[iwar] [fc:War.Exercise.Adds.A.Digital.Front]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2002-08-10 08:23:23


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-5154-1028992975-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 [204.181.12.215] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.7.4) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Sat, 10 Aug 2002 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 8564 invoked by uid 510); 10 Aug 2002 15:21:34 -0000
Received: from n36.grp.scd.yahoo.com (66.218.66.104) by all.net with SMTP; 10 Aug 2002 15:21:34 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-5154-1028992975-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com
Received: from [66.218.66.95] by n36.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Aug 2002 15:22:55 -0000
X-Sender: fc@red.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 10 Aug 2002 15:22:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 162 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2002 15:22:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Aug 2002 15:22:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO red.all.net) (12.232.72.152) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Aug 2002 15:22:54 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by red.all.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id g7AFNNo02643 for iwar@onelist.com; Sat, 10 Aug 2002 08:23:23 -0700
Message-Id: <200208101523.g7AFNNo02643@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
X-Yahoo-Profile: fcallnet
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 08:23:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [iwar] [fc:War.Exercise.Adds.A.Digital.Front]
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=DIFFERENT_REPLY_TO version=2.20
X-Spam-Level: 

Los Angeles Times
August 9, 2002
War Exercise Adds A Digital Front
Military: Computerized gear, other advanced technology are being used in
maneuvers of unmatched complexity centered in Southland.
By Peter Pae, Times Staff Writer
FT. IRWIN, Calif. -- In the largest and most complex military exercise of
its kind, thousands of U.S. troops, some armed with hand-held computer
devices, are fighting mock battles across the country, attempting to mimic
what a major military operation could look like in the near future.
Under the specter of a possible invasion of Iraq, about 13,500 soldiers and
70,000 more computer-generated enemy and U.S. troops are waging a simulated
war, testing some of the most advanced technologies in development and
providing a rare glimpse at the Pentagon's efforts to push the lumbering
military into the digital age.
"This is clearly the largest joint experiment we've ever conducted ... and
in my belief the most profound as well," Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen.
Richard B. Myers said. The results could affect future military operations
"like nothing else we've ever done."
For the first time, all of the military services--Army, Navy and Air Force,
as well the Marines and Special Operations Forces--are being linked in real
time to fight coordinated battles at multiple locations. The services
typically like to train and plan operations on their own.
Moreover, in an unprecedented move, hundreds of officials with the State
Department, the CIA and the FBI are taking part in the exercise, providing
for the first time a coordinated effort to gather and share intelligence
data with the Pentagon.
The training exercise, dubbed Millennium Challenge 2002, was planned months
before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, but military action in Afghanistan
and the possibility of another one in Iraq have heightened the importance of
the operation.
All of the "live" mock battles using real troops, for instance, are set in
the Southern California desert, which provides climate and terrain similar
to Iraq.
Pentagon officials insisted that the three-week exercise--which ends Aug. 15
and is expected to cost $250 million--was not in preparation for any
specific conflict, including Iraq. But they acknowledged that the results
could provide commanders and strategists invaluable experience and insight
into using information technology to overwhelm enemy forces.
The exercise reflects post-Cold War realities in which U.S. troops are
expected to fight swift regional skirmishes against nontraditional foes such
as rebel forces or terrorist groups, rather than set battles with
well-defined enemies, defense analysts said.
The exercise includes Marines attacking a mock chemical weapons laboratory
at the former George Air Force Base in Victorville. The exercise is also
taking place at the Navy's China Lake weapons station, the Marines' Camp
Pendleton and at various Western sea ranges from Point Mugu to San Clemente.
Teams of computer hackers at undisclosed locations have also been attempting
to crack into U.S. defense computer networks, hoping to disrupt the exercise
and simulate the kind of cyber warfare military analysts expect in future
battles.
Pentagon officials said that in the end, the exercise will test new
technologies and procedures that they hope will eventually allow generals to
plan and initiate a major military operation within a week of a crisis
erupting. It took three weeks to plan and implement Operation Enduring
Freedom in Afghanistan.
Moreover, finding the right mix of technology and organizational changes
will mean saving money, time and even lives, Pentagon officials said.
In a preview of what a future operation may look like, Lt. Gen. B.B. Bell
coordinated the mock battles this week via laptops, first aboard a C-17
aircraft and then a Navy ship off the San Diego coast. The laptops were
linked to other regional commanders at 26 different locations via a secret
satellite-based Internet protocol network and provided a "common picture" of
the military operation. It gave Bell, the commanding general, an
unprecedented view of the battles while he was still moving from location to
location.
The technology, which consists of about a dozen laptop computers, was first
used by Central Command Chief Army Gen. Tommy Franks aboard a C-17 during
Operation Enduring Freedom, but Pentagon planners hope to eventually field
the system to regional commanders.
In the past, the command center would have used "stickies" and grease
pencils to map out battles based on verbal communications over a radio
system, which were often inaccurate and prone to miscommunication and
failure.
Meanwhile, paratroopers with the 82nd Airborne Division dropping into a
nighttime raid at Ft. Irwin last week were equipped with hand-held devices,
dubbed "digital op pods," that not only told them exactly where they were
but relayed that information to the commanding general hundreds of miles
away.
It marked the first time that infantry tested the technology, which Pentagon
officials hope will improve the soldiers' "situational awareness," as well
as helping battle commanders better coordinate operations. The devices,
which resemble hand-held computers, have a global positioning system linked
to a satellite.
For instance, during the air drop to seize a desert airfield, the 750
paratroopers were able to quickly move into their predetermined battle
positions using the hand-held devices despite darkness and lack of any
defined landmarks on the flat desert terrain.
At a "digital operations center," a mobile trailer outfitted with large
monitors, computers and communications equipment, the commanding officer was
able to view the troops' precise locations as well as the position of
potential enemy troops and targets.
A video monitor also showed real-time, infrared images from an unmanned spy
plane hovering above the battlefield. At the same time, the commanding
general in San Diego was able to view the same images and information on his
laptop.
"Commanders at all levels are going to have a much higher level of
understanding of what's taking place on the ground with their
soldiers--where they're located, where friendly units are, where the enemy
is located--than we've ever had in the past," said Brig. Gen. John M. Brown
III, deputy commanding general for transformation.
Even though 80% of the exercise involves computer-generated troops and
simulated battles, the exercise hasn't been free of accidents typical of
massive training operations. Last week, a vehicle rolled over, killing a
soldier and injuring two others, all of them with the 82nd Airborne unit
that had successfully seized the airfield a few days earlier.
In an unusual twist, the exercise is generating more attention elsewhere,
particularly by governments that are seen as potential U.S. adversaries. In
a radio report last week, North Korean officials decried the exercise,
saying it "shows the recklessness of the U.S." and that the exercise was
"heating up aggression and war fever."
Maj. Gen. John R. Vines, the commander for the 82nd Airborne Division who
parachuted into a battle with his troops last week, said the new
technologies tested in the exercise are helping his soldiers make quicker
decisions but cautioned against relying on technology too heavily.
"Technology is an enabler, but not the solution," he said as his troops
dropped from the sky around him. "It still requires people with a will to
confront the enemy. They're the secret weapon of America." 

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/Ey.GAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2002-10-01 06:44:32 PDT