Defense-Technology News: August 7, 2010

Saturday, August 07, 2010

DTN News: Iran Tops US Terror List

DTN News: Iran Tops US Terror List

Source: DTN News / The Jerusalem Post - By Hilary Leila Krieger

(NSI News Source Info) WASHINGTON - August 8, 2010: Iran has remained the “most active” state sponsor of terrorism, according to the 2009 US annual terrorism report relea

sed last week.

Meanwhile, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Saturday questioned the death toll in the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, saying there was no evidence that 3,000 people were killed, according to Reuters.

The US report reads, “Iran’s financial, material and logistic support for terrorist and militant groups throughout the Middle East and Central Asia had a direct impact on international efforts to promote peace, threatened economic stability in the Gulf and undermined the growth of democracy.

“Iran remained the principal supporter of groups that are implacably opposed to the Middle East peace process,” the report continued, highlighting the role of the Quds Force – the external operations branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – as the regime’s primary for cultivating and supporting terrorists abroad.

The report points to the Islamic Republic’s provision of weapons, training and funding to Palestinian groups including Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

In addition, Teheran has provided “hundreds of millions of dollars” to support and train Hizbullah, including hosting thousands of the group’s fighters at training camps in Iran.

The report also notes that “while Israel remained vulnerable to rocket and mortar attacks launched from inside Gaza, it continued to be largely successful in confronting the threat posed by suicide bombers and rockets from the Palestinian territories.”

It also cited Israel’s transfer to the Palestinian Authority of control of territory in the West Bank as security conditions allowed.

Overall, terrorist attacks dropped worldwide by about 6 percent, which corresponded to a 5% decrease in death from such attacks. More than 15,700 people were killed by terrorists in 2009.

More attacks took place in South Asia than in the Middle East, the first time that’s occurred since the reports began to be compiled. Congress mandated the annual terror report following the attacks of September 11, 2001. “In South Asia, incident totals have crept up, so that for the first year, since we’ve been doing this at least, South Asia has proven to be more violent than the Middle East, [and] the rest of the world basically flat,” National Counterterrorism Center Deputy Director Russ Travers told reporters on Thursday after the report was released. “In the Middle East, what we’ve seen over the last three or four years is a pretty substantial decline in total number of incidents.”

Ahmadinejad, in his speech on Saturday, also accused the United States of trumping up the September 11 attacks to “create and prepare public opinion” for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and said that no “Zionists” were killed in the attacks because “one day earlier they were told not go to their workplace.”

Ahmadinejad has previously denied the September 11 attacks, calling them “a big fabrication.”

Ahmaedinejad said, “They announced that 3,000 people were killed in this incident, but there were no reports that reveal their names. Maybe you saw that, but I did not.

“What was the story of September 11? During five to six days, and with the aid of the media, they created and prepared public opinion so that everyone considered an attack on Afghanistan and Iraq as [their] right,” he said in the televised speech, Reuters reported.

The Iranian president also repeated his denial of the Holocaust.

**Jerusalem Post staff contributed to this report & link....click here

*'Era of discrimination is ending' Press TV *Ahmadinejad slams West's instrumental use of media Tehran Times *AFP - National Post - The Associated Press - Reuters Africa

DTN News: Canadian Chinook Shot Down By Taliban Insurgents In Afghanistan

DTN News: Canadian Chinook Shot Down By Taliban Insurgents In Afghanistan

Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources

(NSI News Source Info) KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - August 7, 2010: The Canadian Forces has confirmed that a Chinook helicopter forced to make an emergency landing on Thursday was

