Tagged: john

0

Soldiers from Army's newest armored BCT win 'best tank crew' trophy

Soldiers with the Army’s newest armored brigade became this year’s best tank crew.

The crew from Fort Stewart, Georgia’s 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team[1], 3rd Infantry Division claimed the Sullivan Cup during the biennial competition[2] to determine the Army’s top four-person tank crew, according to an Army news release.

Pvt. Brandon Zacher, from left, Cpl. Justin Harris, Staff Sgt. Johnathan Werner, and Pvt. Dekken Sanders of Bravo Company, 3rd Combined Arms Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division won the the Sullivan Cup. (Spc. Leo Jenkins/Army)

Pvt. Brandon Zacher, from left, Cpl. Justin Harris, Staff Sgt. Johnathan Werner, and Pvt. Dekken Sanders of Bravo Company, 3rd Combined Arms Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division won the the Sullivan Cup. (Spc. Leo Jenkins/Army)

Pvt. Brandon Zacher, from left, Cpl. Justin Harris, Staff Sgt. Johnathan Werner, and Pvt. Dekken Sanders of Bravo Company, 3rd Combined Arms Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division won the the Sullivan Cup. (Spc. Leo Jenkins/Army)

The soldiers competed against 15 other tank crews across the Army, Marine Corps and allied militaries at Fort Benning, Georgia.

In October, the brigade converted from an infantry to armored brigade, becoming the Army’s 15th ABCT, the release said.

Cpl. Justin Harris, gunner of the winning crew, said in the release that their goal was to set the standard for all armored brigades.

“We may be the newest armored brigade combat team in the Army, but we plan to release the ‘Hounds of Hell’ at the competition,” he said before the competition.

Army 1st Lt. John Dupre, with the North Carolina Army National Guard’s C Company, 1st Battalion, 252nd Armored Regiment, directs his tank crew to their next destination. (Sgt. 1st Class Jon Soucy/Army)

Army 1st Lt. John Dupre, with the North Carolina Army National Guard’s C Company, 1st Battalion, 252nd Armored Regiment, directs his tank crew to their next destination. (Sgt. 1st Class Jon Soucy/Army)

Army 1st Lt. John Dupre, with the North Carolina Army National Guard’s C Company, 1st Battalion, 252nd Armored Regiment, directs his tank crew to their next destination. (Sgt. 1st Class Jon Soucy/Army)

References

  1. ^ Brigade Combat Team (www.armytimes.com)
  2. ^ competition (www.armytimes.com)
0

Soldiers from Army's newest armored BCT win 'best tank crew' trophy

Soldiers with the Army’s newest armored brigade became this year’s best tank crew.

The crew from Fort Stewart, Georgia’s 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team[1], 3rd Infantry Division claimed the Sullivan Cup during the biennial competition[2] to determine the Army’s top four-person tank crew, according to an Army news release.

Pvt. Brandon Zacher, from left, Cpl. Justin Harris, Staff Sgt. Johnathan Werner, and Pvt. Dekken Sanders of Bravo Company, 3rd Combined Arms Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division won the the Sullivan Cup. (Spc. Leo Jenkins/Army)

Pvt. Brandon Zacher, from left, Cpl. Justin Harris, Staff Sgt. Johnathan Werner, and Pvt. Dekken Sanders of Bravo Company, 3rd Combined Arms Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division won the the Sullivan Cup. (Spc. Leo Jenkins/Army)

Pvt. Brandon Zacher, from left, Cpl. Justin Harris, Staff Sgt. Johnathan Werner, and Pvt. Dekken Sanders of Bravo Company, 3rd Combined Arms Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division won the the Sullivan Cup. (Spc. Leo Jenkins/Army)

The soldiers competed against 15 other tank crews across the Army, Marine Corps and allied militaries at Fort Benning, Georgia.

In October, the brigade converted from an infantry to armored brigade, becoming the Army’s 15th ABCT, the release said.

Cpl. Justin Harris, gunner of the winning crew, said in the release that their goal was to set the standard for all armored brigades.

