June 22, 2025 • 39 mins
Havok Journal owner and 27 year Army Intelligence Veteran Charles Faint discusses some of the topics recently featured on their website. We do some deep dives into the threats/weakenesses of China and also how the wars in Ukraine and Gaza are causing a re-examination of modern war doctrines.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
We all owe them, but very few of us know them.
They are the men and women of our military and
first responder communities, and these are their stories. American Warrior
Radio is on the air.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Hello, ladies and gentlemen, Welcome to American Warrior Radio. This
is your host, Spenduler Garcia. American Warrior Radio broadcast from
the Sallencer Central Studios are the nation's largest suppressor dealer
and ready to make your silencer buying journey as simple
as possible. Visit Silencercentral dot com or call them today
at eight six six six four zero three two seven zero.
Be sure to check Silencercentral dot com first to confirm
(00:47):
if ony a silencer is legal in your state. Charles
Faint served with the US Army for US Army for
twenty seven years. As time included seven combat tours in
Iraq and Afghanistan with veryous Special Operations Forces. He also
served two stints as an instructor at West Point, and
he currently serves as the managing editor of the Modern
War Institute. Charles also owns the Havoc Journal, my go
(01:08):
to resource for all things military and first responders, so
we rarely like to check in with him. Charles Welcome
back to American Warrior Radio, our longest living guest.
Speaker 3 (01:19):
Hey, Ben, it's great to be back on the show.
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
So let's start off with Ben's dumb question of the
show right off the bat. To get this out of
the way. You were going on another podcast, Charles. I
recently appeared on the one Ready podcast, which is pretty interesting.
The name of the episode was the Smart Intel Guy.
Why do they get to call you Charlie and I
have to call you Charles.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
I think that's dealer choice. Ben. You call me whatever
you want, Oh, Charlie, Charles, Chuck, It's all good.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
Well, I really enjoyed it because you told them. And
this is always sort of fascinated me, Charlie. Sometimes when
it's a veteran talking to another veteran, I find that
there are more comfortable sharing stories that they wouldn't necessarily
share with with a civilian like me. You know, not
in your case, because you're a very open emical guy.
But I'm just curious of you as a veteran yourself,
(02:15):
having done both civilian and veteran podcasts, you notice a
difference at all.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Yes, not necessarily with you, because as far as I'm concerned.
You're part of the tribe, You've done so much of
their own community, and you understand us in ways that
a lot of other folks don't, but certainly for a
lot of other guests. And it's even even more segmented
within the veteran community. For example, we've had this conversation before,
Ben that I consider myself a war veteran, but not
necessarily a combat veteran due to the nature of the
(02:41):
stuff that I did overseas. So folks who had a
combat job will open up to a fellow combat veterans
in the way they might not to me, even because
even though I've served in Afghanistan interact many times, I
had a very different job. So I think like people
relate to like people. But certainly the veterans have a
(03:02):
bond that I think a lot of folks outside the
community don't understand.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
I find it one of the things that really struck
me in your interview with those two gentlemen. You were
talking about your time with the night Stalkers, and one
of them even, you know, he said, I'm a one
sixtieth fan boy. He just love everything about the night Stalkers,
And you spent some time in that community quite a
bit of time. But you had mentioned that I don't
know if he was your former commander, but someone else
(03:27):
in the unit had told you, you know, once a
night stalker, always a night stalker, and if you ever
need anything, let me know. And you did, you know,
leverage that offer on behalf of one of your cadets,
And I thought that was that just struck me as
pretty darn special. That that kind of loyalty and affinity
for the tribe.
Speaker 3 (03:45):
I thought so too, Ben. So yeah, you mentioned the
Ones Ready podcast, which was which is a great show
to do. I wanted to be on that show for
a long time. So Aaron Love is one of the
three driving factors of that show. Aaron and I have
been friends for a long time. He's a pair rescue
min of PJ and I think it was Trade that
made the comment about being a fanboy for the one sixtieth,
which is high praise coming from someone with his background
(04:07):
from that community. And we talked before about my experiences
in the one sixtieth Special Operations Aviation Regiment. Ben, I'm
an Intel guy, so I was not a pilot, so
I was just there observing and assisting lots of times,
and you mentioned the story that I related on ones
ready about the high ranking member of the one sixtieth
who made that observation to me. Ben, I don't even
(04:29):
know that guy. I've talked to him before, We've had
some correspondence. I've got a lot of respect for him
in his background what he does, but I've never met him.
So for him to say once a nightstalker, I was
a nice stalker guy like me who had kind of
minimal time comparatively in the unit. It meant a lot
to me personally, and being able to help out one
of our cadets here literally. I got a message from
(04:51):
that cadet last night, Ben, and he sent me a
bunch of photos and a comment saying that that last
night was the best night of his life because those
night stalkers let him some nights talker things with them,
and apparently they invited him back. And I told him
I might have helped him get his foot in the door,
but there was no expectation of a follow up. So
whatever he did to get himself invited back, that was
(05:13):
on him. He accomplished that on his own. So what
a great opportunity for that young cadet and what a
great thing for those nice talkers to do for potentially
a future nice talker.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
Well, you know, given the results, I'm gonna forgive you.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
Thanks, man, But you know you're always my favorite. I
don't think i'd I think far and away. I've been
on American Warrior Radio more than I've done any other show.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Do you make that sound like a confession.
Speaker 3 (05:43):
Well, we got to spread the gospel of the Modern
Moristitute far and wide, So yeah, we go in all
kinds of shows.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Ha ac journal dot com, havoc with a K check
it out, folks. I really I learned, particularly as a civilian,
I learned so much from reading those articles and getting
the insights from the men and women who've worn the
uniform or carried a badge. And so I'm very grateful
for it, and I'm always excited to talk to you.
But today, based on a couple of articles you published recently,
(06:10):
something that's been really bearing on my mind quite a
bit of a concern, and that's China, and you wrote
a couple of articles about that I'd like to talk
about here for a little bit. But on this past
May twenty eighth and twenty ninth, China hosted delegations from
several Pacific island countries for the third China Pacific Island
(06:30):
Countries Foreign Ministers Meeting. That's a mouthful. It's the third
time this group has gotten together, but it was the
first time it was held in mainland China. And you know,
folks from China, they do things purposefully that I think
that sends a message all in itself. But the delegations
included the president of some place I'd never even heard
of before, the island nation of Kiribati. And you wrote
(06:54):
an article called Tooseless Dragons, the five Incapables of the
Chinese Military. Let's back up a little bit because in
that article you talk about something called the Taiwan Test.
Expound on that a little bit for us, if you would, Charles.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
We all know that China wants to retake Taiwan. They've
talked about it, they planned for it. We have a
policy of strategic ambiguity when it comes to Taiwan, meaning
maybe we will, maybe we won't, and that appears to
have served us pretty well so far. That creates a
lot of uncertainty, but it also creates space for people
to maneuver in there in terms of whether or not
(07:29):
it's a red line that we're going to go in
to defend Taiwan or not. I think everyone understands that
we will. So when we're talking about the Taiwan Test,
we're thinking about what that might look like in terms
of an invasion. So a lot of people who study
China more closely than I do think that China will
will invade Taiwan as soon as they think they're capable.
(07:50):
I mean, crossing about a body of water under fire
is one of the most complex things to have to do,
so right now they are trying to do it. They're
making advances in their naval forces and air forces and
ground forces. But right now you mentioned that they they're
facing a series of incapables by their own judgment, and
(08:12):
those and the things that they're claiming that they're incapable
of doing. I think zach ar assessment of their forces
I think will prevent them in the near term from
being able to pass the Taiwan Test and successfully invade
that country.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
Well, this is you're the expert. I'm not, but Taiwan.
They need to take Taiwan a whole. This is not
like World War Two. We can just bomb the heck
out of Dresident and you know, Declara victory. They so
that what that means to me, Charles is an amphibious landing.
They need to actually put boots on that island and
(08:46):
try and keep it intact as much as possible. Just
the logistics of that's I compare that to D Day.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
I kind of wonder, Ben they have such a long
planning timeline, in such tolerance for probably casualties and other
things we don't, certainly human rights abuses that we don't.
I wonder if they would be okay with just taking it,
taking it intact. Would the ideal You get the population,
you get all the chip manufacturers, all their technology. That
would be ideal. But maybe they see it as hey,
(09:18):
we'll take the island now, we will rebuild everything later.
We got a thousand year timeline or whatever craziness they're planning.
So I think they will eventually try to do it,
and consequences be damned if they got to be confident
of success in it, because if they try it and fail,
the whole worm will turn against them, and the internal
population will turn against them. That could affect regime survivability.
Speaker 2 (09:41):
Eralie, we got to take quick break when you come back,
I like to talk more about China. Ladies and gentlemen.
