The Defense Department pushed back Friday against House Republican charges that U.S. troops in Afghanistan were being denied life-saving systems that were used to counter enemy rocket, artillery and mortar fire in Iraq.
“It’s altogether unclear that this system is a silver bullet,” George Little, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, said of the C-RAM – the Counter Rocket, Artillery and Mortar system that links advanced radars with what is essentially a land-based version of the Navy’s Phalanx rapid-fire CIWS (Close-In Weapons System.)
Little acknowledged that requests for deployment of C-RAM to Afghanistan came from the U.S. Central Command in 2009 but “operational conditions have changed since ’09” as U.S. troops have begun withdrawing with the goal of having all combat forces out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014.
If commanders in the field were to renew requests for C-RAM, “then they will get what they need,” Little said.
In a letter to President Obama on Thursday, Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, wrote: “If a C-RAM intercept capability would protect our troops against lethal threats without detraction from our mission in Afghanistan, please immediately order the deployment of these weapon systems.”
In July 2009, CENTCOM put in a Joint Urgent Operational Needs Statement (JUONS) requesting C-RAM for Afghanistan that was supported by Gen. David Petraeus, then the overall commander in Afghanistan.
At the time, “the Army agreed that the systems were available for deployment and determined that approximately 80–100 additional forces per site would have to be deployed to support the C-RAM intercept capability,” McKeon said.
“The Chairman didn’t assert that this would be a silver bullet,” a spokesman for McKeon said, but he said the need for C-RAM system would grow as the Afghan withdrawal continues and the U.S. forces consolidate on larger bases that will become more inviting targets for the Taliban.
The C-RAMS “effectively protected installations in Iraq” but were being denied to troops in Iraq because of of a “force cap” imposed by the Obama administration during the withdrawal, the McKeon spokesman said.
“We’ve got other adequate measures in place” to detect enemy fire, Army Lt. Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, said without going into detail. With the C-RAM system, “you have to put a lot of fire into the air which, of course, threatens civilians,” Warren said.
The C-RAM system was deployed to Iraq in the summer of 2005 and was used to protect the “Green Zone” compound and Camp Victory in Baghdad.
The system’s radars are designed to pick up indirect fire and automatically fire a 20mm M61A1 Gatling gun, similar to the Navy’s Phalanx weapon against anti-ship missiles, to eliminate the threat. Unlike the sea-based system, the land-based system uses shells fused to self-destruct in the air to avoid civilian casualties.
{ 81 comments… read them below or add one }
More political dribble from idiots like Buck McKeon. in some controlled situation this works fine. Iraq was flat territory and alot of open distances for radars to find incoming mortars and shells. Afghanistan not so much. Since the mountains can block radar and hid mortars very close by. This is more crap from Republicans fat with bribes from the companies who make this and are full of crap themselves. If they needed them in A-stain they would have asked the pentagon for one.
Your administration is a failure. Dont kill yourself on Nov 7th.
And if your side wins I hope you speak Persian, don't mind getting sick or maimed and like not being able to pay for treatment.
Actually, the cost of healthcare for people who already had it has increased. Don't give me national statistics, I'm speaking from experience.
Or, 'don't give me data, I have an anecdote!'
Too funny!
I assume you meant Farsi?
Guess I will watch red dawn again…
Um, they brass did request it. Don't let the fact get in the way though lance.
"In July 2009, CENTCOM put in a Joint Urgent Operational Needs Statement (JUONS) requesting C-RAM for Afghanistan that was supported by Gen. David Petraeus, then the overall commander in Afghanistan."
Read more: http://defensetech.org/2012/10/19/pentagon-counte…
Defense.org
So Lance, let me get this right… You would rather keep our troops from having everything they need to protect themselves and other US, and NATO personal from rocket or mortar attack. . . Ya but the big guy got OBL right at least the way he says it we would seem to think he was on the Black Hawk that night. And then put the hammer down all by himself. . .Sure hope you get a chance to get deployed to Afghanistan to help our troops pack. Have a safe trip. . .
Man I get so sick of you Liberal arm chair soldiers. . .
Cheers
Yeah I was just in Bagram and these things are NEEDED! I can't go into details but these would've saved lives and aircraft had they been in place. It's total BS that they aren't there and that you would deny them to the folks deployed there in some inane partisan rant. Seriously, you don't know what you're talking about. I cannot stress that enough.
as someone sitting in afghanistan RIGHT NOW i would like to have every bit of protection i could have but i guess you clearly know more about the conditions out here dont you chairborne ranger!
