U.S. Naval Academy Commencement As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta, Annapolis, MD, Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Thank you, Vice Admiral Miller.  Secretary Mabus thanks for the great job you do as the Secretary of the Navy.  Governor O'Malley, Congressmen, distinguished guests, parents, friends, families, deans and faculty, Brigade of Midshipmen, and above all, Class of 2012:  it is for me a very great honor and distinct privilege for me to take part in this special occasion as the Secretary of Defense. And let me first and foremost express my deepest congratulations to those of you in the class of 2012. Congratulations to all of you, you made it! And I'm sure that right about now your families are all saying, "Thank God, you made it!" It's also a real privilege to be welcomed here on Navy turf as a former Army officer, although I have to tell you that one of our three sons is a former Navy officer and served in Afghanistan. I try as secretary to be a loyal supporter of each of our outstanding services.  Even when I had the opportunity to attend the Army-Navy football game, my allegiance was to both teams.  I sat on each side of the stadium.  But I have to tell you I am getting a little bit tired, you're probably not, but I am, of the West Point cheer:  "Maybe Next Year...Maybe Next Year...Maybe Next Year..." To the Brigade, today's ceremony is your last military duty of the academic year, after which most of you can go home or start summer training. Of course, as you know, a few of you can't leave the Yard because you crossed the conduct system and are being held incommunicado. However, I'm told that by tradition, I'm expected to set you free.  Well, as an Italian-American, I do things in the Italian style, which means that obvious, I treat the Navy as family – and I don't like anyone to mess with family. It also means that I can make you an offer you can't refuse. So in exchange for freeing your classmates on restriction, I have an offer – I want the entire Brigade to lead the class of 2012 and their families in one big cheer. I need to hear everyone or it doesn't count. Let's hear a big 'Go Navy' on my count.  And remember this is the difference between Salvation and Purgatory. So, on three: ready: one...two...three! [Crowd says: "Go Navy!"] Well done.  Vice Admiral Miller, I exercise my authority as Secretary of Defense to grant amnesty to all midshipmen on restriction for minor conduct offenses. As a Catholic, I'm tempted to order you all to say three Hail Marys and a good Act of Contrition! With that out of the way, let me first and foremost offer my deepest thanks. Thank you to the class of 2012, and to all midshipmen, for your decision to serve this nation at a time of war.  You have set yourselves apart in a profound and in an honorable way. Thank you also to all of those in uniform, including the officers, senior enlisted leaders, and instructors, for your dedication and loyalty to our country. Finally, thank you to the families, sponsor families, administrators, professors, mentors, and friends here today.  This is every bit your day to celebrate along with this truly extraordinary class of 2012. Class of '12, congratulations:  over the past four years, you have passed an unrelenting test of character. You chose to give up the life of a normal college kid and endure the demands of Navy life:  rising before dawn, putting on the uniform of our country, standing watch, and marching in formation. The highs and lows of your life here have changed you in ways that you may not fully understand for years or even decades to come. You experienced some defining moments together as a class...you celebrated as plebes when a few of you pulled off a daring spirit mission:  building an unmanned aerial vehicle, flying it over the Superintendent's house at night, and using it to place a hat on top of the chapel dome.  Hell, I could have used you at the CIA. Two years later, along with the rest of the country, you paid tribute to your Navy brethren who pulled off another daring mission:  ridding the world of Osama bin Laden. Having worked on that mission as Director of the CIA, I will never forget coming out of the White House after the President's announcement and hearing the cheers coming from the crowds that had spontaneously gathered outside the White House: "USA – USA," and I know I heard "CIA – CIA." You are men and women from every state in the Union and 12 foreign nations, rich and poor, secular and religious, black, white, Latino, Native American, Asian, straight, and gay. The diversity of this class is a tribute to the life and service of Retired Lieutenant Commander Wesley Brown, Class of '49, the first African-American graduate of the Naval Academy.  Wesley passed away last week at the age of 85, and today we honor his groundbreaking legacy. And while your class progressed from the first hour of Induction Day up to this moment, the world has undergone its own transformation.  Naval Academy graduates have had a lot to do with that transformation: Retired Admiral Mike Mullen, Class of '68, guided our military to fight with the right strategy in two wars, and to be ready for future challenges; Retired Admiral Eric Olson, Class of '73, led Special Operations Command and its efforts to go after al Qaeda;  General John Allen, Class of '76, is leading the campaign in Afghanistan with outstanding leadership; Admiral Sam Locklear, Class of '77, commands U.S. Pacific Command and spearheaded NATO's efforts and campaign that led to the fall of Qaddafi. And the list goes on...to the Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jon Greenert and innumerable other Naval Academy alumni influencing events around the entire globe.  Throughout my time in government, I've relied on the vision and advice of Navy and Marine Corps officers – as President Clinton's Chief of Staff, as Director of the CIA, and now as Secretary of Defense.    Because of their efforts, and the sacrifices of brave men and women from across the services, today the United States stands at a strategic turning point after a decade of war. Our combat forces have come home from Iraq;  NATO just approved a plan last week in Chicago a plan by General Allen to fully transition the lead for security to Afghan forces by the end of 2014;  and we have successfully gone after the leadership of al Qaeda to send a very clear message that no one attacks the United States and gets away with it.   And we successfully fought with our NATO allies to give Libya back to the Libyan people. And yet we still face significant challenges and risks:   we continue to face the threat of violent extremism, those who continue to threaten attacks on our homeland;  we're still at war; we confront proliferation of weapons of mass destruction;  the destabilizing behavior of Iran and North Korea;  military modernization across the Asia-Pacific;  turmoil in the Middle East;  piracy on the high seas;  and increasing and creative attacks, cyberattacks, here in our country and elsewhere.   All of this coming at a time of increasing budget challenges here at home. Our nation now looks to you, the next generation of military leaders, to confront these challenges I just outlined, to protect our nation, and to ensure that America always has the strongest military force in the world. That is the way it has always been.  