Plan Outlines Strategy for War on Terror

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued Feb. 6, 2006)

WASHINGTON --- A document being released today by the Pentagon defines the national strategy for the war on terrorism for the U.S. armed forces.

The National Military Strategic Plan for the War on Terrorism, developed by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, supports the national U.S. government strategy for the war on terrorism by outlining strategic guidance for military activities and operations, a senior defense official said on background.

The document designates a global-supported combatant commander for the war on terror, the official said. This commander will write a national campaign plan, and each combatant commander will be required to write a regional campaign plan, he explained.

This is the authoritative document to describe the nature of the war, the nature of the enemy, and the military strategy to face the enemy, he said. This plan was needed because conflicting views within DoD were hurting cooperation and efficiency, he said.

"By having the authoritative description, we brought the entire efforts of the DoD in line in an integrated and synchronized manner to achieve strategic effectiveness," he said.

The plan emphasizes that violent extremism, in its various forms, is the primary threat to the United States, its allies and interests, and that the global war on terror is a war to preserve ordinary people's ability to live as they choose.

The United States is at war against extremists who advocate and use violence to gain control over others and threaten the way of life for free and open societies, the plan states. The document uses the word "murder" when describing the extremists' actions to deter any connotations of freedom fighters when thinking of jihadists, the defense official said.

This is not a religious or cultural war, the document stresses, but a struggle of ideas within Islam. "It's a war of ideas between moderates and extremists," the official said. "We ally ourselves with those who are moderate in their belief to achieve our aims."

The U.S. government strategy for the war on terror, as outlined in the military plan, is to continue to lead an international effort to deny violent extremist networks the components they need to operate and survive. To execute this strategy, the military will focus on three areas, the official said.

The first area of emphasis is expanding international partnerships to combat violent extremists, he said. The second area of emphasis is to "keep the world's most dangerous weapons out of the hands of the world's most dangerous people" - to deny terrorists the use of weapons of mass destruction, he said. The third area is institutionalizing the strategy against violent extremism, both domestically and internationally.

The military also has a crucial role in establishing conditions that counter terrorist ideologies, the official said. This includes providing security, giving humanitarian assistance, maintaining contact with foreign military leaders, and considering how operations can affect ideological support for terrorists, he explained.


Click here for the full National Military Strategic Plan for the War on Terrorism document (40 pages in PDF format)


-ends-

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Sgt_Schlappy,

Rumsfeld Stresses PR in Terror War

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued Feb. 18, 2006)

WASHINGTON --- The war on terror is unlike any conflict the U.S. has ever faced, and some of the most important battles are fought not on the ground, but in newsrooms around the world, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said yesterday in New York.

Never before has a war been fought in an environment as technologically advanced as today's, with scores of media and communication tools available to everyone, Rumsfeld said at the Council on Foreign Relations. Insurgents around the world have learned to use this media-rich environment to further their goals, and to successfully combat them, the U.S. government needs to adapt and use the technology that has proven to be so powerful, he said.

"We are fighting a battle where the survival of our free way of life is at stake and the center of gravity of that struggle is not simply on the battlefield overseas; it's a test of wills, and it will be won or lost with our publics, and with the publics of other nations," Rumsfeld said. "We'll need to do all we can to attract supporters to our efforts and to correct the lies that are being told, which so damage our country, and which are repeated and repeated and repeated."

Insurgent groups have their own media relations committees, which decide how best to manipulate public opinion using the media, Rumsfeld said. To combat them, the U.S. government is considering some changes to its communication strategy, he said.

An important change the government needs to make is to incorporate communications planning into every aspect of the war on terror, Rumsfeld said. The government needs to develop more rapidly deployable communications forces that are trained to use all facets of the media, he said. Waiting too long to put communications teams into place can give the enemy a foothold in public opinion, as was proven in the early days after the major conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, he said.

"Let there be no doubt, the longer it takes to put a strategic communication framework into place, the more we can be certain that the vacuum will be filled by the enemy and by news informers that most assuredly will not paint an accurate picture of what is actually taking place," he said.

Public affairs and public diplomacy forces deployed to a theater of operation need to be experienced enough to engage the full range of media that the world uses, Rumsfeld said. This will require an elevation in Internet operations, the establishment of 24-hour press operations centers, and training in other channels of communication, he said.

