U.S. Launches Drone from Aircraft Carrier for First Time

ExtraWorldNews 

breitbart

(AP) - A drone the size of a fighter jet took off from the deck of an American aircraft carrier for the first time Tuesday in a test flight that could eventually open the way for the U.S. to launch unmanned aircraft from just about any place in the world.

The X-47B is the first drone designed to take off and land on a carrier, meaning the U.S. military would not need permission from other countries to use their bases.

"As our access to overseas ports, forward operating locations and airspace is diminished around the world, the value of the aircraft carrier and the air wing becomes more and more important," Rear Adm. Ted Branch, commander of Naval Air Forces Atlantic, said after the flight off the Virginia coast. "So today is history."

The move to expand the capabilities of the nation's drones comes amid growing criticism of America's use of Predators and Reapers to gather intelligence and carry out lethal missile attacks against terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen.

Critics in the U.S. and abroad have charged that drone strikes cause widespread civilian deaths and are conducted with inadequate oversight.

Still, defense analysts say drones are the future of warfare.

The new Joint Strike Fighter jet "might be the last manned fighter the U.S. ever builds. They're so expensive, they're so complex, and you put a human at risk every time it takes off from a carrier," said James Lewis, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

"This is the next generation of military technology _ the unmanned vehicles, the unmanned submersibles, the unmanned aircraft. This will be the future of warfare, and it will be a warfare that is a little less risky for humans but maybe a little more effective when it comes to delivering weapons and effect."

While the X-47B isn't intended for operational use, it will help Navy officials develop future carrier-based drones. Those drones could begin operating by 2020, according to Rear Adm. Mat Winter, the Navy's program executive officer for unmanned aviation and strike weapons.

The X-47B is far bigger than the Predator, has three times the range and can be programmed to carry out missions with no human intervention, the Navy said.

While the X-47B isn't a stealth aircraft, it was designed with the low profile of one. That will help in the development of future stealth drones, which would be valuable as the military changes its focus from the Middle East to the Pacific, where a number of countries' air defenses are a lot stronger than Afghanistan's.

"Unmanned systems would be the likely choice in a theater or an environment that was highly defended or dangerous where we wouldn't want to send manned aircraft," Branch said.

During Tuesday's flight, the X-47B used a steam catapult to launch, just as traditional Navy warplanes do. The unarmed aircraft then landed at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland.

The next critical test for the tailless plane will come this summer, when it attempts to land on a moving aircraft carrier, one of the most difficult tasks for Navy pilots.

Earlier this month, the X-47B successfully landed at the air station using a tailhook to catch a cable and bring it to a quick stop, just as planes setting down on carriers have to do.

The X-47B has a wingspan of about 62 feet and weighs 14,000 pounds, versus nearly 49 feet and about 1,100 pounds for the Predator.

While Predators are typically piloted via remote control by someone in the U.S., the X-47B relies only on computer programs to tell it where to fly unless a human operator needs to step in. Eventually, one person may be able to control multiple unmanned aircraft at once, Branch said.

The group Human Rights Watch said it is troubled by what it described as a trend toward the development of fully autonomous weapons that can choose and fire upon targets with no human intervention.

"We're saying you must have meaningful human control over key battlefield decisions of who lives and who dies. That should not be left up to the weapons system itself," said Steve Goose, director of the arms division at Human Rights Watch.

Developed by Northrop Grumman under a 2007 contract at a cost of $1.4 billion, the X-47B is capable of carrying weapons and providing around-the-clock intelligence, surveillance and targeting, according to the Navy, which has been giving updates on the project over the past few years.

The X-47B can reach an altitude of more than 40,000 feet and has a range of more than 2,100 nautical miles, versus 675 for the Predator. The Navy plans to show the drone can be refueled in flight, which would give it even greater range.

U.S. Launches Drone from Aircraft Carrier for First Time

US Marines pack up in Afghanistan as Taliban wages spring offensive

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read >>

US Marines pack up in Afghanistan as Taliban wages spring offensive

17 Air Force officers stripped of authority to launch nuclear missiles

Security Clearance

www.usaukonline.com

By Barbara Starr

In an unprecedented action, an Air Force commander has stripped 17 of his officers of their authority to control and launch nuclear missiles.
The 17 are being sent to undergo 60 to 90 days of intensive refresher training on how to do their jobs. The action comes after their unit performed poorly on an inspection and one officer was investigated for potential compromise of nuclear launch codes, according to Lt. Col. John Dorrian, an Air Force spokesman.
The story was first reported by The Associated Press.
The action was taken by the deputy commander of the 91st Operations Group, Lt. Col. Jay Folds, whose officers run launch control centers for the Minuteman III nuclear missiles from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota.
Folds announced the action in an emotionally charged April e-mail to his unit, saying in part, "Did you know that we, as an operations group, have fallen - and its it time to stand ourselves back up?"
In that e-mail, Folds says, "We're discovering such rot in the crew force," while they are on alert status - standing watch over the nuclear force - that the unit is accepting of violations of weapons safety rules, and code compromises.
In words not often used by military officers, Folds told his troops to "crush any rules violators" and said, "We are, in fact, in a crisis right now."
CNN obtained a copy of the e-mail, which was also first obtained by the AP.
Dorrian confirmed that Folds was referring to a potential deliberate violation of Air Force rules regarding nuclear launch codes and the failure of his troops to report when they see potential violations.
The Air Force action affects only the 17 personnel deemed to need the training; others remain on duty.
The unit underwent a regular comprehensive inspection in March, according to Dorrian. The inspection consisted of an evaluation of 22 tasks. At the time, the unit was announced as having passed with a 'satisfactory" rating, which is third on a scale of five.
But on one of the 22 tasks involving launch operations, it was rated "marginal" which is one step above "unsatisfactory." Dorrian called it the equivalent of a "D" grade.
Then the incident of potential compromise of launch codes occurred. Dorrian said the investigation found no compromise, but did find the codes were "potentially handled improperly," by one officer, who is now facing discipline. All of this then led to Folds' e-mail and action, according to Dorrian.
Dorrian noted that while some in the Air Force might view Folds' e-mail as "emotional," his actions are fully supported at the highest levels of the Air Force. In other portions of his e-mail Folds told his unit:
– "Turn off the TVs."
– "Clean your patches, uniforms and get your hair cut."
– "Bring to my attention immediately any officer who bad mouths a senior officer."
While some nuclear officers are sent for retraining every year, this is the most extensive action taken to date, Dorrian confirmed. It comes after a 2008 Pentagon report was sharply critical of the Air Force for not focusing on the post-Cold War nuclear mission, and for a bomber that, in a flight over multiple states, carried nuclear-tipped missiles without the Air Force realizing it.