And that's the way it will always be. Across generations, the Navy and Marine Corps have led our nationand our military into the future. It is up to your generation to ensure that our fleet remains unrivaled by any other nation on earth. That is why you came here... for the challenge of leading others at sea;  deploying to every part of the world;  taking risks in the skies;  fighting ferociously ashore; and giving our enemies hell wherever you find them.   After you leave here, the challenge that I just outlined is exactly what you'll get.   And it won't be easy.  You'll need every quality that got you through the past four years:  love of country;  the desire to learn; the will to work hard; the will to sacrifice;  the judgment to make good decisions; and the drive to overcome any odds. No one can tell you what challenges you will face in the future.  But one thing is for sure – you must be prepared to respond to whatever threats we confront in the future – with courage, with creativity, with leadership. Adapting to new challenges is what the Naval Service does best.  This is not a time for playing it safe; it is a time for imagination and initiative, for putting new ideas into action.  That has always been the very heart of the Naval Service. At the dawn of this Republic, Commodore Edward Preble urged a generation of young officers to take the Navy in new directions.  During the War of 1812, "Preble's Boys" improvised the construction of a flotilla that defeated the British on Lake Erie and helped save the nation from British domination. During the Civil War, David Farragut and his young officers embraced the revolutionary technology of all-iron ships, blockaded the rebel states, and doomed the rebellion. Farragut's famous words are one of history's finest expressions of initiative and they are built into your very bones.  Vice Admiral Miller tells me you can finish this one:  so let me hear it from all of you loud and clear.... "Damn the Torpedoes!" [Crowd says: "Full Speed ahead!"] That initiative is what has carried us through the generations. When Teddy Roosevelt sent the Great White Fleet around the world, the Admirals of that time didn't want to bring along the brand new destroyers.  That didn't sit well with some young lieutenants.  So these enterprising junior officers found Roosevelt aboard his presidential yacht and asked him to overrule the admirals. Roosevelt did, proving junior officers can have the best ideas...you just need to have the guts to prove it. Down through time, our nation has needed military leaders with that kind of vision: Chester Nimitz's screen formations to push the Japanese back across the Pacific; Hyman Rickover's bold plan to put nuclear power in ships and submarines, and; Grace Hopper's computer genius that anticipated a networked fleet.  The future is no different.  That is why we developed a new defense strategy adapting to the budget requirements that we face, but more importantly to ensure our military can meet the challenges of the 21st century. Our military force for the future must be agile, it must be flexible, it must be deployable, it must be technologically advanced; we will emphasize Asia-Pacific as well as the Middle East; we will strengthen key alliances and partnerships around the world; we will ensure our military can confront aggression and defeat any opponent anytime, anywhere; and we will protect investments in new capabilities – from cyber, to unmanned systems, to space to special operations forces. The Navy and Marine Corps are fundamental to every element of that strategy. America is a maritime nation, and we are returning to our maritime roots.  One of the key projects of your generation will have to face is sustaining and enhancing American strength across the great maritime region of the Pacific. America's future prosperity and security are tied to our ability to advance peace and security along the arc extending from the Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean and South Asia.  That reality is inescapable for our country and for our military, which has already begun broadening and deepening our engagement throughout the Asia-Pacific. One of your great challenges as an officer in the Navy will be to ensure the peace and prosperity of the Asia-Pacific region for the 21st century. We need you to project America's power and to reflect America's character:  to serve on ships and submarines, to fly planes, and to train and operate throughout the region. We need you to do the important work of strengthening and modernizing our historic alliances with Japan, with Korea, with Australia, with the Philippines, with Thailand. We need to you to build robust partnerships throughout the region; with countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia; with Vietnam, Singapore, India and others.    We also need you to strengthen defense ties with China.  China's military is growing and modernizing.  We must be vigilant.  We must be strong.  We must be prepared to confront any challenge.  But the key to peace in that region is to develop a new era of defense cooperation between our countries – one in which our militaries share security burdens to advance peace in the Asia-Pacific and around the world. Tomorrow I depart on a trip to Southeast Asia.  And later this year, I will visit to China for the first time as Secretary of Defense. I'll tell all of these nations that the United States will remain a Pacific power, and I'll tell them why: because of you.  Because during your careers many of you will be headed to the Pacific. There and across the globe, the Navy and Marine Corps must lead a resurgence of America's enduring maritime presence and power. As graduates of the Naval Academy, you've earned much and you've been given much. And now, as Navy and Marine Corps officers, your nation will ask you to give much of yourselves to service to this country.  It is about giving back to this country.  That's what service is all about. As Secretary of Defense, I could not be more proud of you for choosing to serve this great country.  As mentioned, I'm the son of Italian immigrants.  And as a young boy, I once asked my dad:  "Why would you travel all of that distance, coming to a strange country, no language ability, no money, no skills, why would you do that?" My father said he did it because he and my mother believed they could give their children a better life in America.  That is the American dream: the dream that we all want for our children, to have a better life.  That dream depends on people like you who are willing to serve and to fight for America. A U.S. Navy ship captain once wrote that he could think of no greater prize for anyone than an appointment to the Naval Academy...for as he put it, "there may be more money elsewhere, but there is no more honor anywhere." Indeed, there is no more honor anywhere than right here. As you leave here, carry that honor with you.  Defend it, fight for it and yes, if necessary, die for it.  The honor is yours – now earn it! Congratulations to all of you.  God Bless you, God Bless the Navy, God Bless the Marine Corps, and Fair Winds to the Class of 2012. Thank you.