The U.S. government cannot rely on any other source for information, and it is bound by the truth, therefore it cannot move with the speed of the insurgents, who use lies to try to prove their ideology, Rumsfeld said. Even though the enemy is very skilled at manipulating the media, the United States has an advantage in its standard of truth, which will triumph in the end, he said.

"I believe with every bone in my body that free people, exposed to sufficient information, will, over time, find their way to right decisions," he said.

-ends-

Hello,

Regarding the second part, that is what our project aims to address, we can gurantee success. We have had approval but the issue needs to be addressed and the proposal run through asap, we cannot wait on this sort of problem, the longer we wait the more time the enemy has to spread its ideology, and unfortunately it is doing that very efficiently. We can change that, if this is addressed asap.

God Bless

Security Cooperation Essential to DoD Mission, Deputy Secretary Says

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued March 27, 2006)

WASHINGTON --- Partnerships and cooperation with allies and friendly nations are essential for the U.S. to address threats in the global war on terrorism, the deputy defense secretary said here today.

The U.S. faces a wider array of threats and a more uncertain future than ever before, and no single country can stand up to these threats and win alone, Gordon England said at the Defense Security Cooperation Agency Worldwide Conference.

To meet the diverse security challenges of the future, DoD must strengthen and adapt long-term alliances, as well as form relationships with new international partners, enabling them to enhance their capabilities, England said. To that end, DoD supports such efforts as the evolution of NATO and the Proliferation Security Initiative, which includes more than 70 nations, he said.

"Effective multinational efforts are essential to solve the problems we face together," he said.

Within the Quadrennial Defense Review, DoD addressed these issues of international cooperation and security assistance, England said. The department evaluated its security assistance practices and determined they needed to be refined, he said. The transfer of technology and the export of equipment are often hindered by security reviews. And while these procedures are necessary for the security of the U.S., delays in the process affect America's relationship with its partners, he said.

"The goal is to have better effectiveness and, through it, better efficiency," he said.

To further help international partnerships, DoD is taking steps to make itself a better partner, England said. Language skills and cultural awareness are being integrated into the military and DoD is working to ensure it will continue to learn from security partnerships, he said.

DoD is creating a new center that will analyze and institutionalize lessons learned by the military on the ground and from coalition partners, he said. This center, the Joint Center for International Security Force Assistance, will be based at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., under Army Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, who was the first commander of Multinational Security Transition Command Iraq.

In the QDR, the Defense Department also asked Congress for new authorities to help strengthen international partnerships, England said. The QDR includes a request for the DoD to be able to provide logistics support to allies and coalition partners for military operations in which they are participating with U.S. forces, he said. DoD is also requesting authority to lease and lend significant military equipment to allies in the same situations, he said.

To fulfill its strategic vision, DoD must also partner with academic and think-tank institutions and must stay ahead of the technology curve, England said.

The U.S. has the right strategy to win in the war on terrorism, England said, but the support of national and international partners is essential for that vision to become reality.

"This is a war of resolve, determination and commitment in terms of our national security," he said. "This is a necessary unity of action and will if we are to prevail in this long war."

-ends-

V.C. of Joint Chiefs: Conventional Trident Missiles Will Aid Terror War

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued June 8, 2006)

ALEXANDRIA, Va. --- Arming submarines with nonnuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles will give America a necessary quick-strike weapon in the war on terror, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said here yesterday.

The proposal, part of the Defense Department's 2007 budget request, aims to remove two nuclear missiles from each of the Navy's 14 ballistic missile submarines, or SSBNs, and replace them with two conventionally armed Trident missiles, said Navy Adm. Edmund P. Giambastiani at the Naval Submarine League's annual symposium.

The move would put about 22 such missiles into operational deployment, he said.

"It's meant to be a very niche capability," Giambastiani told about 400 retired officers, businessmen and fellow submariners. "We're not talking a lot of missiles here. So this really is a small, quick-strike capability.

"Why would you want it?," the vice chairman, whose career spans many submarine assignments and commands, asked. "So that you can respond within 60 minutes or so to something at very long ranges, very precisely, assuming you have very precise knowledge."

