Le recteur de l'Université des sciences de l'information et de la communication (UNISIC), Jean Kambayi Bwatshia am appelé, jeudi 8 août, les étudiants et l'ensemble du personnel à reprendre leurs activités.
Il a lancé cet appel un jour après la délégation syndicale de cet établissement universitaire a lancé un mouvement de grève.
Presidential candidates dread sudden reversals of fortune in a campaign’s final weeks. Modern-day “October Surprises” include Richard Nixon prematurely announcing a Vietnam peace agreement (1972), Iran refusing to release U.S. hostages until after Election Day (1980), and Mitt Romney taped belittling less-wealthy voters (2012).
Yet, the biggest “surprise” for an incumbent president nearly took place in the fall of 1864 when Abraham Lincoln was in the White House. In going against George McClellan, the Democratic Party nominee, many in the GOP and Lincoln’s cabinet weren’t certain he could win again.
Despite the Union Army advancing to Richmond, the Civil War had already lasted nearly four years, resulting in more than 600,000 deaths. Many Americans were eager for peace—even if it meant allowing the Confederacy to become its own nation. Against that backdrop, rebel spies positioned themselves along our northern border with British Canada.
Their Northwest Conspiracy was led by Jacob Thompson, a former cabinet secretary under President James Buchanan and now a Southern sympathizer. Given $1 million in gold by Confederate President Jefferson Davis, Thompson’s assignment was to direct a clandestine operation along the border. One of his first targets was the USS Michigan, which was the only Union warship left on the Great Lakes late in 1864.
Anchored off Sandusky, Ohio, the iron-hulled steamer had a thirty-pound parrot rifle, a half-dozen howitzers, and additional firepower. In mid-September, rebel leader John Yates Beall led a raiding party from the Detroit area to seize the Michigan. A private in the “Stonewall Brigade” at the war’s onset, Beall had shifted to piracy and espionage.
By this point in the Civil War, British Canada had become a haven for rebel spies and their supporters. John Wilkes Booth, who would soon assassinate Lincoln at Ford’s Theatre in Washington, was a visitor to Montreal. Julian Sher, author of The North Star: Canada and the Civil War Plots Against Lincoln, says the Catholic Church helped one of Booth’s accomplices hide out for months. Also, a leading financier in Montreal allowed Confederates to launder money through his bank.
In fact, when Booth was killed near Port Royal, Virginia, in late April 1865, less than two weeks after shooting Lincoln, a banknote from the Ontario Bank branch in Montreal was found in his pocket. It was signed by bank manager Henry Starnes, the former and future mayor of Montreal.
Beall and Booth knew of each other and perhaps met at John Brown’s execution in Harper’s Ferry in 1859. Ironically, Brown’s son, John Jr., who lived on an island near Sandusky, nearly derailed the rebels’ plan in 1864 to take the Michigan.
While Booth’s plots were haphazard, spurred by hatred for Lincoln, Beall’s raids, first on the Chesapeake Bay and then on Lake Erie, were backed by Confederate officials in Richmond.
Arriving by nightfall at Sandusky Harbor on September 19, 1864, Beall moved the steamship he had stolen into position near the Michigan. Everything went smoothly until a signal from the shore wasn’t posted. This was supposed to indicate that the warship’s officers and crew were incapacitated by spiked liquor at a party. When no flare was seen, Beall’s crew got cold feet, and the rebel leader had to flee back across Lake Erie.
That’s how close the 1864 presidential election came to an “October Surprise.” If Beall had captured the Union warship, he planned to free Confederate prisoners on Johnson’s Island, outside of Sandusky Harbor and not far from where the Michigan was anchored. Approximately 3,000 rebels were imprisoned there, including twenty officers. From there, the Confederates could have bombarded Cleveland, Buffalo, and other targets along the southern shore of Lake Erie.
In the end, the 1864 presidential election was a landslide for the Republican Party. Lincoln won the Electoral College by 212-21 and 55 percent of the popular vote. But what’s rarely mentioned in history textbooks is how the Confederates nearly opened a new front in the Civil War only weeks before voters went to the polls.