Upgrades for the B-52

Memorial Day Message

   Law of the Sea Convention before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee


As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta, Washington, D.C., Wednesday, May 23, 2012



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Chairman Kerry, Senator Lugar, distinguished members. I want to thank you for the opportunity to be the first Secretary of Defense to testify in support of United States accession to the Law of the Sea Convention.



I have been involved in ocean issues most of my career and I strongly believe that accession to this treaty is absolutely essential not only to our economic interests and our diplomatic interests but I’m here to say that it’s extremely important to our national security interests as well.



I join a lot of the military voices of the past and present that have spoken so strongly in support of this treaty. The fundamental point is clear: if the United States is to assert its historical role as a global maritime power, and we have, without question, the strongest Navy in the world, but if we’re going to continue to assert our role as a maritime power, it’s essential that we accede to this important Convention.



Being here with Secretary Clinton and Chairman Dempsey – their presence alone is a testament to the conviction of our diplomatic and military leadership that this Convention is absolutely essential to strengthening our position around the world.



Let me outline some of the critical arguments with regards to U.S. national security and why it’s time to move forward with this issue.



First of all, as the world’s strongest pre-eminent maritime power, we are a country with one of the longest coastlines and largest extended continental shelves in the world, we have more to gain from approving the Convention than almost any other country. There are 161 countries that have approved. We are the only industrial power that has failed to do that, and as a result, we don’t have a seat at the table.



If we are sitting at this international table of nations, we can defend our interests, we can defend our claims, we can lead the discussion in trying to influence those treaty bodies that develop and interpret the Law of the Sea. We are not there. And as a result, they’re the ones who are developing the interpretation of this very important treaty.



In that way, we would ensure that our rights are not whittled away by the excessive claims and erroneous interpretations of others. It would give us the power and authority to support and promote the peaceful resolution of disputes within a rules-based order.



Second, we would secure our navigational freedoms and global access for military and commercial ships, aircraft, and undersea fiber optic cables.



Treaty law remains the firmest legal foundation upon which to base our global presence, as the Secretary has pointed out, and it’s true on, above, and below the seas. By joining the Convention, we would help lock-in rules that are favorable to our freedom of navigation and our global mobility.



Third, accession would help secure a truly massive increase in our country’s resource and economic jurisdiction, not only to 200 nautical miles off our coasts, but to a broad extended continental shelf beyond that zone adding almost another third to our nation in terms of jurisdiction.



Fourth, accession would ensure our ability to reap the benefits—again, as the Secretary has pointed out—of the opening of the Arctic. Joining the Convention would maximize international recognition and acceptance of our substantial extended continental shelf claims in the Arctic, and—as again the Secretary pointed out—we are the only Arctic nation that is not a party to this Convention.



More importantly from our navigation and military point of view, accession would also secure our freedom of navigation and our over-flight rights throughout the Arctic, and it would strengthen the freedom of navigation arguments with respect to the Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage.



And finally, let me say that we at the Defense Department have gone through an effort to develop a defense strategy not only for now but into the future as well. It emphasizes the strategically vital arc that extends from the Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean region and South Asia on to the Middle East. By not acceding, we potentially undercut our credibility in a number of Asia-focused multilateral venues that involve that arc I just defined – we're pushing, for example, for a rules-based order in the region and the peaceful resolution of maritime and territorial disputes in the South China Sea, the Strait of Hormuz and elsewhere.



How can we argue that other nations must abide by international rules when we haven’t joined the very treaty that codifies those rules? We would also help strengthen worldwide transit passage rights under international law and isolate Iran as one of the few remaining non-parties to the Convention.



These are the key reasons from a national security point of view for accession – reasons that are critical to our sovereignty, critical to our national security. Again, as the Secretary pointed out, I understand the arguments that have been made on the other side, but at the same time, I don’t understand the logic of those arguments.



The myth that somehow this would surrender U.S. sovereignty, nothing could be further from the truth. Not since we acquired the lands of the American West and Alaska have we had such an opportunity to expand U.S. sovereignty. The estimated extended continental shelf is said to encompass at least 385,000 square miles of seabed. As the Secretary pointed out, it’s one and half times the size of Texas that would be added to our sovereignty, that would be added to our jurisdiction.



Some claim that joining the Convention will restrict our military’s operations and activities, or limit our ability to collect intelligence in territorial seas. Nothing could be further from the truth.



The Convention in no way harms our intelligence collection activities; in no way does it constrain our military operations. On the contrary, U.S. accession to the Convention secures our freedom of navigation and over-flight rights as bedrock treaty law.



Some allege that the Convention would subject us to the jurisdiction of international courts – and that this represents a surrendering of our sovereignty.



Once again, this is not the case. The Convention provides that a party may declare it does not accept any dispute resolution procedures for disputes concerning military activities; we would do the same – as so many other nations have chosen likewise to do. Moreover, it would be up to the U.S. to decide precisely what constitutes a military activity—not others.



Others argue that our maritime interdiction operations will be constrained. And again, this is simply not the case.



The U.S. and our partners routinely conduct a range of interdiction operations based on UN Security Council Resolutions on treaties, port state control measures and the inherent right of self-defense. The U.S. would be able to continue conducting the full range of maritime interdiction operations.



In short, the Law of the Sea Convention provides the stable, recognized legal regime that we need in order to conduct our global operations today, and in the future.



Frankly, this is not even a close call – the Law of the Sea Convention is supported, as pointed out by the Secretary, by major U.S. industries, by the Chamber of Commerce, by our energy, shipbuilding, shipping, and communications companies, by fishing interests, and by environmental organizations – along with past and present Republican and Democratic administrations, strong bipartisan majorities of this committee, and the entire national security leadership.



By finally acceding to the Convention, we help make our nation more secure and more prosperous for generations to come. America is the strongest power in the world. We have the strongest Navy. And make no mistake, we have the ability to defend our interests anytime, anywhere. But we are strong precisely because we play by the rules.



For too long, the United States has failed to act on this treaty. For too long, we have undermined our moral and diplomatic authority to fight for our rights and our maritime interests.



For too long, we have allowed our inability to act to impair our national security. The time is now, for this Senate to do what others have failed to do: join the Law of the Sea Convention.



Thank you.

HIV epidemic
Deployed U.S. forces have historically been exposed to diseases that are not prevalent in the U.S. such as malaria, leishmaniasis and dengue.



To combat these disease threats, the U.S. military has excelled at infectious disease research and spurred some of medicine’s greatest advances in disease prevention, diagnostics, and treatment.



When the HIV epidemic first emerged in the 1980s, the U.S. government immediately recognized the threat the disease could pose to service members.



In response, Congress established the U.S. Military HIV Research Program (MHRP) at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. In this age of global deployments, HIV not only continues to pose a threat to service members, but it can also compromise the stability of a nation where the disease is prevalent and endanger worldwide security.



Early in the epidemic, the U.S. military emerged as a leader when MHRP developed the first HIV disease staging system, which was adopted by the Army in 1986.



Around the same time, MHRP published evidence of the then-controversial notion that HIV could be transmitted heterosexually. In 1987, MHRP scientists developed the criteria for Western blot positivity—the fist supplemental confirmatory test for HIV.



Fast-forward to 2009; the U.S. Army announced the results of RV144, the first HIV vaccine trial to show some ability to protect people against this disease.



