Lawmakers, he snapped, "just got to suck it up" and do what's right for the country.

Panetta is stepping down after about 18 months as Pentagon chief. President Barack Obama has nominated former GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel to take his place.

U.S. Sees Hazy Threat From Mali Militants

 As Islamic militants methodically carved out a base in the desert of northern Mali over the past year, officials in Washington, Paris and African capitals struggling with military plans to drive the Islamists out of the country agreed on one principle: African troops, not European or American soldiers, would fight the battle of Mali.
But the surprise French assault last Friday to blunt the Islamists’ advance upended those plans and set off a cascading series of events, culminating in a raid on Wednesday by militants on a foreign-run gas field in Algeria. That attack threatens to widen the violence in an impoverished region and drag Western governments deeper into combating an incipient insurgency.
And yet the rush of events has masked the fact that officials in Washington still have only an impressionistic understanding of the militant groups that have established a safe haven in Mali, and they are divided about whether some of these groups even pose a threat to the United States.
Moreover, the hostage situation in Algeria has only heightened concerns that a Western military intervention could transform militant groups that once had only a regional focus into avowed enemies of the United States — in other words, that the backlash might end up being worse than the original threat.
Largely for these reasons, the Obama administration adopted a strategy over the past year to contain the Islamists in Mali until African troops were ready to confront them, rather than to challenge them directly with an American military campaign of drone strikes or commando raids.
During Congressional testimony in June, Johnnie Carson, the assistant secretary of state for African affairs, played down the terrorist threat to the United States from Mali, saying that the Qaeda affiliate operating there “has not demonstrated the capability to threaten U.S. interests outside of West or North Africa, and it has not threatened to attack the U.S. homeland.”

Marine Pleads Guilty To Urinating On Corpses

 Staff sergeant says 'I have no excuse' in Afghanistan incident that ignited protests.
By David Zucchino
A Marine who urinated on the corpses of Taliban fighters in a video seen worldwide pleaded guilty Wednesday to several charges at a court-martial at Camp Lejeune, N.C.
Staff Sgt. Edward W. Deptola admitted desecrating the remains and posing with the bodies of insurgents in Afghanistan for what he called "trophy photographs.'' He also admitted that he failed to supervise other Marines involved in the incident and did not report the violations of military regulations.
In a 39-second video that was widely viewed on the Internet after it appeared in January 2012, four Marines in combat gear were shown urinating on three corpses in southern Afghanistan in July 2011. One Marine could be overheard saying to one of the bodies, "Have a good day, buddy.''
Deptola had previously been instructed that desecrating corpses was a serious violation of Marine Corps regulations, he told the presiding judge, Lt. Col. Nicole Hudspeth. Nonetheless, he said, he urinated on the dead men and did not intervene to prevent other Marines in his sniper platoon from doing so.
"I was in a position to stop it and I did not,'' Deptola said, according to the Associated Press. "I should have spoken up on the spot.''
Deptola, a veteran of deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq, told the judge that he could not explain his behavior.
"I have no excuse, no reason, ma'am,'' he said. "It was not the correct way to handle a human casualty.''
The video was the first of several incidents involving U.S. troops in Afghanistan early last year that triggered concern in the U.S. and outrage in Afghanistan. Violent protests erupted in Afghanistan, and U.S. commanders expressed fears that the incidents would turn ordinary Afghans against the U.S. mission and serve as recruiting tools for the Taliban.

USAF committed to new bomber despite declining budgets

Washington DC - Despite a declining budget, the US Air Force is committed to its secretive Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) programme. However, what kind of military capacity the service will be able to offer in the future is an open question.

"Long term, we're committed to the long range strike bomber," says USAF Secretary Michael Donley. "We're going to try to keep programmes like that on track. But every programme would be affected if sequestration were to hit."

Sequestration was originally scheduled to be enacted on 2 January, but a last minute deal reached between the Obama Administration and the US Congress delayed the maneuver by 51 days. If the Congressional sequestration were to be enacted, it would automatically cut US defence outlays immediately by about 10% every year for 10 years. "Sequestration is a self-inflicted wound on national security," says US Army Gen Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "It's an irresponsible way to manage our nation's defense. It cuts blindly, and it cuts bluntly."

