The Missouri–Kansas–Texas Railroad  was a Class I railroad company in the United States, with its last headquarters in Dallas, Texas. Established in 1865 under the name Union Pacific Railroad (UP), Southern Branch, it came to serve an extensive rail network in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri. In 1988, it merged with the Missouri Pacific Railroad; today, it is part of UP.

In the 1890s, the MKT was commonly referred to as "the K-T", because for a time it was the Kansas–Texas division of the Missouri Pacific Railroad and "KT" was its abbreviation in timetables as well as its stock exchange symbol. This soon evolved into the nickname "the Katy".

The Katy was the first railroad to enter Texas from the north. Eventually, the Katy's core system linked Parsons, Emporia, Fort Scott, Junction City, Olathe, and Kansas City, Kansas; Kansas City, Joplin, Columbia, Jefferson City, and St. Louis, Missouri; Tulsa, Wagoner; and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Dallas, Fort Worth, Waco, Temple, Austin, San Antonio, Houston, and Galveston, Texas. An additional mainline between Fort Worth and Salina, Kansas, was added in the 1980s after the collapse of the Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad; this line was operated as the Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas Railroad (OKKT). Former Rock Island trackage rights acquired by the Katy also gave it access to Lincoln and Omaha, Nebraska and Council Bluffs, Iowa.

At the end of 1970, MKT operated  of road and  of track.

History

Formation and construction

The Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway was incorporated in May 1870 in Junction City, Kansas.  The company received government land grants to build a supply railroad connecting the frontier military posts of Fort Riley, Fort Gibson, and Fort Scott; and eventually Fort Worth, as well as establishing connections with other railroads that served Fort Leavenworth, Fort Wallace and Fort Smith — but its broader ambitions were to connect Chicago and New Orleans. Upon its incorporation, the MK&T acquired the Union Pacific Railway, Southern Branch (est. 1865) and its  of track in Kansas.

At the time of its incorporation, consolidations were also made with the Labette & Sedalia Railway Co. and the Neosho Valley & Holden Railway Co.; MK&T also acquired the Tebo and Neosho Railroad, the St. Louis & Santa Fe Railroad Co., and the Hannibal & Central Missouri Railroad Co. Combined with the UP Southern Branch, these small, newly built railroads formed the foundation on which the Katy built. In the late 1890s, a subsidiary once called the Missouri-Kansas-Eastern railroad was established to run from existing MKT rails approaching Kansas City into St Louis via the Missouri River basin.

Congress had passed acts promising land grants to the first railroad to reach the Kansas border via the Neosho Valley. The Katy portion of the former UP Southern Branch, which had begun building from Fort Riley just north of Junction City, Kansas, was in a heated competition for the prize. On June 6, 1870, Katy workers laid the first rails across the Kansas border, winning the race. Congress' promised land grants were never made, as the courts overturned the grants because the land was in Indian Territory and was the property of the Indian tribes.

The Katy continued its push southward, laying track through the territory and reaching Texas in 1872,  acquiring other small railroads while extending its reach to Dallas in 1886, Waco in 1888, Houston in April 1893, and to San Antonio in 1901.

When the Katy railroad reached Houston, its joint ownership of the Galveston, Houston and Henderson Railroad gave it immediate access to the Port of Galveston and its ocean-going shipping on the Gulf of Mexico.

Operations
A Katy train was robbed by the Dalton Gang on July 14, 1892, at Adair, Oklahoma, in what was then Indian Territory.  The gang got away after a gun battle.

In 1896, as a publicity stunt set up by William Crush, the Katy crashed two locomotives head-on, pulling loaded trains, at a site that came to be known thereafter as Crush, Texas.  The collision occurred before more than 40,000 spectators, three of whom died (and several were injured) by debris from the exploding boilers.  Ragtime composer and pianist Scott Joplin, who was performing in the area at the time, commemorated the event in his piano piece, "The Great Crush Collision March" (which he dedicated to the Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railway).

The Katy acquired the Beaver, Meade, and Englewood Railroad in 1931. This trackage, like the length between Altus and Forgan, was abandoned in January 1973.

From 1915 until January 4, 1959, the Katy, in a joint venture with the St. Louis – San Francisco Railway (popularly known as the Frisco), operated the Texas Special from St. Louis to Dallas, Ft. Worth, and San Antonio. It sported rail cars with names including Sam Houston, Stephen F. Austin, David Crockett, and James Bowie after prominent men of the state.

Merger and legacy

On August 12, 1988, the Missouri Pacific Railroad (MoPac) and its owner, Union Pacific Corporation, purchased the Katy with approval from the Interstate Commerce Commission.  The merging and restructuring of railroads during the 1980s had cost the Katy much overhead traffic, and it had been seeking a merger partner. On December 1, 1989, the Katy was merged into the MoPac, which is now part of the Union Pacific Railroad system.

In the "rails to trails" program, much of the Missouri track line has been adapted for use as the Katy Trail State Park, including a spur to Columbia, a Missouri State Park, which runs along the Missouri River for the major portion of its route. In downtown Dallas, a 3.5-mi-long section called the Katy Trail is being converted into a multiuse trail linking Southern Methodist University to the American Airlines Center.

In 1997, the segment linking Katy, Texas, to downtown Houston was abandoned, and stripped of rails soon after. The section between Katy and Interstate 610 was purchased by the Texas Department of Transportation in 1998 for the expansion of Katy Freeway. The line that went into Houston was purchased by the city's Parks and Recreation Department. In 2009, it was adapted and paved as the Heights Bike Trail.

In Tulsa, Oklahoma, the  Katy trail follows an old corridor of the railroad between the northwest edge of downtown Tulsa and its suburb of Sand Springs.