Did you read the article? No mention in it of radars.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but your logic is flawed. The mountainous terrain has nothing to do with the C-RAM's radar, since the radar is looking for indirect fired munitions. Incoming rockets and mutions would be coming in from above, and unless you're in a cave, there won't be a mountain up there. (If you are in a cave, you don't need to worry about indirect munitions.)
I am wondering if this could have protected those Harriers that were lost in the Taliban attack a few months ago. How many were destroyed? 6? 8? I think that having a few of these in the sensitive areas like Bagram airbase, or other fire-bases in which it can be effective should still be considered. What happened to the ones from Iraq?
I thought the camp was directly infiltrated by insurgents wearing U.S. Army uniforms? I don't think CRAM would be effective there.
Let me try to clear the smoke.
1. The tatical capabilities of the weapon system; it is pointed out in the article that the CRAM is a force protection measure vs. indirect fire. Note: the name C-RAM – the Counter Rocket, Artillery and Mortar system should have been a dead give away as to its role. Does anyone see in the name or article an indication of anti-personnel capabilities? No.
2. As pointed out by others we're Vietnamizing the fight in The Stan with big "safe" bases. This distances us from the people, decreases our situational awareness and puts us on the path to a Tet-like offensive. We did this in Iraq and turned that fight around via The Surge. We took risks by putting service members out into remote bases but in direct contact with the population.
If you looked at the pictures of the perimeter security, they only had a ditch and chain linked fence for the perimeter. The Taliban used a truck to breach the fence–Duh– then dismounted to attack the base. I'm not sure why they didn't have the concrete anti-vehicle barriers you see everywhere(US bases, federal buildings etc). That would have stopped the truck and allowed reaction time.
A C-RAM wouldn't help since I don't think it's set-up to respond to people. A mini-gun on the pictured guard towers probably would had been a good "toy" to have.
We can be thankful the causality count was low-it could have been much worse.
Finally, we're doing the same things the Soviets did. We're sitting in large fortress camps and then occasionally doing patrols. Exactly what the Soviets did. The Taliban know this.
anyway, just MHO.
I have a question: I've seen reports that patrols are left without air support. How does this happen? Why isn't there a CAP anytime there's a patrol? My guess is we're over-extended with high op tempo and less aircraft deployed than we should have. Again, MHO.
Just leave now FFS, it's not going to get better in the next 2 years, everyone knows it but no one wants to be the one who "lost Afghanistan". They don't call it the grave yard of empires for nothing.
Kandahar Airfield had a population of 25,000 troops and contractors last year. It is on a flat plain with open fields in all directions going out 10-20 miles before you get to any mountains. We received rocket and mortar fire a few times a month.
Here's an idea, how about patrolling outside the walls so the bad guys can't get within range of their mortars. I know this is a crazy idea…
So Jack we should just have a patrol out hiking the mountains 24 hours a day?
The taliban do
And make perfect targets for roaming AH-64s and UAVs when they leave their caves.
Good point. Sort of a the same reason we kept sending B-17′s up everyday. Fighter bait. If you want to catch fish or Taliban you need a lure…
Well I suppose you've accomplished one thing in your life by learning how to upvote yourself a dozen times.
Even if the messenger is unpopular, he's still got a point. They're out there, like a fish in the sea, as Mao would say.
Makes you wonder how difficult it would be to enforce a nighttime curfew in Afghanistan, then detain/capture whoever's out at night.
Yes! And again: yes! Agressive combat patrolling *combined with* arty support, smart bombs and the lot.
What else, hide inside a big secure (…) base? Complain if the enemy shoots at you?
Of course that would be the move if you were trying to win……………….
What we have is a campaign promise fought on the cheap with bad ROE limiting firepower. With troop levels enough to look good but not enough asked for by the commanders to do the job. Relations so bad we can not trust the Army we are training!!!
Jack.. lol think before you speak.
You're silly. You are talking like we are at war or something. Oh, wait……..
I do agree with your comment.
Actually jack, it is kindo of crazy because the level of threat is extremely high once you leave the base. In the case of some of the deployment bases no troops leave thru the wire at all. They are bases used to ferry in supplies and then out to FOB's. The safest thing for them to do is stay inside the wire.
Menzie, war is not safe. If you want to destroy the enemy, you have to go after them, not hide inside the base.
I see Dim isn't as stupid as his name inplies.
The "stan is getting to be a bit Vietnam-ized with large bases and fixed positions.
We had the same hunker down mentality in Khe Sahn, and lots of other places. We should definitely be patrolling outside the gate, that's what our talented recon teams train for, concealment, observation, and reporting.