Combatant commanders are looking for ways to increase operational availability throughout the military, Giambastiani said. "That's what an SSBN is, the ultimate operationally available platform," he said. From that perspective, giving ballistic missile submarines a nonnuclear role makes sense.

Giambastiani said he is not worried about concerns raised about what level of authority should be required to launch the missiles or whether two-way communication was necessary between a submerged submarine and a command authority, because he would use the system that's already in place. He said he sees the value in "using a command and control system that over the years has been proven but requires the highest level of release authority."

One concern being addressed, however, is how to maneuver a potential launch so the missile's flight path doesn't appear threatening to someone who could see it coming and worry it was coming to hit them, he said. Precautions are being taken, but under almost every conceivable scenario, a small launch would not touch off alarms.

"There are some people who think if we fire one missile you're going to go to nuclear war," he said. "Well it's just the opposite, and we've found that over a few launches over the years."

Converting existing platforms to make them more adaptable to today's warfighting environment can be a very cost-effective endeavor, he said. Already the Navy has transformed two of the four oldest SSBNs into guided-missile submarines, called SSGNs, which carry the Tomahawk land-attack cruise missile.

"SSGN, the follow-on to the Trident, is clearly one of those examples of a very successful, quick-turn program," he said. "It's not too bad if you can introduce it officially in the Department of Defense at the end of September 2001, put it in the budget with the president's submission in February 2002, have it become an effective program on the first of October 2002, and already have two deliveries with two others to be following shortly. That's big stuff."

Giambastiani challenged the audience of submariners to continue to use that "modular approach" to problem solving, removing one part of a well-working machine and replacing that part with something more relevant to the current mission.

He also said the group should continue to seek different perspectives on how to develop solutions.

"You never want to bring everybody in who looks like you," he said. "You want people who come at problems from a different perspective, and submarine folks do that exceptionally well. They're mission-oriented, goal-oriented, they're smart, and they're useful."

Working jointly with other services -- combining resources and communicating effectively -- is the way business has to be conducted now, Giambastiani said. Since the Cold War ended, the submarine force, like the rest of the nation's armed services has had to learn to be flexible.

"It is a complicated world," he said. "How can we make the most adaptable, flexible forces to respond to these things across the board? That's what we're spending most of our time doing, trying to be adaptable."

-ends-

Plan, things are grave if the Top really want a plan from the Field. wcarter

Pentagon mulls creation of Africa Command

LINK

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Pentagon is considering creating a military command for Africa, which currently falls under three different regional military commands, the Defense Department said this week.

"There's obviously been discussion about whether there should be an Africa Command or not," Eric Edelman, undersecretary of defense for policy, said at a roundtable discussion on Monday.

"That's a proposal that's still being discussed," he said.

The Pentagon has various regional commands around the world, all led by generals.

The US Central Command, or Centcom, oversees US military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East, as well as Central Asia and the Horn of Africa.

The European Command oversees operations in a large part of Africa, and the Pacific Command oversees operations in Madagascar.

The United States has expressed concern that some African countries could serve as a haven for terrorist organizations.

Sgt_Schlappy reveals the way to ID the enemy,
violent extremism. Now, don't that sound alot like...
1. ACLU's violent legal pushes to
rid our nation of Judeo-Christian
influence & Historical Facts?

2. The Militant Homosexual Agendae
to shove their Sodomistic values down
the throats of all Americans, especially
in the Education Arena?

3. Clintonian-like Gov't Officials
who are trying to Disarm the public
of firearms...i.e. The Mayor of New
Orleans, LA?

4. The Clintonese-like Abortionists
who seek to slaughter our unborn &
make a $$$$ profit in the mean time?
(46 million unborn children have been
slaqughtered in the name of choice since
the 1970's. That's more than 7 times the
casualties of all the USA's wars added
together.)

5. The end-product of the presence of
the parasitic illegal alien. For those
unfamiliar with it. Just move to the
average Southern California
neighborhood.

....You tell me?????

the plan is to take over the middle east.