There's your host, Ben Biler Garcia. We're talking with Charles Faint,
owner of the Havoc Journal. Check them out Havoc Journal
with AK dot com. We'll be right back. Welcome back
(10:11):
to American Warrior Radio. There's your host, Bed Buler Garcia.
We're talking with Charles Faint. Charles serving in the United
States Army for twenty seven years an intel specialist. He's
also taught at West Point. He currently serves the managing
editor of the Modern War Institute, and he's the owner
of the Havoc Journal, my go to resource for all
things military and first responder. Before we get into your
(10:31):
the five incapables, because I tell you that that made
me feel a little bit better at Charles, but it's
it's to me, it's interesting that they and you make
a good point because I did spend some time in
China myself, and you know, in our nation we think
in terms of election cycles, and in China they think
in term of centuries, you know, and that that can
(10:55):
be an advantage, I would think. But the coming back
to you, the five incapables that you listed and I
think it's interesting about this because again the Chinese, they
they're very purposeful. This was not a leak. They actually
have published this document, this study, if you will, And
(11:15):
I think that's significant. But you said there for their
five incapables are they're incapable of effectively judging a situation
or we're talking about their troops now, incapable of understanding
the higher authorities intentions, They're incapable of making operational decisions,
incapable of effectively planning and leading troop deployments, and incapable
of dealing with unexpected situations in a I don't know
(11:36):
what this means of the UCA ENVIRONMUCA.
Speaker 3 (11:38):
Yeah, volkah and certain complex and ambiguous, so yeah, yeah,
ben So. I first was exposed to these five A
capables through an article that Lieutenant Noah Yager wrote for
us in the Modern War Journal. We had the first
edition of Modern War Journal published by the Modern Warts
do We just pushed that out a week ago, And
(12:00):
I was first exposed to his article. And he talks
about the five incapables, among a host of other things
that China has written about itself with like what's that?
And I paraphrased in this article, I paraphrased the points
that he made that he got from the original Chinese sources,
and all those things go back to troop leadership, which
(12:21):
we tend to be really good at, and logistics, which
America tends to be really good at. Now, these things
talking about not being able to judge the situation, understanding intent,
and things like that, we do that very well in
the American Army through the mission command paradigm, which is
the way we do leadership bent, and we do that
very well. We function in chaos very well, and that
allows us to deal with enemy actions and take advantage
(12:43):
of unexpected opportunities in a way that a lot of
other organizations don't. So our junior level tactical leadership from
the young officers, especially not commissioned officers in those formations
way better than anybody else's, including especially China, and our
legit sticks and being able to manage deployments way better
than anybody else's. So we have a distinct advantage in there.
(13:06):
But quantity sometimes has a quality all its own, and
China's making a lot of stuff then, so we'll see
how this sort's out.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
So in civilian terms, in effect, what this you and
some others are proposing that that PLA officers. They can't
think critically, they can't interpret orders, they can't plan effectively,
they can't maneuver, and they can't think on the fly.
And I think that it's interesting. One other advantage from
a civilian perspective is we've just spent thirty years doing
(13:37):
the opposite of that. I mean, we've been fighting an
adversary that's always adapting, always maneuvering, always changing tactics. So
I would guess that means that are certainly our senior
enlisted and then you know, maybe some of our lower
rising up and the ranks officers have got actual experience
on the ground doing that, and that would serve us
(13:58):
well in the worst case scenario.
Speaker 3 (14:00):
Indeed, the course if we do fight China will be
a way different fight than we had in Afghanistan and
in Iraq. We enjoyed uncontested logistics for the most part
in those locations, which we wouldn't have fighting a Taiwan situation.
And also we're losing a lot of that experience. I
retired two years ago. There are many young officers and
(14:21):
no commission officers coming to West play with no combat experience,
And I mentioned this other one's ready that it's not
their fault. They weren't dodging deployments. They're just a lot
fewer of them now. So one of those major advantage,
which was that combat experience is either not there anymore
with this younger generation of troops that's coming up, or
is no longer relevant. For example, at the big base
of Blab, when I was stationed there in Iraq, we
(14:43):
had a literal burger king on the base. We're probably
not going to have burger king on Taiwan. Our green beans,
coffee is probably going to be a short supply. There's
going to be a lot more missiles, a lot more rockets,
and they'll be able to touch us in the homeland
that al Qaida and the Taliban just weren't able to,
either physically or through cyber attacks. So it'll be a
(15:04):
completely different character war.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
I think that that's well, that's that's a good transition
point here at Charles, because the other document or article
you wrote that I found really interesting, it's called logistics
is destiny what Taiwan and the Pacific theater tell us
about sustain and warfare, And and you'd mentioned and I
just had a great author on who wrote a just
a very powerful book about the Marines, who pilots who
(15:28):
almost I shouldn't say single handley, but they were they
were a big part of saving Guadalcanal. And but you
know you also touched on that effect. That's a that's
a big ocean out there. And you know we held
Guadalcanal by by by sheer grit, but also because the food,
(15:49):
the fuel and the ammunition kept coming, you know, by
hook er by crook, we're able to at least get
some supplies to those Marines who are fighting that battle. Taiwan. Man,
that's a long ways away. I mean, what if you
can say, Charles, what what is our closest asset if
things go south on this? Is it? Is it Japan?
(16:12):
Is it South Korea? Is it Guam? How do we
get there?
Speaker 3 (16:17):
All those all those locations? And it's been a while
since since I studied at Pacific Theater. I did do
a couple of years in the USR Pacific between West
Point assignments. But you've got Japan up to the north,
You've got the Phippines down the south, you got Guam,
which is which is a good bit further away. You
have all those locations, but you're right, the ocean is
big and full of terrors, to paraphrase Game of Thrones,
(16:40):
So we've got a lot of things going on trying
to get stuff in there. China is a lot closer
to Taiwan than we are from any of those locations, obviously,
because it's right across straight there. So what was interesting
is the way that the US Navy is in particular
is getting after contested logistics. And I've seen some reports
on stealth automated basically semi submersibles and submarines that you
(17:05):
load up with whatever supplies you need. No people are
on them, and you send them on their very way,
and some of them will get detected and defeated, but
some of them get through. So that logistics and survivabilities
are going to be huge for those units. So it's
going to have to be dispersed, it's going to have
to be supplied, it's got to be survival, it's had
to be flexible, and that's super tough, especially when you're
(17:25):
on an island that's already got a bunch of stuff
on it, where you're going to put everybody, Where are
you going to survive on those things and those atolls
and those little tidy islands that China made. Eventually we're
going to want to take them and put people on
them to keep them from using the airstrips and air
defense locations. So how are those people going to survive
the inevitable counter attack. It's a huge problem, and it
(17:47):
all goes back to logistics. How are we going to
get the people and how we get the supplies, and
how do we get that sustainment. How do we backaul
our casualties in our broken equipment. That's a huge problem
for us, but also for China.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Okay, I want to keep talking about this when you
come back Trails, because you actually had an older article
I found, I think it was about three years old
that you were talking about this will bring us back
to our lovely island nation of Cure Body, which I'd
never heard about. But I want to talk about that, folks,
because that I felt pretty good reading about the five incapables,
and then I read this three year old article and
it made me feel a little bit a little bit
(18:21):
squarely again. So ladies and gentlemen, there's your host Benda
la Garcia talking with our good friend Charles faint. He's
the owner of the Havoc Journal twenty seven years plus
or well, plus al the United States Army and in
tel guy and an honorary Nightstalker, which is pretty good
stuff too. Don't forget. You can find this podcast and
over six hundred others at American Warrior Radio dot com
the most recent episodes on your favorite platform, whatever that
(18:45):
might be. iHeart, Spotify, Pandora would try to be everywhere.
Please share these important misses with your friends. Our goal
is to educate the civilian population out there. We'll be
right back. Welcome back to American Warrior Radio. Ladies and gentlemen.
(19:13):
There's your host, Ben Blagarcia. We're talking with Charles Faith,
owner of the Havoc Journal. We're coming to you from
the Silencer Central Studios. Adding a silencer can make shootings
safer and more enjoyable and improve your accuracy. Begin the
process by visiting Silencercentral dot com to see if owning
a silencer is legal in your state. They can then
walk you through the permitting process and ship your new
silencer right to your front door. Called silencer Central today
(19:35):
at eight six six six four zero three two seven zero,
or visit silencercentral dot com. Charles, we're talking about an
older article that you wrote. I want to say it
was about three years ago. You was talking about this
this island nation of Cure Body, and you pointed out
on that article, if China is able to get airbase
rights there, that would put them within twenty four hundred
(19:58):
miles of US territory and the range of their age
twenty bomber is over five thousand miles, so clearly Hawaii
is easily in the crossairs. I mean, they could even
be dumping munitions on California from there.
