More Photos
The Army wants to modernize its vast Pohakuloa Training Area on the Big Island for the 10,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops who use it each year, and increase high-altitude helicopter training on Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa to meet a shift in emphasis to Afghanistan.
An Infantry Platoon Battle Area at 133,000-acre Pohakuloa that also could be used for companies of about 150 soldiers -- and replace past live-fire training at Makua Valley -- is a priority for the Army, with the service hoping it can begin construction in 2013.
Other plans being examined in an environmental impact statement include updating targets and digitizing firing ranges for better evaluation, improving roads and utilities, and demolishing 1950s-era Quonset huts and replacing them with modern structures.
The Army said many of the training ranges at Pohakuloa do not meet current training requirements and do not provide enough capacity.
"PTA looks like a 'M*A*S*H' set. You could film a Korean War movie over there and not have to change a doggone thing," said Chuck Cardinal, director of training for U.S. Army Pacific headquartered at Fort Shafter.
In 2006 the Army bought 23,000 acres from Parker Ranch for military maneuver training for $31.5 million, and it has spent $33.6 million for a Stryker armored vehicle "battle area complex" expected to open in 2012 at a separate spot at Pohakuloa. But that facility is mainly for Stryker gunnery, officials said.
"We need a digitized modern range to support (infantry) maneuver live fire," Cardinal said. He added that there is company-level live fire capability now at Pohakuloa, "but it's like sticking a bunch of old targets out on the range and calling that company-level live fire. It's not a sophisticated modern range."
The Army was unable to provide a cost estimate for the plan, but officials previously said as much as $300 million could be spent over the next 10 to 15 years at the training area.
Pohakuloa has 153 ranges, including the 566-acre housing and base operations area, and numerous firing ranges directed at a central 51,000-acre ordnance impact area.
Army soldiers, Hawaii-based and transiting Marines, and the Hawaii National Guard are among the ground forces that regularly train at Pohakuloa, officials said.
Artillery, mortars, rockets and missiles are fired at Pohakuloa, and Air Force bombers drop dummy bombs on the range.
In recent years the military has exported some of its training to the mainland with additional time spent at facilities such as the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., which certifies a brigade's readiness for combat.
The 3,500 soldiers of Schofield Barracks' 3rd Brigade are at the training center now, conducting large-scale exercises for a deployment to eastern Afghanistan in late March and April.
Army officials say an extra two weeks of training time on the mainland to make up for Hawaii training shortcomings adds an additional $8 million onto the usual $24 million trip.
In the future, as Iraq and perhaps Afghanistan wind down, there will be an increased need to provide home-station training for a greater number of Hawaii-based troops, and Pohakuloa will become even more key, the Army said.
The Army faces opposition to the Pohakuloa plan from some Big Island residents, including peace activist Jim Albertini.
Albertini said in a statement following a public meeting held by the Army on the modernization plan that he is concerned about depleted uranium left over from a 1960s weapon system used at Pohakuloa.
"There has been plenty of money over the years for military buildup but very little funding for military cleanup. It's time to change those priorities," Albertini said. "The bottom line is this: Hawaii residents don't want the U.S. military training to do to others what the U.S. has already done to Hawaii -- overthrow and occupy its government and nation and contaminate its air, land, water, people, plants and animals with military toxins."
The Infantry Platoon Battle Area, the first proposed modernization the Army wants to pursue at Pohakuloa, would include a nearly 2.5-by-1-mile battle course for soldiers on foot with objectives and targets, a two-story live-fire "shoothouse" and a 24-building military operations on urban terrain, or MOUT, site replicating a village setting, officials said.
The high-altitude helicopter training plan seeks to standardize and make an annual requirement of similar exercises that were held at Pohakuloa in 2003, 2004 and 2006, a change that reflects new Army doctrine, according to documents.
The 25th Combat Aviation Brigade at Schofield would use the Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa training as it too prepares for deployment to Afghanistan, where operations routinely exceed 10,000 feet.
Six existing landing zones would be used for approach, landings and takeoff at elevations above 8,000 feet under high winds, extreme temperatures and during night operations.
The training was examined in an environmental assessment separate from the infantry plans. A draft finding of "no significant impact" was released in December.
Helicopter training hours at Pohakuloa would be increased by 30 percent to 6,000 total hours based on 300 to 400 aviators receiving the training, the Army said.
Replies
Amelia,
Using my postings as a parking lot. I had to post a counter on KHNL and copy and paste
In response too the idiot on KHNL: "This was a mean-spirited foul-mouthed bully who won't be missed by most. Good riddance to bad garbage."