As part of a new heritage program, in July 2005, Union Pacific unveiled a new EMD SD70ACe locomotive, Union Pacific 1988, painted in traditional MKT colors.

Passenger trains
The Katy operated these named passenger trains:
(On its main line routes, trains originated in St. Louis or in Kansas City, linking in Parsons, KS, split in Denison, TX, with sections going via either through Dallas or Fort Worth, linking again in Waco, then heading south to either San Antonio or Houston.)
 Train numbers 1 and 2: The Texas Special:
 St. Louis, Missouri - San Antonio, Texas (March 4, 1917 – 1959) jointly with the St. Louis-San Francisco Railway), then
 Kansas City-San Antonio (1959-July 26, 1964), then
 Kansas City-Dallas (July 27, 1964 to June 30, 1965)
 Train numbers 3 and 4: Katy Limited
 Kansas City-Dallas, with sections to Oklahoma City, Fort Worth and San Antonio
 Train numbers 5 and 6: Katy Flyer
 St. Louis and Kansas City originating trains, south to San Antonio
 Train numbers 7 and 8: Bluebonnet
 Kansas City to San Antonio via Dallas, and Kansas City to Houston via Fort Worth
 Train numbers 23 and 28: Sooner
 Kansas City - Oklahoma City

Company officers
Presidents of the Missouri–Kansas–Texas Railroad:

Judge Levi Parsons, prior to 1878
Jay Gould, 1880
George J. Gould, 1886–1887
 Henry C. Rouse, –1904
Frederick N. Finney, 1904–1906
Adrian H. Joline 1906–
Charles E. Schaff, 1912–1926
Charles N. Whitehead, 1926
Columbus Haile, 1927–1930
Michael H. Cahill, 1930–1934
Matthew S. Sloan, 1934–1945
Donald V. Fraser, 1945–1956
William N. Deramus III, 1957–1961
Charles T. Williams, 1961–1965
John W. Barriger III, 1965–1970
Reginald N. Whitman, 1970–1975
Harold L. Gastler, 1975-1988

See also

 Dalton Gang Train Robbery
 She Caught the Katy
Katy Trail State Park

References

Bibliography
Katy Railroad Historical Society, M-K-T / Katy Frequently Asked Questions . Retrieved February 22, 2005.
Museum of the American Railroad, A Brief History of Railroads in Dallas. Retrieved January 20, 2008.
Katy Railroad Historical Society, Katy Railroad Passenger Service . Retrieved January 20, 2008.

"The Opening of the Great Southwest: A Brief History of the Origin and Development of the Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Better Known as The Katy" - Published: May 1970 by the M-K-T R.R. Co.
"Miss Katy in the Lone Star State", Steve Allen Goen, 2006
"The Katy Railroad and the Last Frontier", V. V. Masterson, 1952

Further reading

External links

Katy Railroad Historical Society
Map of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway, published 1877, hosted by the Portal to Texas History
The "M" in the MKT - A detailed history of the MKT in Missouri.
MKT locomotive roster at edisaurus.com.
FallenFlags.org's Katy page with links to hundreds of photos of MKT locomotives and a humorous story about a Conrail locomotive leased by the Katy.
Texas Special car restoration at the Houston Railroad Museum.
Construction and Mergers that Formed M-K-T
Oklahoma Digital Maps: Digital Collections of Oklahoma and Indian Territory
MKT (Missouri Kansas Texas) Katy Railroad Time Tables, published in 1946, hosted by Texas General Land Office

Former Class I railroads in the United States
Defunct Kansas railroads
Defunct Missouri railroads
Defunct Oklahoma railroads
Defunct Texas railroads
Rail lines receiving land grants
Predecessors of the Union Pacific Railroad
Railway companies established in 1870
Railway companies disestablished in 1989

Missouri–Kansas–Texas Railroad


Veľké Kosihy este o comună slovacă, aflată în districtul Komárno din regiunea Nitra. Localitatea se află la , se întinde pe o suprafață de  și în 2017 număra 963 de locuitori. Se învecinează cu Nagyszentjános, Ács și Klížska Nemá.

Istoric
Localitatea Veľké Kosihy este atestată documentar din 1268.

Note

Legături externe

Localități din Slovacia

Veľké Kosihy


La Interestatal 74 (abreviada I-74) es una autopista interestatal ubicada en el estado de Illinois. La autopista inicia en el sur desde la  en Moline hacia el norte en la  en Danville. La autopista tiene una longitud de 354,6 km (220.34 mi).

Mantenimiento
Al igual que las carreteras estatales, las carreteras federales, la Interestatal 74 es administrada y mantenida por el Departamento de Transporte de Illinois por sus siglas en inglés IDOT.

Cruces
La Interestatal 74 es atravesada principalmente por las siguientes autopistas:
 en Moline
 en Colona
 en Peoria
 en East Peoria
 cerca de Morton
 en Bloomington
 en Champaign
 en Urbana

Véase también

Referencias

Enlaces externos

 Página oficial  de IDOT
 Lista de ciudades servidas por autopistas interestatales
 Lista de Autopistas por estado

Carreteras interestatales de Illinois

Interestatal 74 (Illinois)


Svjetski grad, svjetsko središte ili globalni grad pojmovi su kojima se naslovljuju gradovi od svjetskog (globalnog) društveno-gospodarskog značenja. U urbanoj geografiji označavaju postupno razvijanje i širenje gradova povećanjem broja njihovih gospodarskih, kulturnih i društvenih uloga na svjetskoj razini u procesu globalizacije.

