Happy Secession Day

Thursday, July 4th, 2013

Once again, I wish you a happy Secession Day! I’ve discussed the colonies’ secession from the motherland more than once over the years:

The Explosive of Choice

Thursday, July 4th, 2013

Potassium chlorate — the stuff that makes matches catch fire — has surpassed fertilizer as the explosive of choice for insurgents in Afghanistan:

Potassium chlorate is an odorless white crystal or powder that, when combined with a fuel, forms an explosive mixture. Ammonium nitrate fertilizer, meanwhile, requires several steps to transform into an explosive.

“It’s much, much easier,” Sweetser said.

It’s also cheaper. A 110-pound bag of ammonium nitrate costs $160 in Afghanistan; the same-size bag of potassium chlorate goes for $48, according to JIEDDO. The average IED in 2012 contained about 52 pounds of ammonium nitrate. Such a bomb cost about $416 to produce.

The price soars when a suicide bomber drives a car or truckload of explosives into a target. That can cost as much as $19,593, according to JIEDDO.

Insurgents in Afghanistan generally pack explosives into plastic jugs used to store cooking oil. The typical IED in Afghanistan is triggered by the victim stepping on it or driving over it.

“What the insurgents hit on there is the low- to no-metal victim-operated IED,” Sweetser said. “It’s kind of the signature device of the conflict in Afghanistan. Very simple to construct with readily available materials. And very hard to counteract.”

Feral Hogs at Fort Benning

Thursday, July 4th, 2013

Apparently Fort Benning had a problem with feral hogs — and had to outsource a solution. As Weapons Man notes, the answer is obvious:

And they’ve sent to Auburn University for some expertise. In what, semiotics? For crying out loud, this is Fort Freaking Benning, the home of the Infantry. There are tens of thousands of qualified (and bacon-loving) shooters, and all the AR-15s they could possibly ever need. (True, some of the M16s are a little rattly after passing through the sore and tired hands of sixty or seventy Ranger classes). Why hire the skills you already have?

Ranger Assessment and Selection Program (RASP)

Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013

Like many military “schools”, the Ranger Assessment and Selection Program (RASP) looks like systematic torture:

The instructors admit that they can’t teach many of the traits they need in a Ranger.

Science versus Engineering

Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013

Robin Hanson cites Eric Drexler’s new book on science versus engineering:

Scientists seek unique, correct theories, and if several theories seem plausible, all but one must be wrong, while engineers seek options for working designs, and if several options will work, success is assured.

Scientists seek theories that apply across the widest possible range (the Standard Model applies to everything), while engineers seek concepts well-suited to particular domains (liquid-cooled nozzles for engines in liquid-fueled rockets).

Scientists seek theories that make precise, hence brittle predictions (like Newton’s), while engineers seek designs that provide a robust margin of safety.

In science a single failed prediction can disprove a theory, no matter how many previous tests it has passed, while in engineering one successful design can validate a concept, no matter how many previous versions have failed.

Lincoln’s Folly

Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013

The arrogance of the South Carolinians and their followers in the six Deep South cotton states would not have plunged the nation into a war that killed 750,000 Americans, Steve Sailer says, if not for Abraham Lincoln’s Hicksville unpreparedness:

Indeed, Lincoln’s worldly Secretary of State William Seward came up with a brilliant plan to avert civil war at the last moment, only to have it shunned by a jealous Lincoln.

The 16th president has been so sanctified that we’re not supposed to notice that Lincoln’s insularity left him unready to lead during the great crisis of secession in 1860-1861. Conversely, Lincoln’s detractors like to portray him as a power-mad dictator. Yet his actions during the crucial months in which the Civil War might have been averted are most redolent of a crafty small-town lawyer who was badly in over his head in his new role. Lincoln worked hard and learned fast, but by the time he was ready for his job, the worst catastrophe in American history was underway.

In early October 1860, the experienced Democratic candidate Stephen Douglas conceded to his secretary, “Mr. Lincoln is the next President. We must try to save the Union. I will go South.”

But Lincoln took few steps to ready himself for this task. His main response to his election in November 1860 was to hire a second secretary to help answer his increased mail from politicians seeking patronage.

During the interregnum, Lincoln kicked around the notion of maybe adding one Southerner to the Cabinet, what with the secession and all, but nothing came of the idea. After Lincoln finally took the oath of office on March 4, 1861 he devoted much of his first six weeks to conscientiously interviewing the long line of Republican job-seekers that stretched out of the White House and down Pennsylvania Avenue to determine which would make the best local postmasters.