The Pentagon, in a memo issued by deputy secretary of defense Ashton Carter, has already taken steps to try to mitigate the damage by deferring maintenance and civilian personnel actions. But even if sequestration were to be avoided, analysts say that defence budget cuts are all but unavoidable given the massive hole in Washington's coffers.

In that eventuality, the Pentagon needs the ability to manage its finances in a strategic manner. "We need budget certainty; we need time to absorb the budget reductions; we need the flexibility to manage those reductions across the entire budget," Dempsey says.

Obama to nominate Hagel, Brennan for top security posts despite criticism

President Obama plans to nominate two controversial officials for his second-term national security team on Monday, teeing up what could turn into a confirmation battle shortly after the inauguration.

The president is expected to nominate former Sen. Chuck Hagel for defense secretary and White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan for CIA director. The administration is touting the credentials and years of service each would bring to their respective posts. In a recent Sunday show interview, Obama said Hagel, a Vietnam veteran, is a "patriot" and "somebody that's done extraordinary work" in the Senate and on his own intelligence advisory board.
Yet each nominee is poised to attract tough bipartisan criticism -- and perhaps opposition -- during the confirmation process. While Obama went the relatively safe route with his pick for secretary of state, tapping Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, his choices for his national security team could cause a ruckus on Capitol Hill.
On Sunday, several Republican senators suggested they would have problems with Hagel, while Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said he is reserving judgment. Republicans question Hagel's commitment to Israel and his toughness when it comes to Iran. But Hagel also has come under fire from gay rights groups for saying in 1998 that a nominee for an ambassador post was "openly, aggressively gay."
He has since apologized for those comments. Gay rights group GetEQUAL, though, panned the apology as "hollow" and "politically expedient."
Texas Sen. John Cornyn had the most strident remarks, saying Obama nominating Hagel sends "the worst possible message" to Israel and other U.S. allies in the Middle East.

"I will not support Chuck Hagel's nomination," Cornyn said in a release, citing in part Hagel's views on Israel and his opposition to Iranian sanctions. He did not say whether he would try to block Hagel's potential nomination during a Senate confirmation hearing.
Hagel, a decorated Vietnam combat veteran, would replace Pentagon chief Leon Panetta in Obama's second-term Cabinet.
Newly-elected Texas Sen. Ted Cruz told "Fox News Sunday" that "it is very difficult to imagine the circumstance in which I could support his confirmation."
Cruz also cited Hagel's views and statements about Israel and Iran and questioned why Obama might pick Hagel in the face of tough opposition.
"The president seems bound and determined to proceed down this path, despite the fact that Hagel's record is very, very troubling on the nation of Israel," Cruz told Fox News. "I do think it is interesting that the president seems hell-bent on nominating him despite the fact that a number of prominent Republicans have criticized him and the Democratic senators have been surprisingly silent on it."
Hagel, a 66-year-old moderate Nebraska Republican, has criticized discussion of a military strike by either the U.S. or Israel against Iran. He also irritated some Israel backers with his reference to the "Jewish lobby" in the United States. And he has backed efforts to bring Iran to the table for future peace talks in Afghanistan.
McConnell told ABC's "This Week" that Hagel has "certainly been outspoken in foreign policy and defense over the years. The question we will be answering, if he's the nominee, is do his views make sense for that particular job?"
"This is a controversial pick," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told CNN. "He is an antagonistic figure when it comes to the state of Israel. It's a signal you're sending to Iran at the worst possible time and to our allies."
But Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, told CNN's "State of the Union" that Hagel "is a serious candidate if the president chooses to name him."
Officials close to the White House have talked up Hagel as a patriot who served in the military with distinction during Vietnam and someone who shares the president's skepticism about potential conflict with Iran and a large U.S. footprint in Afghanistan.
Brennan, meanwhile, is a 25-year CIA veteran who, during the George W. Bush administration, served as director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Despite his credentials, Brennan has faced criticism from both sides of the aisle, as well.
In 2008, he removed his name from consideration for the CIA's top job amid concerns on the left about his connection to enhanced interrogation techniques.
In a letter to Obama at the time, Brennan said he was "a strong opponent of many of the policies of the Bush administration, such as the preemptive war in Iraq and coercive interrogation tactics, to include waterboarding." White House officials say they don't expect Brennan to face similar trouble this time around given his four years of service in the Obama administration.
"The issue has been removed from the debate because the president and John Brennan, as his top counterterrorism adviser, brought those techniques to an end," Ben Rhodes, Obama's deputy national security adviser, said.
Brennan, though, also has defended the legality of the U.S. drone program, another issue that could come up during confirmation. And following the 2009 Christmas Day bombing attempt, Brennan agitated Republican lawmakers by defending the decision to read the bombing suspect his Miranda rights.
If confirmed, Brennan will succeed David Petraeus, who resigned in November after admitting to an affair with his biographer.
The Obama administration defends Brennan as a candidate with deep knowledge of the CIA's inner workings, and notes he has been on the front lines for more than a decade in the fight against Al Qaeda -- including involvement in the decision to launch the raid against Usama bin Laden.