Even after Lincoln was reelected, the rebels remained active in the Great Lakes. Beall wasn’t apprehended until December after he attempted to derail a train carrying Confederate prisoners and a load of gold south of Buffalo. A historical plaque near the Whirlpool Bridge in Niagara Falls, NY, now marks where authorities finally arrested him. Despite a petition signed by ninety-two members of Congress asking for Beall to be pardoned, he was hung on Governors Island in New York Harbor.
All we can be sure of today is if the Confederates had seized the USS Michigan, it would have been an October Surprise and certainly made Beall & Co. more than a historical footnote.
About the Author:Tim Wendel is the author of Rebel Falls. The historical novel details the Confederates’ spy network along the U.S.-Canadian border in 1864. Follow him on X: @Tim_Wendel.
Image Credit: Shutterstock.
Ukrajna külügyminisztere, Dmitro Kuleba és Maneesh Gobin mauritiusi külügyminiszter a két ország közötti kapcsolatokról tárgyalt augusztus 8-án Port Louisban – közölte az ukrán külügyminisztérium a Telegramon.
A közlemény szerint Ukrajna külügyminiszterének ez az első mauritiusi látogatása a két ország közötti kapcsolatok 1992-es fennállása óta.
A találkozón Maneesh Gobin biztosította Kulebát, hogy országa kész segíteni Ukrajnának abban, hogy több afrikai országot is bevonjanak a békeformulán alapuló igazságos és tartós béke helyreállításának folyamatába.
A tárgyalások végén a külügyminiszterek aláírták az Ukrajna és Mauritius közötti vízummentességről szóló megállapodást, amely megkönnyíti a mauritiusi befektetők utazását Ukrajnába, és a háború befejezése után növeli majd az ukrán turisták számát Mauritiuson – írta a külügyminisztérium.
The post Mauritiuson tárgyalt az ukrán külügyminiszter appeared first on Kárpátalja.ma.
Similarly to other weapons, the 250 kg AASM munition is carried by a custom made pylon under the MiG-29’s innermost wing attachment point. After images and videos earlier this year showed the French-made AASM Hammer [...]
The post First Close-Up Image of the French AASM Hammer Bomb on a Ukrainian MiG-29 appeared first on The Aviationist.
The Important Stuff: In February 2009, a shocking collision occurred between two nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, the UK's HMS Vanguard and France's Le Triomphant, in the Atlantic Ocean. The incident, later revealed by a Royal Navy whistleblower, highlighted significant failures in communication, equipment, and seamanship on the part of the British submarine.
-Despite the potential for a nuclear disaster, no injuries or radioactive leaks occurred. The collision underscored the need for improved coordination among allied navies to prevent future mishaps.
-The incident serves as a stark reminder of the risks involved in submarine operations, particularly in today's tense geopolitical climate.
The 2009 UK-France Submarine IncidentIn February 2009, an unprecedented and nightmarish event occurred in the depths of the Atlantic Ocean: two nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines belonging to France and the United Kingdom collided with each other. The ships involved were the British Royal Navy’s HMS Vanguard and the French navy’s Le Triomphant.
The CollisionThe collision happened in the early hours of 3 February 2009. The two subs were conducting routine patrols. At some point, in the mid-Atlantic, the two nuclear-powered submarines crossed paths and crashed into each other.
This catastrophe was the result of a combination of factors, but the most damning one of all comes from a Royal Navy submariner, William McNeilly, who decided to become a whistleblower. According to this whistleblower, the accident was likely the result of the British submarine which had been subject to “massive equipment failures, crew errors, and lax standards” onboard the HMS Vanguard.
Indeed, the official account provided to the public by the British government (and backed up by the French government), according to McNeilly, was far less caustic than the event actually had been. In fact, according to the whistleblower testimony, the British nuclear submarine was mere moments away from exploding (which would have ignited the ship’s nuclear reactor, causing all kinds of problems for the world).
The whistleblower account details how the FNS Le Triomphant had bashed out a “massive chunk” from the HMS Vanguard after which the French sub “grazed down the side of” the Vanguard. From there, “compressed air bottle groups had been dislodged by the collision and ‘were hanging off and banging against the pressure hull.’ The submarine had to return to base slowly because ‘if one of the [High Pressure Air] bottle groups exploded it would’ve created a chain reaction and sent the submarine plummeting to the bottom.’”
A “massive cover-up of the incident” soon followed.