But could anything have been done to avert the Civil War?

Perhaps. A glance at a map showing the dates of secession suggests that it might have been contained at the brushfire stage.

The 15 slave states can be thought of as comprising three tiers from south to north. The first tier to secede was the southernmost, led on December 20, 1860 by South Carolina, home of the ideological spokesmen of the pro-slavery “King Cotton” interests. English mills’ demand for cotton had created vast wealth and self-righteousness in the six Deep South cotton states. Inspired by South Carolina’s Fire-Eater orators, the states of Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas soon followed.

But then, secession ground to a halt.

It is unknowable whether a seven-state Confederacy would have survived the next downturn in world cotton prices, or, disheartened, would have asked for readmission to the Union. We can see now that King Cotton proved to be a bubble. With the North declaring a blockade and the South an export embargo in 1861, the British ramped up cotton growing in Egypt and India, leaving the South impoverished after the war.

A rump Confederacy confined to the Deep South might have eventually been bought off by the plan Lincoln floated in the middle of the war for ending slavery voluntarily by compensating slave-owners with the proceeds from the sale of Western lands. At minimum, a seven-state Confederacy would have been easier to defeat on the battlefield than the eleven-state South that fought for four years.

The next tier of states northward—North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas—didn’t secede until May or June, well after the outbreak of fighting at Fort Sumter, South Carolina on April 12, 1861.

Finally, in the northernmost tier of slave states, above 36.5 degrees latitude, four states never seceded—Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri. Legend has it that Lincoln wittily replied to a well-wisher who assured him God was on his side, “I hope to have God on my side, but I must have Kentucky.”

Operation Linebacker

Wednesday, July 3rd, 2013

The North Vietnamese pulled off some pretty impressive operations of their own to counter our Operation Linebacker:

The American attacks were, basically, a war plan first proposed in 1965 and rejected out of hand by LBJ. (Indeed, when the Joint Chiefs raised the issue, LBJ, who wore a fraudulent Silver Star for nonexistent WWII heroism, abused them at length, and SecDef McNamara showered them with the sort of contempt only a Harvard man who knows deep down he’s wrong can generate). US air and naval air forces would drop the bridges and close the choke points in the Vietnamese rail network, and aircraft would mine North Vietnam’s crucial harbors. Losing rail and sea transport, and having road transport constricted,  wouldn’t completely choke North VIetnam’s war machine, but it would deprive it of air defense, which depended on large machines that had to come from abroad — radars, missiles and fighters. A first strike would disable the North Vietnamese Air Force on the ground.

The North Vietnamese and their Russian patrons had excellent sources in the US Government and had plenty of advance warning of the “sudden” attack. But with facilities like ports, airfields, and railway bridges to defend, there wasn’t that much they could do. At the end of Day One, the USAF confidently reported that the North Vietnamese Air Force wasn’t flying any more.

But the USAF was wrong, because the NVAF went into special-operations mode. Leveraging technology, daring, and secrecy, on the eve of the US raids many of the air force’s MiG-17 and MiG-21 fighters were airlifted — sling loaded — by Mi-6 helicopters.  Russia had developed this capability in order to disperse their air defense forces prior to any future nuclear war, and they didn’t mind sharing the concept with their Vietnamese satellite. The gigantic cargo helicopters took the jets to austere, improvised airfields — firm farm fields, stretches of straight road — whence they would launch against US sorties. To do this they depended on a capability that had been developed, but mostly abandoned, by the WWII German and then the US Air Forces — rocket assisted take-off. Once again, Russia maintained this capability to retain a fighter force in the event of almost certain wartime attacks on airfields — attacks like the ones that had opened the German attack on Russia in 1941. The strap-on, drop-off rocket pods let a runway-loving turbojet fighter blast off almost like a space rocket, using a minimum stretch of ground. The aircraft would then recover to Phuc Yen airfield.

mi-6-with-MiG-15UTI

Here the NVAF were doing some smart, asymmetrical things that leveraged their capabilities and the US’s limitations. US ROE did not allow helicopters to be engaged at night, granting invulnerability to the most vulnerable evolution in the NVA plan. The civilian side of dual-purpose Phuc Yen was likewise off limits to US target planners.