Izvornim svjetskim gradovima stvaraju se tri grada; New York, London i Hong Kong, no zbog globalizacije i razvoja brojnih drugih gradova postupno je sve veći broj gradova dobio naslov svjetskog grada pod različitim stupnjevima (alfa, beta ili gama svjetski grad). Rangiranje i stupnjevanje gradova odvija se prema smjernicama više različitih indeksa (Indeks svjetskih gradova, Index moći svjetskih gradova, Indeks gospodarske moći i dr.)

Pojam svjetskog grada značajno se razlikuje od pojma megagrada ili velegrada, čije je glavno obilježje velika površina i napučenost, ne i svjetski gospodarsko-kulturni značaj.

 Indeks moći svjetskih gradova
 London
 New York
 Tokio (Tokyo)
 Pariz
 Singapur
 Seoul (Seul)
 Amsterdam
 Berlin
 Hong Kong
 Sydney

Vanjske poveznice
 UN HABITAT Službene stranice UN-ove organizacije za urbanizam

Urbanizam

Svjetski grad


Udaipur (en hindi: उदयपुर जिला) es un distrito de la India en el estado de Rajastán. Código ISO: IN.RJ.UD.

Comprende una superficie de 13430 km².

El centro administrativo es la ciudad de Udaipur.

Demografía
Según censo 2011 contaba con una población total de 3067549 habitantes, de los cuales 1 500 768 eran mujeres y 1 566 781 varones.

Referencias

Enlaces externos
 Sitio web oficial.

Udaipur

Distrito de Udaipur


The 24th Division was an infantry division of the British Army, raised in September 1914 from men volunteering for Lord Kitchener's New Armies during the First World War. After almost a year spent training in England the division was sent to the Western Front between August and September 1915. It served in Belgium and France in the trenches of the Western Front for the duration of the war.

Unit History
The Division was one of the six created for the Third New Army on 13 September 1914. It moved to France in August 1915 and it saw action at the Battle of the Somme in 1916, the Battle of Passchendaele in 1917 and the Final Advance in Picardy in 1918. From its arrival in France to May 1917, it was commanded by Major-General John Capper. It was disbanded by March 1919.

Order of Battle
The 24th Division was constituted as follows during the war:

71st Brigade
 9th (Service) Battalion, Norfolk Regiment
 9th (Service) Battalion, Suffolk Regiment
 8th (Service) Battalion, Bedfordshire Regiment
 11th (Service) Battalion, Essex Regiment
The brigade moved to the 6th Division in 11 October 1915, swapping with the 17th Brigade.

72nd Brigade
 8th (Service) Battalion, Queen's (Royal West Surrey Regiment) (left February 1918)
 8th (Service) Battalion, Buffs (East Kent Regiment) (left October 1915)
 9th (Service) Battalion, East Surrey Regiment
 8th (Service) Battalion, Queen's Own (Royal West Kent Regiment)
 1st Battalion, Prince of Wales's (North Staffordshire Regiment) (from October 1915)
 72nd Machine Gun Company M.G.C. (joined 14 March 1916, transferred into Divisional MG Battalion 5 March 1918)
 72nd Trench Mortar Battery (joined 19 July 1916)

73rd Brigade
 12th (Service) Battalion, Royal Fusiliers (City of London Regiment) (left October 1915)
 9th (Service) Battalion, Royal Sussex Regiment
 7th (Service) Battalion, Northamptonshire Regiment
 13th (Service) Battalion, Duke of Cambridge's Own (Middlesex Regiment)
 2nd Battalion, Prince of Wales's Leinster Regiment (Royal Canadians) (from October 1915, left February 1918)
 73rd Machine Gun Company M.G.C. (joined 14 March 1916, transferred into Divisional MG Battalion 5 March 1918)
 73rd Trench Mortar Battery (joined 15 July 1916)

17th Brigade
 1st Battalion, Royal Fusiliers (City of London Regiment)
 1st Battalion, Prince of Wales's (North Staffordshire Regiment) (left October 1915)
 2nd Battalion, Prince of Wales's Leinster Regiment (Royal Canadians) (left October 1915)
 3rd Battalion, Rifle Brigade (Prince Consort's Own)
 12th (Service) Battalion, Royal Fusiliers (City of London Regiment) (from October 1915, disbanded February 1918)
 8th (Service) Battalion, Buffs (East Kent Regiment) (from October 1915, disbanded February 1918)
 8th (Service) Battalion, Queen's (Royal West Surrey Regiment) (from February 1918)
 1/2nd (City of London) Battalion, London Regiment (Royal Fusiliers) (left February 1916)
 17th Machine Gun Company (formed 17 January 1916, transferred into Divisional MG Battalion 5 March 1918)
 17th Trench Mortar Battery (formed by 26 July 1916)
The brigade transferred from the division from the 6th Division on 18 October 1915, swapping with the 71st Brigade.

Divisional Troops
 11th (Service) Battalion, Royal Warwickshire Regiment (joined before March 1915, left 9 April 1915)
 13th (Service) Battalion, Royal Fusiliers (joined before March 1915, left 9 April 1915)
 12th (Service) Battalion, Sherwood Foresters (joined before March 1915, converted to Divisional Pioneer Battalion in April 1915)
 No 3 Motor Machine Gun Battery (joined 30 October left 23 November 1915)
 191st Machine Gun Company (joined 15 December 1916, moved into Divisional MG Battalion 5 March 1918)
 24th Machine Gun Battalion (formed 5 March 1918)
 Divisional Mounted Troops
 A Sqn, 1st Royal Glasgow Yeomanry (joined 30 June 1915, left 29 April 1916)
 24th Divisional Cyclist Company, Army Cyclist Corps (joined by 15 February 1915, left 29 April 1916)
 24th Divisional Train A.S.C.
 194th, 195th, 196th and 197th Companies A.S.C.
 36th Mobile Veterinary Section A.V.C. (joined 25 June 1915)
 223rd Divisional Employment Company (formed by 30 June 1917)