“We may be the newest armored brigade combat team in the Army, but we plan to release the ‘Hounds of Hell’ at the competition,” he said before the competition.

Army 1st Lt. John Dupre, with the North Carolina Army National Guard’s C Company, 1st Battalion, 252nd Armored Regiment, directs his tank crew to their next destination. (Sgt. 1st Class Jon Soucy/Army)

Army 1st Lt. John Dupre, with the North Carolina Army National Guard’s C Company, 1st Battalion, 252nd Armored Regiment, directs his tank crew to their next destination. (Sgt. 1st Class Jon Soucy/Army)

Army 1st Lt. John Dupre, with the North Carolina Army National Guard’s C Company, 1st Battalion, 252nd Armored Regiment, directs his tank crew to their next destination. (Sgt. 1st Class Jon Soucy/Army)

References

  1. ^ Brigade Combat Team (www.armytimes.com)
  2. ^ competition (www.armytimes.com)
0

Indiana awaits Homeland Security election risk assessment review as primaries heat up

INDIANAPOLIS — With the midterm congressional primaries about to go into full swing, the Department of Homeland Security has completed security reviews of election systems in only about half the states that have requested them so far.

The government’s slow pace in conducting the reviews has raised concerns that the nation’s voting systems could be vulnerable to hacking, especially after U.S. intelligence agencies warned that Russia plans to continue meddling in the country’s elections.

Among those still waiting for Homeland Security to conduct a risk assessment is Indiana, one of four states with primaries on Tuesday. Its ballot includes several hotly contested races, including a Republican primary for U.S. Senate.

Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson said she is confident state officials have done what they can to safeguard Tuesday’s voting, but acknowledged: “I’ll probably be chewing my fingernails during the entire day on Election Day.”

Like other states, Indiana used a private vendor to conduct a risk assessment and is one of 33 states and 32 local election offices that are receiving remote cyber scanning services from Homeland Security to identify vulnerabilities in their networks.

The concerns aren’t just theoretical.

The nation’s intelligence chiefs warned earlier this year that Russia remains interested in disrupting U.S. elections after a multipronged effort to interfere two years ago. That included attempts to hack into the election systems of 21 states.

Election officials in nine of those states said they were still waiting for a DHS risk assessment, according to a nationwide AP survey.

There is no indication Russian hackers succeeded in manipulating any votes, but U.S. security agencies say they did manage to breach the voter rolls in Illinois. That state and Texas are the only two to hold statewide primaries so far this year, and neither reported any intrusions into their election systems.

But a local election in Tennessee last week highlights the concern: Knox County has hired a cybersecurity firm to investigate why a website that reports election results crashed after the polls closed.

The county’s technology director said some of the unusually heavy traffic came from overseas servers. DHS spokesman Scott McConnell said there is no indication so far that the outage was caused by a “malicious actor.”

Homeland Security designated elections systems critical infrastructure just months after the 2016 presidential election, adding them to a list that includes chemical plants, dams and nuclear reactors.

The department said it has completed risk assessments of election systems in just nine of the 17 states that have formally requested them so far. It has pledged to finish them by November for every state that asks, but the reviews are not likely to be done in time for some state primaries, many of which are in May and June.

The number of states is likely to grow. At least 28 said they want Homeland Security to conduct the risk assessments, according to a 50-state survey of state election officials by The Associated Press.

The security reviews are designed to identify any weaknesses that could be exploited by hackers; such examinations are routinely conducted in the private sector. They are just one tool, although an important one, in ensuring a computer network has a robust defense.

Homeland Security officials attribute the backlog to increased demand for such reviews since the 2016 election and say they are devoting more money and shifting resources to reduce wait times. The reviews typically take two weeks each.

“Elections remain a top priority,” said Matt Masterson, the department’s senior adviser for cybersecurity.

Some states prefer to do the security checks on their own, with some, such as New Hampshire, expressing concern about federal overreach in a country where elections are run by state and local governments.