Ballistic missile: North Korea can reach the United States

According to South Korea, the recent firing of the rocket Unha-3 made by Pyongyang is equivalent to a test ballistic missile with a load of half a ton and a range of about 10,000 km.

The recent firing rocket by North Korea is equivalent to a test ballistic missile with a load of half a ton and a range of about 10,000 km, said Sunday the South Korean army. This distance would allow a North Korean pitcher to reach any point in Asia, Eastern Europe, Western Africa, Alaska and part of the West Coast, including San Francisco. Pyongyang launched on 12 December, with success, a rocket Unha-3 loaded into orbit a satellite civilian mission purely scientific as the North. To its estimates, the South Korean army relied on the analysis of oxidizer tank, a product by combining with another product operates the combustion of the latter fell at sea during launch and recovered by the Navy South. "Based on our analysis and process simulation, the missile is capable of flying more than 10,000 km, with a load of between 500 and 600 kg," said a spokesman for the Ministry of Defence to press.

Pyongan control Does technology ICBMs?

The tank was mounted on the first stage of the rocket. In the absence of debris 2nd and 3rd floors of the Unha-3, South Korean scientists have been unable to determine whether the rocket was able to reenter the atmosphere, a key technology of intercontinental ballistic missiles . Debris recovered by the South consisted of eight panels of aluminum and magnesium welded by hand. "The welding was coarse, handmade," said the ministry official, adding that this type of tank for storing toxic chemicals was rarely used by the powers have a advanced space technology.

According to a study by the Foundation for Strategic Research (FRS) published in 2011, Pyongyang has systems North Korean Taepodong, but BM-25/SS-N-6 Nodong and North Korea "should hold some Copies of longer-range gear deployed north of the country in fixed configurations. " However, the FRS estimates "in 2015 that North Korea will have two regiments Nodong missile type, that is to say, a dozen mobile launchers and several hundred missiles". And noted that "given the cooldown and preparation imposed by the Nodong system, and assuming that its mobile launchers undergo attrition zero, we can assume that North Korea would at most be able to make two launches for a day and a score launch before exhausting its stock of missiles. "

An atomic bomb North Korea?

The shooting of 12 December is considered by Washington and its allies as yet another test of long-range ballistic missile. It ended a long series of misfires that have earned a volley of Pyongyang sanctions since 2006 and allows the young North Korean leader, Kim Jong-Un, to strengthen his authority. Westerners and their Asian allies accuse Pyongyang to hold several nuclear bombs and carry out nuclear tests in order to achieve the miniaturization and install them on missiles. However, experts believe that it is far from having a reliable ballistic power and the development of a deliverable nuclear capability by intercontinental ballistic missile take much time.

What Is Site 911? And Why Is The U.S. Building It For Israel At A Cost Of $100 Million?