Royal Artillery
 CVI Brigade, R.F.A.
 CVII Brigade, R.F.A.
 CVIII Brigade, R.F.A. (left 27 January 1917)
 CIX (Howitzer) Brigade, R.F.A. (broken up 3 October 1916)
 24th Heavy Battery, R.G.A. (raised in August 1914 left August 1915)
 24th Divisional Ammunition Column
 13th Divisional Ammunition Column (attached 3 July to 6 August 1915)
 V.24 Heavy Trench Mortar Battery R.F.A. (joined 30 July 1916, left February 1918)
 X.24, Y.24 and Z,24 Medium Trench Mortar Batteries R.F.A. (4 x 6-inch mortars) (joined by 30 April 1916, Z.24 broken up in February 1918 and X and Y expanded to 6 x 6-inch mortars each)

Royal Engineers
 91st Field Company (left January 1915)
 92nd Field Company (left January 1915)
 103rd Field Company (joined February 1915)
 104th Field Company (joined January 1915)
 129th Field Company (joined March 1915)
 24th Divisional Signals Company

Royal Army Medical Corps
 72nd Field Ambulance
 73rd Field Ambulance
 74th Field Ambulance
 41st Sanitary Section (left 5 April 1917 for First Army)

General Officer Commanding
The following commanded the division:
 Maj-Gen. Sir J. G. Ramsay: 19 September 1914 – 3 October 1915
 Maj-Gen. J. E. Capper: 3 October 1915 – 12 May 1917
 Brig-Gen. H. C. Sheppard: 12 May 1917 – 18 May 1917 (Temporary)
 Maj-Gen. L. J. Bols: 18 May 1917 – 12 September 1917
 Brig-Gen. E. S. Hoare Nairne: 12 September 1917 – 15 September 1917 (Temporary)
 Maj-Gen. A. C. Daly: 15 September 1917 – 31 December 1918

See also

 List of British divisions in World War I

References

External links
 The British Army in the Great War: The 24th Division

Infantry divisions of the British Army in World War I
Kitchener's Army divisions
Military units and formations established in 1914
1914 establishments in the United Kingdom

24th Division (United Kingdom)


كارداماس  هي قرية وتجمع سكني ووحدة بلدية في بلدية أمالياذا في مقاطعة إيليا في مقاطعة كينتريكي إلادا في اليونان. وهي تقع في السهول بالقرب من البحر الأيوني، على بعد 3 كم من دونيكا، على بعد 3 كم من جنوب غرب أمالياذا وعلى بعد 14 كم شمال غرب بيرغوس. ويشمل التجمع قرية بترولس الصغيرة. كان بها محطة القطار على الخط بين باتراس وبيرغوس.

يبلغ عدد سكانها حوالي 1,017 نسمة.

مراجع

أماكن مأهولة في إيليا
مدن اليونان

كارداماس


Süleymanbeyler, Zonguldak ilinin Karadeniz Ereğli ilçesine bağlı bir köydür.

Tarihçe
Köy, 1928 yılından beri aynı adı taşımaktadır.

Coğrafya
Köy, Zonguldak il merkezine 66 km, Karadeniz Ereğli ilçe merkezine 16 km uzaklıktadır.

Nüfus

Kaynakça

Dış bağlantılar

Karadeniz Ereğli belde ve köyleri

Süleymanbeyler, Karadeniz Ereğli


Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD, pronounced ), also known in the United States as "Wild Weasel" and (initially) "Iron Hand" operations, are military actions to suppress enemy surface-based air defenses, including not only surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) but also interrelated systems such as early-warning radar and command, control and communication (C3) functions, while also marking other targets to be destroyed by an air strike. Suppression can be accomplished both by physically destroying the systems or by disrupting and deceiving them through electronic warfare. In modern warfare, SEAD missions can constitute as much as 30% of all sorties launched in the first week of combat and continue at a reduced rate through the rest of a campaign. One quarter of American combat sorties in recent conflicts have been SEAD missions. Despite generally being associated with aircraft, SEAD missions may be performed using any means, including through actions by ground forces.

In some contexts, Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses (DEAD) is used to reference physical destruction of air defense targets, while SEAD applies to sorties which discourage enemy use of their air-defense radar assets out of fear of placing the assets in jeopardy.

Primitive operations akin to SEAD emerged during the Second World War, during which multiple participants made attempts to degrade enemy ground radar stations. However, SEAD missions performed by dedicated aircraft first undertook combat missions during the Vietnam War, the United States Air Force's EF-105F/F-105G Thunderchief and United States Navy's A-6B Intruder being amongst these pioneers; Operation Linebacker intentionally incorporated SEAD actions to improve the survivability of bombers and increase overall effectiveness. Other early conflicts that saw SEAD missions conducted included the 1982 Falklands War, over Port Stanley, and the 1982 Lebanon War, in the Beqaa Valley. The tactical awareness, or lack thereof, of air defense operators proved to be a decisive factor in the success rate of these missions. The 1986 United States bombing of Libya, while Libya's integrated air defense network was not destroyed, it was damaged without major losses incurred by US forces.