According to McNeilly the Vanguard had become the poster child in the failing British Royal Navy (an issue about which this author has documented repeatedly in these pages) of mismanagement, lax discipline, and poor seamanship.
Before its collision with the Le Triomphant, there was another cover-up involving the Vanguard pertaining to a “deep depth incident” in which the HMS Vanguard “dived far beyond a normal safe depth. A combination of high-water pressure and the submarine’s low speed made it difficult for the submarine’s hydroplanes [to] generate enough lift to raise the submarine, and ballast water could not be pumped out fast enough to allow the submarine to rise.”
In essence, well before the 2009 collision, the Vanguard was almost lost due to poor seamanship. Yet, the Royal Navy, rather than address the problems, chose to cover it up and continue operating as though everything were normal.
Thankfully, the incident led to a review of submarine operations and safety protocols by both the British and French navies. It further highlighted the need for improved communication and coordination between allied nations operating in the same waters.
Although, the presence of a “massive cover-up” being enacted immediately upon the Vanguard’s return to port is unacceptable and begs the question as to whether the Royal Navy and French Navy really learned the right lessons or if they just figured out how to downplay things better.
The Subs InvolvedBritain’s HMS Vanguard was the lead boat in the Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarine. It displaced 16,000 tons when submerged. It registered a length of around 149.9 meters, or 492 feet. Its beam was 12.8 meters (42 feet).
More importantly, though, the Vanguard’s propulsion system consisted on of one nuclear reactor, two steam turbines, one shaft and 20,000 ship-based horsepower. With this engine alignment, the Vanguard could reach a top cruising speed of 25 knots (or 29 miles per hour) when submerged. She carried a crew of 135.
As for armaments, this particular sub carried 16 Trident II D5 ballistic missiles and had four torpedo tubes for Spearfish torpedoes.
On the other end of the collision was France’s Le Triomphant, the lead boat of the French navy’s Triomphant-class ballistic missile submarine. This boat displaced a total of 14,335 tons when submerged. She had a length of 138 meters (453 feet), a beam of 12.5 meters (41 feet), making her slightly smaller than the Vanguard.
Like her British counterpart, the Triomphant also relied upon a single nuclear reactor to power two steam turbines with one shaft, giving the boat 15,000 ship-based horsepower. So, she was slightly less powerful than the Vanguard.
As for speed, she topped out at 25 knots—29 miles per hour—just like the British submarine did.
The Triomphant carried 15 M45 ballistic missiles and had four torpedo tubes for F17 torpedoes.
This incident on the High Seas between two allied nations that simply were not aware that each other had submarines operating in the same Area of Responsibility (AOR) could have been far worse than it was. The two submarines, as you have read, were nuclear-powered. Thus, these boats could have become like Chernobyl under the waves.
Thankfully, that fate was avoided. But this incident was a clear wake-up call.
Both Britain and France (and the rest of NATO) have all updated their policies for coordinating with allied foreign navies to ensure nothing like this incident occurs.
Yet, there are plenty of other parts of the world where nuclear submarines belonging to navies that do not get along with each other operate frequently.
Implications for Sino-American Interactions Beneath the SeaJust recently, in fact, the USS Connecticut is believed to have crashed into an undersea mountain (seamount) in the crowded South China Sea while it was possibly conducting a covert surveillance mission of China’s secretive naval base at Hainan Island.
It was a major source of embarrassment for the US Navy because, the incident not only revealed what the Connecticut was up to but it also put a dent in the Navy’s limited Seawolf-class fleet.
The Connecticut will not return to service for another year. What’s more, it was quite a propaganda boon for China. Beijing rubbed salt in the wound by claiming—erroneously—that the Connecticut had created an unspecified “environmental disaster.”
Shortly thereafter, rumors abounded that China lost a Type 093 Shang-class nuclear submarine in the Taiwan Strait. It was never confirmed but this came on the heels of the Connecticut incident. Just imagine the nightmare scenario of the Connecticut had collided with a Chinese nuclear-powered Shang-class submarine. It would have been radioactive nightmare fuel for the region.
Thus, the need for stealth is naval engagements should be well understood but it must also be stressed that, in the nuclear age, such secrecy could lead to truly devastating consequences unless some form of modus vivendi is crafted between Washington and Beijing to deescalate certain crises.
This was done throughout the Cold War.
