THE STORY SO FAR: PART 192

DEFEATING TERRORISM—WHAT WORKS BEST, AND WHAT WORKS RARELY

Note well the above sobering figures: Terrorists have only been defeated militarily in 7 percent out of 268 cases reviewed. But surely U.S. military might is different?

Well, it might be nice to think so, but America’s track record does not support such a view.

But what rotten Leftist organization did the research? Actually, it was RAND, who were set up by the Air Force, and who can scarcely be described as liberal. Could it be that that they are merely reporting the facts?

I first encountered terrorism in the Fifties while staying with a friend who lived near the Curragh in Ireland. We were both about twelve at the time.The Curragh is a large area of flat-ish heathland which not only boasts a rather famous race course, but also housed a substantial force of the British Army when they occupied Ireland. Now the Irish Army hold sway, and have since the British withdrew from most of Ireland in 1921—though they, the British, have remained in the North (Six counties out of Ireland’s 32).

My friend and I decided to go to the movies, and since the fastest way there was to cross the Army’s lands, that is exactly what we decided to do. We doubted we would be seen. It was dark, and we prided ourselves in being able to cross country undetected. We were, so to speak, not only going to a movie—but in a movie.  Such is the power of a child’s imagination.

All went well until we came face to face with what looked exactly like a prisoner of war camp straight out of the movies. There were barbed wire fences, watch-towers, a brilliantly lit perimeter, and armed guards. If their weren’t mines and machine-guns, our imaginations painted them in. Frankly, I doubt there were mines—or we would have been blown up. We were crossing the area where such devices are normally placed. As for machine-guns, yes, there were there in all their lethal reality. If a small number of guards has to contain large numbers of prisoners, such are the tools of the trade.

We crouched in the shadows. The weakness of a brightly-lit perimeter is the darkness beyond. This was before the days of night vision.

A POW camp in Ireland! Why?

The sight left an indelible impression on me. It was a graphic demonstration of the power of a government—and I wasn’t entirely relieved when I learned that the camp’s occupants were suspected IRA terrorists who hadn’t actually been convicted of anything, but had merely been interned on the word of a police officer. So much for due process.

Since that time, I had a great deal to do with terrorism and its consequences—sometimes merely though reading, sometimes as a byproduct of living in Ireland and the UK during the decades of the Troubles, and sometimes in places like Northern Ireland, Cyprus and Italy where I suppose I went looking for trouble to get material for my books. When I look back, I shudder—but I was lucky despite quite a number of experiences I would prefer not to repeat.

Have I learned anything about terrorism from my research and experiences? We are talking over 50 years here, so I would like to think so. What I will stress—with some emphasis—is that I don’t think it is good enough to regard terrorists as a bunch of bad guys whose sole fate is to be killed.

• There are normally good reasons why terrorists do what they do. You might not agree with them, but it is vital to understand them.
• If terrorists have valid grievances—and they often do—then remedying those grievances is a good place to start.
• A major terrorist goal is almost always to cause their enemies to over-react.
• One of the best ways of making sure terrorist targets over-react is to make it inevitable that the military will be brought in. Soldiers are trained to kill people and break things—and have never been renowned for their patience or subtlety. They positively excel at alienating the local population. Reflect that soldiers and marines are mostly young, ignorant of the context, and trained to kill without hesitation. As a consequence, they do kill—and then have to live with the consequences the rest of their lives. Society pays.
• As mature people learn in normal life, in most confrontational situations, one of the best courses of action is to refuse to be provoked. Self-righteous is not a substitute for brainpower.
• Once initiated, violence has a momentum of its own—and is extraordinarily hard to stop.
• Neither governments nor terrorists tell the truth, and never all the truth. Typically, such conflicts are supported by a positive flood of propaganda and lies.
• The consequences of such carnage are horrendous beyond our ability to grasp the meaning of that word. They effect every aspect of life, and frequently translate into death. Such consequences can last for generations—and frequently do.

So, what are my conclusions? Have our numerous conflicts in Vietnam, Latin America, the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan really served the National Interest?

Personally, I think it is about time we got to work re-building the United States of America. From education to infrastructure to Middle Class earning power, we are losing ground under more headings than I care to mention. And yet, there seems to be no sense of outrage. The general view seems to be that we remain the richest and most powerful country in the world—so what is the problem?