17 Air Force officers stripped of authority to launch nuclear missiles

Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley was fired: Army forsakes combat hero for Muslims

wnd

www.familysecuritymatters.org

The U.S. Army has further punished a highly respected and decorated officer in the wake of Muslim groups complaining about the approved course he taught on radical Islam at National Defense University.

In October, we reported that Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley was fired from his position at the school for the way he conducted a class on how to respond to a variety of scenarios instigated by radical Muslims. A visitor to the class found the discussions offensive to Muslims and informed some 57 Islamic organizations, which then complained to Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In addition to the firing, Gen. Dempsey promptly orchestrated a negative Officer Evaluation Report against Dooley that deeply tarnished a career that had received only sterling reviews from West Point through nearly 20 years in the service. Dempsey never discussed the incident with Dooley.

On Sunday, the Washington Times reported Dooley has been punished again, this time as he pursued the role of battalion commander. According to the Times, an Army command selection board studied Dooley’s record and candidacy for a command assignment. The five-member panel agreed to keep Dooley under consideration. Shortly thereafter, Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, who at the time was Army vice chief and subsequently became head of U.S. Central Command, overruled the board in a brief memo. His actions could effectively spell the end of Dooley’s career.

“There was no reason given, and that’s also a very disturbing aspect of it,” said Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center, who is representing Dooley in his original appeal of his firing and negative review. “The way they’re treating him now is not only a total miscarriage of justice on a personal level, but it also is really removing an effective combat leader from the Army, and it ultimately effects the national security of the United States.”

Thompson told WND he doesn’t believe this order originated with Gen. Austin. Instead, he believes Gen. Dempsey gave the order and Austin chose to follow so as not to impair his own career. However it happened, he said Lt. Col. Dooley is the victim of a dangerous policy.

“Instead of being loyal to the people that are loyal to you, they would rather throw Lt. Col. Dooley under the bus for their own advancement or to appease the Muslims, which ultimately could lead to the destruction of the United States internally. If we cannot accurately describe who the enemy is, how can we win a war?” asked Thompson.

Dooley’s appeal of his initial punishment is still processing through the military bureaucracy. Thompson said Dooley will file a federal suit to defend his constitutional rights if the Army appeal is denied.

Lt. Col. Matthew Dooley was fired: Army forsakes combat hero for Muslims

Cuba: Yo prefiero una invasión norteamericana

Juan Abreu

www.gabitogrupos.com

Siempre he pensado que los que se escandalizan cuando afirmo que los Estados Unidos deberían haber invadido Cuba hace muchos años lo que están diciendo verdaderamente es que prefieren cincuenta y cuatro años de dictadura (y los que quedan), miles de fusilados, millones de exiliados, decenas de miles de ahogados en el Estrecho de la Florida y ausencia absoluta de libertades y un régimen militar y autocrático para los cubanos. Prefieren eso a una invasión norteamericana.

Yo no. Yo prefiero una invasión norteamericana. Una invasión norteamericana sería un horror muy menor comparado con el horror del castrismo. Preferir el castrismo a una invasión norteamericana me parece miserable, hipócrita, cómplice y canallesco.

Cuba: Yo prefiero una invasión norteamericana

Financial strain pushes many veterans to the breaking point

inplainsight

Courtesy Adam Legg

Navy veteran Adam Legg said a long jobless spell after tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan left him feeling hopeless and led him to "go weeks without smiling, walking around like a shadow, like you're not there."

By Bill Briggs, NBC News contributor

Hundreds of thousands of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have been flying home to a fresh fox hole: A debt crater that’s sucking in entire military families and could be helping to fuel the veteran suicide crisis.

Courtesy Adam Legg

"I was a watch commander where I had 25 to 30 
people working  beneath me, in charge of millions 
of dollars worth of ammunitions, weapons, vehicles, 
computers," said Adam Legg, a Navy veteran. "And 
then  when I come home, not only can I not find 
a job, I can't take care of my family."

A bad job market, a long backlog for federal disability benefits, and occasionally unwise spending habits have been conspiring to strain the financial and mental health of many veterans, experts say.

"We keep hearing of suicides rising. How much pressure do you think one person can take?" asks Christopher Fitzpatrick, deputy director of VeteransPlus, a nonprofit that has fielded more than 170,000 calls from ex-service members with imminent financial concerns. 

"No one wants to talk about the fact that there are other reasons, besides PTSD, for suicide at 2 in the morning. You know how we know? We have an online form people use to contact us, and we get those emails — they’re sent at 1, 2, 3, 4 in the morning. People are reaching out, literally: 'Can you please help me? I’m losing everything.'"

It's a problem that could get even worse in coming years, with more than one million service members expected to make the transition to civilian life.

Navy veteran Adam Legg, 30, ran into financial trouble following two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. A jobless and hopeless period that began after his service separation in 2009 led him to "go weeks without smiling, walking around like a shadow, like you're not there," he said.

He couldn't secure a job at his local McDonald's or at dozens of other companies to which he applied in Central Florida. With a wife, Melissa, and a young daughter to feed, he maxed out a credit card that he was able to pay off with money he'd saved during his eight years in the Navy. 

'Very, very dark place'
But bigger bills — like the mortgage — went untouched. After losing his Florida home to foreclosure and two cars to repossession, Legg said he began to consider suicide. 

"When you feel like you can’t take care of your family, feed them, shelter them, it’s a very, very dark place. A feeling of uselessness that maybe they would be better off if you’re not around," Legg said. 

"We've been below the poverty line, absolutely. I was a watch commander where I had 25 to 30 people working beneath me, in charge of millions of dollars worth of ammunitions, weapons, vehicles, computers. And then when I come home, not only can I not find a job, I can’t take care of my family. If it weren’t for my wife, if she was not supportive the way she was, I really don’t think I’d be here right now."