brought down by enemy small arms fire. The helicopter immediately burst into flames upon landing 20 km southwest of Kandahar city. Eight of the 21 people aboard the Canadian CH-47 Chinook suffered minor injuries. Brig.-Gen. Jonathan Vance, the commander of Task Force Kandahar, said small arms fire struck the aircraft, igniting a fire that forced the aircraft to land and then eventually destroyed it. "Although a helicopter has been lost, this incident highlights the skills of Canadian air crews deployed in Afghanistan," said Vance. "The fact that no one was seriously harmed during the emergency landing speaks to the ability of our aircrews to perform under pressure, which they did in a textbook fashion." Vance said it is the first significant incident of this nature that has occurred since the Canadian Air Wing was activated in Afghanistan in 2008. He said air crews have accumulated thousands of hours without incident. The Chinook helicopter was forced to make what the military calls "a hard landing" near the village of Armarah, which is deep in the heart of the Panjwaii district. It's the birthplace of the Taliban and a region where Canadian troops have been involved in an ongoing struggle with the insurgency for the past four years. There were five crew members and 16 passengers on board. The five crew members included two pilots and three door gunners. Witnesses say those aboard the Chinook were barely able to get off of the aircraft before it was completely engulfed in flames. The Taliban took immediate responsibility. Taliban spokesman Qari Yousef Ahmadi had claimed insurgents shot down the aircraft with a rocket. The site of the landing was immediately secured by Afghan National Police and NATO forces. It's not the first time a Canadian helicopter has crashed in Afghanistan. On July 6, 2009, Master Cpl. Pat Audet, 38, of Montreal, and Cpl. Martin Joannette, 25, of St-Calixte, Que., died in Zabul province when their Griffon CH-146 helicopter crashed on takeoff. Three other Canadian Forces members were injured, one of them seriously. A British officer was also killed in the crash. Last year's crash was believed to have occurred when the chopper clipped a security wall while trying to manoeuvre in a blinding cloud of dust. Canada now has five Chinook helicopters remaining in its Afghanistan fleet. It purchased six from the United States a couple of years ago at a price tag of $292 million. The military says they have done yeoman's service since they began flying in Afghanistan early last year.

DTN News: Afghanistan TODAY August 7, 2010 - The Real Problem In The Afghan War Is India, Pakistan And Kashmir

DTN News: Afghanistan TODAY August 7, 2010 - The Real Problem In The Afghan War Is India, Pakistan And Kashmir *Analysis By DTN News: Interesting subject "United States military and economic aid to Pakistan since 9/11" raised by Mohsin Hamid, in his undermentioned article., in comparison - related reference in Dawn News Media By Anwar Iqbal Friday, 26 Feb, 2010. Substance of the article is self-explanatory. ~ According to Mohsin Hamid - U.S. aid to Pakistan, $4 billion (and counting) ~ Dawn (Pakistani news media) By Anwar Iqbal - U.S. aid to Pakistan, $20.7 billion (The Obama administration, in its latest annual budget, has proposed $1.6 billion in military assistance and about $1.4 billion as civilian assistance to Pakistan. This takes the total US aid to Pakistan to more than $20.7 billion post 9/11.)

Source: The Washington Post - By Mohsin Hamid

(NSI News Source Info) LAHORE, Pakistan - August 7, 2010: The United States is struggling to implement a strategy for Afghanistan that will improve the lives of the Afghan people and allow U.S. troops to go home. Part of what makes it so difficult i