Speaker 3 (20:11):
It's really interesting. Would fascinate to me when I first
read about this was I had never heard of that
place before Curie Body. I didn't know where it was,
but I looked it up on the map and I
started doing some research on It. Reminded me of, especially
when I was on assignment in USR Pacific, about this
term called creeping normalcy that I was exposed to when
(20:33):
I was over there, And that's China just acting up
in so many ways, so many times that people just
think of it as normal. So for example, them shouldering
our naval vessels, which is when basically they played chicken
with our naval vessels and try to come alongside them
and nudge them out of the way. They call it shouldering,
(20:53):
or when they try to force our planes that are
in international airspace to divert They do all kinds of things.
Take an island, a toll that belongs to somebody else,
filled in with sand and making it into an air base.
They do all these crazy things so many times that
we just think of it as normal. They incur on
Taiwan's sovereign waters with a bunch of boats so many
(21:16):
times that when the real attack comes, we don't recognize
that it is something unusual until it's too late. And now,
as part of their creeping normalcy, they're doing this trapped
diplomacy thing that as part of their Belt and Road initiative,
where they're like, hey, we're gonna give you a whole
bunch of money, but we we're gonna load give it
to you and a loan, but we want we want
to build a naval base in your country, and here
are the terms of conditions, and these poor countries can't
(21:39):
repay them. So China's like, guess what this belongs to
us now? And they get into bed with China and
find out that it's probably not in their long term
interest to do that be partners with them. The Cure
Body seems to be going down that road. I haven't
explored it recently in the last couple of years, but
though last time I researched it is the Chinese are
(21:59):
going to put that air base you mentioned there, which
would dramatically negatively affect whatever relations that has not only
with the United States but the West. And over time
we probably see China just take over that whole country.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
Well, and it's speeding up. As I mentioned, they just
had a delegation man China. What a couple of weeks
ago have we fallen down on our end as far
as the diplomacy, Charnles, I mean, if it's just about money,
I mean, let's let's let's make your body another, you know,
a better offer, right?
Speaker 1 (22:31):
What am I not?
Speaker 3 (22:31):
Yeah, there's just there's a there's a limit, of course,
even for someone like us, we don't have unlimited money.
But also a lot of these countries will take money
from both of us and make deals with both of
us that are mutually exclusive. So I don't know what
kind of arrangement in the United States has with Cure body.
Maybe there are a lot Maybe the US government is
(22:52):
a lot less worried about a Chinese navy and air
base there that I am as just just some guy
who's are retired. But yeah, there are problems there. But
I think there's a lot of uncertainty in the world
right now and people are just trying to do whatever
is in their best interests. So we'll see some shifting
around and a lot of these countries. Canads afford to
(23:13):
pick wrong if they picked the wrong side and get
crushed by the other one. This goes the type of
thing has been going on for centuries, all the way
back to the Helponesia or through cities is writing about it.
So the strategy what they will in the week, suff
for what they must and cure body is a pretty
weak country. So they're trying to make the best deal
they can right now. But right now it looks like
it's not in our interest. Bit.
Speaker 2 (23:34):
Let's talk about because the other thing you mentioned that
it kind of scares me, particularly in light of the
recent you know, some of the news I've been reading
about is this battle, if it's fought, will not just
be fought in the Pacific, And you know, let's just
assume that they put an airbase on care body and
they could literally strike us here, you know, on the
home front with their bombers. But there's also I saw
(23:57):
an article Charals recently about these solar panels that we've
all imported from China and we're putting up all over
the place, and apparently people are finding, for lack of
a better term, a kill switch and these solar panels,
and I'm thinking, holy smokes, you know, someone in China
flips a switch and you know, power grids start to
go down all over the place. That would be a
(24:19):
bad thing in the mental of Yeah, we can't trust
any tech we get from China, especially if it's something
that's potentially either dual use military or something that's potentially
useful in our infrastructure. You mentioned the solar panel arrays
anything that has to do with comms or tech is
probably compromised. It didn't surprise me at all to read
(24:40):
that and Ben in terms of the threat to the
US mainland, Yeah, bombers are a threat, but they're pretty
easy to keep track of, and we have a lot
of anti airsists. Of what I'm more worried about is
something like we just saw with the Ukrainians in Russia.
Speaker 3 (24:57):
That's terrified.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
Bit.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
You know, if someone would have done that to us,
I don't know how much better we would have done
in terms of protecting our planes and the Russians did,
because that is just such an unexpected, unanticipated thing, and
I think we're very vulera about those types of attacks,
but i'd.
Speaker 2 (25:15):
Not tell you that. I want to talk a little
bit about that as we're going down on the program,
because you had another article about the lessons we need
to be learning from Ukraine and Mexico, and certainly I
don't agree with calling that, you know, Russia's Pearl Harbor,
because I just misses on so many levels. Don't get
me started there, but you know, logistically well that and
then of course the Israeli cell phone strike, which was
(25:37):
just masterful. But I was looking to you to make
me feel a little better. Charles found fifty miles for
the Mexican border. I don't know what the range on
a drone is, but theoretically they wouldn't even have to
bring them into our country to hit my local Air
Force base.
Speaker 3 (25:52):
Now they wouldn't. They could put it on a container
ship in China, ship it into Mexico's international waters and
then just push them button on it, or just remotely
set it and have it just explode on out. Or
they could have put it on one of those balloons
they like to float over our countries and just have
it said to release. It'd be super easy to just
overwhelm some of the defenses we got.
Speaker 1 (26:14):
Now.
Speaker 3 (26:14):
I'm not privy to what defenses are around US military base.
I don't know, maybe we already have some other place,
but it seems likely to me that if you put
enough of that stuff up in the air, and especially
in a place that might be a little softer target,
you could do untold damage to any number of things,
and just this sheer panic that comes out of it
would be a huge win for any adversary that wanted
(26:36):
to attack us.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
Here's my suggestion. So much of the cool stuff I've
seen in U style, I mean, I don't know if
you ever seen it. There's shows about how, you know,
the old Star Trek. How now we have basically the
equivalent of you know, the communications devices and not quite
a tri quarter. But you know, a lot of the
stuff that we're using, the technology that's actually in place
now was based on science fiction. So I would suggest
(26:59):
to deal with drones, somebody to take a much closer
look at the Batman movies and just see if he's
got something going on there that maybe, you know, maybe
we could use. You know, coming back to your art
about logistics is destiny, your quote is, and the end
wars are won by the side that doesn't run out
out of will, out of weapons, out of food, out
(27:19):
of fuel, out of the fight. That's why logistics isn't
just a support function, it's a strategic weapon. I don't
feel like we really learned the lessons we needed to
learn from the pandemic when it came to our supply chains.
You know, we talked about these solar panels. I don't
see why we don't. Just we got to start building
that stuff stateside again, just so we can trust it.
(27:41):
I mean, holy smokes, who knows what else is out there?
Speaker 3 (27:44):
Yeah, and human behavior is so interesting, Ben, I've talked
to my daughters about some famine situations, because that's one
of the things myes is studying in high school, and
I told her that most famines are not functions of scarcity,
their functions that tribution. Even going back to the potato
famine in Ireland, they had a bunch of food on
(28:04):
the island, but the British were extracting that and sending
it back to the UK. In Somalia, we had aid
that was just rotting on the docks, and Gaza is
the same way because hamas will let the food get
out to the people. So the problem isn't having the material,
is getting it to the people who need it. And
that goes back to the discussion that we're having about
(28:26):
logistics being destiny. We have so much stuff, but can
we get it to the place it needs to be
when we needed to get it there? And I'm also
thinking about when I was on I was on the
island of Wahoo.
Speaker 2 (28:40):
Charles, take a pause or we got to take another
break on I want to want to complete the session
when we come back. Ladies and gentlemen, there's your host,
Bendla Garcia chatting with Charles Faint. Check out the Havoc
Journal dot com Havok Journal dot com. We'll be right back.
(29:10):
Welcome back to American Warrior Radio. Ladies and gentlemen, this
is Ben Biler Garcia. We're talking with Charles Charles serving
in the United States Army for over twenty seven years.
He's an Intel specialist. He's also the owner of the
Havoc Journal and the managing editor at the Modern War Institute.
Give us that website again, Charles, because there's also some
just some great podcasts and articles. And you just published
(29:31):
your first of amazing.
Speaker 3 (29:33):
So our first print, Joil. Yeah, we're really excited about it.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Ben.
Speaker 3 (29:36):
So the website is MWI Dotsquite dot edu. And if
you go to the website and go all the way
far right to the special series drop down menu there
for the Modern War Journal and the Wadern Warstitute has
been in existence for a long time, long before I
joined the team, and we produced a lot of great podcasts.
We produced a lot of great online content. But now
(29:58):
we have our first journal. So we published the Journalists
entirety online. We're going to publish it in print in
the fall. We're very excited about that.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Then now, Charlie, I'll put that on the show notes.