Pentagon Expands Propaganda War on Insurgents

(Source: Voice of America news; issued Oct. 31, 2006)

PENTAGON --- The U.S. Defense Department is taking a new approach in its battle against Islamist militants around the world - it is moving to expand its press operation. Officials say the goals are to counter terrorist propaganda, to respond more quickly to inaccurate or unfavorable news items and to make more use of new media, such as the Internet.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's media office is hiring more people, giving some existing staff members new duties and building a wall across its main work room in what Press Secretary Eric Ruff calls an effort to transform the department's public affairs operation to make it faster and better.

Ruff says the department wants to respond more quickly to breaking news and what he calls "inaccurate stories" in the media.

In spite of the new emphasis on speed, by the end of the day the Pentagon was not able to answer questions posed at Ruff's morning briefing about how many people are being added to the media staff, exactly what their jobs will be and how much the effort will cost.

Secretary Rumsfeld has frequently lamented his department's inability to respond quickly to negative or inaccurate stories, and he has accused militant Islamists of trying to manipulate media coverage of stories like the war in Iraq. He made this comment in August.

"They're waging a psychological war of attrition, designing their attacks to gain maximum media coverage and maximum public outcry, hoping to get free people to give in to the extremists," he said.

President Bush has also said that the United States can only lose in Iraq if the American people lose the will to fight, something he said last week the terrorists are trying to make happen through the media.

"We must not fall prey to the sophisticated propaganda by the enemy, who is trying to undermine our confidence and make us believe that our presence in Iraq is the cause of all its problems," he said.

Many experts agree that public relations may be as important as military efforts in the war on terrorism. Among them is Associate Professor Susan Moeller of the University of Maryland's journalism school.

"War at some level is always about public opinion," she said. "And now with the conflict against terrorism globally, and with hot wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war for public opinion both domestically and international has only become more critical."

But Professor Moeller says as the Pentagon becomes more active on the media battlefield, it must make sure that its increased volleys of information are accurate. "One of the challenges that the military is going to face is to tell its message, to tell it accurately," she said. "If it is just spinning the message, just spinning what's out there, it's not going to be accepted, certainly not by its international audience, but eventually not by its domestic audience either."

Secretary Rumsfeld has said that terrorists do not care whether the information they put out is accurate or not, while the Pentagon tries to be as accurate as possible, often resulting in delays in responding to news reports. The secretary is concerned that as a result the Pentagon's information gets less coverage, and has less influence on public opinion, than the original media reports. But Professor Moeller says the profusion of information sources in recent years has made it easier for people to figure out what is true and what is not, and through that to determine who to believe next time.

The Pentagon press secretary, Eric Ruff, says part of the new effort will focus on getting the Defense Department's viewpoint into new media, such as Internet blogs and podcasts, and also to provide department officials for more radio and television programs. At a briefing, he denied a reporter's suggestion that the department is trying to go around reporters for major news organizations who cover the Pentagon on a regular basis.

One part of the effort has already begun - an increase in the number of letters sent to news organizations to rebut what the Pentagon says are inaccurate stories. At least five such letters were published in various U.S. newspapers on Monday alone, including one in the Washington Post. In addition, the department has begun making public letters it sends to news organizations that are not published.

The press secretary confirmed that the initiative was approved by the department's new Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, Dorrance Smith. He came to the Pentagon earlier this year. At about that time, Secretary Rumsfeld said he would give his own department's media operation a grade of 'D' or 'D-plus' - which is barely a passing grade in American schools. Ruff says the new initiative is designed to improve that.

-ends-

IT IS PLAIN AND SIMPLE LEAVE POLITICS OUT OF IT AND KET OUR MEN AND WOMAN DO WHAT OUR GREAT MILITARY HAS TRAINED THEM TO DO KICK ***. I AM PISSED OFF AT ALL THIS WE ARE NOT WINNING THE WAR, WE NEED TO WITHDRAWL. TELL THAT TO THE 3000+ THAT HAVE DIED. CONGRESS, BUT OUT ESPECIALLY WITH YOUR BUULCRAP POLICIES., AND RULE OF ENGAGEMENT. HELLO AS SOON AS WE STEPPED FOOT ON IRAQI SOIL WE ENGAGED THE ENEMY, TO WIN THIS WAR WE HAVE TO FIGHT THIS WAR. GO BACK TO VIETNAM AND OF COURSE WHEN HITLER TRIED TO FIGHT TO FRONTS, LET OUR COMMANING OFFICERS THAT ARE THERE AND HAVE THE EXPERIENCE TO DECIDE HOW TOO FIGHT THIS WAR. I AM PRIOR SERVICE AND HAVE BEEN OUT FOR NEAR TEN YEARS, I SHOULD HAVE STAYED IN , BUT THATS NEITHER HERE NOR THERE MY HEART GOES OUT TO OUR TROOPS GOD BLESS YOU ALL, BUT THEY ARE THER AND LETS LET THEM DO WHAT KIND OF KICKING *** THEY CAN AND I KNOW THEY CAN DO SHUT UP PENTAGON AND CONGRESS.