During the 1990s, extensive use of SEAD was made, particularly during the Gulf War of the early 1990s. Intense aerial attacks of Iraq's integrated air defenses were conducted during Operation Instant Thunder, the Coalition's aerial attacks at the start of the conflict; Iraqi SAM operators regularly resorted to firing missiles with minimal or no guidance due to fears that radar use brought quick retaliation.
All Iraqi air defenses in the south were destroyed, although the skies remained unsafe for low altitude flight. In the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, the defender's air defences proved to be less vulnerable and more effective; although only two aircraft were reportedly lost to Yugoslavian SAMs, the downing of an F-117A Nighthawk marked the first combat loss ever of a stealth aircraft. In the Iraq War of the 2000s, coalition aircraft repeatedly targeted Iraqi SAMs during the opening phase of the conflict, despite this, aerial strikes were usually performed from stand-off distances to avoid these defenses, and low level flight was avoided. In the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, while many Ukrainian air defence facilities were reportedly destroyed or damaged in the first days of the war by Russian air strikes, Russia may not have been able to gain aerial superiority; it has been alleged that Ukrainian mid-range SAM sites have forced planes to fly low, but this makes them vulnerable to shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles.

History

Pre-Vietnam War
Prior to the Vietnam War, SEAD was an undefined mission: although attempts to destroy enemy air defense sites were undertaken, they were done so on an individual aircraft basis and in relation to specific targets or operations rather than as part of an overall strategy or doctrine of defense suppression. While crude, these tactics were frequently effective for their time.

World War II
During the Battle of Britain, the German Luftwaffe attempted to destroy Great Britain's Chain Home radar stations in order to degrade the British air defense network. However, German High Command failed to realize the efficiency of not only the radar stations themselves but the command and control system directing Britain's air defenses. After initial optimism regarding the radar sites' destruction, it was eventually decided to halt these attacks altogether except for exceptional circumstances. As the air war in Europe shifted in favor of the Allies, the Germans relied heavily on their AAA to defend against bombing attacks. This was borne out in Allied aircraft losses between 1943 and 1944, where losses to enemy fighters were cut in half but losses to flak increased tenfold.

Understanding the importance of Germany's radar sites, the Allies directed attacks against these installations and introduced new technology to counteract the effects of radar-directed AAA, including CARPET (US) and WINDOW (UK). A change in tactics saw bomber formations flying higher and more spread out to avoid the effects of flak. Bombing missions were also carried out to accomplish the physical destruction of AAA sites, using imagery intelligence to locate the weapons and employing both heavy bombers and fighter-bombers to destroy them. The P-47 Thunderbolt in particular was chosen for this task due to its ability to survive enemy fire. The effect of these missions varied, with losses suffered by fighter-bombers much higher—up to 40% in some cases—on account of their low-altitude attacks. Artillery also played a major role in suppressing air defenses, with the British Army the first to develop what became known as counterflak or "Apple Pie" missions. These missions were first employed to limited effect during the Battle of France but matured as the war progressed. The largest SEAD mission in history took place on March 24, 1945, when artillery forces of the British XII Corps attempted to knock out the local German air defense network in support of Operation Varsity. Although twenty-four thousand artillery shells were fired over the course of twenty-two minutes at some one hundred targets, the mission was unsuccessful due to inaccurate targeting data and insufficient firepower.

In the Pacific Theater, the Japanese had made only limited progress in developing radar for air defense and what systems they did have were primitive and easy to avoid. Nevertheless, as the Americans began the bombing campaign against Japan there was concern over the large number of radar sites located on the home islands. For this purpose B-24 Liberators and B-29 Superfortresses were fitted with radar-homing devices to conduct "ferret" missions to locate and identify radar transmissions. The information brought back from these missions was used to outfit other B-29s with radar jammers and chaff to confuse Japanese air defense radars as they conducted their missions. B-25 Mitchells were also outfitted with radar-homing equipment and used to lead "hunter-killer" teams of other B-25s in locating and destroying Japanese early-warning radar sites.

Korean War
While there were some technological changes between World War II and the Korean War, many of the tactics for dealing with enemy air defenses remained the same.  For aircraft performing missions at low altitudes, AAA remained a constant danger; in fact, it was less dangerous for a UNC pilot to engage in air-to-air combat than it was to attack ground targets. The terrain and weather of the Korean Peninsula also contributed to the dangers associated with ground-attack missions.  Nevertheless, the advent of jet aircraft brought about many changes. Compared to propeller aircraft, jets were much faster, could climb more steeply, were more resistant to damage and were quieter in operation.  They were thus able to more effectively attack ground targets and escape, and while both jet- and propeller-driven aircraft participated in the Korean War the latter suffered heavier losses and were largely phased out by the end of the conflict.

As the war progressed, the Communists developed a highly centralized integrated air defense network, incorporating early-warning radars, ground-controlled interception (GCI) and AAA.  The potency of this network compelled UNC bombers to conduct bombing missions at altitudes beyond the reach of ground-based weapons, although this impacted the accuracy of their bombs.  The UNC also possessed an effective air defense network, but the North Korean Air Force had been largely destroyed early in the war and the Chinese Air Force was almost exclusively focused on the mission of air superiority rather than attacking UNC ground forces.

Vietnam War

The Vietnam War saw the evolution of what would become known as SEAD over the course of the conflict.  At the start of Operation Rolling Thunder, North Vietnam's air defenses were only dealt with in a piecemeal fashion, in spite of intelligence indicating that the North Vietnam Army was developing an integrated air defense system (IADS) dedicated to air deniability.  This included the construction of sixty SA-2 Guideline SAM sites by the end of 1965 which, though only accomplishing one hit for every thirteen missiles fired, were responsible for shooting down nearly 15% of American aircraft lost that year.  Early attempts to counter this system consisted of modified F-100 Super Sabres using crude homing equipment to locate and bomb radar-guided SAM and AAA sites, but these missions incurred heavy losses and the threat to American aircraft continued to grow. In 1966 a task force was put together to analyze the challenges presented by the NVA's air defense network and recommend ways to counter it. One of these was for aircraft to operate at low altitudes (below 500 meters) where the missiles were less effective. This also put the aircraft well within range of AAA, which would account for nearly 85% of all American aircraft losses during Rolling Thunder.