The problem is that Middle Class earnings have been in decline for about 40 years and that two people are now needed to maintain a reasonable Middle Class life style—whereas one could have coped before. In short, the standard of living of most Americans is in decline.

I have no answers except one: Conditioning—in the sense of dumbing a population down through a combination of distraction and outright lies—works.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE STORY SO FAR: PART 191

PTSD—POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER—SOMETHING WE NEED TO TAKE MUCH MORE SERIOUSLY

Personally, I don’t think PTSD is confined to combat veterans. Instead, it is a cognitive consequence of extreme stress in virtually any situation which has a semi-permanent to permanent effect of significant proportions. It can manifest itself in numerous ways, but essentially it distorts our ability to cope with life in a calm and positive manner. The consequences are severe and span the gamut—everything from flashbacks and nightmares, to marital discord and alcoholism. They can and do wreck lives.

Yes, I know that is not the medical definition, but I am writing more as a concerned layman.

The point about combat, or even a combat environment, is that everyone is affected to a greater or lesser extent because to live in a world of near constant threat is an assault on all one’s fundamental survival instincts. In addition, those who experience actual combat can be—it varies— exposed to situations and events which are truly horrific and life changing.

But here is the thing: Despite the fact that we have been at war since 2001, we don’t seem to be coping with PTSD very well. The sheer number of sufferers is way too large for the resources that have been committed and the Veterans Administration seems to be bogged down in a bureaucratic morass.

I’m prompted to write about this because I recently met a remarkable woman who has been helping PTSD sufferers. She has no medical qualifications, but her empathy and understanding of the core issues are impressive.

This piece is merely a placeholder. I’ll return to this important subject when I am more up to speed.

 

 

THE STORY SO FAR: PART 190

TRYING TO EXPLAIN THE LURE OF A WRITING CAREER—WITH ALL IT’S INSECURITIES—TO PEOPLE WHO MOSTLY HAVE REGULAR JOBS—IS AKIN TO TRYING TO DEFY GRAVITY

LIVE WITH IT

THE PLEASURE OF WRITING IS MORE THAN ADEQUATE COMPENSATION

THE STORY SO FAR: PART 189

THIS REMARKABLY STYLISH AIRCRAFT IS ACTUALLY A TILT ROTOR—AND IT IS ELECTRIC

If you examine this picture carefully, you will notice two shrouded rotors positioned horizontally to the rear of the extremely elegant wings. This is not a conventional fixed-wing airplane. The rotors allow it to take off and land vertically—just like a helicopter—but then rotate 90 degrees to provide forward thrust. At that point, the wings, and not the rotors, provide most of the lift.

But can Project Zero—yes, it really is called that—hover? It can do that too.

This aircraft has been designed with unusual style and flair. Yes, it is only a technology demonstrator, but most great aircraft technology breakthroughs originate in just such a manner. Beyond that, the reports are that Project Zero works—which is why it is finally being shown. Previously, for over a year and a half, it has been kept secret. This is scarcely surprising. It demonstrates some remarkably original thinking—yet, reportedly, it was designed and built in a little more than six months.

I have long believed in the concept of an electric aircraft—starting with a hybrid electric version. There are good reasons for this:

• Conventional fuel is a major cost component.
• The use of conventional fuel is decidedly detrimental to the environment.
• Hybrid electric power is becoming well proven in automobiles.
• Hybrid electric power is significantly less expensive.
• Hybrid electric power is vastly quieter.
• Electric motors are constantly being improved and are innately simpler and less bulky than the alternatives.

In the case of Project Zero, the aircraft’s control systems, flight controls and landing gear actuators are all electrically powered—which means no hydraulics are needed—and the aircraft does not require a transmission. This all adds up to a significant decrease in mechanical complexity and cost—and an increase in reliability. It also saves a great deal of weight, which has all kinds of positive implications.

Currently, the aircraft is battery powered—which, given the limitations of existing battery technology—allows for only limited flight duration. But a hybrid electric version is being considered using diesel to power a generator.

Conventional helicopters are wonderful things, and extremely useful, but they are also slow, noisy, expensive to buy and maintain—and spend their time trying to vibrate themselves to pieces (vibration is in a major problem). Could it be that Augusta Westland—a particularly interesting company—have come up with a viable new approach to rotary flight?

It would seem to be a decided possibility.

Augusta Westland’s management have stated publicly that they believe the future of rotary flight lies with tilt rotor aircraft. Given the cost and complexity of the V-22 Osprey—which is currently in service with various branches of the military—I would have doubted that, but Project Zero is such an original conception, they may well be right.