The Chinese, sadly, continue to rebuff American requests to create a reliable backchannel between the two superpowers.
France and Britain are key allies and the incident involving their submarines in the Atlantic in 2009 was relatively isolated. No casualties were reported and the two crews could aid each other and then their governments could cordially assess what had happened.
A Sino-American collision, which is likely to occur given the tension and interactions thus far between the two powers, could either lead to an environmental catastrophe. Or worse, it could lead to a world war.
Author Experience and Expertise: Brandon J. WeichertBrandon J. Weichert, a National Interest national security analyst, is a former Congressional staffer and geopolitical analyst who is a contributor at The Washington Times, the Asia Times, and The-Pipeline. He is the author of Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. His next book, A Disaster of Our Own Making: How the West Lost Ukraine, is due October 22 from Encounter Books. Weichert can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon.
All images are Creative Commons or Shutterstock.
From the Vault
Russia Freaked Out: Why the U.S. Navy 'Unretired' the Iowa-Class Battleships
Battleship vs. Battlecruiser: Iowa-Class vs. Russia's Kirov-Class (Who Wins?)
Summary and Top Points: In 2009, a rare and alarming incident occurred when two nuclear-armed submarines, the UK’s HMS Vanguard and France’s Le Triomphant, collided deep beneath the Atlantic Ocean.
-While no injuries or radioactive leaks were reported, both vessels were damaged, highlighting the risks submarines face even from allied forces.
-The collision, involving two of NATO’s most secretive ballistic missile submarines, underscored the challenges of "waterspace management" agreements, which exclude the exact locations of these strategic assets to maintain their secrecy.
-The incident added to a history of submarine collisions, raising debates over whether greater data sharing among allies could prevent future mishaps.
Collision of Nuclear Submarines: UK's HMS Vanguard and France's Le Triomphant IncidentWhile many have heard of submarines crashing to the bottom of the ocean floor or colliding with underwater mountains, it is harder to imagine that sometimes a ship’s greatest danger is simply another ship.
In 2009, two nuclear-armed submarines from France and the United Kingdom collided deep under the Atlantic Ocean. While no radioactivity was released, both ships were damaged when the Royal Navy’s HMS Vanguard struck France’s Trident-class Le Triomphant submarine. No crew members or injuries were reported by either country.
An Overview of the IncidentWhen the HMS Vanguard returned to its base in Scotland days later, it had visible damage on its starboard side and near its missile compartment. A whistleblower who served in the UK’s nuclear submarine program later claimed that, “The French submarine had took a massive chunk out of the front of HMS Vanguard and grazed down the side of the boat. The High Pressured Air (HPA) bottle groups were hanging off and banging against the pressure hull. They had to return to base port slowly, because if one of HPA bottle groups exploded it would've created a chain reaction and sent the submarine plummeting to the bottom.”
Perhaps the British government was minimizing the damage inflicted on the submarine in an effort to quell public concern over the potential dangers of nuclear leaks.
This freak accident was especially alarming since nuclear reactors power the ships, and both countries’ vessels routinely carry nuclear warheads onboard. Although “waterspace management” agreements among NATO allies direct member-states to advise one another of the general locations of submerged submarines, ballistic-missile-carrying ships are not included in the arrangement.
France’s Le Triomphant submarine could carry sixteen M45 ballistic missiles, and the Vanguard could carry the same number of Trident II missiles. Additionally, each submarine could carry 4 and 6 nuclear warheads, respectively.
The Triomphant-Vanguard incident did not mark the first time two submarines collided. During the Cold War, Western and Soviet ships collided on several occasions, according to The New York Times. In 1992, the American-made Baton Rouge nuclear submarine was struck by a surfacing Russian sub in the Barents Sea. Only one year after this mishap, the Russian K-407 collided with the USS Grayling. Decades earlier, in the mid-1970s, the U.S. Navy’s USS James Madison collided with a Soviet Victor-class attack submarine roughly 30 miles off the coast of Glasgow, near Holy Loch.
While some analysts argue that allies should share more data to mitigate the risks of future collisions, others argue that maintaining secrecy around nuclear-armed submarines is of the utmost importance. As Lee Willet of the Royal United Services Institute in London once put it, these vessels are the “strategic crown jewels” of any nation, and relaying such sensitive intelligence even to allies would be risky.