It wasn’t enough to do much more than slow down the USAF though.

Archaeopteryx Plumage

Tuesday, July 2nd, 2013

Archaeopteryx PlumageArchaeopteryx had light feathers with dark edges and tips, rather than all-black feathers, a new x-ray study suggests:

Only 11 specimens of Archaeopteryx have been found, the first one consisting of a single feather. Until a few years ago, researchers thought minerals would have replaced all the bones and tissues of the original animal during fossilisation, leaving no chemical traces behind, but two recently developed methods have turned up more information about the dinobird and its plumage.

The first is the discovery of melanosomes – microscopic ‘biological paint pot’ structures in which pigment was once made, but are still visible in some rare fossil feathers. A team led by researchers at Brown University announced last year that an analysis of melanosomes in the single Archaeopteryx feather indicated it was black. They identified the feather as a covert – a type of feather that covers the primary and secondary wing feathers – and said its heavy pigmentation may have strengthened it against the wear and tear of flight, as it does in modern birds.

However, that study examined melanosomes from just a few locations in the fossilised feather, explained SLAC’s Dr Uwe Bergmann: “It’s actually quite a beautiful paper,” he said, “but they took just tiny samples of the feather, not the whole thing.”

The second is a method that Drs Bergmann, Manning and Roy Wogelius have developed for rapidly scanning entire fossils and analysing their chemistry with an X-ray beam at SLAC’s Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SSRL) in the USA.

Over the past three years, the team used this method to discover chemical traces locked in the dinobird’s bones, feathers and in the surrounding rock, as well as pigments from the fossilised feathers of two specimens of another species of early bird. This allowed the team to recreate the plumage pattern of an extinct bird for the very first time.

In the latest study, the team scanned the entire fossil of the first Archaeopteryx feather with the SSRL X-ray beam. They found trace-metals that have been shown to be associated with pigment and organic sulphur compounds that could only have come from the animal’s original feathers.

“The fact that these compounds have been preserved in-place for 150 million years is extraordinary,” said Dr Manning. “Together, these chemical traces show that the feather was light in colour with areas of darker pigment along one edge and on the tip. Scans of a second fossilised Archaeopteryx, known as the Berlin counterpart, also show that the trace-metal inventory supported the same plumage pigmentation pattern.”

Artificial Bone

Tuesday, July 2nd, 2013

Materials researchers are turning to bone for inspiration:

Bone is strong and tough because its two constituent materials, soft collagen protein and stiff hydroxyapatite mineral, are arranged in complex hierarchical patterns that change at every scale of the composite, from the micro up to the macro.

[...]

In a paper published online June 17 in Advanced Functional Materials, associate professor Markus Buehler of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and co-authors describe their approach. Using computer-optimized designs of soft and stiff polymers placed in geometric patterns that replicate nature’s own patterns, and a 3-D printer that prints with two polymers at once, the team produced samples of synthetic materials that have fracture behavior similar to bone. One of the synthetics is 22 times more fracture-resistant than its strongest constituent material, a feat achieved by altering its hierarchical design.

The collagen in bone is too soft and stretchy to serve as a structural material, and the mineral hydroxyapatite is brittle and prone to fracturing. Yet when the two combine, they form a remarkable composite capable of providing skeletal support for the human body. The hierarchical patterns help bone withstand fracturing by dissipating energy and distributing damage over a larger area, rather than letting the material fail at a single point.

“The geometric patterns we used in the synthetic materials are based on those seen in natural materials like bone or nacre, but also include new designs that do not exist in nature,” says Buehler, who has done extensive research on the molecular structure and fracture behavior of biomaterials. His co-authors are graduate students Leon Dimas and Graham Bratzel, and Ido Eylon of the 3-D printer manufacturer Stratasys. “As engineers we are no longer limited to the natural patterns. We can design our own, which may perform even better than the ones that already exist.”

The researchers created three synthetic composite materials, each of which is one-eighth inch thick and about 5-by-7 inches in size. The first sample simulates the mechanical properties of bone and nacre (also known as mother of pearl). This synthetic has a microscopic pattern that looks like a staggered brick-and-mortar wall: A soft black polymer works as the mortar, and a stiff blue polymer forms the bricks. Another composite simulates the mineral calcite, with an inverted brick-and-mortar pattern featuring soft bricks enclosed in stiff polymer cells. The third composite has a diamond pattern resembling snakeskin. This one was tailored specifically to improve upon one aspect of bone’s ability to shift and spread damage.