Eventually new SEAD-dedicated aircraft were introduced, the Air Force's EF-105F/F-105G Thunderchief and Navy's A-6B Intruder, which mounted more sophisticated detection equipment and carried the AGM-45 Shrike and AGM-78 Standard anti-radiation missiles (ARMs).  These fighter-bombers became very adept at tracking down and destroying ground-based air defense weapons, such that it became common for a vast majority of NVA SAM operators to turn off their radars whenever an F-105G was spotted.  While this prevented the SAM from physically being destroyed, it essentially accomplished the same mission of suppressing air defenses around the target.  Electronic warfare aircraft were also used to suppress air defenses by jamming NVA radars, with first the EB-66 Destroyer joined later by the EA-6B Prowler. By the end of Rolling Thunder these changes had caused a significant degradation in the effectiveness of SAMs: only one SA-2 missile out of every forty-eight fired resulted in a hit.  In spite of these changes, SEAD remained a primarily tactical function throughout Rolling Thunder, with American leadership either unaware or unappreciative of North Vietnam's IADS.

Losses suffered by F-105 Wild Weasels spurred on the development of a new variant based on the F-4C Phantom II, the EF-4C Phantom Wild Weasel IV.  The first thirty-six of these were delivered to Southeast Asia in 1969 and so missed taking part in Rolling Thunder. While carrying the same electronics as in the F-105G, the dense internal structure of the F-4 Phantom prevented the EF-4C from efficiently mounting this equipment, which meant it could not carry the superior AGM-78 Standard missile. By the start of Operation Linebacker, Wild Weasel missions were both more and less effective. Tactics and technology had evolved which improved the suppression of individual SAM sites, however the American military still failed to consider the integrated nature of North Vietnam's air defense network. Not only did the network possess thousands of radar- and optical-guided AAA and SAM sites, it also consisted of early-warning radars, intelligence-gathering agencies, and hundreds of ground-controlled interceptors.  Thus, while fewer American aircraft were lost to SAMs during Linebacker, many more were lost in air-to-air combat.

Operation Linebacker II started off similarly to Linebacker I with regards to SEAD tactics but was remarkable for the introduction of B-52 Stratofortress bombers in the defense-suppression role. During the early part of the operation, a combination of poor tactical employment and overconfidence on the part of Strategic Air Command resulted in the loss of a number of B-52s to SA-2 missiles, enough to force a rethink in how to counteract the enemy's air defenses.  The latter part of Linebacker II finally saw a concerted effort made to suppress the entire North Vietnamese IADS and significantly reduced the losses suffered. Only one SA-2 missile for every sixty-eight fired resulted in a hit, the lowest ratio of the entire war. The SEAD tactics displayed at the end of Linebacker II, involving the combination of traditional understanding of SEAD with electronic warfare and C3 countermeasures, laid the groundwork for future development.

Post-Vietnam Wars

With the phase-out of the F-105G, the US Air Force was in need of a new SEAD-dedicated aircraft  This effort was given more urgency in 1973 when, during the Yom Kippur War, Egypt employed a Soviet-built IADS that severely mauled the Israeli Air Force. After a series of tests, the new F-4G 'Wild Weasel V' first took flight in 1975 and became operational in 1978. Built on the F-4E airframe, the F-4G removed the M61 Vulcan pod to make room for specialized detection and jamming equipment and could carry the latest anti-radiation missile, the AGM-88 HARM. The F-4G Wild Weasel was then joined by EF-111A Raven and EC-130H Compass Call to become part of the USAF's "triad" of electronic combat aircraft. Each aircraft performed its own role in the overall mission of SEAD: the F-4G with seeking out and destroying enemy air defenses, the EC-130 with degrading the enemy's C3 capabilities, and the EF-111A with jamming enemy early-warning and target-acquisition radars.  Additional aircraft often part of SEAD missions included the E-3 Sentry, EC-130E Commando Solo and RC/EC-135.

On the other hand, the Soviets did not treat SEAD as an independent air operation but as a tactical role to be performed as part of a larger mission, namely an overwhelming air assault against NATO. This role was not carried out by SEAD-specific aircraft but normal bombers and fighter aircraft, such as the Tupolev Tu-16 and Tupolev Tu-22M, which could carry Soviet anti-radiation missiles. These aircraft would be organized into several strike groups whose mission was to lay down "chaff corridors" 40–50 kilometers across at intervals of 10 kilometers, including directly on top of suspected SAM sites. A small number of aircraft in these groups would be equipped with ARMs to physically destroy the sites. These missions were conducted against pre-planned targets which had been previously identified by signals intelligence and other reconnaissance efforts, rather than having aircraft seek out targets of opportunity. The closest the Soviets came to dedicated SEAD platforms were modified stand-off interceptors like the Mikoyan MiG-25BM and attack aircraft like the Sukhoi Su-24M.

The first example of a post-Vietnam SEAD campaign was by the United Kingdom during the 1982 Falklands War. The RAF Avro Vulcan B.Mk-2 was initially planned to be retired in early 1982 but the outbreak of the Falklands War, in April that year postponed it. The Falklands conflict was the only time that the Vulcan performed SEAD missions, flying very long-range missions against Port Stanley, armed with AGM-45 Shrike missiles mounted on makeshift underwing pylons and carrying a AN/ALQ-101 pod for jamming.

