Military doctrine on the control of stress in combat is presented in a new Army field manual (pdf).
“In our own Soldiers and in the enemy combatants, control of stress is often the decisive difference between victory and defeat across the operational continuum. Battles and wars are won more by controlling the will to fight than by killing all of the enemy combatants. Uncontrolled combat stress causes erratic or harmful behaviors, impairs mission performance, and may result in disaster….”
See “Combat and Operational Stress Control,” U.S. Army Field Manual 4-02.51, July 2006.
A recent Congressional Research Service report “presents difficult-to-find statistics regarding U.S. military casualties in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF, Afghanistan), including those concerning medical evacuations, amputations, and the demographics of casualties.”
“Some of these statistics are publically available at the Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) website, while others have been obtained through contact with experts at DOD.”
See “United States Military Casualty Statistics: Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom,” June 8, 2006.
“Medical Program Support for Detainee Operations” (pdf) is the subject of Department of Defense Instruction 2310.08E, issued June 6, 2006.
DNA synthesis and export controls remain the primary regulatory safeguards against de novo production of harmful biological agents, yet governance frameworks lack the situational awareness and enforcement capacity to keep pace with rapidly falling technical barriers.
Called today to speak on behalf of U.S. science and technology, Dr. Jedidah Isler, astrophysicist, educator, strategist, policy-maker, and science communicator, will provide constructive, nonpartisan feedback to the House Committee’s hearing “American Global Competitiveness at 250: Legislative Proposals to Secure U.S. Technology Leadership.”
“Federal data and access to it is not a partisan issue. It is a people issue. Our country cannot achieve greatness without access to the data that measure what we value, who we are, and where we’re heading.”
The United States’ biosecurity governance system is structurally incapable of detecting and responding to certain classes of threats. U.S. biosecurity tools have not kept pace with technological advancements or a changing threat landscape.