According to VeteransPlus, fewer than 20 percent of their clients have stockpiled a six-month savings cushion while serving in Iraq or Afghanistan despite untaxed, hazardous-duty wages that fattened paychecks.

Some returning veterans planned to live off their credit cards until landing civilian work, even though the veteran unemployment rate is two points higher than the civilian rate, Fitzpatrick said. Some expected to support themselves via VA benefits, apparently unaware that average wait time for that money approaches — and sometimes eclipses — one year.  

The Pentagon urges military personnel and their families to bank some money while in the service. This year, during “Military Saves Week," service members were reminded to “set a goal, make a place and save automatically.” Service members also can take advantage of the Thrift Savings Plan, a federally sponsored retirement savings and investment program resembling a civilian 401(k).

But even some of those who build up savings while serving abroad find their stash exhausted after buying gifts for family and plucking shiny toys, like motorcycles, for themselves when they come home from war, according to VeteransPlus.

"We don’t like using the word ‘entitlement,’ but often that’s what it really is for these young men and women who feel like they’ve served their country and are coming home with some money and ‘now it’s my turn,’" Fitzpatrick said. 

Move west, young man
For Legg, the way out was to escape Florida, not his life. He and his wife packed up their daughter, dog, cat and remaining belongings and recently drove to the Pacific Northwest. Two things lured the Legg family to Baker City, Ore.: a lower cost of living and its proximity to a military-friendly college, Eastern Oregon University. 

He's now a full-time student, living off of his GI Bill and his VA benefits for a diagnosed anxiety disorder (not PTSD), damaged knees, a bad back, and an injured left arm — combat baggage that requires daily Vicodin consumption. They live in a small, rented house.

Melissa was scheduled to deliver their second child last Wednesday. Soon, Legg plans to file for bankruptcy. 

Courtesy Adam Legg/ Navy veteran Adam Legg and 

his family moved to Oregon from Florida.

"I have no choice. We're at that rock bottom line," he said. "I'm not the only one. Of the (veteran) friends I've kept up with, most are struggling." 

Many veterans panic when they face getting kicked out of their homes, or must decide between buying food or diapers, said Kristy Kauffman, executive director of Code of Support, an Alexandria, Va.-based nonprofit that proclaims to "bridge the gap between civilian and military America."

"It happens far too often. We get at least one call, email, or referral every week," she said.

Kaufmann agrees with Fitzpatrick that poverty is one factor behind the veteran suicide rate, adding: "It does increase the risk." 

"The vast majority of those who have worn the uniform," she said, "are imbued with a strong sense of mission and pride in 'getting it done.' For those who have trouble reintegrating into the civilian world — whether due to physical or mental health issues, or lack of employment opportunities — it's that loss of mission that seems most debilitating."

Financial strain pushes many veterans to the breaking point

Navy unveils powerful ship-mounted laser weapon

U.S. News

U.S. Navy

The Laser Weapon System (LaWS) temporarily installed aboard the guided-missile destroyer USS Dewey.

By Courtney Kube, NBC News

The U.S. Navy announced Monday that it is preparing to deploy a new weapon that can disable a hostile boat and even destroy a surveillance drone overhead — all without dispensing any expensive ammunition.

The Navy released this video showing its new laser weapons system during an exercise at sea. The laser is capable of destroying planes, drones and boats.

It is the Navy's Laser Weapons System (LaWS), a laser mounted on a ship that is so strong it can ignite a drone, sending it crashing and burning to earth in mere moments.

The USS Ponce, an amphibious transport docking ship, will be the first Navy vessel to deploy with the LaWS, officials announced Monday.

The new laser will be installed on the Ponce over the next year and operational in summer 2014. The Ponce is now based in the Fifth Fleet area, which covers the Persian Gulf and the Horn of Africa.

The LaWS will initially be used to combat small boats that pose a threat to larger U.S. Navy vessels — much like the small Iranian fast boats that pester U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz.

The Navy plans to use the laser to combat missiles and other threats from the air, to ward off threatening ships and to stop other foreign threats. Eventually the system will be able to stop an incoming missile.

While making the announcement in Maryland today, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert praised the LaWS ability to take out targets at a tiny fraction of the cost of other conventional weapons.

He claimed that the LaWS can shoot down a small drone for about $1 worth of electricity and, once the laser is operational, it should be able to replace a Gatling gun, whose rounds can cost several thousand dollars each.

A defense official also stressed that the laser will not have full capability to take down a larger target for a decade or so.

Despite speculation the laser is deploying to the Fifth Fleet to warn Iran, a U.S. military official says that the real reason it's going to that region is that it is "the hardest environment" the Navy has available to test the new system.

Navy unveils powerful ship-mounted laser weapon

Drones crash (a lot) but the military's safety lessons may help civilians

NBCNews

National Transportation Safety Board

The remains of a Predator B "Reaper" drone, sprinkled across the Arizona mountainside near Nogales, in this April 2006 photo released by the National Transportation Safety Board.

Around 9:30 on the night of May 1, 2011, an Air Force Predator that had been in the air for 18 hours suddenly hurtled towards the ground at 400 feet per minute, crashing near a U.S. base at Jalalabad, Afghanistan.

The soldiers who brought the craft back to camp had to cut off its wings so it would fit in their vehicles. Cause of crash? Engine failure, clogged oil filter.

Five years earlier, over American soil, a similar incident occurred. A Department of Homeland Security drone on a routine border patrol was destroyed after nosediving into hilly scrubland near Nogales, Ariz. Investigations revealed a number of causes: pilot errors, display failures, poor design.

Big drones actually crash a lot. Official statistics on large unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) accident rates vary, but drones are 30 to 300 times more likely to crash than small civil aircrafts, according to one estimate. According to a 2005 Department of Defense report, every 100,000 flight hours saw 191 AAI Shadow UAVs destroyed or in need of drastic repairs, compared to just four manned F-16s.

Drones suffer from the usual aircraft mechanical and pilot failures, but they also grapple with uniquely drone-ish issues: They're harder to launch and land, and lost communication links pose a problem. But as drones spend more time aloft, operators and craft manufacturers have had a chance to find and iron out kinks in the machinery. Most drones today are of the larger military variety, but that'll change. In 2015, regulators will begin granting permits to a wider array of small drone operators in U.S. airspace. Fortunately, they'll have detailed obituaries of hundreds of lost UAVs to help inform their safety guidelines.