Today, the U.S. military continues to pursue the goal of developing a globally effective HIV vaccine to assist in the eventual eradication of HIV/AIDS. Earlier this year, the New England Journal of Medicine published a paper co-authored with MHRP scientists that detailed clues to why the vaccine tested in RV 144 protected some volunteers.



Military scientists continue to work closely with partners across the world to develop and test novel vaccine strategies. Collaborative work with Harvard University, Crucell Corporation and MHRP, published this year in the journal Nature, point the way to novel vaccine combinations that will soon be evaluated in clinical studies.



Additionally, MHRP has developed a promising next-generation HIV vaccine that is currently in clinical testing in Africa and Sweden.



For the first time in history scientists and global leaders alike are talking about the end of AIDS. Recently, great advances have been made in preventing HIV through the use of new strategies such as adult male circumcision in Africa and AIDS therapeutics as prophylaxis.



However, these new prevention strategies have their limitations, and it will take a combination of prevention methods, including a vaccine, to truly end the pandemic. The U.S. military pursues this mission vigorously to protect U.S. troops and the global community so that we may one day achieve an AIDS-free generation.

The Man Who Walked On The Moon

The Man Who Walked On The Moon

Solar Power for Soldiers

Solar Power for Soldiers

If you or someone you know is in an emotional distress or suicidal crisis, please seek help immediately. If an emergency, contact 911.



Some available resources:



National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is there to help 24/7, or give them a call at 1-800-273-TALK (8255)




Suicide.org has an international listing of hotline numbers that could help you or someone you know.



The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) has some great resources available

Check out the SAMHSA Facebook Page




  look at the AfterDeployment.org website





Check out more information about the Wingman Project

Or check out the Wingman Project Facebook Page

Did you know that the GPS was invented by scientists at the Naval Research Center?

One of NRL’s greatest accomplishments has been the invention and development of the enabling technologies that became the Global Positioning System (GPS).
Like another towering NRL achievement in an earlier generation, radar, GPS has transformed warfare while also providing major benefits to navigation.
GPS is not only a global navigation aid, it is also the means for precision time and time transfer throughout the world, which has wide ranging and influential impact on communications and commerce; these features are a direct outcome of the technology envisioned and introduced by NRL scientists and engineers.
This bibliography is offered as an aid to those who are interested in better understanding the NRL role in the origins of GPS.  Bibliographic citations, primarily of published works, are presented.
These are annotated with abstracts, photos, and figures to facilitate selecting which of the referenced papers to examine more closely. A timeline is provided to aid in setting the citations in their context of historical development.
Learn more about what made all our lives easier, or at the very  least, a little less lost.

Solar - B Spacecraft goes into orbit to begin looking at the sun. It is specifically looking at solar magnetic fields and the origins of the solar wind. (Photo concept from NASA)

http://science.dodlive.mil/2012/05/17/the-military-mission-in-space/solarb-print-2_web/

Eyes On The Skies – Space Weather and Satellites


05/16/2012 06:09 AM CDT





The Space Surveillance Network has been tracking space objects since 1957 when the Soviets opened the space age with the launch of Sputnik I. Since then, the SSN has tracked more than 24,500 space objects orbiting Earth. Of that number, the SSN currently tracks more than 8,000 orbiting objects.

NRL Researchers Discover New Solar Feature


05/10/2012 06:23 AM CDT





Scientists at the Naval Research Laboratory have discovered a previously unreported solar feature – Coronal Cells – where high-temperature coronal emission is confined to discrete plumes that extend upward from unipolar concentrations of magnetic flux. The NRL researchers think that future studies of these cellular regions will lead to an improved understanding of magnetic field

Law of the Sea Symposium


As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta, Washington, D.C., Wednesday, May 09, 2012



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Thank you very much John, I really appreciate your kind introduction. Thank you for your commitment to public service and your great contribution to this country. All of us who have had the chance to serve with you have tremendous respect for your many years of service to our nation, both in uniform, as a leader in the Department of Defense, and of course in the United States Senate.



Good afternoon. It’s a pleasure to be here today with Chairman Marty Dempsey, my pal, over there, in running the Department of Defense. You don’t have to worry, that place is so damn big, there are so many people that they don’t even know we’re here right now. Eisenhower said that it was such a huge, complex building that you could walk in a Major and come out a General. David Brinkley had another good one, he said, that a lady went up to a guard in the Pentagon and said to the Guard, “Sir, can you help me, I’m about to deliver a baby.” And the guard said, “Ma’am, you should not come into this building in that condition.” And she said, “When I came into this building I wasn’t in that condition.” It’s a big place.



And it’s a great privilege to have a chance to be here with all of you to discuss an issue that is of immense importance to this nation’s prosperity, as well as our national security.



I want to commend Senator Warner, the Pew Charitable Trusts, Chuck Hagel, and the Atlantic Council for their leadership in support of this country’s long overdue accession to the Law of the Sea Convention. Let me also acknowledge Senator Trent Lott, who I also had the pleasure of serving with in the House, and let me tell you, seeing him here in this room makes me feel a hell of a lot better about the possibility of ratification.



This afternoon, I’d also like to pay tribute to another statesman who has long supported the ratification of the Convention, Senator Dick Lugar. He is a friend, and a tremendous friend to national security, and a friend to our nation’s ocean. This country has benefitted immensely from his many years of leadership in the Senate on foreign policy, and national security issues. He is in every sense of the word, a statesman. And these days as my former colleagues here all know, the most important thing is those who are willing to reach across and try to see if they can find solutions to the problems that confront this country. He often reached across the aisle to try to find consensus on the most challenging issues of our times and that’s what leadership is all about.



Our country desperately needs that kind of bipartisan spirit and leadership that Dick Lugar embodies. I guess it would be a great tribute to Dick Lugar’s distinguished career and what a great legacy it would be for him, if we were able to ratify the Convention on the Law of the Seas on his watch.



As many of you know, I’ve long been passionate about oceans policy, and the need to be able to work with and develop and protect our maritime resources for this country, ourselves, for our children and for future generations. My love for the oceans goes back to my own childhood along the California coast. My grandfather was actually in the Italian Merchant Marine, and sailed the oceans in great sailing ships of the day around the world, and fished off California and Alaska.