About the Maya CarlinMaya Carlin, National Security Writer with The National Interest, is an analyst with the Center for Security Policy and a former Anna Sobol Levy Fellow at IDC Herzliya in Israel. She has by-lines in many publications, including The National Interest, Jerusalem Post, and Times of Israel. You can follow her on Twitter: @MayaCarlin
All images are Creative Commons.
From The Vault
Felfüggesztett börtönbüntetésre ítélte a bíróság azt a 19 éves munkácsi lányt, aki 2024. március 22-én halálra késelte édesapját – tudatta a zakarpattya24.com csütörtökön.
A nyomozás során kiderült, hogy a tragédiát súlyos családi problémák előzték meg. A lány többször panaszkodott arra, hogy apja lelkileg és fizikailag is bántalmazta őt.
Szemtanúk szerint a férfi és lánya gyakran veszekedtek. A gyilkosság estéjén a 19 éves lány saját és testvére testi épségének védelmében ragadott kést, és szúrta le az apját.
Ennek fényében az ügyész és a vádlott között vádemelési megállapodás jött létre. A lány őszinte megbánására való tekintettel a bíróság öt év szabadságvesztésre ítélte, egy évre felfüggesztve.
A lánynak azonban 37 539 hrivnyát kell fizetnie a vizsgálatok lebonyolításával kapcsolatos eljárási költségek fedezésére.
Kapcsolódó:
Leszúrta édesapját egy 19 éves lány MunkácsonThe post Ítélet született az édesapját meggyilkoló munkácsi lány ügyében appeared first on Kárpátalja.ma.
Une personne est morte et deux autres ont été grièvement blessés lors éboulement de terre survenu, mercredi 7 août, au quartier Nkafu, dans la commune de Kadutu, ville de Bukavu, (Sud-Kivu).
Des sources locales rapportent que cet incident s’est produit sur la route nationale numéro 2, sur le chantier où la Société congolaise de construction (SOCOC), exécute des travaux de modernisation sur l’axe Bukavu-Walungu, long d’environ 145km.
Le gouverneur du Tanganyika, Christian Kitungwa, a lancé mercredi 7 août, un ultimatum de 30 jours aux groupes armés afin qu’ils déposent les armes.
L’autorité provinciale a lancé cet appel lors d’un meeting populaire à Kalemie.
Il a affirmé que dépassé ce délai, les récalcitrants y seront contraints.
Dans son adresse, Christian Kitungwa a insisté sur le fait que l'heure de l'impunité est révolue.
Hamisított irattal szerette volna elhagyni Ukrajnát egy 29 éves kárpátaljai lakos az Asztély–Beregsurány határátkelőhelyen – közölte az Ukrán Állami Határőrszolgálat Nyugati Regionális Főosztálya a Facebook-oldalán csütörtökön.
A férfi a határellenőrzés során az útlevele mellett egy rokkantsági igazolást nyújtott be. A dokumentum ellenőrzésekor azonban kiderült, hogy az iraton számos olyan jel található, amely az okmány teljes hamisítására utal.
A helyszínre kihívták a rendőrséget. Az ügyben eljárás indult.
The post Hamis irattal bukott le egy férfi Asztélynál appeared first on Kárpátalja.ma.
Summary and Key Points: The U.S. Navy is relocating the USS Minnesota (SSN-783), a Virginia-class fast attack submarine, from Hawaii to Guam, reinforcing its presence in the Indo-Pacific amid rising tensions with China.
-The deployment of this nuclear-powered submarine to Guam, part of the strategic second island chain, aims to counter China’s maritime activities in the region. The USS Minnesota, which recently completed extensive maintenance, will enhance the U.S. Navy's capabilities in sea control, power projection, and deterrence.
-This move underscores the U.S. commitment to maintaining stability and security in the Indo-Pacific.
U.S. Navy to Deploy Virginia-class Submarine in GuamThe Hub of the Pacific will soon be the homeport for a submarine named after the Land of 10,000 Lakes.
The U.S. Navy is adding to its submarine squadron on the U.S. territory of Guam. USS Minnesota (SSN-783), the 10th and final Block II Virginia-class fast attack submarine, is now scheduled to change homeport from Hawaii to Guam.