But because you repeat the website again, as if we
weren't speed.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
Readers, MWI dot west Points dot edu.
Speaker 2 (30:18):
Okay, super, thank you, Well I interrupted you. You were
just about to start a really good point. We were
talking about logistics.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
It's probably good you interrupted me because I was about
to talk about toilet paper and pooping and in the
context of scarcity and resupply. So I was on the
island of Awa who during the great toilet paper shortage
during the pandemic, and what was interesting to me was
this human behavior. So we didn't have less toilet paper
(30:46):
on the island. People weren't pooping more because of COVID,
but because people got it into their head that there
was going to be a shortage, they bought out all
the toilet paper. I lived with three women, and I
like to go the bathroom time to time myself, so
this was a huge insight into how panicky people are.
If everyone just bought their normal amount of toilet paper
(31:09):
beIN everyone would have been able to poop in peace
on the island of Oahu. But because they went on
panic bought by the growth of toilet paper, everybody ran out.
So there's another example of that. It's very rarely an
issue of supply, it's a problem of distribution.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
I suggest a title for the very next have a
journal article to be poop and piece. I got to
be able to poop in piece one Day've been coming
back to the Chinese. I try not to be overly
conspiracy theorist, but we just had two Chinese agents arrested
carrying some kind of a biological stuff that would have
(31:51):
been bad. And here in my home state of Arizona,
our largest egg producer basically had to destroy two million chickens.
They're out of business for two years. That's the bottom line.
And you see stuff like that and you start to
think about, well, you know, again giving the Chinese the
credit for being really smart and really you know, thinking
long term ahead. You've got to wonder how many you know,
(32:15):
what do they call them, and in video, how many
Easter eggs or sitting around out there in the solar panels,
or infecting our chickens or whatever. But I want to
talk really quick, Charles about another article that you had
that you might not have been prepared for. You're talking
about how leadership has to change based on what we're
seeing in Ukraine and Gaza. And you know, we saw
(32:37):
clearly that just masterful attack of the drones, you know,
deep in Russian territory, and so basically your four points
there are you know, decentralized Commandit is in a buzzword.
It's survival and leaders must train their people to lead
without them. I found that statement in particularly interesting because
going back to your original or other article we talked
(33:00):
out about China, where they don't appear to have the
ability to do that because they're all responding to the party,
not necessarily to the chain of command, which doesn't always
make you know. They might be able to quote son Zou,
you know, all day long, but that doesn't necessarily mean
they can lead soldiers into battle, whereas we have done
a pretty good job of that.
Speaker 3 (33:18):
And the Israeli it's the same way. So this whole
point about training their people to lead without them what
was very interesting to me when this war first kicked off.
Of course, it went badly from the beginning, and then
we started seeing all these Russian generals getting killed way
more than we did American side, perhaps even going back
to World War Two. And I was talking with my
kiddess about it when I was teaching here, and they
(33:41):
were like, why are so many generals getting killed? Well,
because they got to be so close to the front lines,
because nobody knows how to lead. So in the United States,
in Michigan command, we believe in discipline, initiative, commanders and
ten all this stuff like, hey, here's the purpose, here's
in state, here the key task, and I'll go out
and do it. And a lot of other countries don't
(34:02):
do that. It's very hierarchical. It's very you will go
left when I tell you too, And they stand by
a weight for orders, and with comms and everything being
so far down and no one having an initiative that
generals have to be out there to physically make people go.
So if we want to continue to be successful when
you keep doing that, they want to be successful, they
need to find a way to allow their troops to
(34:22):
lead without them. I don't think they're set up that way, Ben,
I don't think they can do it.
Speaker 2 (34:26):
You know one other thing that really struck me. You
talked about morally and messaging and the weight of leadership.
And this is a different world now where you know,
stuff is flashed globally and seconds nanoseconds, and you know,
any time I see any statistics coming out of Gaza,
I mean I don't take other grain of solent. I
take it with a whole salt mine because you just
don't know. But you know, the particularly the American people,
(34:49):
they tend to react on that first glimpse, and it
takes a strong leader to just to not flinch and
to keep going and to pursue the mission.
Speaker 1 (35:00):
Right.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
Is that a new thing that you're teaching your cadets.
Speaker 3 (35:04):
I think we've known that for a long time. It's
been an interesting phenomenon since the start of the Global
war and terror, this concept of the strategic corporal. And
we all know that corporals are a very low level
leadership thing. That's not a strategic thing, that's a very
tactical thing. But the actions taken by low level troops
at the platoon level and even below can have strategic
level consequences because of mass media. And one of the
(35:27):
things I teach my cadets is you've got to do
the right thing all the time, and people will make
up stuff about you that's not true and grossly overexaggerate,
but don't make it easy for him.
Speaker 2 (35:37):
I was listening.
Speaker 3 (35:37):
I was editing a podcast that we're going to run
here shortly by General Mcryan, who's actually an Australian general
we do a lot of work with here at the
Modern War Institute, and he cited the book Blackhearts, which
is the story a true story of a US military
atrocity in Iraq, and we need to make sure that
we're doing the right thing so they can't use actual
(35:59):
things against the like black arts, like a booga reb,
like any number of other things. So we do we
can to control the narrative at our level, but we
also don't give the enemy an easy win. And I
think that's a lot of things. That's something that a
lot of leaders need to concentrate more on.
Speaker 2 (36:14):
Inn Charles, I've really enjoyed our talk, and I don't
want to give a short shrift to one other thing.
I noticed that you I was really kind of touching.
And there's an article you wrote called not If, But
when rethinking Kipling for our daughters. Your daughter Shannon just
received an award from her high school for some actions
she took to help save another student. That got you
(36:34):
thinking about rude your Kipling's poem if, and folks would
recognize if you keep your head while all about your
losing layers and blame it on you. So you went
to that thing that you case nowadays like so much.
Ai and rewrote that poem.
Speaker 3 (36:49):
Why Yeah, So I could talk about Kipling for hours,
but I know we only have a couple of minutes
been so some of this up shortly. You did a
great job of accurately sad the the tone there on
that with my daughter and what happened at her school,
so when she came home was she was talking to
her mom, my wife and me about it made me
think of if I like that. She hadn't heard of
(37:11):
it before. They have studied that yet. I had to
read it. But reading Kipling's hard right. It's not written
for a modern audience. He's a brit He wrote a
lot of English slanging in there. So I just thought
about what would if look like if I wrote it
for my daughters, because he wrote it for her, he
talked about you'll be a man my son. I don't
have these sons.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
I have two daughters.
Speaker 3 (37:30):
So I went to Chad GBT and I gave it
a prompt and it kicked out something I thought was
really good Ben and I called it not if, but
when for our daughters. And that's what that article is about,
because it's not if our children will be called upon
to do great things, but when and when that happens,
I want my daughters to be prepared.
Speaker 2 (37:50):
Well, just a little context, both your daughters. I mean,
military service has been a tradition and your family going
back gosh, World War One at least, and you're daughters
both are considering. Also we're in the uniform too.
Speaker 3 (38:03):
Right, Yeah. My older daughter Emily is actually away in
Norwich right now, which is the military school. And my
daughter Shannon starts the summer leader experience here at West
Point tomorrow and she'll apply to West Point and we'll
see what happens. I'm proud of both of them for
considering it, and if either or both of them go in,
that's great. If neither of them go in, that's great because,
(38:23):
as you know, Ben and we talked about many times,
there are many ways to serve him.
Speaker 2 (38:27):
One other quick question about a minute left, Charles, I'm
curious do you feel more comfortable writing now that you're
no longer in uniform about some of the things that
you didn't want to before?
Speaker 3 (38:39):
One pre se and a lot of that is the
encouragement from Mike Warnocker editor slash, my best friends in
eighth grade. Also, because I'm not an activity service member,
I still employee of the US government, so there's still
things there's a limit to what I would say, but
I wouldn't color outside those lines anyway, But yes, Ben,
and I'm feeling a lot more introspective, so I think
the next time on the show, they'll probably be some
(39:00):
more things that I have coming out that we can
talk about, and more reflections on how I feel about
the war twenty years on.
Speaker 2 (39:06):
Well, I certainly look forward toward. Ladies and gentlemen, check
out have a journal hjav ok with ates yeah havoc
with a k oh yeah yaie Have a journal dot com.
Check it out and enjoy it. Also check out the
Modern War inst website. Lots of great stuff there. Charles,
thank you for spending time with our listeners again today.
Speaker 3 (39:24):
Thanks Ben, It's always great to be on the show.
Speaker 2 (39:26):
Look forward to coming back again, Ladies and gentlemen. Until
next show, all polishes or procedures remain in place. Take care.