How about the stradegy to prtect our own borders from illegal aliens/Al Quida/Hezbolla types here at home. I haven't read or seen any stradegy for this. The bombs that will go aff will not discriminate, military families will die as well as civilians. THere is a hugh divide amoung the Rank and File as to the TOTAL War on Terror and yes we can win overseas but how about here on the home front. National Guard/Sheriff Dept/Municipal Police are being overrun and fired on by Mexican drug cartels and troops. What is the thought on this subject and how can we get Congress to close these borders. Thanks Bill B.

Moves afoot to change 'war' definition

source link

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Momentum is building among even President Bush’s most loyal allies to change the name of the war the United States has fought for more than five years. One Republican said use of the term “war” elevates mass murderers to the status of a standing army.

The British government, Bush’s most loyal partner in combating Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda group, said last month it is dropping the “war” title because it does not capture the struggle’s full dimensions.

The Pentagon coined “The Global War Against Terrorism,” or GWOT, while the building still displayed a deep gash from the al Qaeda strike on Sept. 11, 2001. Bush, in a speech to a joint session of Congress, called it simply “the war on terror.”

Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, a Bush loyalist and ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, told The Examiner he has lobbied the White House to follow the British lead.

“Language is important, and I’ve told [National Security Adviser Stephen] Hadley and the president the past year and a half that I think the ‘war on terror’ is a terrible idea,” Hoekstra said.

“Going back to 9-11, we shouldn’t dignify these 19 [plane hijackers] by calling them warriors and saying that they’re involved in a war,” he said. “These are not warriors. These are cold-blooded terrorists and murderers, and that’s all we should dignify them with.”

John Brennan, a former senior CIA officer who directed the U.S. National Counter Terrorism Center, also believes the word “war” should be dropped.

Brennan said the term connotes only military force that is required defeat radical Islam, when in fact a lot of tools, including public relations and diplomacy, are needed.

“A worldwide ‘campaign’ against terrorism would be a more accurate depiction of the multidimensional scope of the effort,” he said.

Finding just the right words for a fight that encompasses ideological battle and armed combat has proven illusive.

The White House national security staff in 2005 weighed a name change, but decided against it.

I thought of an idea you may like. Create the majic bullet. Place a transmitter in enemy discovered ammo and vests to track movement. This will help identify terrorist activities and personnel.

You could also replace enemy stores with ammo designed to damage or gum up weapons and personnel.

It is possible that vests found are resurved for bombers so knowing were they are would be nice.

You may want to experiment with very high voltage very low current to destroy electonic circuits without setting off the device.

quote:

Originally posted by NeedM0reAmm0:
the plan is to take over the middle east.

Therefore we need to bomb Mecca!The very
heart of terrorism.

From: Press Service
To: DEFENSE-PRESS-SERVICE-HTML-L@DTIC.MIL
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 11:14 AM
Subject: Gates, Karzai Share Optimism About Afghanistan's Course

Gates, Karzai Share Optimism About Afghanistan's Course

By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service


KABUL, Afghanistan, June 4, 2007 – The expected spring Taliban offense here has turned into an "Afghan alliance offensive that has put the Taliban off their game," Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said here today.
Gates and Afghan President Hamid Karzai told reporters during a joint news conference today that they're optimistic that efforts to rid Afghanistan of terrorists and build its new government are working.

"I absolutely think that this is a winnable fight," Gates said. "I think there has been real progress."

Gates said the 42-nation coalition in Afghanistan demonstrates solid international support that will ensure that progress continues. "And I am confident that the United States and our partners in the alliance will be here for as long as it takes to ensure victory," he added.