There shouldn't be any excuse for bad guy to penetrate the base-that is un-excusabe. If we had teams out there we'd know if they were coming or not. Lastly, where is all of our fancy surveillance, night vision, FLIR, etc, are they being used to protect the bases?
The "perimeter" is only useful against night attacks by guys with small arms and sappers with explosives. If they hang back and use rockets, you'd need a perimeter and an electronic frontier so big there would be no money left for Congressional healthcare.
Besides, wars aren't won by hunkering down, as the Taliban know. Take the fight to the enemy. Unfortunately, we can't do much when they hide in Cambodia…whoops, Pakistan.
Makes you wonder if it would be appropriate to recruit Border Troops from the Tajiks and move them to the AfPak frontier. They'd be less able to tell who is who (being from different ethnic group) but they should be reliable and trustworthy…?
The Tajiks shoudl remember the fate of the Hmong.
I'm sure they do! After the Soviets left, we left all of Afghanistan to their own devices. They turned on each other…
What and move to Minnesota and Wisconsin?
You make it sound like they wanted to come,as if getting chased through the jungle by Pathet Lao to Thailand was some kind of reality tv show.
That said, the Tajiks should consider what happened to the Shia in 92. don't expect the west to pay it forward any more than they do today.
The Australian base at Tarin Kowt in Uruzgan province in Afghanistan is protected by CRAM.
Opsec, just saying.
OPSEC? Lol. OPSEC doesn't really apply to the CRAM. Taliban knew about CRAM the day it went online. Kind of impossible not to figure it out when you pop off a mortar and a hundred flak explosions turn it into snowflakes in mid air followed by BRRRRT. -/k/
The Australian Government publicly announced it: http://www.defence.gov.au/defencenews/stories/201…
Not to mention that I'm sure the Taliban have seen the thing arrive at the base, get setup, tested, and sitting there now.
"At the time, “the Army agreed that the systems were available for deployment and determined that approximately 80–100 additional forces per site would have to be deployed to support the C-RAM intercept capability,”
Team O since day one is locked on withdrawal not victory, with of course enough support to hold plausible deniability. ala surge short full request but just enough to impression, and see above.
war based on craven personal political ambitions.
Amazing.
All of these marvelous technology and NATO still losing the war!!
hahahahahahaha
We could win. We could win every war. It's because we prefer to avoid genocide and salting the earth that we don't. So go fuck yourself.
Sorry Skyepapa.
You cant win, bad guys never win.
USA are the evil!
Then why even ask a rhetorical question about winning?
You don't beat insurgents with hugs. Even the victorious anti-bourgeoise North Vietnamese had to dump half of the ARVN guys into re-education camps.
Hey Sarek… Bet you're a big friend of the guys who shot that little girl for supporting education for women. And the clowns who destroyed the ancient Buddhist statues. You loved them. And the wholesale slaughter of civilians by both Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Your cheer those murderers, don't you?
Your idea of "evil" is interesting to say the least…
Dont matter what NATO people says.
Until NATO still make wars, you all are the bad guys. No matter the reason.
You have to remember that we dont have a professional military.
Instead of patroling and basic tactics we have people who prefer to cower in bunkers crying for C-RAM while claiming they could win if only somebody would nuke the enemy.
Wow. Just wow. Ltfunk3, walk a mile in the solider/airman/marine/saliors shoes before you say crap like that.
Serivice is a previlage not some sort of sympathy inspiring disability.
Blunt, to the point, stands his ground. Thumbs up!
If the brass thinks they don't need them then they dont need them. Who here was stationed in Balad, Baghdad or Basrah? Then you might know how intense IDF can be.
I was in Speicher in 2004-2006, without any C Ram, I am a 13 R , Radar Operator for the Q36 and Q37, these are great and do the job, However in 2007 in Balad I had the pleasure to experience the good and bad, we had like 7 or 8 of them, I played liason between contractors, and navy on working to get parts and getting them fixed, the problem, not all ran once at the same time, but when they work they are great
There is no need for C-RAM our military has lost yet another war and all it thinks about now is saving thier own necks. Rather then deploy some elaborate pretence simply evacuate the bases.
If we were serious about having a real military rather than an expensive horse and pony show we'd court-martial a generration of officiers and discharge the ranks without recomendation. Starting again from the bottom is the only way.