Speaker 1 (39:35):
You've been listening to American Warrior Radio. Archived episodes may
be found at Americanwarriorradio dot com or your favorite podcast platform.
We all owe them, but very few of us know them.
They are the men and women of our military and
first responder communities, and these are their stories. American Warrior
Radio is on the air.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Hello, ladies and gentlemen, Welcome to American Warrior Radio. This
is your host, Spenduler Garcia. American Warrior Radio broadcast from
the Sallencer Central Studios are the nation's largest suppressor dealer
and ready to make your silencer buying journey as simple
as possible. Visit Silencercentral dot com or call them today
at eight six six six four zero three two seven zero.
Be sure to check Silencercentral dot com first to confirm
(00:47):
if ony a silencer is legal in your state. Charles
Faint served with the US Army for US Army for
twenty seven years. As time included seven combat tours in
Iraq and Afghanistan with veryous Special Operations Forces. He also
served two stints as an instructor at West Point, and
he currently serves as the managing editor of the Modern
War Institute. Charles also owns the Havoc Journal, my go
(01:08):
to resource for all things military and first responders, so
we rarely like to check in with him. Charles Welcome
back to American Warrior Radio, our longest living guest.
Speaker 3 (01:19):
Hey, Ben, it's great to be back on the show.
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (01:22):
So let's start off with Ben's dumb question of the
show right off the bat. To get this out of
the way. You were going on another podcast, Charles. I
recently appeared on the one Ready podcast, which is pretty interesting.
The name of the episode was the Smart Intel Guy.
Why do they get to call you Charlie and I
have to call you Charles.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
I think that's dealer choice. Ben. You call me whatever
you want, Oh, Charlie, Charles, Chuck, It's all good.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
Well, I really enjoyed it because you told them. And
this is always sort of fascinated me, Charlie. Sometimes when
it's a veteran talking to another veteran, I find that
there are more comfortable sharing stories that they wouldn't necessarily
share with with a civilian like me. You know, not
in your case, because you're a very open emical guy.
But I'm just curious of you as a veteran yourself,
(02:15):
having done both civilian and veteran podcasts, you notice a
difference at all.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Yes, not necessarily with you, because as far as I'm concerned.
You're part of the tribe, You've done so much of
their own community, and you understand us in ways that
a lot of other folks don't, but certainly for a
lot of other guests. And it's even even more segmented
within the veteran community. For example, we've had this conversation before,
Ben that I consider myself a war veteran, but not
necessarily a combat veteran due to the nature of the
(02:41):
stuff that I did overseas. So folks who had a
combat job will open up to a fellow combat veterans
in the way they might not to me, even because
even though I've served in Afghanistan interact many times, I
had a very different job. So I think like people
relate to like people. But certainly the veterans have a
(03:02):
bond that I think a lot of folks outside the
community don't understand.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
I find it one of the things that really struck
me in your interview with those two gentlemen. You were
talking about your time with the night Stalkers, and one
of them even, you know, he said, I'm a one
sixtieth fan boy. He just love everything about the night Stalkers,
And you spent some time in that community quite a
bit of time. But you had mentioned that I don't
know if he was your former commander, but someone else
(03:27):
in the unit had told you, you know, once a
night stalker, always a night stalker, and if you ever
need anything, let me know. And you did, you know,
leverage that offer on behalf of one of your cadets,
And I thought that was that just struck me as
pretty darn special. That that kind of loyalty and affinity
for the tribe.
Speaker 3 (03:45):
I thought so too, Ben. So yeah, you mentioned the
Ones Ready podcast, which was which is a great show
to do. I wanted to be on that show for
a long time. So Aaron Love is one of the
three driving factors of that show. Aaron and I have
been friends for a long time. He's a pair rescue
min of PJ and I think it was Trade that
made the comment about being a fanboy for the one sixtieth,
which is high praise coming from someone with his background
(04:07):
from that community. And we talked before about my experiences
in the one sixtieth Special Operations Aviation Regiment. Ben, I'm
an Intel guy, so I was not a pilot, so
I was just there observing and assisting lots of times,
and you mentioned the story that I related on ones
ready about the high ranking member of the one sixtieth
who made that observation to me. Ben, I don't even
(04:29):
know that guy. I've talked to him before, We've had
some correspondence. I've got a lot of respect for him
in his background what he does, but I've never met him.
So for him to say once a nightstalker, I was
a nice stalker guy like me who had kind of
minimal time comparatively in the unit. It meant a lot
to me personally, and being able to help out one
of our cadets here literally. I got a message from
(04:51):
that cadet last night, Ben, and he sent me a
bunch of photos and a comment saying that that last
night was the best night of his life because those
night stalkers let him some nights talker things with them,
and apparently they invited him back. And I told him
I might have helped him get his foot in the door,
but there was no expectation of a follow up. So
whatever he did to get himself invited back, that was
(05:13):
on him. He accomplished that on his own. So what
a great opportunity for that young cadet and what a
great thing for those nice talkers to do for potentially
a future nice talker.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
Well, you know, given the results, I'm gonna forgive you.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
Thanks, man, But you know you're always my favorite. I
don't think i'd I think far and away. I've been
on American Warrior Radio more than I've done any other show.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Do you make that sound like a confession.
Speaker 3 (05:43):
Well, we got to spread the gospel of the Modern
Moristitute far and wide, So yeah, we go in all
kinds of shows.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Ha ac journal dot com, havoc with a K check
it out, folks. I really I learned, particularly as a civilian,
I learned so much from reading those articles and getting
the insights from the men and women who've worn the
uniform or carried a badge. And so I'm very grateful
for it, and I'm always excited to talk to you.
But today, based on a couple of articles you published recently,
(06:10):
something that's been really bearing on my mind quite a
bit of a concern, and that's China, and you wrote
a couple of articles about that I'd like to talk
about here for a little bit. But on this past
May twenty eighth and twenty ninth, China hosted delegations from
several Pacific island countries for the third China Pacific Island
(06:30):
Countries Foreign Ministers Meeting. That's a mouthful. It's the third
time this group has gotten together, but it was the
first time it was held in mainland China. And you know,
folks from China, they do things purposefully that I think
that sends a message all in itself. But the delegations
included the president of some place I'd never even heard
of before, the island nation of Kiribati. And you wrote
(06:54):
an article called Tooseless Dragons, the five Incapables of the
Chinese Military. Let's back up a little bit because in
that article you talk about something called the Taiwan Test.
Expound on that a little bit for us, if you would, Charles.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
We all know that China wants to retake Taiwan. They've
talked about it, they planned for it. We have a
policy of strategic ambiguity when it comes to Taiwan, meaning
maybe we will, maybe we won't, and that appears to
have served us pretty well so far. That creates a
lot of uncertainty, but it also creates space for people
to maneuver in there in terms of whether or not
(07:29):
it's a red line that we're going to go in
to defend Taiwan or not. I think everyone understands that
we will. So when we're talking about the Taiwan Test,
we're thinking about what that might look like in terms
of an invasion. So a lot of people who study
China more closely than I do think that China will
will invade Taiwan as soon as they think they're capable.
(07:50):
I mean, crossing about a body of water under fire
is one of the most complex things to have to do,
so right now they are trying to do it. They're
making advances in their naval forces and air forces and
ground forces. But right now you mentioned that they they're
facing a series of incapables by their own judgment, and
(08:12):
those and the things that they're claiming that they're incapable
of doing. I think zach ar assessment of their forces
I think will prevent them in the near term from
being able to pass the Taiwan Test and successfully invade
that country.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
Well, this is you're the expert. I'm not, but Taiwan.
They need to take Taiwan a whole. This is not
like World War Two. We can just bomb the heck
out of Dresident and you know, Declara victory. They so
that what that means to me, Charles is an amphibious landing.
They need to actually put boots on that island and
(08:46):
try and keep it intact as much as possible. Just
the logistics of that's I compare that to D Day.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
I kind of wonder, Ben they have such a long
planning timeline, in such tolerance for probably casualties and other
things we don't, certainly human rights abuses that we don't.
I wonder if they would be okay with just taking it,
taking it intact. Would the ideal You get the population,
you get all the chip manufacturers, all their technology. That
would be ideal. But maybe they see it as hey,
(09:18):
we'll take the island now, we will rebuild everything later.
We got a thousand year timeline or whatever craziness they're planning.
So I think they will eventually try to do it,
and consequences be damned if they got to be confident
of success in it, because if they try it and fail,
the whole worm will turn against them, and the internal
population will turn against them. That could affect regime survivability.
Speaker 2 (09:41):
Eralie, we got to take quick break when you come back,
I like to talk more about China. Ladies and gentlemen.
There's your host, Ben Biler Garcia. We're talking with Charles Faint,
owner of the Havoc Journal. Check them out Havoc Journal
with AK dot com. We'll be right back. Welcome back
(10:11):
to American Warrior Radio. There's your host, Bed Buler Garcia.