U.S. overseeing mysterious construction project in Israel

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plans to supervise construction of a five-story underground facility for an Israel Defense Forces complex, oddly named “Site 911,” at an Israeli Air Force base near Tel Aviv.

Expected to take more than two years to build, at a cost of up to $100 million, the facility is to have classrooms on Level 1, an auditorium on Level 3, a laboratory, shock-resistant doors, protection from nonionizing radiation and very tight security. Clearances will be required for all construction workers, guards will be at the fence and barriers will separate it from the rest of the base.

Only U.S. construction firms are being allowed to bid on the contract and proposals are due Dec. 3, according to the latest Corps of Engineers notice.
Site 911 is the latest in a long history of military construction projects the United States has undertaken for the IDF under the U.S. Foreign Military Sales program. The 1998 Wye River Memorandum between Israel and the Palestinian Authority has led to about $500 million in U.S. construction of military facilities for the Israelis, most of them initially in an undeveloped part of the Negev Desert. It was done to ensure there were bases to which IDF forces stationed in the West Bank could be redeployed.
As recorded in the Corps’ European District magazine, called Engineering in Europe, three bases were built to support 20,000 troops, and eventually the Israeli air force moved into the same area, creating Nevatim air base. A new runway, 2.5 miles long, was built there by the Corps along with about 100 new buildings and 10 miles of roads.
Over the years, the Corps has built underground hangers for Israeli fighter-bombers, facilities for handling nuclear weapons (though Israel does not admit having such weapons), command centers, training bases, intelligence facilities and simulators, according to Corps publications.
Within the past two years the Corps, which has three offices in Israel, completed a $30 million set of hangars at Nevatim, which the magazine describes as a “former small desert outpost that has grown to be one of the largest and most modern air bases in the country.” It has also supervised a $20 million project to build maintenance shops, hangars and headquarters to support Israel’s large Eitan unmanned aerial vehicle.
Site 911, which will be built at another base, appears to be one of the largest projects. Each of the first three underground floors is to be roughly 41,000 square feet, according to the Corps notice. The lower two floors are much smaller and hold equipment.

Security concerns are so great that non-Israeli employees hired by the builder can come only from “the U.S., Canada, Western Europe countries, Poland, Moldavia, Thailand, Philippines, Venezuela, Romania and China,” according to the Corps notice. “The employment of Palestinians is also forbidden,” it says.
Among other security rules: The site “shall have one gate only for both entering and exiting the site” and “no exit or entrance to the site shall be allowed during work hours except for supply trucks.” Guards will be Israeli citizens with experience in the Israeli air force. Also, “the collection of information of any type whatsoever related to base activities is prohibited.”The well-known Israeli architectural firm listed on the plans, Ada Karmi-Melamede Architects, has paid attention to the aesthetics of the site design as well as the sensibilities of future employees. The site, for example, will be decorated with rocks chosen by the architect but purchased by the contractor. Three picnic tables are planned, according to the solicitation.
The Corps offered a lengthy description of the mezuzas the contractor is to provide “for each door or opening exclusive of toilets or shower rooms” in the Site 911 building. A mezuza (also spelled mezuzah) is a parchment which has been inscribed with Hebrew verses from the Torah, placed in a case and attached to a door frame of a Jewish family’s house as a sign of faith. Some interpret Jewish law as requiring — as in this case — that a mezuza be attached to every door in a house.
These mezuzas, notes the Corps, “shall be written in inerasable ink, on . . . uncoated leather parchment” and be handwritten by a scribe “holding a written authorization according to Jewish law.” The writing may be “Ashkenazik or Sepharadik” but “not a mixture” and “must be uniform.”
Also, “The Mezuzahs shall be proof-read by a computer at an authorized institution for Mezuzah inspection, as well as manually proof-read for the form of the letters by a proof-reader authorized by the Chief Rabbinate.” The mezuza shall be supplied with an aluminum housing with holes so it can be connected to the door frame or opening. Finally, “All Mezuzahs for the facility shall be affixed by the Base’s Rabbi or his appointed representative and not by the contractor staff.”
What’s the purpose of Site 911? I asked the Pentagon on Tuesday, and the Corps on Wednesday said that only an Israeli Defense Ministry spokesman could provide an answer.
This may be a trend-starter. The Corps is also seeking a contractor for another secret construction project in Israel in the $100 million range to awarded next summer. This one will involve “a complex facility with site development challenges” requiring services that include “electrical, communication, mechanical/
HVAC [heating, ventilation, air conditioning] and plumbing.” The U.S. contractor must have a U.S. secret or equivalent Israeli security clearance for the project, which is expected to take almost 2¹/₂ years to complete.
That sounds like a secure command center.
The purpose of Site 911 is far less clear.