Shortly afterwards was Israel's Operation Mole Cricket 19, launched at the start of the 1982 Lebanon War. During the prior Yom Kippur War of 1973, Egyptian and Syrian SAM batteries proved to be costly to attack for the Israeli Air Force (IAF), such as during Operation Model 5; during the first three days of the war alone, the IAF lost 50 aircraft in about 1,220 sorties, a loss rate of four percent. The IAF found it challenging to provide air support to ground forces. Shortly after the conflict's end, the service stated a multiyear project, active between 1973 and 1978, specifically to devise an effective counter to the SAM threat. By 1982, the Bekaa Valley had been heavily reinforced by the Syrian Armed Forces with a modern Soviet-style air defense network consisting of multiple radar installations, GCI facilities, SAM and AAA sites, and a redundant C3 network. Prior to the start of the operation, Israel conducted an extensive intelligence-gathering effort, consisting of reconnaissance aircraft, remotely piloted vehicles (RPVs) and electronic surveillance aircraft, to paint an expansive picture of where Syrian air defense sites were located and which radar frequencies they were using.

Israel's attack on the SAMs was inadvertently assisted by the Syrians, who often placed their sites in sub-optimal positions and failed to relocate their equipment, use dummy radars or maintain active combat air patrol. When the operation began, efficient coordination of jamming/deception efforts with attacks against air defense sites effectively neutralized the ground component of the Bekaa Valley IADS. In response to the attacks, the Syrians launched a large number of fighter aircraft, however without the aid of their radar and GCI facilities, these forces were "flying blind" and suffered crippling losses in the resulting air-to-air combat. So complete and disturbing was the Israeli dismantling of the Bekaa Valley IADS that the deputy commander of the Soviet Air Defense Forces was sent to investigate what had gone wrong. Part of Israel's success was due to extensive reconnaissance and preparations prior to the battle, incompetence on the part of the Syrians, and desert conditions conducive to SEAD operations.

Operation El Dorado Canyon, the United States' response to the 1986 Berlin discotheque bombing, employed lessons learned from the Bekaa Valley campaign, including extensive planning and practice runs.  In contrast to the Israeli mission though the goal of El Dorado Canyon was not the destruction of Libya's IADS itself but to conduct a punitive strike against Muammar Gaddafi. Suppressing the IADS through non-lethal means would help accomplish this mission and, just as important after the Vietnam War, reduce casualties suffered by the strike group. For this reason, electronic jamming played a more prominent role in the operation than at Bekaa Valley and was carried out by both EF-111A Ravens and EA-6B Prowlers in the first ever joint US Air Force-Navy SEAD operation. For several reasons, F-4G Wild Weasels could not take part in El Dorado Canyon, requiring the use of the Navy's carrier-borne A-7E Corsair IIs and F/A-18 Hornets to attack Libyan SAM sites. Their lack of the Wild Weasel's specialized equipment required these fighters to fire their HARMs preemptively at Libyan SAM sites, a costly and wasteful method which nevertheless was effective due to the limited nature of the raid. For their part, the Libyans and their Soviet advisers had also learned lessons from the Bekaa Valley campaign: their IADS was constructed with multiple redundancies (including overlapping radar coverage and hardened landlines between defense sites) and a wider array of both Soviet and Western radar systems able to operate on multiple frequencies to avoid jamming. In the end, US forces succeeded in suppressing the Libyan IADS and conducted their punitive strike with minimal casualties suffered.

Gulf War

Coalition forces made extensive use of SEAD during the Gulf War against Iraq in order to counter its – at least on paper – formidable IADS. By 1990 Iraq was protected by approximately 3,700 SAMs, organized into 105 firing batteries, and approximately 7,000 AAA pieces, supported by hundreds of overlapping early warning, search and acquisition radars. In the air the Iraq Air Force was the sixth largest in the world, including hundreds of interceptors which were housed and protected within hardened bunkers. At the center of the Iraqi IADS was Kari, an automated command and control system developed by Iraq and built by French contractors in the wake of Operation Opera (Kari in turn is the French spelling of Iraq backwards). Kari tied the entire IADS to a single location, the national Air Defense Operations Center (ADOC) located in an underground bunker in Baghdad, and in turn divided the country into four defense sectors each overseen by a Sector Operations Center (SOC) located at H-3, Kirkuk, Taji and Talil; a fifth SOC was added at Ali Al Salem to cover the recently conquered Kuwait. Each SOC oversaw the local airspace and commanded anywhere from two to five Intercept Operations Centers (IOCs) per sector. The IOCs were located in bunkers constructed at Iraqi Air Force bases and tied into local radar systems, whose information they could pass on to their SOC and thence on to Baghdad. In this way a SOC was capable of simultaneously tracking 120 aircraft and selecting for the appropriate weapon system to engage them. The SOC could automatically target for SA-2 and SA-3 SAM systems in their sector, which meant the SAMs did not have to turn on their own radar and reveal their position, or an IOC could direct local interceptors to engage the targets. Baghdad itself was one of the most heavily defended cities in the world – more heavily defended several times over than Hanoi during the Vietnam War – protected by 65% of Iraq's SAMs and over half of its AAA pieces.

However, the Iraqi IADS had several fatal flaws of which Coalition air forces were able to take advantage.  The system was primarily oriented towards defending against much smaller attacks from Iraq's most likely enemies – Iran, Syria and Israel – and focused on point defense rather than area defense.  This meant there were significant gaps in its coverage, particularly on the orientation from Saudi Arabia straight to Baghdad, and attacking aircraft would be able to approach their target from multiple directions.  Much of the Iraqi air defense equipment was also quite outdated: Iraqi SA-2 and SA-3 systems were nearing the end of their operational lifespan and their countermeasures well known at this point, while what SA-6, SA-8 and Roland systems they possessed weren't much younger either.  Likewise a majority of Iraq's interceptor force were less-capable MiG-21s, with fewer more modern variants including export versions of the MiG-29 and F1 Mirage.  Furthermore, the IADS was centralized to a fault.  Although each IOC was datalinked to their respective SOC and in turn back to the ADOC, the defense sectors couldn't share information between each other.  If a SOC was knocked out of action the attached air defense weapons lost all ability to coordinate their response; its respective SAM batteries would be forced to rely on their own radar systems while most AAA guns lacked any radar guidance.  Training was also poor, with Iraqi pilots overly reliant on ground-control instructions such that if the IOCs were disabled they lost situation awareness and became easy targets.