I was born and raised in Monterey, California, a fishing community made famous by John Steinbeck’s books, particularly Cannery Row. The Central California coastline, I can say very objectively, is one of the most beautiful in the world, and it is. One of my proudest accomplishments as a member of Congress was establishing the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.



President John Kennedy once said that our oceans are the “salt in our blood.” And I think that’s true. They are critical to the life of our nation. Critical to our health, our economy, critical to our recreation, our weather, our trade, and our security.



Recently, before I took the jobs in this administration, I had the honor to chair an Oceans Commission, and later co-chaired a Joint Oceans Commission Initiative with Admiral Jim Watkins – both commissions confirmed the importance of our oceans – but more importantly both strongly supported accession and ratification of the Law of the Sea Convention.



The time has come for the United States to have a seat at the table, to fully assert its role as a global leader, and accede to this important treaty. It is the bedrock legal instrument underpinning public order across the maritime domain. We are the only permanent member of the U.N. Security Council that is not a party to it. China, France, Russia, other countries, Germany, India, 161 countries have approved this treaty. We are the only industrialized country in the world that has not approved it.



This puts us at a distinct disadvantage, particularly when it comes to disputes over maritime rights and responsibilities when we have to engage with the 161 countries, including several rising powers, which are party to that treaty.



In years past, several Senate committees have examined the Convention and its various elements in hearings, and earlier Committee votes were approved by large bipartisan majorities.



Accession also has broad support among major U.S. industries. This is an important point. This is something that is not just supported by the diplomatic community or the environmental community. This is also supported by the business community. Companies that are dealing with offshore energy, shipbuilding, commercial shipping, communications companies, on and on and on. Industries that have to deal with our offshore resources. They need this treaty in order to be able to do their business and to effectively accomplish their goals. The same is true for national security.



You have already heard the importance that Chairman Marty Dempsey attaches to U.S. ratification of the treaty. His views are echoed by the senior leadership through the department of Defense: the Chief of Naval Operations, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and the Coast Guard Commandant.



Let me take a few minutes and outline why I too believe that this Treaty is absolutely critical to U.S. national security, why it is time to move forward on this important issue, and why the longer we delay, the more we undermine our own national security interests.



The United States is at a strategic turning point after a decade of war. I’ve made that point time and time again. We’re facing, obviously, the requirement that we reduce the Defense budget by $487 billion dollars over the next ten years, pursuant to the directions of the Congress and the Budget Control Act. This is one of the few times in our history as we begin to come down from a war and from a period of threats to our national security, the problem is that even as these wars recede, we face a range of security challenges that are continuing to threaten our national security.



We confront transnational threats like violent extremism, terrorism, the kind of things we’ve heard about just over these last few days, those threats continue; the destabilizing behavior of nations like Iran and North Korea, military modernization across the Asia-Pacific and turmoil across the Middle East and North Africa and elsewhere. At the same time, we are dealing with the changing nature of warfare, the proliferation of lethal weapons and lethal materials, and the growing threat of cyber intrusion and cyber attacks.



These real and growing challenges and the reality is that they are beyond the ability of any single nation to resolve alone. That is why a key part of our new defense strategy is to try to meet these challenges by modernizing our network of defense and innovative security partnerships—the kind that we have at NATO, the kind that we have elsewhere, different parts of the world—to try to develop those partnerships so that we can support a rules-based international order that promotes stability, that promotes security, and that promotes safety.



And that is also why the United States should be exerting a leadership role in the development and interpretation of the rules that determine legal certainty on the world’s oceans.



Let me gives you some reasons why this treaty is essential to a strong national security.



First, as the world’s pre-eminent maritime power, and we are, and we will remain so, this country with one of the largest coastlines and extended continental shelf in the world, we have more to gain from accession to the Convention than any other country because of the interest we have from our coastlines, from our oceans, and from our continental shelves. By moving off the sidelines, by sitting at the table of nations that have acceded to this treaty, we can defend our interests, we can lead the discussions, we will be able to influence those treaty bodies that develop and interpret the Law of the Sea. If we’re not there, then they’ll do it, and we won’t have a voice.



In that way, we would ensure that our rights are not whittled away by the excessive claims and erroneous interpretations of others. And it would give us the credibility to support and promote the peaceful resolution of disputes within a rules-based order.



Second, by joining the Convention, we would protect our navigational freedoms and global access for our military our commercial ships, our aircraft, and our undersea fiber optic cables. As it currently stands, we are forced to assert our rights to freedom of navigation, asserting hopefully, through customary international law, which can change to our own detriment.



Treaty law remains the firmest legal foundation upon which to base our global presence, on, above, and below the seas. By joining the Convention, we would help lock in rules that are favorable to freedom of navigation and our own global mobility.



Third, accession would help lock-in a truly massive increase in our country’s resource and economic jurisdiction, not only to 200 nautical miles off our coasts, but to a broad continental shelf beyond that zone.



Fourth, accession would ensure our ability to reap the benefits of the opening of the Arctic – a region of increasingly important maritime security and economic interest. We already see countries that are posturing for new shipping routes and natural resources as Arctic ice cover melts and recedes. The Convention is the only means for international recognition and acceptance of our extended continental shelf claims in the Arctic, and we are the only Arctic nation that is not party to the Convention.



Accession would also preserve our navigation and over-flight rights throughout the Arctic, and strengthen our arguments for freedom of navigation through the Northwest Passage and Northern Sea Route.



Finally, our new defense strategy emphasizes the strategically vital arc extending from the Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean region and South Asia. Becoming a party to the Convention would strengthen our position in these key areas.



For example, numerous countries sit astride critical trade and supply routes and propose restrictions on access for military vessels in the Indian Ocean, Persian Gulf, and the South China Sea. The United States has long declared our interests and our respect for international law, for freedom of navigation, for the peaceful resolution of disputes.







How New Prosthetics Are Changing

Walter Reed National Military Medical Center 


ShareAccording to the Department of Defense, 1,453 service members have lost limbs since the start of the wars in 2001. Of those, 82% were lower extremity injuries. In spite of this, some wounded warriors are not letting their lack of limbs slow down their stride


Thanks to some advancements in technology, some of these injured troops have returned to active duty. A few of them even went back to the war. How’s that possible? Injured troops at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center are trying out a new type of computerized prosthetic that’s helping them to walk

He Made It Look Easy


‘Eisenhower in War and Peace,’ by Jean Edward Smith

By JOHN LEWIS GADDIS

Published: April 20, 2012

Facebook

Twitter

Google+

Email

Share

Print

Reprints





 



SCIENCE OF MILITARY
FROM NEW YORK TIMES BOOK REVIEW
EISENHOWER IN WAR AND PEACE



By Jean Edward Smith



Illustrated. 950 pp. Random House. $40.



Related

Times Topic: Dwight David EisenhowerJean Edward Smith challenged that argument about Grant in a well-received biography published a decade ago: Grant had been a better president than contemporaries or previous biographers realized, Smith maintained. In “Eisenhower in War and Peace,” Smith, who is now a senior scholar at Columbia after many years at the University of Toronto and Marshall University, makes a more startling claim. Apart from Franklin D. Roosevelt (whose biography Smith has also written), Ike was “the most successful president of the 20th century.”



Historians long ago abandoned the view that Eisenhower’s was a failed presidency. He did, after all, end the Korean War without getting into any others. He stabilized, and did not escalate, the Soviet-American rivalry. He strengthened European alliances while withdrawing support from European colonialism. He rescued the Republican Party from isolationism and McCarthyism. He maintained prosperity, balanced the budget, promoted technological innovation, facilitated (if reluctantly) the civil rights movement and warned, in the most memorable farewell address since Washington’s, of a “military-industrial complex” that could endanger the nation’s liberties. Not until Reagan would another president leave office with so strong a sense of having accomplished what he set out to do.



But does Eisenhower merit a place in the pantheon just behind Franklin Roosevelt? Smith’s case would be stronger if he had specified standards for presidential success. What allowances should one make for unexpected incumbencies, like those of the first Roosevelt, Coolidge, Truman, Johnson and Ford? Or for holding office in wartime? Or for “black swan” events — economic crashes, natural disasters, protest movements, self-inflicted scandals, terrorist attacks? What’s the proper balance between planning and improvisation, between being a hedgehog, in Isaiah Berlin’s famous distinction, and being a fox?



Smith doesn’t say. But he does carefully trace Eisenhower’s preparation for the presidency, and that’s what this biography is really about. (Only a quarter of the book is devoted to the White House years and beyond.) From it, Eisenhower’s own views on success in leadership emerge reasonably clearly. To reduce them to the length of a tweet — an exercise my students recommend, and which Ike might well have approved — they amount to achieving one’s ends without corrupting them.



Ends, Eisenhower knew, are potentially infinite. Means can never be. Therefore the task of leaders — whether in the presidency or anywhere else — is to reconcile that contradiction: to deploy means in such a way as to avoid doing too little, which risks defeat, but also too much, which risks exhaustion. Failure can come either way.



Exhaustion was the problem in World War I, in which the costs on all sides allowed no decisive outcome. As a young (and disappointed) Army captain, Eisenhower was kept stateside during the hostilities, training troops in the use of the recently invented tank. After peace returned, he and his fellow officers assumed there would be another war, but they had to plan for it under conditions wholly different from the profligacy with which the last one had been fought. With cuts in military spending that left ranks reduced, Eisenhower’s generation took limited means as their default position.



Doing as much as possible with as little as possible required setting priorities, so Eisenhower made himself an expert, during the 1920s and 1930s, on the theory and practice of limited means. The theory came from the 19th-century Prussian strategist Carl von Clausewitz, whose difficult classic, “On War,” Eisenhower mastered, as almost no one else in the Army at the time did. The practice came from serving on staffs: of Fox Conner in Panama, who introduced him to Clausewitz; of John J. Pershing in Paris, who had him map World War I battle sites; of Douglas MacArthur in Washington and the Philippines, from whom Eisenhower learned the pitfalls of arrogance in command; and, in the final years of peace, of the indispensable George C. Marshall, who catapulted Eisenhower above hundreds of more senior officers to make him, after Pearl Harbor, the Army’s chief planner.



Eisenhower’s skills were not those required to command armies on battlefields: in this respect, he lacked the talents of his World War II contemporaries Bradley, Patton and Montgomery. But in his ability to weigh costs against benefits, to delegate authority, to communicate clearly, to cooperate with allies, to maintain morale and especially to see how all the parts of a picture related to the whole (it was not just for fun that he later took up painting), Eisenhower’s preparation for leadership proved invaluable. Lincoln went through many generals before he found Grant, Smith reminds us. Roosevelt found in Eisenhower, with Marshall’s help, the only general he needed to run the European war.



There were setbacks, to be sure: the North African and Italian campaigns, the Battle of the Bulge after the triumph of D-Day. But because Eisenhower showed himself to have learned from these crises, Roosevelt and Marshall never lost confidence in him. At the same time, Ike was perfecting the art of leading while leaving no trace — the “hidden hand” for which he would be known while in the White House. The best wartime example, Smith suggests, was the way he gave his subtle support to Charles de Gaulle as the leader of the Free French, which left Roosevelt — no fan of le grand Charles — with a fait accompli. Eisenhower was getting to be good at politics as well as war.



Politics beckoned, after his victories, as it did with Grant before him, but the situations they inherited upon becoming president could hardly have been more different. Facing no credible external enemy, the United States in 1869 was as inward looking as it ever had been or would be. But by 1953, its interests were global and threats seemed to be too. Grant, in the aftermath of the Civil War, struggled to maintain any weapons more lethal than those required to fight American Indians. Eisenhower controlled weaponry that, if used without restraint, could have ended life on the planet.



Success in his mind, then, required not just avoiding the corruption of ends by means, but also their annihilation. How could the United States wage a war that might last for decades without turning itself into an authoritarian state, without exhausting itself in limited conflicts on terrain chosen by adversaries, without risking a new world war that could destroy all its participants? And how, throughout all of this, could the country retain a culture in which its traditional values — even the bland and boring ones — could flourish?



Eisenhower’s greatest accomplishment may well have been to make his presidency look bland and boring: in this sense, he was very different from the flamboyant Roosevelt, and that’s why historians at first underestimated him. Jean Edward Smith is among the many who no longer do. The greatest virtue of his biography is to show how well Eisenhower’s military training prepared him for this task: like Grant, he made what he did seem easy. It never was, though, and Smith stresses the toll it took on Eisenhower’s health, on his marriage and ultimately in the loneliness he could never escape. Perhaps Ike earned his place in the pantheon after all.