Cybersecurity experts say that as long as the process is robust, it should not matter who conducts the risk assessments.

“You could do this right in a number of different ways,” said Mike Garcia, lead author of a handbook for state and local election officials released recently by the nonprofit Center for Internet Security. “What matters is that you are doing it right.”

The delays have caught the attention of Congress, including the Senate Intelligence Committee, which recommended in March that Homeland Security expand capacity to reduce wait times.

“DHS and the FBI have made great strides, but they must do more,” committee chairman Sen. Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, said at the time.

Of the other states holding primaries on Tuesday, the traditional battlegrounds of North Carolina and Ohio said they had received on-site reviews by Homeland Security. Election officials in the fourth state, West Virginia, told the AP they have yet to request a federal risk assessment but plan to do so before the November election. They asked the National Guard to help monitor the state’s election networks on Tuesday.

Other states that told the AP they had received the DHS reviews are Colorado, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico and Oregon.

Two of the states targeted in 2016 — Alabama and Oklahoma — have yet to request a DHS security review.

Alabama Secretary of State John H. Merrill said the state could still decide to make the request before the election.

“We are trying to be as prepared as we can possibly be with our existing partners,” Merrill said. “We want to keep every option open that we have.”

MORE TOP STORIES | More than 35,000 pounds of ground beef sold at Kroger stores in Indiana recalled for contamination | Dozens of Indianapolis area concerts discounted to just $20 for National Concert Week | Body found on Indy’s southeast side identified as missing 35-year-old man | Mother wants answers after daycare claims another child beat up her 1-year-old son | State closes Indianapolis day care after 1-year-old seriously hurt[1][2][3][4][5][6]

Top Trending Videos

[embedded content]

0

Indiana awaits Homeland Security election risk assessment review as primaries heat up

INDIANAPOLIS — With the midterm congressional primaries about to go into full swing, the Department of Homeland Security has completed security reviews of election systems in only about half the states that have requested them so far.

The government’s slow pace in conducting the reviews has raised concerns that the nation’s voting systems could be vulnerable to hacking, especially after U.S. intelligence agencies warned that Russia plans to continue meddling in the country’s elections.

Among those still waiting for Homeland Security to conduct a risk assessment is Indiana, one of four states with primaries on Tuesday. Its ballot includes several hotly contested races, including a Republican primary for U.S. Senate.

Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson said she is confident state officials have done what they can to safeguard Tuesday’s voting, but acknowledged: “I’ll probably be chewing my fingernails during the entire day on Election Day.”

Like other states, Indiana used a private vendor to conduct a risk assessment and is one of 33 states and 32 local election offices that are receiving remote cyber scanning services from Homeland Security to identify vulnerabilities in their networks.

The concerns aren’t just theoretical.

The nation’s intelligence chiefs warned earlier this year that Russia remains interested in disrupting U.S. elections after a multipronged effort to interfere two years ago. That included attempts to hack into the election systems of 21 states.

Election officials in nine of those states said they were still waiting for a DHS risk assessment, according to a nationwide AP survey.

There is no indication Russian hackers succeeded in manipulating any votes, but U.S. security agencies say they did manage to breach the voter rolls in Illinois. That state and Texas are the only two to hold statewide primaries so far this year, and neither reported any intrusions into their election systems.

But a local election in Tennessee last week highlights the concern: Knox County has hired a cybersecurity firm to investigate why a website that reports election results crashed after the polls closed.

The county’s technology director said some of the unusually heavy traffic came from overseas servers. DHS spokesman Scott McConnell said there is no indication so far that the outage was caused by a “malicious actor.”

Homeland Security designated elections systems critical infrastructure just months after the 2016 presidential election, adding them to a list that includes chemical plants, dams and nuclear reactors.

The department said it has completed risk assessments of election systems in just nine of the 17 states that have formally requested them so far. It has pledged to finish them by November for every state that asks, but the reviews are not likely to be done in time for some state primaries, many of which are in May and June.