Ranger Fitness

Tuesday, July 2nd, 2013

Almost half of Ranger School students fail to graduate, many because they fail to pass the Ranger Physical Fitness Test, which is somewhat harder than the Army Physical Fitness Test — and graded much more strictly. But the real question is, is it a good test of combat fitness? Not really:

Hmmm… want a combat Ranger Fitness test? Well, buckaroos, this paper from 1999 [.pdf file] is a partial answer. Major Michael Pemrick, a former Ranger Battalion Company Commander, examined both the current fitness program of the 75th (Ranger) Infantry Regiment, and the Regiment’s Mission Essential Task List, and came up with what he thought was a more combat-oriented test, to be given in addition to the regular APFT.

  • 5-Mile Road March – 15 min/mile min, 10 min/mile to max; 45 lb. equipment
  • Rope Climb – 1 climb to pass, 3 climbs to max; begin at end of Road March without rest, 30-foot rope, 2 minutes
  • Casualty Carry – 150 m; begin at end of Rope Climb without rest, carrying a Ranger of equal body weight

There are many other thoughtful gems in this paper. One of Maj. Pemrick’s more interesting conclusions was that strength, relative to body weight, is an important factor.

The ideal is that a Ranger has enough size to better support the weight of a heavy rucksack or a fellow Ranger while being strong enough relative to his body weight to climb effectively. To put it simply a 140 pound Ranger who can climb and do pull-ups all day long will be less able to carry eighty or a hundred pounds of combat equipment, while the 220 pound Ranger who can handle that weight with less stress may have trouble pulling his own body weight while climbing.

Pemrick’s paper is now quite old. It doesn’t quite apply because the Regiment’s METL has changed a good bit in the years since 1999, as has the equipment of the combat Ranger. But it shows the path to something that GEN Odierno has said does not presently exist: combat-oriented, operationally required standards.

Except…in the Ranger Battalions (as in SF, that has its own internal PT standards), they have been doing combat-oriented PT for a long time; Major Pemrick, wherever he is, would probably be pleased. The estimable Jack Murphy at SOFREP had the story a while ago.

RTWT, of course, but the test used in Jack’s battalion had six events, and was even more combat-oriented than the CPFT suggested above, although it also required more gear:

  1. Conduct a 2-mile run wearing ACUs (Army Combat Uniform), boots, RBA (Ranger Body Armor) and MICH helmet. The run will begin and end at a 20-foot fast rope.
  2. After the completion of the run, immediately climb the 20-foot fast rope and do a controlled descent.
  3. When the rope climb is complete, drag a 160-pound SKEDCO litter 50 yards, turn round and drag it back 50 yards to the start point.
  4. Immediately following the SKEDCO pull, climb a 20-foot caving ladder and climb all the way back down.
  5. At the bottom of the Caving ladder, sprint 100 yards, turn around, sprint back 100 yards and climb over the 8-foot wall.
  6. Conduct a 1 mile run wearing ACUs, boots, RBA and MICH helmet. The run will begin and end at the 8-ft wall. Time stops when you cross the line at the 8-foot wall.

Note that two of Pemrick’s events, the rope climb and a version of the casualty carry (a drag instead) are here. The standards? By the time you’re taking this test, you’re in the Regiment and through RIP. If you aren’t pro-athlete-fit by now, you’re gone. So the standard for this test is to get better every time. It also reflects on the squad as well as the individual, so individual Rangers are competitively motivated to help their buddies’ fitness improve.

Gay marriage isn’t the problem

Monday, July 1st, 2013

Gay marriage isn’t the problem, from a reactionary point of view — any marriage for love is the problem:

Before the twelfth century, in Europe, love between men and women was not regarded as heroic; it was instead considered a sign of weakness, the preoccupation of a person without character.

Why this change? Since the twelfth century, lovers have been consistently considered heroic in Western countries. The plot of the story of Lancelot and Guinevere written about 1170 and the plot of the famous movie Casablanca (1942) — perhaps the most admired Hollywood film of all time — are virtually the same. Why have heroic visions of love endured through all these centuries?

This is not just a question of literary images, because there is plentiful evidence that millions of people have experienced their love in this way.

During the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, it was thought that, when people were freed to pursue their desires without hindrance or moral condemnation, romantic love would fade out. The illusions and idealizations of love would no longer be needed to assuage feelings of guilt or selfishness. But the opposite occurred. Since the 1980s, romantic love has regained its old salience. It may be more important now than it ever was.

Love now dominates the institution of marriage as never before. In recent years, Hollywood has been pouring out wedding movies, while the average cost of real weddings climbs higher every year — now over $25,000 in the U.S., over 10,000 pounds in the U.K., over 10,000 Euros in France. (Just paying for the wedding is becoming a “heroic” act today.) High divorce rates likewise reflect the belief that, if love goes, the marriage must end. Why this surprising aftermath to the sexual revolution?

Outside of Western industrialized countries, there is little evidence of love heroism.

Romantic love is the single greatest energy system in the Western psyche.

In our culture it has supplanted religion as the arena in which men and women seek meaning, transcendence, wholeness, and ecstasy…We are so accustomed to living with the beliefs and assumptions of romantic love that we think it is the only form of “love” on which marriage or love relationships can be based. We think it is the only “true love”. But there is much that we can learn from the East about this. In Eastern countries, like those of India and Japan, we find that married couples love each other with great warmth, often with a stability and devotion that puts us to shame. But their love is not “romantic love” as we know it. They don’t impose the same ideals on their relationships, nor do they impose such impossible demands and expectations on each other as we do.

Romantic love has existed throughout history in many cultures. We find it in the literature of ancient Greece, the Roman empire, ancient Persia, and feudal Japan. But our modern Western society is the only culture in history that has experienced romantic love as a mass phenomenon. We are the only society that makes romance the basis of our marriages and love relationships and the cultural ideal of “true love”.

One of the greatest paradoxes in romantic love is that it never produces human relationships as long as it stays romantic. It produces drama, daring adventures, wondrous, intense love scenes, jealousies, and betrayal; but people never seem to settle into relationship with each other as flesh-and-blood human beings until they are out of the romantic love stage, until they love each other instead of “being in love”.

Romance, in its purest form, seeks only one thing — passion. It is willing to sacrifice everything else — every duty, obligation, relationship, or commitment — in order to have passion.

In imperial Rome, patrician men sometimes found themselves falling deeply in love with the slaves they met in brothels.

This love was a release from the oppressive obligations and rivalries found in arranged marriages and in the intrigues of public life. Roman poets idealized their beloved slave prostitutes as domina, literally reversing the role of master and slave.

… In other societies the dangers of sexual servitude were avoided by expediently guaranteeing the chastity of romantic relationships. The best-known examples are the Medieval Troubadours, who, in a transformation of the cult of the Virgin Mary, renounced physical contact with the women they worshipped.

Lunar Power

Monday, July 1st, 2013

First Solar’s AVSR1 ranch in California’s high desert has generated 1MW from moonlight:

The AVSR1 ranch is a little over half way through completion, with 136MW of its nominal 250MW (AC) capacity already delivering electricity to the grid.

On Sunday night, local time, on the occasion of a “super” full moon, or “supermoon”, the arrays already in place actually generated 1MW of capacity, its operators were stunned to find when they turned up to work on Monday morning.

The “supermoon” was 14 per cent larger and 30 per cent brighter than a “normal” full moon as it moved to its closest point to the Earth for 2013. And while it took the operators a little by surprise, it’s not about to open up any new strategic thoughts, as the moon won’t be this close again till August 2014. That’s not exactly a base-load option.

Hostage in China

Monday, July 1st, 2013

Charles Starnes, co-owner of Specialty Medical Supplies, visited his Beijing factory to lay off 30 workers — and was taken prisoner by his employees while they demanded compensation:

But this isn’t an unusual occurrence in China. Lacking any other recourse for abuses, workers will sometimes act against managers when they’re on site. In January, for example, the staff of an electronics manufacturer in Shanghai went on strike and locked 18 managers inside a room to protest harsh rules imposed by new management, according to the Epoch Times. Usually, it doesn’t make for international headlines.

“This has been occurring for a long time,” said Li Quiang, with the advocacy group China Labor Watch, through a translator. “Workers do this because bosses have a history of just running off, and workers know this, so they trap them in, and say we’re not going to let you run, you’re going to pay us.”

They also do it because it works, he says, when official legal procedures are unreliable.