John Lewis Gaddis teaches history and grand strategy at Yale. His latest book is “George F. Kennan: An American Life.”



This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:



Correction: May 6, 2012





A review on April 22 about “Eisenhower in War and Peace,” by Jean Edward Smith, erroneously attributed a distinction to Ulysses S. Grant, who, like Eisenhower, won elections easily. It was Benjamin Harrison — not Grant — who was the last general before Dwight D. Eisenhower to become president. (Like Harrison, Rutherford B. Hayes, James Garfield and Chester A. Arthur all attained the rank of general and also reached the White House subsequent to Grant.)

Subject:  Armed with Science Update


You are 

Inspiring Future Leaders STEMS From Innovative Thinking

05/08/2012 10:05 AM CDT





The 317th Recruiting Squadron, based at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, recently started a program to inspire innovation and creativity in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) programs. They challenged students in Washington D.C., Virginia and Maryland schools with a simple question: Why are STEM careers important to our Nation? The squadron received an overwhelming response.

Because this looks like it would be hard to fit on a dashboard or in a cockpit. (United States Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Mike Meares)

“Platforms such as missiles rely on GPS for a variety of information,” explained Andrei Shkel, DARPA program manager. “When GPS is not available gyroscopes provide orientation, accelerometers provide position and oscillators provide timing. The new C-SCAN effort focuses on replacing bulky gyroscopes with a new inertial measurement unit (IMU) that is smaller, less expensive due to foundry fabrication and yields better performance.”

WASHINGTON (Army News Service, April 18, 2012) -- An Army doctor has helped develop a vaccine that he believes will prevent cancer, or at least its recurrence.




The drug NeuVax began phase III clinical trials Jan. 20, which Col. George Peoples said could lead to its Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, approval. Peoples is chief of surgical oncology at the San Antonio Military Medical Center when he's not traveling the world to provide surgical expertise or working to try and find a cure for cancer.



He is currently deployed to Honduras.



The phase III clinical trial for NeuVax will involve at least 700 breast cancer patients at 100 sites in the United States and abroad. The trial is titled PRESENT, Prevention of Recurrence in Early-Stage, Node-Positive Breast Cancer with Low to Intermediate HER2 Expression with NeuVax Treatment.



Participants will receive one intradermal injection every month for six months, followed by a booster inoculation every six months thereafter. The primary endpoint is disease-free survival at three years.



"The first patient was vaccinated with NeuVax in January at San Antonio Military Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas," Peoples said.



Peoples is the director and principal investigator for a Cancer Vaccine Development Program that he has been working on since the early 90s. The vaccine carries the generic name E75.



This third and final phase of testing before FDA approval will bring NeuVax one step closer to the market and to the breast cancer patients who need more options, Peoples said.



According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 203,000 individuals in the United States are diagnosed with invasive breast cancer each year.



VACCINE DEVELOPMENT



The current vaccine is the result of nearly 20 years of research by Peoples and others, and has paralleled the development of the drug Herceptin.



"Herceptin is one of our biggest breast cancer drugs right now. It targets a protein commonly over-expressed in breast cancer cells called human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, or HER2/neu," Peoples said.



This drug, he said, has cut the rate of breast cancer recurrence in half ; the first drug to ever have this dramatic of a response.



"So of course, HER2/neu became the molecule of the decade and Herceptin now is a multi-billion dollar drug," Peoples said.



At the time that this was all being developed in the 90s, he said, HER2/neu had also been identified as a potential target for vaccination at two different labs.



"During my surgical residency in Boston, I was working with a lab at the Harvard Medical School in the Laboratory of Biologic Cancer Therapy, and there was another lab working on a very similar type approach at MD Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas," he said.



After identifying the protein HER2/neu as a potential target, both labs continued their search for the portion actually recognized by the immune system. The immune system knows HER2/neu is a dangerous protein, particularly during adult development, and if it sees a lot of this protein, it will kill that cell, Peoples said.



The E75 peptide was discovered at MD Anderson by Dr. Constantin Ioannides and his then-graduate student Bryan Fisk. Interestingly, Bryan would later become an Army physician, Peoples related.



"But then, as luck would have it, after I finished my surgical residency in Boston, I did my surgical oncology fellowship at MD Anderson," Peoples said, adding that he shifted his focus to this peptide, working in the lab with Dr. Ioannides and helping initially with one of the first clinical trials, run by Dr. James L. Murray, a medical oncologist there.



After finishing his fellowship, Peoples went back to Walter Reed to start as staff surgical oncologist where he initiated a similar clinical trial of E75, but focused on using the vaccine to prevent the recurrence of cancer.



During this time, he did vaccine trials on multiple HER2/neu-related peptides and other antigens, which he says work well for breast cancer, but also other similar-type proteins made by cancers that can be targeted as cancer vaccines.



VACCINE MIGHT PREVENT OTHER CANCERS



"People who are in my field approach this by saying, yes there are ways to treat cancer, but why wait and treat, why not try to prevent?



The desire to prevent disease, he said, is what led to the eradication of smallpox and hopefully will lead to the eradication of polio.



"If you vaccinate enough people, you prevent the disease and it can no longer exist in the population; eventually it's eradicated. So, if you believe that concept, then we need to figure out a way to prevent cancers, as opposed to detect them earlier or treat them better," Peoples said.



He said one of the advantages of HER2/neu is the majority of cancers actually express some levels of the protein. It's not exclusive to breast cancer, either, Peoples said.



"Clinically, we think about it mostly being associated with breast cancer, but that's just because of the popularity of Herceptin," he said.



Unfortunately, Peoples said, Herceptin is not effective in most cancers. In fact, in breast cancer only 20 percent have a sufficient amount of the HER2/neu protein for the antibody to work, and in other cancers it's even less than that.



"So that leaves the other 80 percent of breast cancer out and not eligible for Herceptin," Peoples said. He added that fortunately, the NeuVax vaccine can target breast cancers that have lower levels of HER2/neu expression.



Along with the 20 percent of breast cancer that has high enough levels of HER2/neu for Herceptin to work, Peoples further explained that another 20 percent of breast cancer has no HER2/neu expression.