The company already has considerable experience of tilt rotor aircraft. It has recently developed the AW609 (see below) which is, in effect, a civilian derivation of the V-22 Osprey. Project Zero, with its emphasis on simplicity, would suggest they have learned a great deal from this exercise.

 

 

 

 

THE STORY SO FAR: PART 188

WHAT IS CURIOSITY—AND WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT FOR A WRITER—OR IS IT?

My much loved sister, Lucy, has a habit of coming up with provocative illustrations which she features on Facebook—so, once again, I am using her as a source of inspiration.

When Lucy was a baby, she was described by my mother as: Lucy the boosy—milky and juicy.

My mother was a difficult woman, but she had her tender moments. She loved Lucy—we all did—and we still do. Lucy is the matriarch of the family—yet the youngest. Yes, I know that is not logical. Humans are not logical. It is a matter of respect. It is an honor which has been earned.

The first question I asked myself was: Can you be a writer if you are not curious? Well, clearly you can in a mechanical sense—in that you can string words together—but the word writer to me implies much more.

It suggests an observer of life whose work helps to illuminate and advance the human condition. Yes, that does sound like a lofty goal, but I am not being that arrogant. One can achieve such desirable objectives in small ways—by entertaining, by contributing a little perspective, by stimulating the reader’s mind, by simply distracting him or her. Frankly, if I can do all that, I am vastly pleased. Do I have higher objectives? Of course—but I will settle for the practical.

But can you do that if you aren’t curious—if you are not remotely concerned about the behavior of your fellow human beings?

In effect, you are the ultimate disinterested observer. Perhaps, you observe; and perhaps you take notes—but since you are not remotely curious about motivation, or indeed any detail, your involvement is less dispassionate than inhuman.

Roll on flawed human beings. Curiosity may well be your primary redeeming feature.

My conclusion: curiosity is endemic to the role of a writer. Nothing matters more than a simple word: Why?

 

THE STORY SO FAR: PART 187

IF IT’S NOT A BIRD, OR A BEE—COULD IT BE A DUTCH APACHE?

Yes, is the short answer—though from the angle of the aircraft in the photo, it is rather hard to be sure. Also, that spectacular paint job is decidedly different, and not something we are used to here. More is the pity! It is extraordinarily effective.

Just in case you haven’t discovered the fact already, I am an Apache AH-64 fan and follow the aircraft with the enthusiasm of a sports fan.

“AH” stands for  “Attack Helicopter;” and though other attack helicopters certainly do exist, the AH-64, which has been significantly upgraded over the years, is widely considered to be superior to the competition.

For a great deal of the time, weapons procurement is little more than money flow for the MICC—the Military Industrial Congressional Complex—but every now and then the Pentagon gets it right, and produces a completely superb weapons system; and the Boeing manufactured Apache AH-64 is such an example. Arguably, it is over-priced—that is not my fight—but I do believe that excellence deserves a premium.

This all stems from my researching the XVIII Airborne Corps of the U.S. Army back in the mid Nineties and the Corps Commander, General Jack Keane—as he now is—insisting that I fly in an Apache in order to gain a greater understanding of the 101st Airborne (Air Assault) Division. When generals insist—and Jack Keane was, and remains, much more than your average general—action tends to follow.

I was a civilian, but a very willing victim—I love helicopters—and I don’t think I have ever had a more enjoyable time, though I confess to feeling decidedly queasy when my rather awesome pilot, CW Ron Thompson, said: “Let’s try a few Gs”—and did just that. In fact, he didn’t do anything too outrageous—losing guests is frowned upon—but he certainly got my attention.

Later on in that flight—when I was beginning to feel cocky as opposed to plain terrified—I asked Ron would he loop the loop? He, sensibly, drew the line at that.

Incidentally, the correct way to address a warrant officer is as “Mr.” so I really should refer to Ron as “Mr. Thompson.” Warrant officers are the specialists and problem solvers of the Army. It’s an intriguing rank and extraordinary talent lies within it. I suspect much of it is untapped.

Aerobatics in a real, live helicopter are both thrilling—and absolutely terrifying. Appreciate that a fixed wing aircraft can glide even if it loses power, whereas an unpowered  helicopter has a tendency to drop like—an unpowered helicopter. Such a descent is not conducive to human survival. Hold that thought, but suspend it while you are flying.