s the way Washington views the conflict: through the lens of what officials have dubbed "AfPak," a war in the southern part of Afghanistan and the adjoining border areas of Pakistan. Though the acronym is falling out of official favor, the AfPak mind-set remains. A different shorthand for the war might help. "AfPInd" may be less catchy, but it is far more useful. Peace in AfPInd requires not U.S. troops on the ground, but a concerted effort to bring India and Pakistan to the negotiating table, where under the watchful eyes of the international community they can end their hydra-headed confrontation over Kashmir. But that's not how the United States sees this conflict. Mutual mistrust has bedeviled the U.S.-Pakistani alliance since the Afghan war began in 2001. Certain suspicions surfaced again recently in military documents revealed by WikiLeaks alleging that members of the Pakistani intelligence agency collaborated with militant groups fighting the United States in Afghanistan. Both Pakistani and U.S. officials have said that the information is old, unreliable and not true to the situation on the ground. Yet the recriminations and controversy have a "here we go again" feel. After all, we've seen this pattern before. In 1947, when Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan were partitioned into two countries, the status of the region of Kashmir, with a Muslim-majority population and a Hindu prince, was unresolved. The United Nations said Kashmiris should hold a referendum, but both India and Pakistan seized parts of the territory, and since then the two countries have been at each other's throats. Enter the United States -- not once, but three times. In the 1950s and 1960s, Pakistan and the United States were allies. The United States gave Pakistan weapons and $2 billion in economic aid; it thought that the Pakistani military would be a bulwark against communism. The Pakistani military thought the United States would help it against a much larger and hostile India. Then India and Pakistan went to war in 1965. American leaders castigated Pakistan for using U.S.-supplied weapons and terminated the alliance. Fast forward to the 1980s, and Pakistan and the United States once again were allies. The United States gave Pakistan weapons and $3 billion in economic aid; it thought that the Pakistani military would be a bulwark against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The Pakistani military thought the United States would help it against a much larger and hostile India. Then the Soviets were defeated. The United States castigated Pakistan for developing nuclear weapons (to counter India) and terminated the alliance. Today, Pakistan and the United States are allies for a third time. Over the past decade, the United States has given Pakistan weapons and $4 billion (and counting) in economic aid; it hopes that the Pakistani military will be a bulwark against terrorist groups in the region. The Pakistani military hopes the United States will help it against a much larger and hostile India. Then . . . By now, the recurring failure in the Pakistan-U.S. alliance should be obvious: The Pakistani military views it primarily as a means of reducing the threat from India, and the United States does not. But perhaps the United States should. The reason the Pakistani military continued to back jihadist groups, jointly set up with the CIA in the 1980s, after the Soviet Union was defeated in Afghanistan was that it believed the same tactics could be used in Kashmir against India. And the reason the Pakistani military remains obsessed with shaping events in Afghanistan is because that country is the site of a power struggle between Pakistan and India -- what commentators in Pakistan go so far as to call a "proxy war." It is what Ashfaq Kayani, the Pakistan army chief, means when he speaks of Pakistan's desire for "strategic depth" in Afghanistan. Fighting terrorists or fighting the Taliban -- or indeed, fighting in Afghanistan at all -- addresses symptoms rather than the disease in South Asia: the horrific, wasteful, tragic and dangerous six-decade confrontation between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. This confrontation ravages Afghanistan, where the Northern Alliance, which was organized to fight the Taliban, is backed by money and weapons from India, and militant groups among the southern Pashtuns are backed by Pakistan. It is a big part of why peace eludes the country, even though the Soviets left a generation ago. Ignore Kashmir, as the United States does, and the conflict seems incomprehensible. Include Kashmir in the picture, and it all makes sense. At the moment, the Pakistani military uses militant groups to put pressure on India to negotiate, and India uses terrorism as an excuse not to negotiate. By so doing, both sides harm themselves greatly. The vast majority of people in South Asia, who like myself desire peace built on compromise, find our hopes held hostage by security hawks. The situation is not improving. India's stance toward Pakistan has hardened since attacks by Pakistan-based militants on Mumbai killed 173 people in 2008. And here in Pakistan, militants are killing even more civilians, police officers and soldiers every month -- more than 3,000 Pakistanis in 2009. Some of the preschools I'm considering for my daughter now have snipers on their roofs and steel barricades at their gates. Meanwhile, the United States has placed 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, where they can do little to eliminate the single biggest problem that nation faces: being made into a battleground by its neighbors. The United States still sets much of the global agenda. If it hopes to salvage any remotely positive outcome from its massive, nine-year-old war in Afghanistan, then it should move a resolution over Kashmir up on its list of priorities. Peace in AfPak is failing because the term itself is a willful illusion. Peace in AfPInd will not be easy, but the term rings true, and that at least offers a start. *Mohsin Hamid is a writer based in Pakistan. His most recent novel is "The Reluctant Fundamentalist."

*This article "The Real Problem In The Afghan War Is India, Pakistan And Kashmir - The Washington Post - By Mohsin Hamid" & link to this article ....click here.

*"Hillary urges rich Pakistanis to pay more tax" Dawn News Media By Anwar Iqbal Friday, 26 Feb, 2010. & link to this article ....click here. *This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News, contact: dtnnews@ymail.com

Disclaimer statement

Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated, opinions expressed herein are those of the author of the page and do not necessarily represent the corporate views of DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News.

THIS STORY

*A better shorthand for the Afghan war

* WikiLeaks must be stopped

DTN News: 'Combat Mission Shock Force: NATO' - 11 New Screens (Games)

DTN News: 'Combat Mission Shock Force: NATO' - 11 New Screens (Games)

Source: DTN News / WorthPlaying.com

(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - August 7, 2010: Combat Mission Shock Force - NATO focusses on modern warfare in a fictional conflict in Syria, introducing forces from three additional NATO countries: Germany, Canada and the Netherlands, as well as some new, much requested, units and vehicles for the Syrian side.

All three countries in the module share similar armaments, such the powerful Leopard 2 MBT, but also field vehicles, weapons and variants that make them unique. Germany: Marder IFV, Wiesel and G36 rifle. Canada: LAV3, Bison, Nyala, Leopard C2, unique variants of the Leopard 2 MBT such as Leopard 2A4+ and Leopard 2A6M. Netherlands: CV90-35, the iconic YPR-765 and the mighty Gil(Spike-MR) missile system. Add to this their own unique organization and formations, realistically depicted in the module. Play with them on their own or as part of a multi-national joint task force using any of CMSF's other units. Included in the package are a number of new scenarios and three (!) new campaigns for exciting play right out of the box. You can also use the powerful editor to create your own scenarios and share them with other S hock Force players. New voices, sound effects, and game features round out the game experience.