The number of states is likely to grow. At least 28 said they want Homeland Security to conduct the risk assessments, according to a 50-state survey of state election officials by The Associated Press.

The security reviews are designed to identify any weaknesses that could be exploited by hackers; such examinations are routinely conducted in the private sector. They are just one tool, although an important one, in ensuring a computer network has a robust defense.

Homeland Security officials attribute the backlog to increased demand for such reviews since the 2016 election and say they are devoting more money and shifting resources to reduce wait times. The reviews typically take two weeks each.

“Elections remain a top priority,” said Matt Masterson, the department’s senior adviser for cybersecurity.

Some states prefer to do the security checks on their own, with some, such as New Hampshire, expressing concern about federal overreach in a country where elections are run by state and local governments.

Cybersecurity experts say that as long as the process is robust, it should not matter who conducts the risk assessments.

“You could do this right in a number of different ways,” said Mike Garcia, lead author of a handbook for state and local election officials released recently by the nonprofit Center for Internet Security. “What matters is that you are doing it right.”

The delays have caught the attention of Congress, including the Senate Intelligence Committee, which recommended in March that Homeland Security expand capacity to reduce wait times.

“DHS and the FBI have made great strides, but they must do more,” committee chairman Sen. Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, said at the time.

Of the other states holding primaries on Tuesday, the traditional battlegrounds of North Carolina and Ohio said they had received on-site reviews by Homeland Security. Election officials in the fourth state, West Virginia, told the AP they have yet to request a federal risk assessment but plan to do so before the November election. They asked the National Guard to help monitor the state’s election networks on Tuesday.

Other states that told the AP they had received the DHS reviews are Colorado, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico and Oregon.

Two of the states targeted in 2016 — Alabama and Oklahoma — have yet to request a DHS security review.

Alabama Secretary of State John H. Merrill said the state could still decide to make the request before the election.

“We are trying to be as prepared as we can possibly be with our existing partners,” Merrill said. “We want to keep every option open that we have.”

MORE TOP STORIES | More than 35,000 pounds of ground beef sold at Kroger stores in Indiana recalled for contamination | Dozens of Indianapolis area concerts discounted to just $20 for National Concert Week | Body found on Indy’s southeast side identified as missing 35-year-old man | Mother wants answers after daycare claims another child beat up her 1-year-old son | State closes Indianapolis day care after 1-year-old seriously hurt[1][2][3][4][5][6]

Top Trending Videos

[embedded content]

0

Indiana awaits Homeland Security election risk assessment review as primaries heat up

INDIANAPOLIS — With the midterm congressional primaries about to go into full swing, the Department of Homeland Security has completed security reviews of election systems in only about half the states that have requested them so far.

The government’s slow pace in conducting the reviews has raised concerns that the nation’s voting systems could be vulnerable to hacking, especially after U.S. intelligence agencies warned that Russia plans to continue meddling in the country’s elections.

Among those still waiting for Homeland Security to conduct a risk assessment is Indiana, one of four states with primaries on Tuesday. Its ballot includes several hotly contested races, including a Republican primary for U.S. Senate.

Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson said she is confident state officials have done what they can to safeguard Tuesday’s voting, but acknowledged: “I’ll probably be chewing my fingernails during the entire day on Election Day.”

Like other states, Indiana used a private vendor to conduct a risk assessment and is one of 33 states and 32 local election offices that are receiving remote cyber scanning services from Homeland Security to identify vulnerabilities in their networks.

The concerns aren’t just theoretical.

The nation’s intelligence chiefs warned earlier this year that Russia remains interested in disrupting U.S. elections after a multipronged effort to interfere two years ago. That included attempts to hack into the election systems of 21 states.

Election officials in nine of those states said they were still waiting for a DHS risk assessment, according to a nationwide AP survey.

There is no indication Russian hackers succeeded in manipulating any votes, but U.S. security agencies say they did manage to breach the voter rolls in Illinois. That state and Texas are the only two to hold statewide primaries so far this year, and neither reported any intrusions into their election systems.