True, you can auto-rotate if you react fast enough, but since helicopters normally fly low, you may well not have enough time to trim your speed back; or you may not be positioned correctly for your blades to have any lift. Sometimes a writer’s imagination can be a disadvantage.

But, the good news is that nothing disastrous happened—and I fell in love with the aircraft; and I have remained in love ever since. I say “in love” with both respect and irony. Can one really be in love with a machine? I’m not sure of the answer to that. Brilliant design and execution have a tendency to evoke strong feelings.

I also developed an understanding of the integration of ground and air warfare which has remained with me. Soldiers tend to be trained to stay in their lane—to do only what they are trained to do—but commonsense suggests a more holistic approach. As with being under fire, sometimes you have to experience it to understand it. Were my Apache experiences a “life event”—as a friend suggested recently? Yes, they were.

But enough of my adventures—which included flying at night, a completely surreal experience. Night is when the Apache is at its absolute deadliest. Here is the blurb on the Dutch Apache, the HAWK.

For 2013 the Apache demo helicopter received a new design. The prints can be removed quickly, so that the helicopter can be deployed to operational missions when required.

The Q-17 is a standard Dutch Apache dedicated to the demonstrations calendars for the coming 2 years. This relieves the squadron from the difficult task of finding a spare aircraft for each show.
The Hellfire racks and rocket pods are removed from the helicopter. This saves weight, enabling the Apache to speed up faster in between the individual maneuvers.

The aircraft also flies the show with a minimum amount of fuel on board. This also saves weight and allows the helicopter to accelerate faster between individual maneuvers.

For 2013 the HAWK is also equipped with AMASE pods. These are used to fire the flares during the show. These pods are normally used in Afghanistan to deceive heat-seeking missiles.

NOTE: AMASE stands for Apache Modular Aircraft Survivability Equipment.

 

THE STORY SO FAR: PART 186

WHAT IS IT LIKE—TO BLOG EVERY DAY?

The good friend who encouraged me to write this blog did not expect me to commit to a blog-a-day schedule. He merely requested and insisted on consistency—and was right to do so. He is a very persuasive man.

Not unreasonably, people like their routines. If an author decides to write but once a week, his readers will accept that fact—providing that the end result is worthy, and delivered on time. If Saturday is the chosen day, then each and every blog should be delivered on Saturday.

That sounds reasonable, but it is a tougher discipline than it seems, because creativity isn’t something you can turn on and off like a tap. Or so one might think. The truth is that one’s creativity does vary—we all have bad days—but all of this is underpinned by discipline.

I decided to write a daily blog, because I wasn’t sure I would remember to write a weekly one—ridiculous but true—and because my instincts said it would improve my writing. Above all, it would be a discipline—and writing is hugely about discipline. After all, mostly we write alone without supervision—so who is to know whether we are dozing or working?

The reality is that a professional writer knows, and every instinct screams if he is not delivering—because that is the way he (or she) has conditioned himself. The trick is ferocious self-discipline over more years than I care to think about.

It is easy to describe, but hard to achieve, because we humans, by definition, are flawed, lazy, and easy to distract. And yet, for all our faults—the list is long—the evidence is clear that professional writers are impressively self-disciplined. We face a blank screen and we deliver—normally regardless of our personal circumstances—because that is what we do.

There are all kinds of skills in the world—from plumbing to flying drones from several thousand miles away.

Writing happens to be mine—and, much to my surprise, I have found writing a daily blog to be an invaluable assist. In truth, it is ferociously demanding—but it is consistently rewarding.

In terms of words, assuming one averages 500 words a blog a day—and I tend to average rather more—the end result over a year equates to 182,500 words a year. Impose some editing (editors love to cut) and that equates to about one Big Thriller a year. Think 150,000 words—and keep cutting. Word has it that the optimum size of a book in today’s market is 90,000 words. I find that a pity. I like a really good Big Read.

But readers want books not blogs? Actually, you guys—and I say this with all due respect—want both. The reality is that it doesn’t work that way. Fundamentally, my blog is both a way of communicating to you, my readers—and a way of getting up momentum for the serious writing that has to follow. It is a rigorous discipline—broadly akin to the exercises a musician goes through—but it is not the end result.

You exercise; and then you get really serious—and I say that with humor. Here is the thing: Seriousness in work—contrary to popular opinion—is positively NOT incompatible with humor, however counter-intuitive that sounds.