Why do they fail?
Because they don't carry a human life, drones are sometimes pushed harder than piloted planes. In one instance, a Reaper drone was running perilously low on fuel as it neared its destination, but controllers felt that the target was important enough to sacrifice a drone. So they kept going, Peter Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute told NBC News, citing a private Air Force briefing.

In another instance, a drone ran out of missiles. "But they really wanted the target, so they turned that system into a kamikaze," Singer said.

Like manned aircrafts, UAVs can run out of fuel or encounter mechanical failures, John Hansman, an aviation researcher at MIT, told NBC News. Though such problems aren't drone specific, they are significant — a DoD survey showed that 57 percent of accidents until 2005 were caused by flight control issues or engine or transmission problems.

National Transportation and Safety Board

Another 2006 photo of the downed Predator from Nogales, Ariz.

The same DoD survey said 14 percent of failures involved lost communication links. "Even if things move at the speed of light over fiber optics, there’s still a delay," Singer told NBC News.

It's getting better
These days, takeoffs and landings are controlled by a local crew within sight of the craft, while in-air maneuvers are controlled by mission control at a base in the U.S. To help drone pilots, researchers like MIT's Missy Cummings and Raza Waraich are studying ways to develop control systems and environments in which drone operators can operate more efficiently.

The unmanned craft are getting smarter, too. AeroVironment's small military drones can return to their launch point or land at a safe spot if their communication link falls silent, company spokesman Steve Gatlin told NBC News.

A tall tree or hill can interrupt the link, so some AeroVironment drones are programmed to climb in altitude and reestablish that link. If General Atomics' Predator or Grey Eagle UAVs lose contact, they can navigate to different air space and try connecting again. If that doesn't work, the crafts navigate back to the operating base. The Grey Eagle can even land itself.

Air Force stats reflect these improvements. In 2005, for every 100,000 hours of flight time, 22 drones cost the Air Force $2 million or more (each!). By 2012, that number fell to 3.5 per 100,000-hour interval, Air Force Safety Center spokesperson Masao Doi told NBC News via email. According to General Atomics, the original Predator now encounters 8.5 mishaps every 100,000 flight hours.

What about smaller flying robots?
The military tends to fly big UAVs, but the drones that may soon dot the skies over local municipalities are smaller, weighing under 55 lbs. For now, safety data on civil drones is scarce, Gerald Dillingham, a civil aviation expert at the Government Accountability Office told NBC News.

In preparation for a more drone-friendly U.S. airspace, the Federal Aviation Administration is working with the DoD. They signed an agreement in 2011, in which the DoD agreed to share military drone data on safety with the civilian regulatory agency.

Meanwhile, the FAA has begun collecting accident reports from companies that apply to test their drones domestically, and will set up six test sites within the U.S. to help establish the airworthiness of smaller UAVs.

"It’s still not black and white," Dillingham said about applying data from military crashes to civilian safety concerns. However, "I do still say that some information is a lot better than no information."

Drones crash (a lot) but the military's safety lessons may help civilians

7 Marines killed during explosion at Nevada's Hawthorne Army Depot

Fox News

An explosion at a military ammunition storage facility in Nevada during a Marine Corps training exercise killed seven U.S. Marines and wounded several others, military officials said.

The North Carolina-based Marines with the 2nd Marine Division were killed late Monday when a 60-millimeter mortar exploded during a live-fire training exercise at Hawthorne Army Depot as they were preparing to fire it.

The Marines immediately issued an indefinite moratorium on firing of all such mortars worldwide until an investigation clears as safe the type of weapon and ammunition in the tragedy. The moratorium could last for weeks or months.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity said it was not immediately clear whether the mortar exploded prematurely inside its firing tube or whether more than a single round exploded. The official was not authorized to speak about the accident. 

The cause of the incident remains under investigation. The investigation will focus on whether the Marines followed procedures to properly fire the weapon, whether there was a malfunction in the firing device or in the explosive mortar itself, the official said.

The identities of those killed were not released pending notification of their families, officials said in a statement from the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp LeJeune, N.C.

"We send our prayers and condolences to the families of Marines involved in this tragic incident. We remain focused on ensuring that they are supported through this difficult time," said Maj. Gen. Raymond C. Fox, the force's commander. "We mourn their loss, and it is with heavy hearts we remember their courage and sacrifice."

 Renown Regional Medical Center in Reno, the area's major trauma hospital, took nine patients, including one who died, three who are in serious condition and five who are in fair condition, according to spokeswoman Stacy Kendall. All the patients are men under the age of 30, she said. Kendall described their injuries as penetrating trauma, fractures and vascular injuries.

The 60mm mortar is a weapon that traditionally requires three to four Marines to operate but it's common during training for others to observe nearby. 

Earlier, Russ Collier, an official at the facility, told KRNV-TV that the explosion was an accident unrelated to the ammunition that is stored at the military facility near the small desert community of Hawthorne.

The 147,000-acre depot, established in 1930, is about 140 miles southeast of Reno. The facility stores and disposes of ammunition, and provides long-term storage for industrial plant equipment. It's comprised of nearly 3,000 buildings — including igloos, supply warehouses and munitions sheds — throughout more than 230 square miles.

Since World War II, when the facility became the staging area for ammunition, bombs and rockets for the war, Hawthorne has held an important place in U.S. military history. The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection said the depot employed more than 5,500 people at its peak. Nevada was chosen for the location because of its remoteness in the wake of a crippling explosion at the government's main depot in New Jersey in the 1920s.

The facility had an operating budget of $270,000 and a payroll of $2.88 million in fiscal year 2009, according to its website.

Nevada's political leaders expressed their sympathy on Tuesday.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., gave his condolences to victims of the explosion during a morning speech on the Senate floor.

Nevada Republican Sen. Dean Heller tweeted, "Thoughts and prayers are with the families who lost a loved one in the Hawthorne Army Depot explosion. Grateful for their service."