But a local election in Tennessee last week highlights the concern: Knox County has hired a cybersecurity firm to investigate why a website that reports election results crashed after the polls closed.

The county’s technology director said some of the unusually heavy traffic came from overseas servers. DHS spokesman Scott McConnell said there is no indication so far that the outage was caused by a “malicious actor.”

Homeland Security designated elections systems critical infrastructure just months after the 2016 presidential election, adding them to a list that includes chemical plants, dams and nuclear reactors.

The department said it has completed risk assessments of election systems in just nine of the 17 states that have formally requested them so far. It has pledged to finish them by November for every state that asks, but the reviews are not likely to be done in time for some state primaries, many of which are in May and June.

The number of states is likely to grow. At least 28 said they want Homeland Security to conduct the risk assessments, according to a 50-state survey of state election officials by The Associated Press.

The security reviews are designed to identify any weaknesses that could be exploited by hackers; such examinations are routinely conducted in the private sector. They are just one tool, although an important one, in ensuring a computer network has a robust defense.

Homeland Security officials attribute the backlog to increased demand for such reviews since the 2016 election and say they are devoting more money and shifting resources to reduce wait times. The reviews typically take two weeks each.

“Elections remain a top priority,” said Matt Masterson, the department’s senior adviser for cybersecurity.

Some states prefer to do the security checks on their own, with some, such as New Hampshire, expressing concern about federal overreach in a country where elections are run by state and local governments.

Cybersecurity experts say that as long as the process is robust, it should not matter who conducts the risk assessments.

“You could do this right in a number of different ways,” said Mike Garcia, lead author of a handbook for state and local election officials released recently by the nonprofit Center for Internet Security. “What matters is that you are doing it right.”

The delays have caught the attention of Congress, including the Senate Intelligence Committee, which recommended in March that Homeland Security expand capacity to reduce wait times.

“DHS and the FBI have made great strides, but they must do more,” committee chairman Sen. Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, said at the time.

Of the other states holding primaries on Tuesday, the traditional battlegrounds of North Carolina and Ohio said they had received on-site reviews by Homeland Security. Election officials in the fourth state, West Virginia, told the AP they have yet to request a federal risk assessment but plan to do so before the November election. They asked the National Guard to help monitor the state’s election networks on Tuesday.

Other states that told the AP they had received the DHS reviews are Colorado, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico and Oregon.

Two of the states targeted in 2016 — Alabama and Oklahoma — have yet to request a DHS security review.

Alabama Secretary of State John H. Merrill said the state could still decide to make the request before the election.

“We are trying to be as prepared as we can possibly be with our existing partners,” Merrill said. “We want to keep every option open that we have.”

MORE TOP STORIES | More than 35,000 pounds of ground beef sold at Kroger stores in Indiana recalled for contamination | Dozens of Indianapolis area concerts discounted to just $20 for National Concert Week | Body found on Indy’s southeast side identified as missing 35-year-old man | Mother wants answers after daycare claims another child beat up her 1-year-old son | State closes Indianapolis day care after 1-year-old seriously hurt[1][2][3][4][5][6]

Top Trending Videos

[embedded content]

0

Senators lobby to bring new armored brigade team to Texas …

U.S. Senators Ted Cruz and John Cornyn sent a letter Monday to Secretary of the Army Mark Esper requesting the Army relocate a newly-designated armored brigade combat team to either Fort Hood or Fort Bliss.

The Army’s 2nd Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, currently located at Fort Carson, Colorado, is in the process of conversion from an infantry brigade combat team to an armored brigade combat team. The two Texas Army installations already have the training ranges necessary to prepare an armored brigade combat team for deployment.

“We write regarding the conversion of the Army’s 2nd Brigade, 4th Infantry Division from an infantry brigade combat team to an armored brigade combat team,” the senators wrote. “As this conversion occurs, we also write to express our strong support for the relocation of the 2nd Brigade from Fort Carson, Colorado to one of Texas’s premier armor installations. The conversion of an infantry brigade combat team to an armored brigade combat team is a daunting task. Nevertheless, as you look across the Army, Fort Hood and Fort Bliss stand out as hosts for a unit of this size and composition.”