I tend to agree with you about our leadership-in all services. (The Marine Corp isn't totally incompetent yet)
For some reason the current crop of leadership, not everyone, but most are spinless, not very smart, politically correct, afraid to call "it" what "it" is, and don't give a crap about the common soldier, sailor, or marine
Here's are the types of leaders, from best to worst
Rate your leader
1. War fighter
2. Hard charger
3. Smarter then Albert Einstein
4. Good intentions but not a great leader
5. Next chairman of xyz corp
6. total jerk
7. In over his/her head
8. how in the hell did he/she get promoted
9. tries hard but is useless
10. should be fired today
Sad to say the POTUS is not ranking high on that 10 scale…….
You have no clue what you're talking about. None. Literally some of the most ignorant thinking I've seen in awhile. We haven't "lost" anything. To the contrary, we have given the Afghan's their best hope to stand on their own. If they refuse to step up and take the reins, there is nothing practical to be done. They have until 2014 to figure it out. If they don't we will continue to prosecute violent warfare against our enemies via aircraft and special forces.
But our conventional ground forces will come home AS THEY SHOULD.
Learn how to spell before you try to discuss strategy ltfunk.
Or, you know, we could just leave now. Then the rockets and mortars would be Afghanistan's problem.
Indeed. We can just make friends with the Tajiks and neighboring stans, or make friends in the Panjshir and set up a UAV base there. We can hold that ten percent of Afghanistan for the next century, if necessary. Warlords can fight over Afghanistan all they want. If they want to aid trans-national terror, then they will just have to die, now won't they?
Like we did to Cambodia and Laos
We didn't do anything in Cambodia. We did however intervene rather heavily in Laos, but instead of backing the national government we backed the Hmong, and once the Pathet Lao took over the national army it became a matter of funding nation-building in Vietnam and simultaneously funding an insurgency in Laos. Once we withdrew from RVN it was game over for the Hmong.
The US wasted a ton of political capital on prolonging a poorly executed war, and we didn't have enough to save South Vietnam after Vietnamisation or to protect the Hmong. When you go double or nothing, people die.
So many liberals and hippies posting in defense threads and videos these days. As for the system, they should be deployed to key bases in Afghanistan as IDF attacks occur on a daily basis.
What, maybe that'll give the US a chance to win? ;)
the US Navy has stopped installing the Phalanx, it can't discriminate targets.
The Phalanx works too well, it will shoot at anything it detects in target range
(friend or foe). The RAM is replacing the Phalanx on ships, not quite as good in some respects as the Phalanx.
It has range, and there's a diminishing return to installing more and more CIWS when you can replace some mounts with a RAM and take out targets from further away.
well the taliban will be a bit more careful then to shoot at the us military like they will probably learn real quick
I wonder what the 4 Apaches lost to mortar attack in 2007 would have to say about this? (And yes, I realize that 2007 occurs before 2009.)
http://defensetech.org/2012/03/15/insurgents-used…
Saudi Arabia: Jewish Bloodline, Jewish State
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/22127-…
SPENT A YEAR IN KANDAHAR AT THE MERCY OF ROCKET'S E3ACH MORNING WITH NO RETALIATION. NATO PLUS. WHY NO REACTION?
It’s like a race to the bottom, here in what was once America, land of the free and home of the brave. Which one will be the nail in the cffoin: the eco-catastrophe playing out all over the globe (including Peak Everything ), the military policy/corporate fiasco *********** or the insolvent bank (Wall Street/Fed) casino situation, practically guaranteed to default in our lifetime? i don’t think even Prozac will help, what we’re facing.
i cant believe that you would deny them what they ask for -if they say they need the equipment why would you even hesitate-they are the only ones at war and placing it all on the line for this nation they got bin laden and now the feds why even insult the expertise of the military ops in the middle east
I would support any system that would improve security for our troops and I totally support the Congressman's recommendations.
Spend a day taking incoming where your only defense is hitting the ground and hoping you don't get hit. Give us the C-RAM and save lives and property.
heres the bottom line. i was a C-RAM operator in iraq. there are two parts of C-RAM, intercept (the phalanx) and sense and warn. and yes the C-RAM intercept does discriminate targets. C-RAM is in A-stan but only the sense and warn and its contracted. call it a money game if you want. all i know is i made a fraction of the pay as what contractors make in A-stan. as far as intrecept, they really dont need it. capabilities the phalanx cant cover the area you might think or hope. so only HIGH profile assets would be cover by the phalanx. army side of the house sense and warn would be 5 times cheaper than intercept. contractor side it would be pretty close to if they had a phalanx.
Education for women = evil. Sharia law = good. Individual freedom = evil. Religious dictatorship = good. Science = evil. Corruption and drugs = good.
Your "good" world and you can have it…
"Blunt, to the point, stands his ground."
How is that different from "rude and stubborn"?
Regards & all,
Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg