DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report, the SEI-3 Group Made Several Recommendations for Areas of Further Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report, the SEI-3 Group Made Several Recommendations for Areas of Further Study NPS-97-04-001 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA Expeditionary Warfare Force Protection by Eric John Higgins Ronald Leroy Higgs Gregory Rodger Parkins Vincent Santos Tionquiao Christopher Kevin Wells January 2004 Reproduction of all or part of this report is not authorized without permission of the Naval Postgraduate School. Prepared for: Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs (OPNAV N7), 2000 Navy Pentagon, Rm. 4E392, Washington, DC 20350-2000 BIBLIOGRAPHY AAAV. Federation of American Scientists. January 16, 1999. Accessed October 4, 2003. www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/aaav.htm. AH-1Z. Bell Helicopter. Accessed November 3, 2003. http://www.bellhelicopter.textron.com/aircraft/military/bell_ah-1z.html. AIAA/INCOSE. Systems Engineering: A Way of Thinking, A Way of Doing Business, Enabling Organized Transition From Need To Product. INCOSE.org. June 4, 1999. Accessed September 30, 2003. <www.incose.org/lib/aiaa/brochure.html>; www.incose.org/whatis.html. Airborne Laser Mine Detection System. Northrop-Grumman Integrated Systems. 2003. Accessed November 20, 2003. <http://www.is.northropgrumman.com/products/navy.html>. Avital, I., Kim, H., NG, Y., and Tan, C. 2003. SI4000: Defense of Sea Base. Department of Operations Research, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Bloom, G.S. MV-22. The Helicopter Page. August 2, 2003. Accessed October 3, 2003. http://www.helicopterpage.com/aircraft/military/bell_v22.html. Braga, B. 1996. Worldwide Torpedo Countermeasure Technology Assessment Circa 1995. Naval Undersea Weapons Center, Newport, RI. Calvano, C. Memo, dtd May 22, 2003. 2003 Project Guidance for AY 2003 SEA4 Team. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Chan, J., Cheng, W., Choo, J. Goh, S., Khoo, W., Phua, T., and Tan, W. 2003. Exploratory Study of the Operationalization of the Flapping Wing MAV. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Chee Hwee, O., Ching Leong, T., Cher Shin, E., Sin Hie, S., Teck Yong, L., Wai Lek, L., Wee Pin, L. 2003. Protection of the Sea Base (A Sensory Perspective). Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Chee Khan, K., Vi-Keng, K., Soo Sim, N., Tee Huu, S., Boon Hwee, T., Kheng Lee, T., and Tiat Leng, T. 2003. SI4000: Information Assurance Plan for the Protection of the Sea Base Information Systems. Department of Computer Science, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Clark, V. Sea Power 21 – Projecting Decisive Joint Capabilities. U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, October 2002. i Cobian, D. December 2002. Sea Javelin: An Analysis Of Naval Force Protection Alternatives. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Department of Defense Dictionary of Military Terms. Joint Doctrine Division. 2003. Accessed November 20, 2003. <http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict>. Directional Infrared Countermeasures System. Northrop-Grumman. 2003. Accessed November 20, 2003. http://www.northropgrumman.com/tech_cd/es/es_dircm.html; <http://www.northropgrumman.com/tech_cd/es/es_dircm_fact.html>. Efimba, M.E. 2003. An Exploratory Analysis of Littoral Combat Ships' Ability to Protect Expeditionary Strike Groups. Department of Operations Research, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Green, J.M. 1999. Modeling the Ship as a Weapon System. Raytheon Naval & Maritime Integrated Systems. Hagan, K.J. 1991. This People's Navy: The Making of American Sea Power. New York: The Free Press. Harney, R.C. 2002. Combat Systems Vol. 2: Sensor Elements. Institute for Defense Systems Engineering and Analysis, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Harney, R.C. 2003. Combat Systems Class Notes. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Headquarters, United States Marine Corps. January 4, 1996. Operational Maneuver From The Sea. Department of the Navy, USMC, Washington, DC. Headquarters, United States Marine Corps. April 16, 1998. Expeditionary Operations MCDP 3. Department of the Navy, USMC, Washington, DC. Headquarters, United States Marine Corps. November 10, 2001. Expeditionary Maneuver Warfare. Department of the Navy, USMC, Washington, DC. Headquarters, United States Marine Corps. 2003. Marine Corps Concepts and Programs Department of the Navy, USMC, Washington, DC. Hughes, W.P. A Salvo Model of Warships in Missile Combat Used to Evaluate Their Staying Power. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Hutchinson, R. 2001. Jane's Submarines: War Beneath the Waves. England: Bath Press. Imagine That!. 2002. EXTEND Professional Simulation Tools Users Guide v5. San Jose: Imagine That!. ii Infrared Propagation and Detection. Fas.org. January 20, 1998. Accessed July 29, 2003. <http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/es310/IR_prop/IR_prop.htm>. Integrated Defensive Electronics Countermeasures. Federation of American Scientists. 2003. Accessed November 21, 2003. <http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/idecm.htm>. Joint Theater Level Simulation. Rolands & Associates Corporation. 2002. Accessed November 14, 2003. <http://www.rolands.com/Home/Projects/JTLS/jtlsinfo.htm>. JSF. Joint Strike Fighter. Accessed October 3, 2003. <http://www.jsf.mil/IEFrames.htm>. LCAC. Global Security.org. February 14, 2000. Accessed October 4, 2003. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/lcac.htm. LCU. Global Security.org. Accessed October 4, 2003. <http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lcu-1610.htm>; http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lcu-gallery.htm. LCU(R). The Anchor. June 25, 2003. Accessed October 4, 2003. http://www.emx-inc.com/images/Soundings.pdf. LCU(R). Global Security.org. Accessed October 4, 2003. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lcu-x.htm. Littoral Airborne Sensor – Hyperspectral. STI Government Systems. 2001. Accessed November 18, 2003. <http://www.sti-government.com/Applications/LASH.html>. Littoral Mine Countermeasures Rapid Reconnaissance System. STI Government Systems. 2001. Accessed November 18, 2003. <http://www.sti-government.com/Optical_Imaging_Systems/L-MCM_RRS.html>. Magic Lantern. Kaman Aerospace. 2003. Accessed November 18, 2003. <http://www.kamanaero.com/EODC/eodcml.htm>, <http://www.kamanaero.com/EODC/eodcas.htm>. MCCDC. July 25, 1997. Ship-to-Objective Maneuver. MCCDC, Quantico, VA. Morison, S.L. 1995. Guide to Naval Mine Warfare. Arlington: Pasha Publications, Inc. Morison, S.L. 2000. International Guide to Naval Mine Warfare. 2nd Ed. Washington, DC: King Communications Group. Morris, D. The Mine Warfare Cycle: History, Indications, and Future. Global Security.org. 1997. Accessed May 29, 2003. <http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/libarary/report/1997/Morris.htm>. iii MSSE Cohort 1. 2003. Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Anti-Air Warfare Self Defense Combat System Concept. Department of Systems Engineering, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Kit Chan, M., Foo Tung, Y., Lim, S., Koon Teo, C., Kapolka, D., and Karunasiri, G. 2003. Cooperative Radar Network: Concept Exploration for Defending the Sea Base. Department of Physics, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. National Research Council. 2000. Oceanography and Mine Warfare. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Naval Simulation System. Metron, Inc. 2000. Accessed November 14, 2003. <http://www.metsci.com/ssd/nss.html>. Paulo, G. 2003. Introduction to the Systems Engineering and Management Process, Text/notes for SI4001. Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System. Kaman Aerospace. 2003. Accessed November 18, 2003. <http://www.kamanaero.com/EODC/eodcrsdd.htm>. Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System. Raytheon. 2003. Accessed November 20, 2003. <http://www.raytheon.com/products/ramics/>. Running Gear Entanglement System. Naval Industry Partners. 2002. Accessed November 21, 2003. <http://www.naval-industrypartners.com/2002/02%20presentations/aug13/selaine.pdf>. Sakuja, V. Terrorist Sea Strategy: The Kamikaze Approach. Taiwan Research Institute. Accessed May 29, 2003. <http://www.dsis.org.tw/peaceforum/papers/2003-02/ap0302001e.htm>. Schoch, E.J. 2003. Quantifying SSGN Contributions to a Complex Joint Warfare Environment Through Simple Application of the Circulation Model. Department of Operations Research, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. Simulation & Modeling for Acquisition, Requirements and Training (SMART) Reference Guide, U.S. Army Modeling and Simulation Office, April 2001. Accessed November 17, 2003. <http://www.amso.army.mil/smart/documents/ref-guide/sec-VI/tools.htm>. Systems Engineering and Integration. 2003. Working Papers Collected in Minutes. Systems Engineering and Integration Curriculum (SEI-3). 2002. Naval Expeditionary Warfare Integrated Project. Department of Systems Engineering and Integration, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. iv UH-1Y. Bell Helicopter. Accessed November 3, 2003. <http://www.bellhelicopter.textron.com/aircraft/military/bell_uh-1y.html>. Urick, R.J. 1983. Principles of Underwater Sound. 3rd Ed. Los Altos: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Vessel Stopping System. Naval Surface Warfare Center – Carderock Division. 2003. Accessed November 21, 2003. <http://www.dt.navy.mil/pao/highlights/monthly%202000/Highlights%2030%20Aug%2000. doc>. Vessel Stopping System. Naval Surface Warfare Center – Carderock Division. 2003. Accessed November 21, 2003. <http://www.dt.navy.mil/pao/highlights/monthly%202000/Highlights%2030%20Aug%2000. doc>. Vision…Presence…Power, A Program Guide to the U.S. Navy. 2002 Edition. Accessed November 18, 2003. <http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/policy/vision/vis02/vpp02-ch3r.html>. v vi REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Cold War Conception of Nuclear Reality: Mobilizing the American Imagination for Nuclear War in the 1950'S
    International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, VoL 6, No. 3, 1993 The Cold War Conception of Nuclear Reality: Mobilizing the American Imagination for Nuclear War in the 1950's Guy Oakes THE CONSTRUCTION OF NUCLEAR REALITY During World War II, the United States was not occupied like Europe, invaded like the Soviet Union, or bombed like Great Britain. Nor was there any plausible suggestion that the home front might be subjected to any of these acts of war. As a result, it has been said that Americans were obliged to fight the war at a distance and "on imagination alone. ''1 Within months of V-J day, civil defense strategists began to make plans to mobilize the American public for World War III. By the late 1940's, these plans included preparations for a Soviet nuclear strike against the United States. Thus Cold War civil defense planning posed the much more daunt- ing problem of fighting an imaginary war. By 1950, the American foreign policy objective of containing what was perceived to be an otherwise irresistible expansion of Soviet power was tied to the strategy of nuclear deterrence. If the Soviets threatened war, the United States would guarantee the peace, if necessary by nuclear re- taliation. As students of the early Cold War have stressed for some years, this strategy rested on domestic presuppositions. It was necessary to mo- bilize the American home front in order to sustain what President Kennedy later called "a long twilight struggle" in support of a new conception of national security. In the nuclear age, the project of securing American na- tional interests would be interminable in principle, unprecedentedly expensive, and uniquely dangerous.
    [Show full text]
  • Future War: an Assessment of Aerospace Campaigns in 2010
    Future War An Assessment of Aerospace Campaigns in 2010 JEFFERY R. B ARNETT Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama January 1996 Li brary of Con gress Cataloging- in- Publication Data Barnett, Jeffery R., 1950– Future war : an assess ment of aerospace campaigns in 2010 / Jeffery R. Barnett . p. cm. Includes biblio graphi cal refer ences and index . 1. Air warfare—Fore cast ing. 2. Twenty-first century—Fore casts. I. Title . UG632.B37 1996 358.4′009′0501—dc20 95-54022 CIP Dis claimer This publication was produced in the Department of Defense school environment in the interest of academic freedom and the advancement of national defense-related concepts. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or pos ition of the Department of Defense or the United States government. This publication has been reviewed by security and policy authorities and is cleared for public release. ii This project would have been impossible without the support and advice of my wife, former Captain Katherine Hoyland Barnett, USAF. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Contents Chapter Page DISCLAIMER ............................. ii FOREWORD .............................. ix ABOUT THE AUTHOR ....................... xi PREFACE ................................ xiii Notes .................................. xiv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...................... xv INTRODUCTION . xvii 1 OVERARCHING CONCEPTS .................. 1 Information War. 2 Parallel War ............................. 8 Revolution in Military
    [Show full text]
  • Beginning Portable Shell Scripting from Novice to Professional
    Beginning Portable Shell Scripting From Novice to Professional Peter Seebach 10436fmfinal 1 10/23/08 10:40:24 PM Beginning Portable Shell Scripting: From Novice to Professional Copyright © 2008 by Peter Seebach All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner and the publisher. ISBN-13 (pbk): 978-1-4302-1043-6 ISBN-10 (pbk): 1-4302-1043-5 ISBN-13 (electronic): 978-1-4302-1044-3 ISBN-10 (electronic): 1-4302-1044-3 Printed and bound in the United States of America 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Trademarked names may appear in this book. Rather than use a trademark symbol with every occurrence of a trademarked name, we use the names only in an editorial fashion and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark. Lead Editor: Frank Pohlmann Technical Reviewer: Gary V. Vaughan Editorial Board: Clay Andres, Steve Anglin, Ewan Buckingham, Tony Campbell, Gary Cornell, Jonathan Gennick, Michelle Lowman, Matthew Moodie, Jeffrey Pepper, Frank Pohlmann, Ben Renow-Clarke, Dominic Shakeshaft, Matt Wade, Tom Welsh Project Manager: Richard Dal Porto Copy Editor: Kim Benbow Associate Production Director: Kari Brooks-Copony Production Editor: Katie Stence Compositor: Linda Weidemann, Wolf Creek Press Proofreader: Dan Shaw Indexer: Broccoli Information Management Cover Designer: Kurt Krames Manufacturing Director: Tom Debolski Distributed to the book trade worldwide by Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 233 Spring Street, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10013.
    [Show full text]
  • Torpedo Technology
    DRDO MONOGRAPH ERIES NO. I INTRODUCTION TO TORPEDO TECHNOLOGY Rear Adm (Retd) NK Ramanarasaiah, VSM Former Director Naval Science & Technological Laboratory Visakhapatnam DEFEN E RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION MINISTR Y OF DEFENCE, GOVT OF INDIA NEW DELHI·II0 011 1993 © 1993, Defence Scientific Information & Documentation Centre (DESIDOC), Delhi-110 054 Cover Photograph (Taken by the author) : The firing of a practice torpedo from a Kamorta class ship. Designed, typeset and printed at DESIDOC, Metcalfe House, Delhi-110 054. uthor r eh ing the' ienti t of the Y ar' award from the then Prime Mini ter ,'mt. Indira ;undhi - 198 ... uthor with Shri R Venkataraman, the then Defence Mini °ter \ hen he vi ited TL in the earl eightee. FOREWORD Oceans have always fascinated man and he has, from early days of civilisation, turned to them for adventure and exploration. Indeed, they have been his 'main highways' for extending his 'empire' and 'trade'. Over the last century, he has been exploiting the waters of the ocean for re ources-living and nonliving-and to fill his unsatiating need for energy. With such a role to play, oceans have been the arena where man has been waging wars to protect his sovereignty over the resources and to subjugate his enemies resulting in 'Armadas'-from Spanish wars to the present. It would not be an overstatement to declare that the 'sea power' to a large extent dictated the outcome of many wars upto and including the World War II The most potent weapon the seagoing ships of this century have been carrying is the 'torpedo', be it for antiship warfare or antisubmarine warfare, the latter being dominant since the World War II.