Karzai said the war against the Taliban, al Qaeda and terrorism was won in Afghanistan when these groups were stripped from power just a month and a half after the war started. "They were ruling Afghanistan five years ago," he said. "They were exporting terrorism from here to the rest of the world five years ago. Afghanistan was under their sway and control."

Karzai contrasted Afghanistan under the Taliban to today, with a democratic Afghanistan building its government institutions and its people living without Taliban oppression.

The challenge that remains, he said, "is to completely uproot them" from Afghanistan. "So the war has been won," he said. "It is the finishing touch that we are getting at now."

He thanked the United States for the role it has played, including "tremendous resources and billions of dollars" to strengthen its police and security forces and improve its citizen's lives.

He said he's confident that, with continued U.S. support, Afghanistan's institutions "will be as strong as reliable and standing on their own feet in a few years." When that happens, Karzai said, Afghanistan will continue to be a grateful partner to the United States.

Both leaders shared concern about civilian casualties that have occurred in fighting Taliban and other extremist elements here. Gates acknowledged that more caution needs to be exercised to prevent innocent civilian deaths, but emphasized that Taliban tactics make this extraordinarily difficult.

"We need to be more careful, but we need to realize that the Taliban are actually the ones who create the opportunity or the risk to civilians posed by military operations," he said. "The Taliban is deliberately putting civilians in harm's way. They deliberately mingle civilians with them. They deliberately put civilians up front."

Gates and Karzai also expressed concern about highly lethal weapons of Iranian origin that have begun appearing here. Both agreed there's no solid evidence that the Iranian government has any role in this.

Karzai said Afghanistan and Iran have never been as friendly as they are today and noted that Iran has been contributing to Afghanistan's reconstruction for the past five years.

A secure, stable Afghanistan is in Iran's as well as Afghanistan's best interest, he said.


Biographies:
Robert M. Gates

Related Sites:
Gates Arrives in Afghanistan to Assess Progress

US Gives Ten UH-1H Helos to Philippines

(Source: U.S. Embassy in the Philippines; issued June 8, 2007)

Demonstrating the American people’s historic partnership with the Philippines, U.S. Ambassador Kristie A. Kenney will turn over to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo 10 UH-1H Huey helicopters in a June 9 ceremony.

The helicopters, which were refurbished under a U.S. Government program, will be used by the Philippine Air Force (PAF) to supplement its modernization program and will increase PAF’s capabilities to combat terrorism and provide humanitarian assistance during natural disasters.

The aircraft are part of 20 helicopters designated for the Philippines by President George Bush; 10 additional helicopters will be delivered later this year. They were refurbished in the United States through the U.S. Foreign Military Financing program at a cost of $22 million for the 20 aircraft. The U.S. gave nearly $30 million in Foreign Military Financing to the Philippines last year.

Upon the helicopters’ arrival in May at Subic Bay, they were transferred to the Clark Economic Zone where PAF specialists conducted the routine maintenance and flight checks required for all aircraft, and painted the helicopters in the PAF color scheme.

President Arroyo and Ambassador Kenney will celebrate the turnover of the aircraft in a traditional ceremony held on Saturday, June 9 at Villamor Air Base in Manila that will include pouring champagne over the nose of the helicopters.

Other invited attendees include Secretary of National Defense Hermogenes E. Ebdane; Armed Forces of the Philippines Chief of Staff General Hermogenes C. Esperon, Jr.; PAF Commanding General Lt. Gen. Horacio S. Tolentino; and senior officers of the U.S. Embassy’s Joint U.S. Military Assistance Group.

The U.S. Foreign Military Financing program is just one example of the long partnership between the Philippines and the U.S. This aircraft turnover, along with the turnover of a C-130 cargo aircraft in April 2006, is part of the long-term U.S. commitment to assist the Armed Forces of the Philippines’ modernization program. The U.S. military also provides training, advice, and security assistance, and shares information with the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

Ongoing U.S.-Philippine military cooperative programs include Philippine Defense Reform; counter-terrorism training; annual exercises; education and training; advice and support for logistics, engineering, equipment, and maintenance; civilian assistance programs such as free community medical, dental, and veterinarian clinics; and humanitarian assistance cooperation during natural disasters.

-ends-