“The reasons it’s effective is because workers are really threatening the one thing the government cares most about, other than economic benefit, and that’s stability,” Quiang says. “The government will become concerned, and when workers are demanding compensation the government might force the company to give economic reparations. By using this method, the workers are bringing in the strongest agent of change.”

Legendary Guns of Special Forces 1972-1992

Monday, July 1st, 2013

While discussing the legendary guns of the Special Forces from 1972 through 1992, a former Special Forces weapons man describes the times:

This era began with withdrawal from Vietnam triggering a period of slow motion and even retrenchment in the Army in general and SF in particular. Headcount was cut back and units vanished as the Army transitioned from a rather clumsily implemented draft levée en masse to an all-volunteer force, something only one major power had attempted before (indeed, it was largely the British success of a volunteer military that encouraged us to end the draft that had run continuously since 1940). Draftees had never been the core of Special Forces (although during Vietnam, draftees had volunteered their way in) but the Regular Army was not going to let end-strength cuts spare SF. In fact, Big Green wasted no time flushing everything that reminded it of Vietnam, including Special Forces. The Chief of Staff was an officer known to despise SF, and he raised a generation of SF-loathing Mini-Me’s. (Pleas click “more” to continue).

The 1st, 3rd, 6th and 8th Special Forces Groups were disbanded, and their experienced NCOs scattered: to drill sergeant duty, to ROTC assignment purgatory, to babysitting fractious troops in conventional units. A few cadred a new idea, two Airborne Ranger battalions, units that the Chief hoped would replace SF’s raid and reconnaissance capability without becoming so culturally distinct from Big Green. SF combat officers bore a disproportionate share of officer Reductions In Force (RIFs). The teams of the surviving groups (5th, 7th, and 10th) inherited responsibility for the areas once covered by the disbanded units, but had to do it at about two-thirds strength. Even the Reserve and Guard groups (11th, 12th, 19th and 20th) lost numbers because some members had joined with a view to avoiding Vietnam without looking yellow. These crypto-yellows were soon gone, and, ironically, were often replaced by Vietnam veterans who, having finished their military service and started new jobs and families, missed something about it.

Money for training dried up. Ammunition was cut, to the point where even an SF unit had to fight to get its men 40 rounds a year to fire the qualification table and another 10 or so to zero. The conventional Army didn’t even try, conducting rifle qualification with the “M1 Pencil.” Forget about blanks for force-on-force training: they were doled out like rubies, and many exercises ended like childhood games, with both sides standing on the objective after shouting “bang, bang!” during the TOT, arguing about who killed whom. It was not only deleterious to readiness, it was unseemly.

The other SF specialties suffered similarly. Funds for continuing education of medics evaporated, too; commo gear repairs didn’t happen, and even crypto pads became scarce, with clueless commanders suggesting saving and reusing old ones (a very bad idea); ultimately they made a set of reusable pads for training, and resigned themselves to Ivan reading our every message on exercises. While all this logistical strangulation was going on, commanders lied on their unit readiness reports. (A truth-teller committed career suicide, in a sea of flunkies admiring the Emperor’s New Clothes). In the Pentagon, all looked rosy; a command culture of unwillingness to listen to negative reports produced, mirabile dictu, an Army that never transmitted a negative report.

This was corrosive to troops’ respect for their superiors, but superiors who could produce the illusion of respect with a command seemed satisfied with it.

Meanwhile, society at large turned on the military in the aftermath of Vietnam, particularly elite, educated society. Soldiers were losers, morons, cretins who could get no better work, or perhaps were attracted to the military by character deficiencies: lust for power, inability to adapt to civilian life, or outright criminality. Celebrity psychologists published research-lite opinion papers on “the military mind.” (In a word: dim). A series of news reports on “tripwire vets” blamed crime on Vietnam veterans. Their examples were often rampant wannabees but Boomer reporters like CBS’s Dan Rather were so disconnected from the military — Rather had flunked out of Marine boot camp, but calls himself a former Marine, a foundational lie in a career packed with them — that they couldn’t tell. (Hot tip: a guy with a below average IQ and personal hygiene, telling tales about cutting babies’ throats, probably wasn’t really a SEAL).

But as we’ve seen, the trend collision of an under-resourced military and leaders’ zero-defects mentality produced a military culture that demanded and tolerated systematic dishonesty whilst paying cynical lip-service to integrity. The psychologists were right about the military being messed up; they were wrong about how.