We're talking with Charles Faint. Charles serving in the United
States Army for twenty seven years an intel specialist. He's
also taught at West Point. He currently serves the managing
editor of the Modern War Institute, and he's the owner
of the Havoc Journal, my go to resource for all
things military and first responder. Before we get into your
(10:31):
the five incapables, because I tell you that that made
me feel a little bit better at Charles, but it's
it's to me, it's interesting that they and you make
a good point because I did spend some time in
China myself, and you know, in our nation we think
in terms of election cycles, and in China they think
in term of centuries, you know, and that that can
(10:55):
be an advantage, I would think. But the coming back
to you, the five incapables that you listed and I
think it's interesting about this because again the Chinese, they
they're very purposeful. This was not a leak. They actually
have published this document, this study, if you will, And
(11:15):
I think that's significant. But you said there for their
five incapables are they're incapable of effectively judging a situation
or we're talking about their troops now, incapable of understanding
the higher authorities intentions, They're incapable of making operational decisions,
incapable of effectively planning and leading troop deployments, and incapable
of dealing with unexpected situations in a I don't know
(11:36):
what this means of the UCA ENVIRONMUCA.
Speaker 3 (11:38):
Yeah, volkah and certain complex and ambiguous, so yeah, yeah,
ben So. I first was exposed to these five A
capables through an article that Lieutenant Noah Yager wrote for
us in the Modern War Journal. We had the first
edition of Modern War Journal published by the Modern Warts
do We just pushed that out a week ago, And
(12:00):
I was first exposed to his article. And he talks
about the five incapables, among a host of other things
that China has written about itself with like what's that?
And I paraphrased in this article, I paraphrased the points
that he made that he got from the original Chinese sources,
and all those things go back to troop leadership, which
(12:21):
we tend to be really good at, and logistics, which
America tends to be really good at. Now, these things
talking about not being able to judge the situation, understanding intent,
and things like that, we do that very well in
the American Army through the mission command paradigm, which is
the way we do leadership bent, and we do that
very well. We function in chaos very well, and that
allows us to deal with enemy actions and take advantage
(12:43):
of unexpected opportunities in a way that a lot of
other organizations don't. So our junior level tactical leadership from
the young officers, especially not commissioned officers in those formations
way better than anybody else's, including especially China, and our
legit sticks and being able to manage deployments way better
than anybody else's. So we have a distinct advantage in there.
(13:06):
But quantity sometimes has a quality all its own, and
China's making a lot of stuff then, so we'll see
how this sort's out.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
So in civilian terms, in effect, what this you and
some others are proposing that that PLA officers. They can't
think critically, they can't interpret orders, they can't plan effectively,
they can't maneuver, and they can't think on the fly.
And I think that it's interesting. One other advantage from
a civilian perspective is we've just spent thirty years doing
(13:37):
the opposite of that. I mean, we've been fighting an
adversary that's always adapting, always maneuvering, always changing tactics. So
I would guess that means that are certainly our senior
enlisted and then you know, maybe some of our lower
rising up and the ranks officers have got actual experience
on the ground doing that, and that would serve us
(13:58):
well in the worst case scenario.
Speaker 3 (14:00):
Indeed, the course if we do fight China will be
a way different fight than we had in Afghanistan and
in Iraq. We enjoyed uncontested logistics for the most part
in those locations, which we wouldn't have fighting a Taiwan situation.
And also we're losing a lot of that experience. I
retired two years ago. There are many young officers and
(14:21):
no commission officers coming to West play with no combat experience,
And I mentioned this other one's ready that it's not
their fault. They weren't dodging deployments. They're just a lot
fewer of them now. So one of those major advantage,
which was that combat experience is either not there anymore
with this younger generation of troops that's coming up, or
is no longer relevant. For example, at the big base
of Blab, when I was stationed there in Iraq, we
(14:43):
had a literal burger king on the base. We're probably
not going to have burger king on Taiwan. Our green beans,
coffee is probably going to be a short supply. There's
going to be a lot more missiles, a lot more rockets,
and they'll be able to touch us in the homeland
that al Qaida and the Taliban just weren't able to,
either physically or through cyber attacks. So it'll be a
(15:04):
completely different character war.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
I think that that's well, that's that's a good transition
point here at Charles, because the other document or article
you wrote that I found really interesting, it's called logistics
is destiny what Taiwan and the Pacific theater tell us
about sustain and warfare, And and you'd mentioned and I
just had a great author on who wrote a just
a very powerful book about the Marines, who pilots who
(15:28):
almost I shouldn't say single handley, but they were they
were a big part of saving Guadalcanal. And but you
know you also touched on that effect. That's a that's
a big ocean out there. And you know we held
Guadalcanal by by by sheer grit, but also because the food,
(15:49):
the fuel and the ammunition kept coming, you know, by
hook er by crook, we're able to at least get
some supplies to those Marines who are fighting that battle. Taiwan. Man,
that's a long ways away. I mean, what if you
can say, Charles, what what is our closest asset if
things go south on this? Is it? Is it Japan?
(16:12):
Is it South Korea? Is it Guam? How do we
get there?
Speaker 3 (16:17):
All those all those locations? And it's been a while
since since I studied at Pacific Theater. I did do
a couple of years in the USR Pacific between West
Point assignments. But you've got Japan up to the north,
You've got the Phippines down the south, you got Guam,
which is which is a good bit further away. You
have all those locations, but you're right, the ocean is
big and full of terrors, to paraphrase Game of Thrones,
(16:40):
So we've got a lot of things going on trying
to get stuff in there. China is a lot closer
to Taiwan than we are from any of those locations, obviously,
because it's right across straight there. So what was interesting
is the way that the US Navy is in particular
is getting after contested logistics. And I've seen some reports
on stealth automated basically semi submersibles and submarines that you
(17:05):
load up with whatever supplies you need. No people are
on them, and you send them on their very way,
and some of them will get detected and defeated, but
some of them get through. So that logistics and survivabilities
are going to be huge for those units. So it's
going to have to be dispersed, it's going to have
to be supplied, it's got to be survival, it's had
to be flexible, and that's super tough, especially when you're
(17:25):
on an island that's already got a bunch of stuff
on it, where you're going to put everybody, Where are
you going to survive on those things and those atolls
and those little tidy islands that China made. Eventually we're
going to want to take them and put people on
them to keep them from using the airstrips and air
defense locations. So how are those people going to survive
the inevitable counter attack. It's a huge problem, and it
(17:47):
all goes back to logistics. How are we going to
get the people and how we get the supplies, and
how do we get that sustainment. How do we backaul
our casualties in our broken equipment. That's a huge problem
for us, but also for China.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Okay, I want to keep talking about this when you
come back Trails, because you actually had an older article
I found, I think it was about three years old
that you were talking about this will bring us back
to our lovely island nation of Cure Body, which I'd
never heard about. But I want to talk about that, folks,
because that I felt pretty good reading about the five incapables,
and then I read this three year old article and
it made me feel a little bit a little bit
(18:21):
squarely again. So ladies and gentlemen, there's your host Benda
la Garcia talking with our good friend Charles faint. He's
the owner of the Havoc Journal twenty seven years plus
or well, plus al the United States Army and in
tel guy and an honorary Nightstalker, which is pretty good
stuff too. Don't forget. You can find this podcast and
over six hundred others at American Warrior Radio dot com
the most recent episodes on your favorite platform, whatever that
(18:45):
might be. iHeart, Spotify, Pandora would try to be everywhere.
Please share these important misses with your friends. Our goal
is to educate the civilian population out there. We'll be
right back. Welcome back to American Warrior Radio. Ladies and gentlemen.
(19:13):
There's your host, Ben Blagarcia. We're talking with Charles Faith,
owner of the Havoc Journal. We're coming to you from
the Silencer Central Studios. Adding a silencer can make shootings
safer and more enjoyable and improve your accuracy. Begin the
process by visiting Silencercentral dot com to see if owning
a silencer is legal in your state. They can then
walk you through the permitting process and ship your new
silencer right to your front door. Called silencer Central today
(19:35):
at eight six six six four zero three two seven zero,
or visit silencercentral dot com. Charles, we're talking about an
older article that you wrote. I want to say it
was about three years ago. You was talking about this
this island nation of Cure Body, and you pointed out
on that article, if China is able to get airbase
rights there, that would put them within twenty four hundred
(19:58):
miles of US territory and the range of their age
twenty bomber is over five thousand miles, so clearly Hawaii
is easily in the crossairs. I mean, they could even
be dumping munitions on California from there.