"I am deeply saddened to hear of the incident at the Hawthorne Army Depot this morning," Republican Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval said in a statement. "The men and women who work and train there put service ahead of self each and every day. Kathleen and I wish to extend our deepest sympathies to those killed and their families. Our thoughts and prayers are with those who have been injured and we pray for their speedy recovery."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/19/explosion-during-training-at-hawthorne-army-depot/#ixzz2O0liSGnf

7 Marines killed during explosion at Nevada's Hawthorne Army Depot

Karzai accuses U.S. and Taliban of conspiring to keep troops in Afghanistan

worldnews

Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo / Dept. of Defense via AFP - Getty Images

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel speaks with Afghan president Hamid Karzai during a private meeting in Kabul.

By Mirwais Harooni and Phil Stewart, Reuters

KABUL —Afghan President Hamid Karzai ratcheted up his criticism of the United States on Sunday, marring a debut visit by the new U.S. defense secretary, Chuck Hagel, and highlighting tensions that could undermine Washington's strategy to wind down the unpopular war.

A day after two Taliban bombings killed 17 people, Karzai accused the United States and the Taliban of colluding to convince Afghans that foreign forces were needed beyond 2014, when NATO is set to wrap up its combat mission and most troops withdraw.

"Those bombs that went off in Kabul and Khost were not a show of force to America. They were in service of America. It was in the service of the 2014 slogan to warn us if they (Americans) are not here then Taliban will come," Karzai said in a speech.

"In fact those bombs, set off yesterday in the name of the Taliban, were in the service of Americans to keep foreigners longer in Afghanistan."

It was one of several inflammatory comments by Karzai and his government on Sunday and follow weeks of efforts by the Afghan leader to curtail U.S. military activity in Afghanistan, including a call to kick American special forces out of an important province. U.S. commanders see special operations forces as key to the end-phase of the conflict.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel responds to Afghan President Hamid Karzai's statements in which Karzai accused the U.S. and Taliban with working together.

Hours after Karzai's speech, Hagel said he spoke "clearly and directly" about the comments during his first meeting with the Afghan leader since becoming U.S. defense secretary on February 27.

Hagel appeared at pains to be respectful of Karzai and avoid sharp criticism, but he told reporters that any collusion between the U.S. and the Taliban "wouldn't make a lot of sense."

The U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, General Joseph Dunford, was more categorical.

"We have fought too hard over the past 12 years, we have shed too much blood over the past 12 years, we have done too much to help the Afghan security forces grow over the last 12 years to ever think that violence or instability would be to our advantage," Dunford told reporters travelling with Hagel.

Of Karzai's remarks, he added: "I'll let others judge whether that's particularly helpful or not at the political level."

Still, politics will be key over the next several months, as the United States and NATO allies work to carry out their strategy of pulling out their troops and decide how large a residual force to leave behind after 2014.

NATO defense chiefs meeting in Brussels last month discussed keeping a combined U.S. and allied force of 8,000-12,000 in Afghanistan, focusing on training Afghan troops and countering the remnants of al Qaeda, the Pentagon has said.

Any deal for a follow-on force, which Washington says must include immunity for U.S. troops, would need Karzai's blessing.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

ABUSING STUDENTS? TALIBAN TALKS?

Karzai has a history of making incendiary statements that exasperate Washington but the nature and awkward timing of his latest remarks about the United States were exceptional.

He also alleged on Sunday that the Taliban and the United States had been holding talks in the Gulf Arab state of Qatar on a "daily basis," further fuelling his suggestion that Washington and the militants were working at common purposes.

"I told the president that it was not true," Hagel said. "The fact is any prospect for peace or political settlements - that has to be led by the Afghans."

The Taliban spokesman in Afghanistan, Zabihullah Mujahid, denied that negotiations with the United States had resumed.

Karzai's government also alleged that U.S.-led forces and Afghans working with them were abusing and arresting university students. Karzai issued an executive order banning foreign troops from entering all education institutions.

Hagel and Karzai were meant to have appeared together at a joint news conference on Sunday evening. But, in a reminder of the threats posed by the resilient insurgency, U.S. officials said it was canceled because of security concerns.

Hagel was about a kilometer away and within earshot of a Saturday morning suicide attack outside the defense ministry that killed nine people. He was meant to have met his Afghan counterpart there this weekend but the venue was later changed.

Hagel's visit coincided with the passing of a deadline imposed by Karzai for U.S. special forces to leave Wardak province accusing them of overseeing torture and killings.

U.S. forces have denied involvement in any abuses.

Hagel has sounded hopeful that a deal could be reached on their continued deployment but acknowledged no breakthroughs were made in his talks with Karzai.

It was unclear how Hagel's trip would be viewed by U.S. Republicans who bitterly fought his nomination to become defense chief, portraying him as soft on Iran and questioning his judgment.

Hagel at times appeared sympathetic to the stresses of political life that Karzai must endure.

"I know these are difficult issues for President Karzai and the Afghan people. And I was once a politician," Hagel said. "So I can understand the kind of pressures - especially leaders of countries - are always under." 

Karzai accuses U.S. and Taliban of conspiring to keep troops in Afghanistan

Holder: No drone strikes on Americans in US, except in ’extraordinary circumstance’

Michael Reynolds / EPA

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder

openchannel

By Michael Isikoff
National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News

The Obama administration has no intention of carrying out drone strikes against suspected terrorists in the United States, but could use them in response to “an extraordinary circumstance” such as the 9/11 terror attacks, according to a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder obtained by NBC News.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who received the March 4 letter from Holder, called the attorney general’s refusal to rule out drone strikes in the U.S. “more than frightening.” 

The letter from Holder surfaced just as the Senate Intelligence Committee was voting 12-3 to approve White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan to be CIA director. The vote came after the White House agreed to share additional classified memos on targeted drone strikes against U.S. citizens overseas.

Paul had threatened to hold up Brennan's confirmation on the floor of the Senate if the administration did not clarify whether targeted drone strikes could be used inside the U.S.

In his letter, Holder called the question of drone strikes inside the U.S. "entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur and we hope no president will ever have to confront. … As a policy matter, moreover, we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat."

But Holder then appeared to leave the door open to such strikes in extreme circumstances.

Read the full letter

"It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the president to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States. For example, the president could  conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances of a catastrophic attack like the ones suffered on Dec. 7, 1941 and Sept. 11, 2001."

Holder: No drone strikes on Americans in US, except in ’extraordinary circumstance’

WikiLeaker Manning reveals why he spilled United States secrets

By Jim Miklaszewski and Courtney Kube, NBC News

FORT MEADE, Md. – A military judge on Thursday accepted guilty pleas by  Army Pfc. Bradley Manning to 10 lesser charges against him, leaving the ex-intelligence analyst to face 12 other counts for allegedly leaking hundreds of thousands of government documents to the WikiLeaks website. 

The acceptance of the "naked guilty pleas" -- meaning there is no agreement between the government and the defense that would limit the sentence – at a pre-trial hearing means that Manning faces up to 20 years in prison, even if he is ultimately acquitted of the most-serious charges against him. 

Col. Denise Lind, the military judge presiding over the case, also accepted Manning’s “not guilty” pleas to the remaining charges, including "aiding the enemy." His court martial on those charges, which carry a maximum sentence of life in prison, is scheduled to begin on June 3. 

During the day-long pre-trial hearing, Manning acknowledged that his actions were a discredit to the service and that he knew WikiLeaks was not authorized to have the information he provided. 

At one point when Lind asked him whether he knew what he was doing was wrong, he answered simply, "Yes, your honor."

More than an hour of Thursday's hearing was consumed by Manning's composed reading of a 35-page prepared statement that offered his first public explanation of his motives for leaking the government documents to WikiLeaks. He said he did so to “spark domestic debate” on foreign policy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

www.susankatzkeating.com

Manning painted himself as a young man with an "insatiable thirst for geopolitical information" and a desire for the world to know the truth about what was happening in Iraq and Afghanistan. But he said he became increasingly disillusioned after being sent to Iraq by actions that "didn't seem characteristic" of the U.S., the leader of free world.

Manning said under oath that the first documents he sent to WikiLeaks in early 2012 were the combined information data network exchanges for Iraq and Afghanistan, which he described as the daily journals of the "on-the-ground reality" of the conflicts in Iran and Afghanistan. 

He said he sent the information while on leave and staying at his aunt's house in Potomac, Md., using a public computer at a Barnes & Noble store in Rockville or North Bethesda. He said included a brief note calling the information the most significant documents of our time, and closing with, "Have a good day." 

He said he tried to send the information to the Washington Post and the New York Times before turning to WikiLeaks.  He said he later sent information to WikiLeaks eight other times from his personal laptop at Contingency Base Hammer in Iraq. 

Manning is facing 22 criminal charges that include "aiding the enemy" and could face a life sentence if convicted of the most serious charges. 

Manning said he decided to release the first batch information because he was depressed and frustrated, and felt "a sense of relief" when he returned to Iraq. He said he finally had a "clear conscience" because someone else knew what was happening.

More on usnews >>

WikiLeaker Manning reveals why he spilled United States secrets

Karzai expels US special forces from key Afghanistan province

 

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read on worldnews >>

Karzai expels US special forces from key Afghanistan province

In wake of Benghazi, rapid response Marine unit heading to Europe

Win Mcnamee / Getty Images

A V-22 Osprey lands at the Pentagon following a meeting between U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Japanese Minister of Defense Satoshi Morimoto August 3, 2012 in Arlington, Virginia.

usnews

By Jim Miklaszewsk, Courtney Kube, and Andrew Rafferty, NBC News

Highlighting the continuing fallout from the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on an American consulate in Libya that took the lives of four Americans, defense officials told NBC News on Wednesday that the U.S. Marine Corps is on the verge of announcing a new group tasked with crisis response in north Africa and eastern Europe.
The group, which will be known as the Marine Air-Ground Task Force, will likely be based at Naval Air Station Sigonella in Sicily, Italy.  The team will be capable of rapid deployment for responding to security threats throughout the region — including a U.S. embassy under attack.
Orders for the new Marine unit will likely go to the secretary of defense for approval late next week. The task force will have around 1,000 Marines and a variety of aircraft, including a half-dozen Ospreys — a airplane that can take off vertically like a helicopter but once airborne is capable of high-speed flight.
If approved, the land-based task force will deploy from Camp Lejeune in North Carolina early this spring.
The announcement of the new Marine group comes just weeks after Republicans in Congress hounded former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over why the diplomatic mission in Libya was not better protected the night of the deadly attack that took the life of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
Hours before the attack, Stevens sent a cable to the State Department warning of deteriorating security conditions. Yet, during hearings on Capitol Hill, Clinton said the warning never came to her attention because the State Department receives more than one million cables each year.
Former Sen. Chuck Hagel could be the one to approve the Marine Air-Ground Task Force — if he is confirmed as Defense Secretary when Congress returns from recess. Senate Republicans blocked a vote to approve his nomination last week.

In wake of Benghazi, rapid response Marine unit heading to Europe

Obama Continues Radical Social Engineering of the Military

Arnold Ahlert

Gays in the Military

The progressive revamping of the military has gotten another boost. Outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has offered an array of new benefits to the same-sex partners of service members, both active and retired, whether they are married or not. They include child care services, member-designated hospital visits, and the issuance of military ID cards to same-sex partners, granting them access to on-base commissaries, movie theaters and gyms.

“Taking care of our service members and honoring the sacrifices of all military families are two core values of this nation. Extending these benefits is an appropriate next step under current law to ensure that all service members receive equal support for what they do to protect this nation,” said Panetta in a statement announcing the development. Yet all service members are not receiving equal support: unmarried heterosexual partners and their families are not getting these benefits.

All the new benefits were previously denied by the Pentagon. The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) mostly prohibits more than 85 other benefits now granted to heterosexual military spouses and their children from being given to same-sex partners. These include medical care, housing allowances, death benefits and burial at Arlington National Cemetery. They will remain prohibited because making such changes “presents complex legal and policy challenges due to their nexus to statutorily-prohibited benefits and due to ongoing reviews about how best to provide scarce resources,” Panetta explained.

Such policy challenges are reflected by the reality that same-sex couples are not legally prohibited from qualifying for on-base housing. But Pentagon officials were concerned that following the “spirit of the law” outlined in DOMA required further review. Those concerns centered around fairness and the reaction of other military members, including married couples who could be bumped from housing lists by same-sex couples.

In a statement issued Monday decrying this development, the Center for Military Readiness (CMR) noted that by “equating same-sex domestic partnerships with natural marriage, the lame-duck Secretary of Defense has created a new inequity. Unmarried same-sex couples signing Secretary Panetta’s on-paper-only ‘Declaration of Domestic Partnership’ will have special rights, status, and benefits that are denied to opposite-sex domestic partners and their dependents.”