"But then there's that middle 60 percent that has some level and that's actually the group of people we're primarily targeting with the vaccine right now, because we've shown that the vaccine works well in that group and that group has no Herceptin-like treatment right now," Peoples explained.



"Probably the bigger point there is ... if it works, if the vaccine works in that lower level of HER2/neu expression group, then you can go look at other cancers that are not being targeted by Herceptin..."



And those other cancers, he said, are anything that comes from an epithelial cell, which are the big cancers - lung cancer, prostate cancer, colon cancer, some blood cancers, ovarian cancer, and gastric cancer.



"So it's all of the big cancers that we face in the United States, all of those have a significant proportion of the tumors expressing some level of HER2/neu and, therefore, theoretically targetable by the vaccine.



"So that's the more exciting piece to this. We have tested the vaccine in prostate cancer, we're testing it currently in ovarian and endometrial cancer, we have not done lung or colon, yet, though that's on the list for future trials.



"So we have tried to show that the vaccine can, in fact, be used in multiple cancers, and it's more related to HER2/neu expression than it is to the actual name on the tumor," Peoples said.



TRULY PREVENTIVE VACCINE



A lot of times, he said, people actually do have cancer cells, or "cancer-esque" cells. It's just they haven't formed the cancer yet. And so those cells will theoretically be recognizable to the immune system, and can be affected by a vaccine.



"Ultimately, that is the goal - to provide a protective-type vaccine so that a person never actually develops the cancer," Peoples said.



HER2/neu, he said, is an important antigen, but it may not be the most critical antigen. There may be others, particularly ones that are common in the development process of the cancer.



"So you could ultimately envision a vaccine that targets those critical proteins that are necessary for cancer to form. And if you have immunity, such that your body can recognize those proteins as soon as they show up, then theoretically, you could prevent a person from ever developing a cancer."



"The good news is, I think those proteins are likely to be common proteins, shared among multiple cancer types. So if you have immunity against one of those proteins, we'll use HER2/neu for an example, if you had immunity against HER2/neu, then you could prevent the development of any one of these types of cancers. So, it wouldn't be a cancer-specific vaccine, but a vaccine that would protect you against lung cancer, colon cancer, prostate cancer, etc."

National Security In Space




Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz addresses attendees at the 28th National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, Colo. (U.S. Air Force photo/Duncan Wood)

The Air Force chief of staff spoke to leaders from industry, academia and the government about the current state of national security space and the U.S. aerospace industrial base at the 28th National Space Symposium.



In his remarks, Gen. Norton Schwartz also recognized the efforts and accomplishments of the Air Force’s major command charged with delivering military-focused space and cyberspace capabilities to the joint warfighting team.



“Operating at 134 locations around the world, the 42,000 Airmen, government civilians and contractors of Air Force Space Command are dedicated and trusted stewards of approximately 85 percent of the Defense Department‘s budget for space, providing space and cyber capabilities that, according to the new Defense Strategic Guidance, are absolutely vital to the conduct of high-tempo, effective operations by modern armed forces — particularly ours,” Schwartz said.



Capabilities and services such as spacelift; secured, high-volume and long-haul communications; space situational awareness; precision navigation and timing; missile warning; and weather forecasting are some of the indispensable enablers that are and will continue to be relevant in both combat and non-military environments alike, the general said.



As the Air Force contends with fewer defense dollars and implements a new defense strategy, Schwartz said space will remain a top priority when it comes to service investments.



“Even with the extraordinary budget pressures we face, we are protecting and, in some cases, increasing investment in our top acquisition priorities,” he said. “Space acquisitions represents 21 percent of all Air Force investment spending, including four of 10 of our largest procurement programs.”



Space-borne capabilities have played and will continue to play a prominent role in the collective U.S. joint team capabilities, Schwartz said.



“In total, our fiscal year 2013 budget request includes about $9.6 billion for investments in our space programs to help us maintain overall preparedness in addressing a wide range of contingencies,” he said.



Space capabilities showed their importance to contingency operations during the recent humanitarian and disaster relief activity in the Far East and the combat operations in North Africa, he said.



“Behind the scenes of cargo airlift in Japan, or fighters and bombers in the air above Libya, was our Joint Space Operations Center providing a full range of reach-back space capabilities for theater commanders around the world,” Schwartz said.



The general also addressed the importance of a strong partnership between the U.S. government and aerospace industry.



“The government will continue to rely on the expertise, creativity, innovation and productivity of private industry — again, throughout the entire chain of materiel and service providers, large and small — while it works to ensure the least onerous regulatory regime possible,” Schwartz said.



As an example, he pointed to the proposal announced April 18 to normalize export control of satellites and related components by moving their jurisdiction from the U.S. Munitions to the Commerce Control List.



“While the government must continue to maintain reliable funding streams and avoid requirements creep, industry must continue to deliver capabilities on cost and on time to America’s warfighters,” Schwartz said.



The general concluded his speech by stating his belief that the air and space capabilities the Air Force provides will continue to be important to the nation.



“With many indicators that presage a continuing upward trend of air and space power’s importance to our national interests and our daily lives, the ability for those who aspire to take to the skies and into the heavens, to pursue their lofty aspirations, remains as promising and inspiring as it was for so many of us over recent decades,” Schwartz said.



“Together, we can — and must — further pick up the pace to maintain our leadership in air and space.”



To read the general’s full remarks, click here.



by Master Sgt. Kevin Williams

Air Force Space Command Public Affairs



———-



Disclaimer: The appearance of hyperlinks does not constitute endorsement by the Department of Defense of this website or the information, products or services contained therein. For other than authorized activities such as military exchanges and Morale, Welfare and Recreation sites, the Department of Defense does not exercise any editorial control over the information you may find at these locations. Such links are provided consistent with the stated purpose of this DoD website.



digg0reddit0email4share8

Better Than Bottled Water

 Physical Sciences 




Water purification specialists with Combat Logistics Battalion 24, 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, put their water purification systems to the test on a Moroccan beach, during the bi-lateral exercise named African Lion 2012.



The Marines assembled a Tactical Water Purification System (TWPS) and Lightweight Water Purification System (LWPS) on the beach to turn ocean water into a sustainable, potable water source for the Marines conducting training operations with the Royal Moroccan Armed Forces, and test the systems on a foreign water source

Stop, Hey, What’s That Sound?

  Sound?