Speaker 3 (20:11):
It's really interesting. Would fascinate to me when I first
read about this was I had never heard of that
place before Curie Body. I didn't know where it was,
but I looked it up on the map and I
started doing some research on It. Reminded me of, especially
when I was on assignment in USR Pacific, about this
term called creeping normalcy that I was exposed to when
(20:33):
I was over there, And that's China just acting up
in so many ways, so many times that people just
think of it as normal. So for example, them shouldering
our naval vessels, which is when basically they played chicken
with our naval vessels and try to come alongside them
and nudge them out of the way. They call it shouldering,
(20:53):
or when they try to force our planes that are
in international airspace to divert They do all kinds of things.
Take an island, a toll that belongs to somebody else,
filled in with sand and making it into an air base.
They do all these crazy things so many times that
we just think of it as normal. They incur on
Taiwan's sovereign waters with a bunch of boats so many
(21:16):
times that when the real attack comes, we don't recognize
that it is something unusual until it's too late. And now,
as part of their creeping normalcy, they're doing this trapped
diplomacy thing that as part of their Belt and Road initiative,
where they're like, hey, we're gonna give you a whole
bunch of money, but we we're gonna load give it
to you and a loan, but we want we want
to build a naval base in your country, and here
are the terms of conditions, and these poor countries can't
(21:39):
repay them. So China's like, guess what this belongs to
us now? And they get into bed with China and
find out that it's probably not in their long term
interest to do that be partners with them. The Cure
Body seems to be going down that road. I haven't
explored it recently in the last couple of years, but
though last time I researched it is the Chinese are
(21:59):
going to put that air base you mentioned there, which
would dramatically negatively affect whatever relations that has not only
with the United States but the West. And over time
we probably see China just take over that whole country.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
Well, and it's speeding up. As I mentioned, they just
had a delegation man China. What a couple of weeks
ago have we fallen down on our end as far
as the diplomacy, Charnles, I mean, if it's just about money,
I mean, let's let's let's make your body another, you know,
a better offer, right?
Speaker 1 (22:31):
What am I not?
Speaker 3 (22:31):
Yeah, there's just there's a there's a limit, of course,
even for someone like us, we don't have unlimited money.
But also a lot of these countries will take money
from both of us and make deals with both of
us that are mutually exclusive. So I don't know what
kind of arrangement in the United States has with Cure body.
Maybe there are a lot Maybe the US government is
(22:52):
a lot less worried about a Chinese navy and air
base there that I am as just just some guy
who's are retired. But yeah, there are problems there. But
I think there's a lot of uncertainty in the world
right now and people are just trying to do whatever
is in their best interests. So we'll see some shifting
around and a lot of these countries. Canads afford to
(23:13):
pick wrong if they picked the wrong side and get
crushed by the other one. This goes the type of
thing has been going on for centuries, all the way
back to the Helponesia or through cities is writing about it.
So the strategy what they will in the week, suff
for what they must and cure body is a pretty
weak country. So they're trying to make the best deal
they can right now. But right now it looks like
it's not in our interest. Bit.
Speaker 2 (23:34):
Let's talk about because the other thing you mentioned that
it kind of scares me, particularly in light of the
recent you know, some of the news I've been reading
about is this battle, if it's fought, will not just
be fought in the Pacific, And you know, let's just
assume that they put an airbase on care body and
they could literally strike us here, you know, on the
home front with their bombers. But there's also I saw
(23:57):
an article Charals recently about these solar panels that we've
all imported from China and we're putting up all over
the place, and apparently people are finding, for lack of
a better term, a kill switch and these solar panels,
and I'm thinking, holy smokes, you know, someone in China
flips a switch and you know, power grids start to
go down all over the place. That would be a
(24:19):
bad thing in the mental of Yeah, we can't trust
any tech we get from China, especially if it's something
that's potentially either dual use military or something that's potentially
useful in our infrastructure. You mentioned the solar panel arrays
anything that has to do with comms or tech is
probably compromised. It didn't surprise me at all to read
(24:40):
that and Ben in terms of the threat to the
US mainland, Yeah, bombers are a threat, but they're pretty
easy to keep track of, and we have a lot
of anti airsists. Of what I'm more worried about is
something like we just saw with the Ukrainians in Russia.
Speaker 3 (24:57):
That's terrified.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
Bit.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
You know, if someone would have done that to us,
I don't know how much better we would have done
in terms of protecting our planes and the Russians did,
because that is just such an unexpected, unanticipated thing, and
I think we're very vulera about those types of attacks,
but i'd.
Speaker 2 (25:15):
Not tell you that. I want to talk a little
bit about that as we're going down on the program,
because you had another article about the lessons we need
to be learning from Ukraine and Mexico, and certainly I
don't agree with calling that, you know, Russia's Pearl Harbor,
because I just misses on so many levels. Don't get
me started there, but you know, logistically well that and
then of course the Israeli cell phone strike, which was
(25:37):
just masterful. But I was looking to you to make
me feel a little better. Charles found fifty miles for
the Mexican border. I don't know what the range on
a drone is, but theoretically they wouldn't even have to
bring them into our country to hit my local Air
Force base.
Speaker 3 (25:52):
Now they wouldn't. They could put it on a container
ship in China, ship it into Mexico's international waters and
then just push them button on it, or just remotely
set it and have it just explode on out. Or
they could have put it on one of those balloons
they like to float over our countries and just have
it said to release. It'd be super easy to just
overwhelm some of the defenses we got.
Speaker 1 (26:14):
Now.
Speaker 3 (26:14):
I'm not privy to what defenses are around US military base.
I don't know, maybe we already have some other place,
but it seems likely to me that if you put
enough of that stuff up in the air, and especially
in a place that might be a little softer target,
you could do untold damage to any number of things,
and just this sheer panic that comes out of it
would be a huge win for any adversary that wanted
(26:36):
to attack us.
Speaker 2 (26:37):
Here's my suggestion. So much of the cool stuff I've
seen in U style, I mean, I don't know if
you ever seen it. There's shows about how, you know,
the old Star Trek. How now we have basically the
equivalent of you know, the communications devices and not quite
a tri quarter. But you know, a lot of the
stuff that we're using, the technology that's actually in place
now was based on science fiction. So I would suggest
(26:59):
to deal with drones, somebody to take a much closer
look at the Batman movies and just see if he's
got something going on there that maybe, you know, maybe
we could use. You know, coming back to your art
about logistics is destiny, your quote is, and the end
wars are won by the side that doesn't run out
out of will, out of weapons, out of food, out
(27:19):
of fuel, out of the fight. That's why logistics isn't
just a support function, it's a strategic weapon. I don't
feel like we really learned the lessons we needed to
learn from the pandemic when it came to our supply chains.
You know, we talked about these solar panels. I don't
see why we don't. Just we got to start building
that stuff stateside again, just so we can trust it.
(27:41):
I mean, holy smokes, who knows what else is out there?
Speaker 3 (27:44):
Yeah, and human behavior is so interesting, Ben, I've talked
to my daughters about some famine situations, because that's one
of the things myes is studying in high school, and
I told her that most famines are not functions of scarcity,
their functions that tribution. Even going back to the potato
famine in Ireland, they had a bunch of food on
(28:04):
the island, but the British were extracting that and sending
it back to the UK. In Somalia, we had aid
that was just rotting on the docks, and Gaza is
the same way because hamas will let the food get
out to the people. So the problem isn't having the material,
is getting it to the people who need it. And
that goes back to the discussion that we're having about
(28:26):
logistics being destiny. We have so much stuff, but can
we get it to the place it needs to be
when we needed to get it there? And I'm also
thinking about when I was on I was on the
island of Wahoo.
Speaker 2 (28:40):
Charles, take a pause or we got to take another
break on I want to want to complete the session
when we come back. Ladies and gentlemen, there's your host,
Bendla Garcia chatting with Charles Faint. Check out the Havoc
Journal dot com Havok Journal dot com. We'll be right back.
(29:10):
Welcome back to American Warrior Radio. Ladies and gentlemen, this
is Ben Biler Garcia. We're talking with Charles Charles serving
in the United States Army for over twenty seven years.
He's an Intel specialist. He's also the owner of the
Havoc Journal and the managing editor at the Modern War Institute.
Give us that website again, Charles, because there's also some
just some great podcasts and articles. And you just published
(29:31):
your first of amazing.
Speaker 3 (29:33):
So our first print, Joil. Yeah, we're really excited about it.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Ben.
Speaker 3 (29:36):
So the website is MWI Dotsquite dot edu. And if
you go to the website and go all the way
far right to the special series drop down menu there
for the Modern War Journal and the Wadern Warstitute has
been in existence for a long time, long before I
joined the team, and we produced a lot of great podcasts.
We produced a lot of great online content. But now
(29:58):
we have our first journal. So we published the Journalists
entirety online. We're going to publish it in print in
the fall. We're very excited about that.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
Then now, Charlie, I'll put that on the show notes.