CMR was equally upset with the incrementalist nature of the move, and where it will inevitably lead. “Eventual correction of this inequity in the name of ‘consistency,’ and eventual extension of medical, housing and other costly benefits on an incremental basis, will rob even more funds from limited defense budget accounts that are devoted to traditional family support.”

Maintaining that traditional family support is likely to be further eroded. DOMA will be reviewed by the Supreme Court of the United States this summer. If two lower court rulings are any indication, it will very likely be overturned. If that occurs, Panetta’s memo indicated that full military benefits will be extended to same-sex couples. With regard to the current changes, Panetta is giving the services until October 1 to effect them, but said they should make every effort to get it done by the end of August.

When the military repealed “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” as their official policy for dealing with gay soldiers in 2011, twenty additional benefits became available to same-sex partners, including the ability to be listed as a beneficiary on the Servicemembers Group Life Insurance policy (SGLI), a death benefit, and hospital visitation rights. This prompted gay advocacy groups to campaign for an additional 100 benefits to be extended to gay couples. Panetta extended 22. Eligibility for the new benefits will require same-sex couples to file a “declaration of domestic partnership” to access such benefits in the 41 states where gay marriage remains illegal. A senior Pentagon official estimated the new benefits would affect approximately 5,600 same-sex couples with an active-duty service member, 3,400 serving with the National Guard or Reserves, and 8,000 military retirees.

Gay and lesbian advocates praised Panetta for the move. “Secretary Panetta’s decision today answers the call President Obama issued in his inaugural address to complete our nation’s journey toward equality, acknowledging the equal service and equal sacrifice of our gay and lesbian service members and their families,” said Allyson Robinson, an Army veteran and executive director of OutServe-SLDN, an association of actively serving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender U.S. military personnel. “We thank him for getting us a few steps closer to full equality–steps that will substantively improve the quality of life of gay and lesbian military families,” she added.

Yet the CMR reminds Americans that, as it is with so many policy decisions enacted by this administration, congressional input is irrelevant. ”Once again, members of Congress are being cut out of the picture by the lame-duck Secretary of Defense, who will not have to cope with the consequences,” their statement reads. “Far from conducting a ‘careful review,’ administration officials have disregarded their own previous commitments regarding marriage that they made to Congress in 2010.”

Regardless, some members of Congress praised the move. “The administration is doing what it can within the constraints that are in place, but the job is not done,” said Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee. “I look forward to continuing to work with the administration and my colleagues in Congress to achieve full equality in the military.”

Others shared the same concerns as the CMR. “We are on a slippery slope here,” said Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Why would the (Defense Department) extend benefits to same-sex partners and then deny cohabiting heterosexual couples the same benefits? The Department of Defense is essentially creating a new class of beneficiary that will increase costs and demand for limited resources that are currently available for military families, active and reserve forces, and retirees.”

Those resources will be further strained if sequestration occurs. The Pentagon will be required to cut $42 billion by Sept. 30. Memos sent to Congress by Joint Chiefs of Staff warned that the military will be reduced to one where Army brigades are unprepared to fight, Navy air craft carriers will remain undeployed and the Air Force will be incapable of operating 24- hour radar surveillance.

Even if such scenarios are exaggerated, adding a whole new benefit class to the cost of military operations will certainly strain the military’s budget even further–which may be precisely the point. Sequestration, which was originally Barack Obama’s idea, is automatic. As a result, Republicans have been disinclined to negotiate any changes to impending spending cuts. Since there are no coincidences in politics, Panetta’s announcement, coming on the same day as Obama’s State of the Union speech, is very likely designed to pressure Republicans into renegotiating that sequester, even as administration officials take credit for another military “milestone.” It remains to be seen where the balancing act between progressive social values and military preparedness leads.

Obama Continues Radical Social Engineering of the Military

Iran gives stealth drone secrets to Russia

WND/ By Reza Kahlili

Russia has helped decode an American stealth drone that was captured by Iran 14 months ago in exchange for its secrets, a source has told WND.

Last week, Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards air and space division, announced the decoding of the drone, while Islamic regime media aired aerial footage below from the drone showing some of its operational capabilities.

“Some (Guards officers) believed that America would send its commando unit to destroy (the drone) while others were of the opinion that the U.S. would not risk having its forces get caught by us, creating a bigger problem for themselves, and that they might just do an air raid to destroy it,” Hajizadeh said. “We gave it a 10 to 15 percent chance on the air raid, and because of that we ordered an alert at all our missile bases to be ready to launch against all U.S. bases (in the region) if they did take any action.”

When the drone was captured, President Obama said, “We’ve asked for it back. We’ll see how the Iranians respond.”

According to Hamidreza Zakeri, a former intelligence officer of the regime who has defected to Europe, Iran and Russia had long been working on trapping a U.S. drone.

A Russian military team from its air and space division had secretly entered Iran days after a strategic agreement between the two countries in 2007 and was stationed at Revolutionary Guard bases to help the Guards with its weapons program and access to modern U.S. technology.

Get the inside story in Reza Kahlili’s “A Time To Betray” and learn how the Islamic regime “bought the bomb” in “Atomic Iran.”

After studying the stealth drone’s travel routes and its surveillance of Iran’s skies, the Russians successfully hacked into the system of one of the RQ170s and forced it to land in Iran Dec. 4, 2011.

With this collaboration, all the information of the stealth drone is now in the hands of the Russians, and much has been given to Iran’s Defense Ministry. Russia in turn provided Iran with the information on its anti-air defense system S300. Russia, because of international sanctions against Iran, could not deliver the actual S300 system.

Other information passed to Iran included technology on the American fighters F35 and X36, which eventually resulted in the Defense Ministry publicly unveiling its new jet fighter, the Qaher 313, with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasting of the advanced features of this super stealth fighter.

However, according to the source, the fighter shown by Iranian media was merely a shell model and not operational and that the regime has only tested the smaller size. The project originally was scheduled to be completed in 2016, but due to the sanctions and economic problems, the regime has had problems following through with the timetable.