 

New Cameras for Army Ranges

Weapons have changed drastically over the last 30 years, but the cameras on Army test ranges have not. So the Army is preparing to upgrade the kineto-tracking mounts — the squat turrets that look like R2-D2 from Star Wars, if cameras were mounted on his head.

“Right now, the current systems are not very reliable; they cannot be remotely operated and they require extensive manpower and labor to set up and calibrate,” said Col. Sharlene Donovan, project manager for Instrumentation, Targets and Threat Simulators at the Army’s Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation (PEO STRI). “And because they are not very reliable after 30 years, we have to have extra systems on standby just to ensure we can guarantee data is collected in case a system goes down.”

PM ITTS, along with the Department of Defense’s Test Resource Management Center and Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program, are conducting market research for new optical tracking systems under the Advanced Range Test Instrumentation System (ARTIS) program. The ARTIS timeline calls for an RFP in mid-2013, a contract award in mid-2014, and initial deployment by 2017, according to Donovan. While she could not provide a cost estimate at this stage, she does expect the Army to buy 30 to 50 mounts, with the other services possibly ordering more for their ranges.
ARTIS will replace a menagerie of optical tracking systems and sensors, including kineto-tracking mounts, cine theodolites and launch area theodolites (used to measure angles), and distant object attitude measurement systems. The new optical tracking systems will come in a small, easily deployed model that can turn quickly for testing ground-based tests, and a larger model to accommodate bigger instruments for tracking aircraft, UAVs, ballistic missiles, and aerial intercepts. They will incorporate multi-waveband sensors for simultaneous optical and infrared data.
Interestingly, ARTIS will improve testing of directed energy weapons such as lasers, masers, or particle beam weapons.
“Instrumentation currently exists that can be used for directed energy testing,” Donovan said. “ARTIS will integrate these capabilities onto a high-precision optical tracking gimbal for an integrated solution with better pointing accuracy.”
One key change will be moving from film-based cameras to digital equipment, which means quicker processing time and less manpower needed to process it. With film, “it literally takes days because all that visual data has to be converted,” said ARTIS project director Nikki Boi. A remote capability means that the systems can be operated without personnel needing to travel to severe areas to operate them.
Different test ranges, such as White Sands, Yuma and Redstone, have different requirements. So the goal is to have tracking systems that can be easily modified to accommodate local needs. But either way, it’s time for new equipment, said Donovan.
“The scenarios under which these original tracking systems were developed were simpler. You’re talking about the traditional aircraft bomb drop or traditional missile intercept. Now we have much more complicated scenarios and we need much more advanced tracking technology to provide data.”

UK intelligence officers knew of CIA's rendition plans within days of 9/11

Meeting at British embassy in US raises questions about repeated denials by MI5 and MI6 of connivance in torture

 Jack Straw, who told MPs in 2005 there was 'simply no truth in the claims that the United Kingdom has been involved in rendition

Within days of the 9/11 attacks on the US, the CIA told British intelligence officers of its plans to abduct al-Qaida suspects and fly them to secret prisons where they would be systematically abused.
The meeting, at the British embassy in Washington, is disclosed in a forthcoming book by the Guardian journalist Ian Cobain. It raises serious questions about repeated claims by senior MI5 and MI6 officers that they were slow to appreciate the US response to the attacks, and never connived in torture.
The meeting signalled to British officials that the US was preparing to embark on a global kidnapping programme which became known as extraordinary rendition. Cobain reveals that at the end of a three-hour presentation by Cofer Black, President George Bush's top counter-terrorist adviser, Mark Allen – his opposite number in MI6 – commented that it all sounded "rather bloodcurdling".