But because you repeat the website again, as if we
weren't speed.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
Readers, MWI dot west Points dot edu.
Speaker 2 (30:18):
Okay, super, thank you, Well I interrupted you. You were
just about to start a really good point. We were
talking about logistics.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
It's probably good you interrupted me because I was about
to talk about toilet paper and pooping and in the
context of scarcity and resupply. So I was on the
island of Awa who during the great toilet paper shortage
during the pandemic, and what was interesting to me was
this human behavior. So we didn't have less toilet paper
(30:46):
on the island. People weren't pooping more because of COVID,
but because people got it into their head that there
was going to be a shortage, they bought out all
the toilet paper. I lived with three women, and I
like to go the bathroom time to time myself, so
this was a huge insight into how panicky people are.
If everyone just bought their normal amount of toilet paper
(31:09):
beIN everyone would have been able to poop in peace
on the island of Oahu. But because they went on
panic bought by the growth of toilet paper, everybody ran out.
So there's another example of that. It's very rarely an
issue of supply, it's a problem of distribution.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
I suggest a title for the very next have a
journal article to be poop and piece. I got to
be able to poop in piece one Day've been coming
back to the Chinese. I try not to be overly
conspiracy theorist, but we just had two Chinese agents arrested
carrying some kind of a biological stuff that would have
(31:51):
been bad. And here in my home state of Arizona,
our largest egg producer basically had to destroy two million chickens.
They're out of business for two years. That's the bottom line.
And you see stuff like that and you start to
think about, well, you know, again giving the Chinese the
credit for being really smart and really you know, thinking
long term ahead. You've got to wonder how many you know,
(32:15):
what do they call them, and in video, how many
Easter eggs or sitting around out there in the solar panels,
or infecting our chickens or whatever. But I want to
talk really quick, Charles about another article that you had
that you might not have been prepared for. You're talking
about how leadership has to change based on what we're
seeing in Ukraine and Gaza. And you know, we saw
(32:37):
clearly that just masterful attack of the drones, you know,
deep in Russian territory, and so basically your four points
there are you know, decentralized Commandit is in a buzzword.
It's survival and leaders must train their people to lead
without them. I found that statement in particularly interesting because
going back to your original or other article we talked
(33:00):
out about China, where they don't appear to have the
ability to do that because they're all responding to the party,
not necessarily to the chain of command, which doesn't always
make you know. They might be able to quote son Zou,
you know, all day long, but that doesn't necessarily mean
they can lead soldiers into battle, whereas we have done
a pretty good job of that.
Speaker 3 (33:18):
And the Israeli it's the same way. So this whole
point about training their people to lead without them what
was very interesting to me when this war first kicked off.
Of course, it went badly from the beginning, and then
we started seeing all these Russian generals getting killed way
more than we did American side, perhaps even going back
to World War Two. And I was talking with my
kiddess about it when I was teaching here, and they
(33:41):
were like, why are so many generals getting killed? Well,
because they got to be so close to the front lines,
because nobody knows how to lead. So in the United States,
in Michigan command, we believe in discipline, initiative, commanders and
ten all this stuff like, hey, here's the purpose, here's
in state, here the key task, and I'll go out
and do it. And a lot of other countries don't
(34:02):
do that. It's very hierarchical. It's very you will go
left when I tell you too, And they stand by
a weight for orders, and with comms and everything being
so far down and no one having an initiative that
generals have to be out there to physically make people go.
So if we want to continue to be successful when
you keep doing that, they want to be successful, they
need to find a way to allow their troops to
(34:22):
lead without them. I don't think they're set up that way, Ben,
I don't think they can do it.
Speaker 2 (34:26):
You know one other thing that really struck me. You
talked about morally and messaging and the weight of leadership.
And this is a different world now where you know,
stuff is flashed globally and seconds nanoseconds, and you know,
any time I see any statistics coming out of Gaza,
I mean I don't take other grain of solent. I
take it with a whole salt mine because you just
don't know. But you know, the particularly the American people,
(34:49):
they tend to react on that first glimpse, and it
takes a strong leader to just to not flinch and
to keep going and to pursue the mission.
Speaker 1 (35:00):
Right.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
Is that a new thing that you're teaching your cadets.
Speaker 3 (35:04):
I think we've known that for a long time. It's
been an interesting phenomenon since the start of the Global
war and terror, this concept of the strategic corporal. And
we all know that corporals are a very low level
leadership thing. That's not a strategic thing, that's a very
tactical thing. But the actions taken by low level troops
at the platoon level and even below can have strategic
level consequences because of mass media. And one of the
(35:27):
things I teach my cadets is you've got to do
the right thing all the time, and people will make
up stuff about you that's not true and grossly overexaggerate,
but don't make it easy for him.
Speaker 2 (35:37):
I was listening.
Speaker 3 (35:37):
I was editing a podcast that we're going to run
here shortly by General Mcryan, who's actually an Australian general
we do a lot of work with here at the
Modern War Institute, and he cited the book Blackhearts, which
is the story a true story of a US military
atrocity in Iraq, and we need to make sure that
we're doing the right thing so they can't use actual
(35:59):
things against the like black arts, like a booga reb,
like any number of other things. So we do we
can to control the narrative at our level, but we
also don't give the enemy an easy win. And I
think that's a lot of things. That's something that a
lot of leaders need to concentrate more on.
Speaker 2 (36:14):
Inn Charles, I've really enjoyed our talk, and I don't
want to give a short shrift to one other thing.
I noticed that you I was really kind of touching.
And there's an article you wrote called not If, But
when rethinking Kipling for our daughters. Your daughter Shannon just
received an award from her high school for some actions
she took to help save another student. That got you
(36:34):
thinking about rude your Kipling's poem if, and folks would
recognize if you keep your head while all about your
losing layers and blame it on you. So you went
to that thing that you case nowadays like so much.
Ai and rewrote that poem.
Speaker 3 (36:49):
Why Yeah, So I could talk about Kipling for hours,
but I know we only have a couple of minutes
been so some of this up shortly. You did a
great job of accurately sad the the tone there on
that with my daughter and what happened at her school,
so when she came home was she was talking to
her mom, my wife and me about it made me
think of if I like that. She hadn't heard of
(37:11):
it before. They have studied that yet. I had to
read it. But reading Kipling's hard right. It's not written
for a modern audience. He's a brit He wrote a
lot of English slanging in there. So I just thought
about what would if look like if I wrote it
for my daughters, because he wrote it for her, he
talked about you'll be a man my son. I don't
have these sons.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
I have two daughters.
Speaker 3 (37:30):
So I went to Chad GBT and I gave it
a prompt and it kicked out something I thought was
really good Ben and I called it not if, but
when for our daughters. And that's what that article is about,
because it's not if our children will be called upon
to do great things, but when and when that happens,
I want my daughters to be prepared.
Speaker 2 (37:50):
Well, just a little context, both your daughters. I mean,
military service has been a tradition and your family going
back gosh, World War One at least, and you're daughters
both are considering. Also we're in the uniform too.
Speaker 3 (38:03):
Right, Yeah. My older daughter Emily is actually away in
Norwich right now, which is the military school. And my
daughter Shannon starts the summer leader experience here at West
Point tomorrow and she'll apply to West Point and we'll
see what happens. I'm proud of both of them for
considering it, and if either or both of them go in,
that's great. If neither of them go in, that's great because,
(38:23):
as you know, Ben and we talked about many times,
there are many ways to serve him.
Speaker 2 (38:27):
One other quick question about a minute left, Charles, I'm
curious do you feel more comfortable writing now that you're
no longer in uniform about some of the things that
you didn't want to before?
Speaker 3 (38:39):
One pre se and a lot of that is the
encouragement from Mike Warnocker editor slash, my best friends in
eighth grade. Also, because I'm not an activity service member,
I still employee of the US government, so there's still
things there's a limit to what I would say, but
I wouldn't color outside those lines anyway, But yes, Ben,
and I'm feeling a lot more introspective, so I think
the next time on the show, they'll probably be some
(39:00):
more things that I have coming out that we can
talk about, and more reflections on how I feel about
the war twenty years on.
Speaker 2 (39:06):
Well, I certainly look forward toward. Ladies and gentlemen, check
out have a journal hjav ok with ates yeah havoc
with a k oh yeah yaie Have a journal dot com.
Check it out and enjoy it. Also check out the
Modern War inst website. Lots of great stuff there. Charles,
thank you for spending time with our listeners again today.
Speaker 3 (39:24):
Thanks Ben, It's always great to be on the show.
Speaker 2 (39:26):
Look forward to coming back again, Ladies and gentlemen. Until
next show, all polishes or procedures remain in place. Take care.
Speaker 1 (39:35):
You've been listening to American Warrior Radio. Archived episodes may
be found at Americanwarriorradio dot com or your favorite podcast platform.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.