Russian-Iranian collaboration goes back many years. After the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s and the formation of the new republics, oil reserves in the Caspian Sea became an issue among the neighboring countries, resulting in disputes with Iran, which claimed half of the reserves.

Russia worried about the impact of the increased importance of this new market and the possible decrease in value of its Siberian oil fields, where over 40 percent of its income is based on its export of gas and oil. Vladimir Putin made a special trip to Iran in 2007 over the issue.

Because the Caspian-Caucasus region could play a significant role in the world economy and world policy, Putin in his meeting with Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was able to significantly expand Russia’s collaboration with the Islamic regime. He also got an agreement on the division of Caspian oil reserves and a bigger Russian role in transporting the oil out of that area.

The 10-year agreement called for the expansion of commerce between the two countries of up to $200 billion and military and secret projects totaling $350 billion.

It was the first time a Kremlin chief visited Iran since Josef Stalin’s trip in 1943.

Russian collaboration extends to the regime’s missile, nuclear and even bio-weapons programs. Sources in the Islamic regime previously have revealed exclusively to WND the existence of secret bio-weapons site in Iran, where, with the help of Russia, Iran has mastered production of eight microbial agents, arming its missiles with biological warheads, and a nuclear site at which, with Russian help, laser technology is enriching uranium.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/iran-gives-stealth-drone-secrets-to-russia/#UyJLOG7EKGeIEv1m.99

Iran gives stealth drone secrets to Russia

Pentagon, State and CIA backed plan to arm Syrian rebels

security

By CNN's Adam Levine

The top two officials at the Department of Defense said Thursday they supported a proposal made at one point by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and CIA Director David Petraeus to arm Syrian rebels, something the Obama administration has so far resisted.

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey said in testimony to a Senate committee that they backed a proposal last summer to provide weapons to the Syrian opposition fighters. U.S. officials tell CNN’s Elise Labott that the White House knocked down the proposal.
Appearing at a hearing in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee, the two defense officials were asked by Arizona Senator John McCain, the leading Republican proponent of a more aggressive backing of Syrian rebels, if they supported the idea of arming the opposition.
“We do,” answered Panetta.
“We did,” answered Dempsey.
Panetta and Dempsey did not get a chance to explain the response as Senator McCain moved on to another topic.
The administration has resisted arming the rebels citing concerns about the infiltration of extremists groups who would possibly use those weapons against other targets. For now the administration has provided millions in humanitarian aid. The CIA has also sent agents to vet the opposition group to try to better understand its composition.
But last December, the U.S. designated a key Syrian rebel group, the al-Nusra Front, as a terrorist entity. U.S. officials argued it was a necessary step that will not weaken the ability of other rebels to combat the Syrian military.
President Barack Obama spoke of the hesitation of getting more involved in Syria in an interview last month with CBS News.
“Syria is a classic example of where our involvement, we want to make sure that not only does it enhance U.S. security, but also that it is doing right by the people of Syria and neighbors like Israel that are going to be profoundly affected by it. And – and so it’s true sometimes that we don’t just shoot from the hip.”
Senator McCain used the answer by Panetta and Dempsey to urge the president to consider the plan, saying in a statement released to the press ““the time to act is long overdue, but it is not too late.”
“The crisis in Syria represents a graphic failure of American leadership. I urge the President to heed the advice of his former and current national security leaders and immediately take the necessary steps, along with our friends and allies, that could hasten the end of the conflict in Syria,” McCain said in the statement.

Pentagon, State and CIA backed plan to arm Syrian rebels

'American Sniper' author Chris Kyle fatally shot

 

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

usnews

Chris Kyle, 38, a former Navy SEAL sniper and author, was shot and killed at a Texas gun range Saturday, along with another man, Chad Littlefield, and police have arrested a suspect, Eddie Routh, 25. Mark Schnyder of KXAS reports and TODAY's Lester Holt takes a look back at an interview with Kyle from last year.

By Gil Aegerter and Alastair Jamieson, NBC News

A former Navy SEAL who wrote "American Sniper," a best-selling book about his lethal career as a marksman in Iraq, was shot to death with another man at a gun range near Stephenville, Texas, on Saturday. 

Chris Kyle, 38, and the other man were found dead at the shooting range of Rough Creek Lodge on Saturday afternoon, Texas Highway Patrol spokesman Lonny Haschel told KXAS.

The gunman, identified as Eddie Ray Routh of Lancaster, Texas, was arrested after a brief pursuit, Trooper Haschel said. The other victim was named as Chad Littlefield, aged 35.

Kyle, a Texas native who grew up hunting, served four tours in Iraq with Navy SEAL Team 3. His shooting during battles in Ramadi and Fallujah became legendary, and insurgents nicknamed him the "Devil of Ramadi" and put a bounty on his head.

He was credited with 160 confirmed kills, including one in 2008 in which he said he fired from 2,100 yards away -- 1.2 miles.

The Star-Telegram described him as "America's deadliest sniper."

Haschel said Routh is believed to have shot the victims at around 3:30 p.m. local time (4:30 p.m. ET) before leaving the shooting range and returning to his home in Lancaster in a Ford pickup truck.

The link between Routh and the two victims wasn't immediately clear, Haschel said. The Dallas Morning News reported that Routh was 25 years old and had military training.

Routh was arraigned Saturday night on two counts of capital murder, said Haschel.

Rough Creek Lodge is a resort and conference center about 90 miles southwest of Dallas and 24 miles southeast of Stephenville in the Texas Hill Country. Lancaster is just south of Dallas.

NBCDFW.com

Chris Kyle was credited with 160 kills during his time as a Navy SEAL marksman.

In a February 2012 interview with NBC News, Kyle said he didn’t want to put the number of kills in the book but the publisher insisted.

“If I could figure out the number of people I saved, that’s something I would brag about,” he told NBC News' Lester Holt. 

After leaving the Navy, Kyle founded Craft International, which provides training to military, police, corporate and civilian clients, Reuters said.

"It just comes as a shock and it's staggering to think that after all Chris has been through, that this is how he meets his end, because there are so many ways he could have been killed" in Iraq, Scott McEwen, who co-wrote "American Sniper," told Reuters.

Kyle appeared on the NBC reality TV show "Stars Earn Stripes" last year.

Kyle was married with two children.

'American Sniper' author Chris Kyle fatally shot