"JohnnyNadscrusher, YOU ARE A STUPID IDIOT! She will be missed more than idiots like you will ever know. As we who have been there in the movement from the onset walked along side our Na Kupuna, eventhough, we opposed a lot of the elders position--we respected their position and opposition to the US and likes. Obviously, you are the likes and know nothing that went on in the Hawaiian Islands. She took on the whole ugly crap on her shoulders after my Uncle Randy Kalahiki died. And both these people carried the problems of our people on their shoulders 24 hours, seven days a week, and the years. Aunty Frenchy rode her scooter up and down the Waianae Coast letting everybody know, that she hasn't given up. We all made mistakes and those of us who made mistakes, we clean up our act. And she did! Often times at the point of a gun! Or, looking down one at most times. She kept the peace and up held non violence the endth degree of raw Civil Disobedience. We are mourning her lost--those of us who took time to get to know her in her last days, but it wasn't enough. The likes of you, you know her finger and I'm not talking cry wee wee all the way home!"
Amelia,
Another comment, I posted
Well tina,
Think again, most of all one needs to read, read and read, and than go talk the talk. When you are done tina you need to write more than just a sentence. If I expect First Graders to write more than one sentence than I am going to expect that from you.
Beginning, middle, and conclusion. It's okay to misspell a word or even have incorrect grammatical sentences. The point is I need to see more writtings when responding.
Amelia,
It is all to complex, but with careful attention one can read and comprehend the text and the realities of humanity
Amelia,
Letters of a Assurance is a practice:
US Letters of Assurances to the Palestinians and Israel
Madrid 18 October 1991
U.S. Letter of Assurances to the Palestinians
Tbe Palestinian decision to attend a peace conférence to launch direct negofiations with Israel represents an important step in the search for a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the region. The United States bas long belleved that Palestinian participation is critical to the success of our efforts.
In the context of the process, on which we are embarking, we want to respond to your request for certain assurances related to this process.
’Ibese assurances constitute U.S. understandings and intentions concerning the conférence and ensuing negotiations. These assurances are consistent with United States policy and do not undermine or contradict United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 and 338. Moreover, there will be no assurances provided to one party that are not known to all the others. By this way we can foster a sense of confidence and minimize chances for misunderstandinos.
As President Bush stated in his March 6, 1991 address to Conoress, the United States continues to believe firmly that a compreliensive peace must be grounded in United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 and the principle of territory for peace. Such an outcome must also provide for security and recognition for aU states in the region, including Israel, and for legitimate political rights of the Palestinian people. Anything else, the President noted, would fail the twin tests of fairness and security.
The process we are trying to create offers Palestinians a way to achieve these objectives. The United States believes that there should be an end to the Israeli occupation which can occur only through genuine and meaninoful negotiations. The United States also believes that this process should create a new relationship of mutuality where Palestinians and Israelis can respect one another’s security, identity, and political rights. We believe Palestinians should gain control over political, economic and other decisions that affect their lives and fate.
Direct bilateral negotiations will begin four days after the opening of the conférence; those parties who wish to attend multilateral negotiations will convene two weeks after the opening of the conférence to organize those negotiations. In this regard, the United States will support Palestinian involvement in any bilateral or multilateral neggotiations on refugees and in aU multilateral negotiations. The conference and the negotiations that follow will be based on UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.
The process will proceed along two tracks through direct negotiations between Israel and Arab states and Israel and Palestinians. The United States is determined to achieve a comprehensive seulement of the Arab-Israeli conflict and will do its utmost to ensure that the process moves forward along both tracks toward this end.
In pursuit of a comprehensive settlement, ail the negotiations should proceed as quickly as possible toward agreement. For its part, the United States will work for serious negotiations and will also seek to avoid prolongation and stalling by any party
The conférence will be co-sponsored by the United States and the Soviet Union. The European Community will be participant in the conférence alongside the United States and the Soviet Union and be represented by its Presidency. The conférence can reconvene only with the consent of ail the parties.
With regard to the role of the United Nations, the UN Secretary General will send a representative to the conférence as an observer. The co-sponsors will keep the Secretary General apprised of the progress of the negotiations. Agreements reached between the parties will be registered with the UN Secretariat and reported to the Security Council, and the parties will seek the Council’s endorsement of such agreements. Since it is in the interest of all parties for this process to succeed, while this process is actively ongoing, the United States will not support a competing or parallel process in the United Nations Security Council.
The United States does not seek to determine who speaks for Palestinians in this process. We are seekingo to launch a political negotiatinc, process that directly involves Palestinians and offers a pathway for achieving the legitimate political rights of the Palestinian people and for participation in die determination of their future. We believe that a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delecation offers, the most promising pathway toward this end.
Only Palestinians can choose their delegation members, which are not subject to veto from anyone. The United States understands that members of the delegatoin will be Palestinians from the territories who agree to negotiations on two tracks, in phases, and who are willino, to live in peace with Israel. No party can be forced to sit with anyone it does not want to sit with.
Palestinians will be free to announce their comportent of the joint delegation and to make a statement during the opening of the conférence. They may also raise any issue pertaining to the substance of the negotiations during the negotiations.
The United States understands how much importance Palestinians attach to the question of east Jerusalem. Thus, we want to assure you that nothing Palestinians do in choosing their delegation members in this phase of the process will affect tbeir claim to east Jerusalem, or be prejudicial or precedential to the outcome of negotiations. It remains the firm position of the United States that jenisalem must never again be a divided city and that its final status should be decided by negotiations. Thus, we do not recognize lsrael’s annexation of east Jerusalem or the extension of its municipal boundaries, and we encourage all sides to avoid unilateral acts that would exacerbate local tensions or make negotiations more difficult or preempt their final outcome. It is also the United States position that a Palestinian resident in Jordan with ties to a prominent Jerusalem family would be eligible to join the Jordanian side of the deleg on.
Furthermore, it is also the United States position that Palestinians of east Jerusalem sbould be able to participate by voting in the elections for an interim self-governing authority. The United States fùrther believes that Palestinians froin east Jerusalem and Palestinians outside the occupied territories who meet the three criteria should be able to participate in the negotiations on final status. And, the United States supports the right of Palestinians to bring any issue, including east Jerusalem, to the table.
Because the issues at stake are so complex and the emotions so deep, the United States bas long maintained that a transitional period is required to break down the walls of suspicion and mistrust and lay the basis for sustainable negotiations on the final status of the occupied territories. The purpose of negotiations on transitional arrangements is to effect the peaceful and orderly transfer of authority frorn Israel to Palestinians. Palestinians need to achieve rapid control over political, economic, and other decisions that affect their lives and to adjust to a new situation in which Palestinians exercise authority in the West Bank and Gaza. For its part, the United States will strive froin the outset and encourage all parties to adopt steps that can create an environment of confidence and mutual trust, including respect for human rights.
As you are aware with respect to negotiations between Israel and Palestinians, negotiations will be conducted in phases, beginning with talks on interim selfPvernment arrangements. These talks will be conducted with the objective of reaching agreement within one year. Once agreed, the interim self-government arrangements will last for a period of five years. Begginning the third year of the period of interim self-government arrangements, negootiations will take place on permanent status. It is the aim of the United States that permanent status negociations will be concluded by the end of the transitional period.
It has long been our position that only direct negociations based on UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 can produce a real peace- No one can dictate the outcome in advance. The United States understands that Palestinians must be free, in opening statements and in the negotiations that follow to raise any issue -of importance to them. Thus Palestinians are free to argue for whatever outcome they believe best meets their requirements. The United States will accept any outcome agreed by the parties. In this regard and consistent with longstanding US policies, confederation is not excluded as a possible outcome of negotiations in final status.
The United States has long beiieved that no party should take unilateral actions that seek to predetermine issues that can only be resolved through negotiations. in this regard the United States has opposed and will continue to oppose settlement activity in the territories occupied in 1967, which remains an obstacle to peace.
The United State s will act as an honest broker in trying to resolve the Arab-israeli conflict. It is our intention together with the Soviet Union, to play the role of a driving force in this process to help the parties rnove forward toward a comprehensive peace. Any Party will have access to the co-sponsors at any time. The United States is prepared to PartIcIpate in all stages of the negociations. with the consent of the parties to each negotiation.
These are the assurances that the United States is providing concerning the implementation we have discussed. We are persuaded that we have a real opportunity to accomplish something very important in the peace process. And we are prepared to work hard together with you in the period ahead to build on the progress we have made. There will be difficult challenges for all parties. But with Palestinians’ continued commitment and creativity we have a real chance of moving to a peace conference and to negotiations and then on toward the broader peace that we all seek.
U.S. Letter of Assurances to Israel
Israel’s decision to attend a peace conference on the Middle East in order to launch direct and bilateral negotiations for peace is an important step that brings Israel closer to the peace and security it so aspires to. Now, it is time for all the sides to take decisions, in order to enable a rapid motion towards a Conférence and negotiations. And indeed, only through direct negotiations can real peace and security be achieved.
In the context of the process on which we are embarking, we want to respond to your request for certain assurances related to this process. These assurances constitute the United States understanding and intentions conceming the Conference and the negotiations.
We have made it clear from the beginning that the United States will be ready to supply assurances which fit with our policy and wbich are not weakening or contradictini! the frainework we created for the convening of the peace process. We also, declared that no assurances will be provided to one party that are not known to all the others.
This process of neggotiation is based on the special relations between our two countries which are based on common values and interests and on respect for democracy. Sinœ the creation of the State of Israel the United States bas understood that the challenges which Israel face are tied to the essence of its existence. Dtuing quite a long period Israel bas been living in a region where its neighbors refused to recognize its existence and tried to destroy it. Therefore, the key for promoting, peace bas always been the recognition of Israel’s security needs and the need for close cooperation between our two countries in order to fulfill these needs.
We assure you that our commitment to Israel’s security remains unaltered. Anyone who tries to drive a wedge between us in an attempt to dainagge this commitment cannot understand the deep, ties between our two countries and the character of our commitinent to Israel’s security, including the commitment to preserve its qualitative advantage. We want to emphasize once again our stand that Israel bas the right to secure and defensible borders that should be agreed upon in direct negotiations and that will be acceptable to its neighbors. The United States believes that the aim of this process is a just and lasting peace that will be achieved through talks based on U.N. Resolution 242 and 338 including signing peace agreements with full diplomatic relations between Israel and its neighbors.
You and the other parties have informed us that there were various interpretations of Security Council Resolution 242 and they will be presented during the negotiations. In accordance with the United States traditional policy, we do not support the creation of an independent Palestinian State. Neither do we support the continuation of the Israeli rule or annexation of the Occupied Territories.
The Conférence will have no power to impose solutions on the parties or to veto the agreements achieved by it. It will not have the power to take decisions nor the right of veto on questions or conclusions. The conférence can be reconvened only by the agreement of all the parties.
Direct bi-lateral negotiations will begin 4 days after the opening, of the Conférence. Those parties who wish to attend multilateral negotiations will convene two weeks after the opening of the Conférence to organize those negotiations. The United States supports the participation and the organization of those multilateral negotiations. We believe that the debates should focus on general regional issues such as water, environment, arms control and reggional security, economic development, the question of refuaees and other issues.
The United States is committed to obtain a comprehensive peace settlement of the lsraeli-Arab conflict and wili do its utmost to ensure that the process moves forward along both tracks towards this end. The United States hopes to enlarge the scope of peace and to include in it other states in the region.
The United States does not support linkage between the various negotiations for the achievernent of a comprehensive seulement.
The United States believes that no party in the process can be forced to, sit with anyone it does not want to sit with. No surprises should occur concerning the nature of the representation in the Conference or in the negotiations. The United States believes that the Palestinians will be represented in a common Jordanian-Palestinian delegation. Palestinian residents of the West Bank and Gaza who agree to the two tracks concept and to negotiation by phases, and who are willing to live in peace with Israel will take part in the delegation and the negotiations on interim arrangements.
Moreover-it is not the United States aim to bring the P.L.O. into the process or to make Israel enter a dialogue or negotiation with the P.L.O. The United States will act as an honest broker in trying to, solve the Israeli-Arab conflict
The United States believes that a transitional period is required to break do the walls of suspicion and mistrust and lay the basis for negotiation on the final status.
In context of the negotiation between lsral and the Palestinians, the negotiations will be conducted in phases, beginninge with talks on interim arrangements for self-government that will last five years. These talks will be conducted with the objective of reaching agreement within one year. Beginning the third year of the period of interim-arrmgements, negotiations will take place on a permanent seulement. In the light of our special relations with Israel, the United States agrees to consult Israel and to take its stands into consideration on the question of the peace process. At the same time the United States reserves their right to declare their traditional stands whenever needed.
You expressed a special concern about the Golan Heights. In this context, the United States continues to stand behind the assurance given by President Ford to Prime Minister Rabin on September 1, 1975, whereby the United States will support the stand that a comprehensive settlement with Syria, concerning a peace treaty, must enforce Israel’s security before any attack directed from the Golan Heights.
The United States continues to support the idea that a just and lasting peace must be accepted by the two parties. The United States has not yet elaborated a definite stand on the issue of borders. When it has to do so, it will pay great attention to the israeli stand whereby any arrangement with Syria should be based on Israel’s continued presence on th Golan Heights. In this context, the United States is ready to propose American guarantees for border security arrangements agreed upon between Israel and Syria, according to our constitutional process.
In the context of Lebanon and in accordance with the United States traditional policy, we believe that Israel has the right to security along its northern border. Moreover-the United States remains committed to the withdrawal of all the anon as well as the dismantling of militias.
We continue to see the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt and the ties between them as the cornerstone of our policy in the region and to support the fulfillment of the peace accords between Israel and Egypt and of its related agreements.
These are the assurances that the United States is providing concerning the implernentation of the initiative we have discussed.Through common work, based on the mutual trust that has always characterized our relations, Israel and the United States can advance towards the peace that was denied to Israel for a long period.
Amelia,
The Palestine Question by Edward seems intriguing at the moment and I was amazed how he discussed the behavior of Nationalism.
It was a bit shocking that he had written an opposition not to Nationalism (my thinking) but the human behavior nationalims. Still rethinking what I read and really haven't fully comprehend the meaning and understanding--actually I'm in disbelief.
To broaden the argument Hawaii Nationalism needs re-awakening of behvior and it's talk. When understanding the Palestine Question, I'm amazed and disappointed, and on the otherhand the questions that follows leaves only the stronger nation as authority and the 'within' state.
I don't think the one-state-solution is a solution however, or (sadly Independence forgive the waning) Independence unless the process of Peace talks return the Social Media in Washington for the sake of Global Justice. I'm just self-talking at this time for writing is a start or the first step in 2011.
Amelia,
How unfortunate that we spend usless time and energy on not taking care of our home.
Don't get me wrong, I love Jim Albertini for what he does every day, but we differ cause I do not want the military to clean up their shit--I want them out of here. It's like a dog licking his ass and blowing a kiss to the Na Kanaka and their ancestors. That's the truth of how I see it and I've made that call not in those words on Jan 13, 2010 and continued that contention ever since.
This is pretty deadly stuff, the Hawaii group that opposed the use of military toxic chemicals at Pohakuloa had an opportunity and decided to welcome the foe. We needed to oppose it with the same force of contention, but we didn't as a collective that is.
This is only too sad, that toxicity will spill over the entire Hawaiian Islands. Tutu Pele will be choking on Uncle Sam's bile if we don't vehemently debated the assholes.
hi Kaohi,
True about Hawaiians NOT TAKING CARE OF OUR HOME............Big Island people, ARE YOU READING THIS TOO?
STEP UP!............or AT LEAST SUPPORT THE ALII/ALII NUI LINES................we're doing a different kind of defending...........but am NOT looking to support your SICK CARCASSES!
Have had a number of PROBLEMATIC PEOPLE say SHIT, do SHIT, and ARE SHIT....because they DO SHIT.....get off you ELEMU's and IMUA...........because if you don't understand that moving forward is also defending the LIVES AND SAFETY OF ALL IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS today..........be it Kanaka Maoli, be it Haole, and all foreigners/visitors INNOCENTS ...........
am posting this is large letters for impact.......... agree with you about toxicity will spill over the entire Hawaiian Islands............and yes, they are assholes, PIRATE ASSHOLES............
aloha.
True about Hawaiians NOT TAKING CARE OF OUR HOME............Big Island people, ARE YOU READING THIS TOO?
STEP UP!............or AT LEAST SUPPORT THE ALII/ALII NUI LINES................we're doing a different kind of defending...........but am NOT looking to support your SICK CARCASSES!
Have had a number of PROBLEMATIC PEOPLE say SHIT, do SHIT, and ARE SHIT....because they DO SHIT.....get off you ELEMU's and IMUA...........because if you don't understand that moving forward is also defending the LIVES AND SAFETY OF ALL IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS today..........be it Kanaka Maoli, be it Haole, and all foreigners/visitors INNOCENTS!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wik2uc69WbU
Peter Paul & Mary - Puff the Magic Dragon
Tonight in Person 1966
by thatsakeeper | 1 year ago | 1,632,397 views
WAKE UP FROM YOUR SLEEP PEOPLE>>>MAKA ALA! EMPOWER YOURSELVES WITH KNOWLEDGE AND KOKUA FOR ALL IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS, ETC.
Amelia,
Spent the better part of the morning reading Edward Said's Reader and "The 2010 Edward Said Memorial Lecture" listening to C-Span Dr. Rashid Khalidi Transcript No. 339 (7 October 2010).