A few weeks later, in early October 2001, at a secret meeting at Nato headquarters in Brussels, US officials drew up a list of "necessary measures to increase security", Cobain discloses. They included flights to and from secret prisons in Asia, Africa, and throughout Europe. "Quietly, Britain pledged logistics support for the rendition programme, which resulted in the CIA's Gulfstream V and other jets becoming frequent visitors to British airports en route to the agency's secret prisons," writes Cobain.
Over the next four years CIA rendition flights used British airports at least 210 times. The book reveals that Washington asked the UK for permission to build a large prison on Diego Garcia, the British territory in the Indian Ocean where the US has a large bomber base. The project was dropped, for logistical rather than legal reasons.
However, Diego Garcia was used as a stopover for CIA flights taking detainees to secret prisons around the world. And in secret memos, Labour ministers said in early 2002 that their "preferred option" was to render British nationals to Guantánamo Bay, Cobain records. MI5 and MI6 officers carried out around 100 interrogations at the US prison on Cuba between 2002 and 2004.
Yet for years ministers emphatically denied any British involvement in America's rendition programme. As late as December 2005, Jack Straw, then foreign secretary, was telling MPs there was "simply no truth in the claims that the United Kingdom has been involved in rendition". Just a year earlier, we now know, MI6 – under Straw's watch and with the blessing of ministers, officials say – helped to render two leading Libyan dissidents to Muammar Gaddafi's secret police.
Despite the post-9/11 Washington embassy and Nato meetings, and other evidence of their early involvement in rendition, MI5 and MI6 witnesses told the parliamentary intelligence and security committee (ISC) that it was some time before they knew what the US was up to. As late as July 2007, the misinformed ISC stated in a report on rendition that MI5 and MI6 "were … slow to detect the emerging pattern of renditions to detention".
Cobain's book, Cruel Britannia, says the British military operated a "torture centre" throughout the 1940s "in complete secrecy, in a row of Victorian villas in one of the most exclusive neighbourhoods in London". They also ran an "interrogation centre" near Hanover in Germany. Evidence from newly released records shows that British involvement in abuse was common earlier – in the colonies, later in Northern Ireland, and much more recently in Iraq.
The book reveals that Allen (who was later to develop a cosy relationship with Gaddafi's intelligence chiefs) expressed concern after the post-9/11 meeting in the UK embassy in Washington about what would happen once the Americans had "hammered the mercury in Afghanistan". Al-Qaida would simply scatter elsewhere, destabilising entire regions, Allen suggested. A CIA officer who was present at the embassy meeting remarked later that while the British appeared laid back, "it was clear they were worried, and not without reason".

US Army chooses Raytheon to provide Thermal Weapon Sights

    Most affordable solution to the government cited as key performance metric

In a competition against two other suppliers, Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) was selected by the U.S. Army to provide Thermal Weapon Sights (TWS) with enhanced capabilities so soldiers can better detect and engage targets day or night. One of the key drivers behind the Army's decision was Raytheon's ability to deliver cost-effective, advanced technology.

The awards for new deliveries were made under a modification to an existing contract and have a potential value of $131 million. Under the contract, which extends the period of performance by three years, Raytheon could potentially supply more than 24,000 sights over the life of the contract. The TWS systems will be built in McKinney, Texas, the headquarters of Raytheon's Network Centric Systems (NCS) business. The thermal sights allow a soldier to spot targets at long distances through haze, dust, fog and other obscurants.

"This is just one example of how Raytheon is putting rugged lightweight thermal imaging technology in soldiers' hands to deliver clear targeting and surveillance imagery, significantly increasing survivability," said Jeff Miller, vice president of Combat and Sensing Systems in NCS. "Our troops are getting equipment with improved detection ranges and the ability to operate effectively day or night."

Since 2000, Raytheon has provided more than 65,000 sights to the Army under various contracts.

7 Billion Human Around the world Demand the US Govt to Stop Drone Attacks on Childers