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, ARSENAL HERBICIDE APPLICATORS CONCENTRATE,09/07/2017
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, DC 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION September 7, 2017 Nina S. Rao Regulatory Manager BASF Corporation 26 Davis Drive P. O. Box 13528 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3528 Subject: Notification per PRN 98-10 – Updating label language to specify NY State applicator requirements. Product Name: Arsenal Herbicide Applicators Concentrate EPA Registration Number: 241-299 Application Date: 08/10/2017 Decision Number: 532575 Dear Nina S. Rao: The Agency is in receipt of your Application for Pesticide Notification under Pesticide Registration Notice (PRN) 98-10 for the above referenced product. The Registration Division (RD) has conducted a review of this request for its applicability under PRN 98-10 and finds that the action requested falls within the scope of PRN 98-10. The label submitted with the application has been stamped “Notification” and will be placed in our records. Should you wish to add/retain a reference to the company’s website on your label, then please be aware that the website becomes labeling under the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and is subject to review by the Agency. If the website is false or misleading, the product would be misbranded and unlawful to sell or distribute under FIFRA section 12(a)(1)(E). 40 CFR 156.10(a)(5) list examples of statements EPA may consider false or misleading. In addition, regardless of whether a website is referenced on your product’s label, claims made on the website may not substantially differ from those claims approved through the registration process.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX a Navy Activity Descriptions
    Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing Final EIS/OEIS September 2018 APPENDIX A Navy Activity Descriptions Appendix A Navy Activity Descriptions Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing Final EIS/OEIS September 2018 This page intentionally left blank. Appendix A Navy Activity Descriptions Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing Final EIS/OEIS September 2018 Final Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX A NAVY ACTIVITY DESCRIPTIONS _____________________________________________A-1 A.1 Description of Sonar, Munitions, Targets, and Other Systems Employed in Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing Events .................................................................. A-1 A.1.1 Sonar Systems and Other Acoustic Sources ......................................................... A-1 A.1.2 Munitions .............................................................................................................. A-7 A.1.3 Targets ................................................................................................................ A-11 A.1.4 Defensive Countermeasures ............................................................................... A-12 A.1.5 Mine Warfare Systems ........................................................................................ A-13 A.1.6 Military Expended Materials ............................................................................... A-15 A.2 Training Activities ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Linux Hardening Techniques Vasudev Baldwa Ubnetdef, Spring 2021 Agenda
    Linux Hardening Techniques Vasudev Baldwa UBNetDef, Spring 2021 Agenda 1. What is Systems Hardening? 2. Basic Principles 3. Updates & Encryption 4. Monitoring 5. Services 6. Firewalls 7. Logging What is System Hardening? ⬡ A collection of tools, techniques, and best practices to reduce vulnerability in technology applications, systems, infrastructure, firmware, and other areas ⬡ 3 major areas: OS vs Software vs Network ⬠ When have we done hardening in this class before? ⬠ This lecture is focusing mostly on OS and software level Why Harden? ⬡ Firewalls can only get us so far, what happens when at attack is inside the network? ⬠ If you have nothing protecting your systems you are in trouble ⬡ We want some kind of secondary protection A Few Cybersecurity Principles ⬡ Zero Trust Security ⬠ Instead of assuming everything behind the firewall is safe, Zero Trust verifies each request as though it originates from an unsecure network ⬡ Principle of Least Privilege ⬠ Only privileges needed to complete a task should be allowed ⬠ Users should not have domain administrator/root privileges ⬡ Principle of Least Common Mechanism ⬠ Mechanisms used to access resources should not be shared in order to avoid the transmission of data. ⬠ Shared resources should not be used to access resources The Threat Model ⬡ A process by which potential threats can be identified and prioritized. ⬠ If you have a web server that feeds input to a mysql database, then protecting against mysql injections would be prioritized in your model. 2 considerations ⬡ *nix like is a very
    [Show full text]
  • The Third Battle
    NAVAL WAR COLLEGE NEWPORT PAPERS 16 The Third Battle Innovation in the U.S. Navy's Silent Cold War Struggle with Soviet Submarines N ES AV T A A L T W S A D R E C T I O N L L U E E G H E T R I VI IBU OR A S CT MARI VI Owen R. Cote, Jr. Associate Director, MIT Security Studies Program The Third Battle Innovation in the U.S. Navy’s Silent Cold War Struggle with Soviet Submarines Owen R. Cote, Jr. Associate Director, MIT Security Studies Program NAVAL WAR COLLEGE Newport, Rhode Island Naval War College The Newport Papers are extended research projects that the Newport, Rhode Island Editor, the Dean of Naval Warfare Studies, and the Center for Naval Warfare Studies President of the Naval War College consider of particular Newport Paper Number Sixteen interest to policy makers, scholars, and analysts. Candidates 2003 for publication are considered by an editorial board under the auspices of the Dean of Naval Warfare Studies. President, Naval War College Rear Admiral Rodney P. Rempt, U.S. Navy Published papers are those approved by the Editor of the Press, the Dean of Naval Warfare Studies, and the President Provost, Naval War College Professor James F. Giblin of the Naval War College. Dean of Naval Warfare Studies The views expressed in The Newport Papers are those of the Professor Alberto R. Coll authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Naval War College or the Department of the Navy. Naval War College Press Editor: Professor Catherine McArdle Kelleher Correspondence concerning The Newport Papers may be Managing Editor: Pelham G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Strategic Defense Initiative- Implications for U.S
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-1987 The trs ategic defense initiative : implications for U.S. deterrence policy. Alan Scot MacDougall University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation MacDougall, Alan Scot, "The trs ategic defense initiative : implications for U.S. deterrence policy." (1987). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 1754. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/1754 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE- IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. DETERRENCE POLICY A Dissertation Presented by ALAN SCOT MACDOUGALL Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY February 1987 Political Science an Scot MacDougaH 1986 Al 1 Ri ghts Reserved i i THE STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE- IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. DETERRENCE POLICY A Dissertation Presented By ALAN SCOT MACDOUGALL ApprovecLas to style and content by Eric Einhorn, Chairperson of the Committee Edward E. Feit, Member .. Stephen Pelz, Member Lewis C. Mainzer, Department Head Political Science i i i TO MY WIFE CAROL i v . PREFACE The strategic defense initiative has brought the issue of strategic defenses and particularly ballistic missile defenses back to the forefront of the ever raging national security debate. Issues that were thought foreclosed by the ABM Treaty in 1972 have reemerged as a host of new questions have been instigated by President Reagan's speech of March 23, 1983.
    [Show full text]
  • Taiwan's Indigenous Defense Industry: Centralized Control of Abundant
    Taiwan’s Indigenous Defense Industry: Centralized Control of Abundant Suppliers David An, Matt Schrader, Ned Collins-Chase May 2018 About the Global Taiwan Institute GTI is a 501(c)(3) non-profit policy incubator dedicated to insightful, cutting-edge, and inclusive research on policy issues regarding Taiwan and the world. Our mission is to enhance the relationship between Taiwan and other countries, especially the United States, through policy research and programs that promote better public understanding about Taiwan and its people. www.globaltaiwan.org About the Authors David An is a senior research fellow at the Global Taiwan Institute. David was a political-military affairs officer covering the East Asia region at the U.S. State Department from 2009 to 2014. Mr. An received a State Department Superior Honor Award for initiating this series of political-military visits from senior Taiwan officials, and also for taking the lead on congressional notification of U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. He received his M.A. from UCSD Graduate School of Global Policy and Strategy and his B.A. from UC Berkeley. Matt Schrader is the Editor-in-Chief of the China Brief at the Jamestown Foundation, MA candidate at Georgetown University, and previously an intern at GTI. Mr. Schrader has over six years of professional work experience in China. He received his BA from the George Washington University. Ned Collins-Chase is an MA candidate at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and previously an intern at GTI. He has worked in China, been a Peace Corps volunteer in Mo- zambique, and was also an intern at the US State Department.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting the Anti-Access and Area-Denial Challenge
    Meeting the Anti-Access and Area-Denial Challenge Andrew Krepinevich, Barry Watts & Robert Work 1730 Rhode Island Avenue, NW, Suite 912 Washington, DC 20036 Meeting the Anti-Access and Area-Denial Challenge by Andrew Krepinevich Barry Watts Robert Work Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments 2003 ABOUT THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND BUDGETARY ASSESSMENTS The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments is an independent public policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking about defense planning and investment strategies for the 21st century. CSBA’s analytic-based research makes clear the inextricable link between defense strategies and budgets in fostering a more effective and efficient defense, and the need to transform the US military in light of the emerging military revolution. CSBA is directed by Dr. Andrew F. Krepinevich and funded by foundation, corporate and individual grants and contributions, and government contracts. 1730 Rhode Island Ave., NW Suite 912 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 331-7990 http://www.csbaonline.org CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... I I. NEW CHALLENGES TO POWER PROJECTION.................................................................. 1 II. PROSPECTIVE US AIR FORCE FAILURE POINTS........................................................... 11 III. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY AND ASSURED ACCESS: A CRITICAL RISK ASSESSMENT .29 IV. THE ARMY AND THE OBJECTIVE FORCE ..................................................................... 69 V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................... 93 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the Cold War, the United States defense posture called for substantial forces to be located overseas as part of a military strategy that emphasized deterrence and forward defense. Large combat formations were based in Europe and Asia. Additional forces—both land-based and maritime—were rotated periodically back to the rear area in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Processes and Job Control
    Processes and Job Control Hour 17 PObjectives < Definitions: process, orphan, and zombie < System processes < Process creation < Examining processes: the ps command < Job control: &, nohup, fg, bg, jobs, ( ), and kill < Exit status Copyright © 1998-2002 Delroy A. Brinkerhoff. All Rights Reserved. Hour 17 Unix Slide 1 of 12 Process Also called a job by C and Korn shells PWhen a program or executable file is loaded from disk and started running (i.e., when a command is run), it is called a process vi pid 641 < identified by a unique process ID (PID) number < has an owner vi < private data vi PA program can be loaded more than once pid 895 < creates multiple processes vi < each process has a different PID < each process may have a different owner PPIDs are unique, nonnegative integers < numbers recycle without collisions Hour 17 Unix Slide 2 of 12 System Processes Processes created during system boot P0System kernel < “hand crafted” at boot < called swap in older versions (swaps the CPU between processes) < called sched in newer versions (schedules processes) < creates process 1 P1 init (the parent of all processes except process 0) < general process spawner < begins building locale-related environment < sets or changes the system run-level P2 page daemon (pageout on most systems) P3 file system flusher (fsflush) Hour 17 Unix Slide 3 of 12 Process Life Cycle Overview of creating new processes fork init init pid 467 Pfork creates two identical pid 1 exec processes (parent and child) getty pid 467 Pexec < replaces the process’s instructions
    [Show full text]