Both installations are equipped with the infrastructure necessary to support the rapid deployment and redeployment of armored brigades, the letter stated. Fort Hood and Fort Bliss both have rail access, airfields capable of handling any size aircraft needed for rapid air transportation of personnel and equipment and the capacity to host an additional brigade.

The letter also touted the “superb quality of life including affordable housing, military friendly communities, recreational activities, and easy access to services” for family members. “Over the years, our installations and the surrounding communities have worked together to identify and provide the best available resources for soldiers and their families assigned to the region.”

0

Lawmakers Move to Protect Fort Carson's 2nd Brigade Combat Team

Colorado’s congressional delegation and Gov. John Hickenlooper have sent a letter urging the Army[1] to keep Fort Carson[2]‘s 2nd Brigade Combat Team in town after it trades its infantry marching boots for armored vehicles.

And Colorado Springs Republican U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn isn’t stopping there. He wants the Army to also send an 800-soldier security force assistance brigade to Colorado Springs.

“I would love to see us expand,” he said.

The Army announced late last month that it would re-equip Fort Carson’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team with tanks and Bradley armored fighting vehicles. But in the shift, the Army is studying whether the brigade should be moved, with posts in Georgia, Kansas and Texas in play for the brigade.

Fort Carson remains all but certain to keep the 4,000-soldier unit, because moving it elsewhere could cost nearly $200 million. That’s because the Colorado Springs post already has the infrastructure an armored brigade would need.

But it doesn’t hurt to have the state’s full political might on Fort Carson’s side, said Rich Burchfield, who heads defense programs for the Colorado Springs Chamber of Commerce.

Burchfield said the lawmakers are adding an assurance to the Pentagon that moves to expand the post will have political backing and federal cash.

He also said keeping the brigade in town would be a boost for the troops involved. Colorado Springs remains the most-requested destination for soldiers.

“You’re looking at 4,400 soldiers and 6,000 family members who are already part of the community,” Burchfield said. “We have to keep our neighbors here in town.”

While keeping 2nd Brigade here is a top priority, Lamborn wants more.

The Army examining options to house a new security force assistance brigade and the congressman wants to woo it to the Rockies.

Assistance brigades are a new kind of Army formation aimed at training allied troops and helping them in battle. Born out of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the assistance units would extend America’s reach in troubled regions while keeping deployed troop numbers low.

Lamborn said Fort Carson has a leg up in landing the unit thanks to the 10th Special Forces Group that’s already stationed here.

The 10th Group’s Green Berets are already expert at training foreign troops and Lamborn said having that experience handy would allow the new assistance brigade to “hit the ground running with a minimal length of time between activation and full operational capability.”

Lamborn also touted the popularity of Colorado Springs with troops in his pitch.

“Finally, I would point out the fact Colorado Springs sits in the congressional district with the largest number of veterans of any congressional district in the U.S.,” he wrote.

A final decision on the fate of 2nd Brigade is weeks away and any decision on an assistance brigade could take months.

But for now, the Army’s top brass knows that Colorado’s leaders love Fort Carson.

“Community support in our state for Fort Carson missions, personnel and families is unmatched,” the lawmakers said.

This article is written by Tom Roeder from The Gazette (Colorado Springs, Colo.)[3] and was legally licensed via the Tribune Content Agency through the NewsCred[4] publisher network. Please direct all licensing questions to [email protected][5].

Show Full Article[6]

© Copyright 2018 The Gazette (Colorado Springs, Colo.). All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

References

  1. ^ Army (www.military.com)
  2. ^ Fort Carson (www.military.com)
  3. ^ The Gazette (Colorado Springs, Colo.) (gazette.com)
  4. ^ NewsCred (www.newscred.com)
  5. ^ [email protected] (www.military.com)
  6. ^ Show Full Article (www.military.com)