The nuclear-powered, conventionally armed cruise missile submarine is being deployed to counter China's naval buildup and expanded operations in the Indo-Pacific. The submarine recently completed an extended docking selected restricted availability (EDSRA) at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility. It began sea trials in June.
"During the maintenance period, the shipyard and crew performed tank blasting and coating, hull preservation, propulsion and ship system repairs, modernization upgrades and made enhancements to mechanical and electrical systems. Following certification, the crew will work together to maintain readiness and is scheduled to homeport shift to Guam later in the year," the U.S. Navy announced earlier this year.
Heading to the Second Island ChainBeginning on Oct. 1, SSN-783 will be homeported from Guam, part of the second island chain that stretches from Japan to Micronesia. The first island chain includes the Kuril Islands, the main Japanese archipelago, and Taiwan, while it also stretches to the northern Philippines and the Malay Peninsula.
A concern for Washington has been China's gray zone operations in the first island chain. By maintaining a strong presence in the second island chain, the U.S. seeks to ensure Beijing doesn't take control of the Indo-Pacific in a time of war. The deployment of a Virginia-class submarine is meant as a defensive measure.
"The Navy routinely assesses its overseas force positioning, to include forward-deployed naval force submarines homeported in Guam," Lt. Cmdr. Rick Moore, a spokesperson for the U.S. Pacific Fleet commander's principal adviser on submarine affairs, told Newsweek. "We are committed to posturing our most capable platforms to preserve peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region."
Guam is the westernmost territory of the United States, located just 1,500 to 1,700 miles from the Taiwan Strait and sitting near the contested waters of the East and South China Seas, the magazine also noted. The last homeport change for USS Minnesota was in March 2022, when the boat was redeployed from Groton, Connecticut, to Pearl Harbor.
The Virginia-Class in the CrosshairsThe U.S Navy's Virginia-class submarines first entered service in 2004, replacing the aging Cold War-era Los Angeles class. The Virginia was designed to incorporate the latest advances in stealth and weapons systems. The boats can handle a variety of open-ocean and littoral missions, including anti-submarine warfare as well as intelligence gathering. There are currently 22 Virginia-class submarines in active service out of the originally planned 66 boats – with current plans for the Navy to acquire at least an additional 30.
The nuclear-powered boats support five of the U.S. Navy's six core strategic maritime capabilities, including sea control, power projection, forward presence, maritime security, and deterrence. They do this through a combination of stealth, endurance, mobility, and firepower. The Virginia class remains the primary submarine for land, surface warfare, and anti-submarine attack missions, while its armaments include cruise missiles and torpedoes.
These SSNs have a fly-by-wire ship control system that provides improved shallow-water ship handling. The subs were also designed to deploy special operator forces including Navy SEALS. A reconfigurable torpedo room can accommodate a large number of SOFs and all their equipment for prolonged deployments and future off-board payloads.
The Third Vessel Named for MinnesotaSSN-783 is just the third U.S. Navy vessel to be named for Minnesota. The first was a wooden steam frigate launched in December 1855, when Minnesota was still a territory. The name for both the state and warship comes from a Lakota (Sioux) word that means "sky-tinted water."
The old frigate served with the U.S. Navy's East India Squadron and sailed some of the same waters the current USS Minnesota could call her stomping grounds. That first USS Minnesota saw service during the American Civil War and was damaged at the Battle of Hampton Roads – the historic showdown between the ironclads USS Monitor and CSS Virginia (aka Merrimack). Repaired and returned to duty, USS Minnesota later took part in the Second Battle of Fort Fisher. She was retired from service and burned as scrap to recover her iron fittings in 1901.
The second USS Minnesota (BB-22) was a 16,000-ton Connecticut-class pre-dreadnought battleship that served with the U.S. Navy's Great White Fleet, circumnavigating the globe in 1908-1909. It later was employed as a training ship during the First World War until being damaged after striking a German naval mine in September 1918. After repairs, her final duty was returning American soldiers from Europe after the end of the war. She was broken up in 1924.
Author Experience and Expertise: Peter SuciuPeter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer. He has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites with over 3,200 published pieces over a twenty-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: Editor@nationalinterest.org.
All images are Creative Commons and/or Shutterstock.
Cet article La disponibilité des sous-marins nucléaires d’attaque de la Royal Navy peine à s’améliorer est apparu en premier sur Zone Militaire.