Suppression of the Iraqi IADS played a prominent role in Operation Instant Thunder, the preliminary air campaign plan against Iraq which served as the basis for Operation Desert Storm's air campaign.  In its initial limited form, Instant Thunder called for three dedicated SEAD squadrons which would significantly degrade the IADS enough to allow decimating strikes against Iraq's military and political leadership and other strategic targets. This role for SEAD was further expanded as the mission grew in scope, involving a larger number of aircraft to completely destroy the air defenses protecting southern Iraq and Kuwait. Planning for this mission was helped when the CIA contacted the French engineer responsible for designing the Kari IADS and passed along information about its vulnerabilities and limitations. In its final form, Phase II of the Desert Storm air campaign sought to decimate the southern Iraqi IADS within two days of the start of hostilities.  F-4G Wild Weasels and other aircraft capable of carrying HARM missiles would destroy air defense sites themselves, electronic warfare aircraft would disrupt radars and other systems, and additional targets would be struck in order to support this mission, such as temporarily knocking out Iraq's electrical infrastructure. In addition to traditional SEAD systems the Persian Gulf War would also see the use of unconventional assets in knocking out Iraq's air defenses, in particular cruise missiles and F-117A Nighthawks, which would be used to attack sensitive targets.

The opening shots of Operation Desert Storm were fired on January 17 in pursuit of defense-suppression: at 2:20AM local time Task Force Normandy, a group of twelve American helicopters, infiltrated into Iraq with the goal of destroying two early-warning radar sites.  Three MH-53J Pave Lows guided nine AH-64 Apaches to the targets, which the gunships destroyed, opening a hole in the Iraqi IADS for the initial wave of aircraft to exploit.  Two F-117As knocked out the Nukhayb IOC, further widening the gap, although their next attack against the H-3 SOC was unsuccessful.  Among the first targets hit by F-117As attacking into Baghdad, bombs damaged the Al Taqaddum IOC and Talil SOC, shortly followed by Tomahawk strikes that disabled the electrical grid upon which Kari depended; reportedly some used special warheads filled with carbon fiber bundles to short-circuit the network.  For the next several hours dozens of Coalition aircraft poured into Iraq.  Those which weren't specifically directed to suppress air defenses had significant SEAD escort, including the use of BQM-74 drones and ADM-141 TALD decoys which would both "take the hit" for the manned airplanes and cause the Iraqis to reveal their position when they tracked or fired upon the lure.  The first night's largest sortie was a joint US Air Force-Navy SEAD mission consisting of fifty aircraft designed to look like a bombing raid on Baghdad but which instead were fitted out with decoys, drones and HARMs to destroy air defenses protecting the city.  With Kari degraded due to the disabling of the civilian electrical grid the Iraqi SAMs were forced to use their organic radar, producing what one pilot called "HARM Heaven".  A total of 67 HARMs were fired over the course of twenty minutes, causing a significant reduction in Iraqi air defenses around the capital based on follow-up missions.

Throughout the rest of the first night additional air-defense targets were hit by Coalition aircraft with varying levels of success while strikes against other targets consisted of a high ratio of SEAD and escort to strike aircraft.  This pace of attack against air-defense and other targets continued into the first day, involving a variety of different aircraft, and spread to targets in Kuwait.  A-10 Thunderbolt IIs were used to attack early-warning radars and similar sites along the border in operations known humorously as "Wart Weaseling" (a play on the Wild Weasel and the A-10 "Warthog" nicknames).  Unable to use Kari and fearful of turning their own radars on, Iraqi SAM operators resorted to firing their missiles with minimal or no guidance.  Furthermore, units of the Iraqi Army – even the elite Republican Guard – possessed inadequate SAM defenses by NATO or Soviet standards.  This allowed Coalition aircraft to attack them from the relative safety of higher altitudes.

By the end of the first forty-eight hours of Desert Storm, the Coalition had achieved its goal of significantly degrading Kari, including the destruction of all air defenses in the south.  Although the Iraqis would replace most destroyed radars and bring back many IOCs and SOCs to at least partial operation, this was done so in an unorganized manner, with the Coalition continuing to bomb any reactivated sites.   In effect, combined with the failure of Iraq's air force to defend its airspace, the Coalition had gained air supremacy in the skies over Iraq from nearly the outset of the conflict.

Coalition aircraft conducting strategic bombing and interdiction inside Iraq were now free to operate at medium altitudes of  and higher with no danger of SAM activity.  This also put them beyond the effective range of most of Iraq's AAA pieces, which remained a threat.  Baghdad's heavy AAA defenses also continued to make it a difficult target to attack, as Coalition forces found out during an attempted strike on January 19 against the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center.  A variety factors, including the threat of AAA and ballistic SAMs, resulted in the strike's failure and loss of two aircraft.

By January 27, no C3 activity was detected at the SOC level by Coalition forces, and only limited activity at the IOC level.  At the end of the conflict, the DIA estimated Kari was operating at 25% its original capacity, and that it would take at least ten years to rebuild the system and another five to retrain the personnel needed to operate it.  In total, the SEAD campaign by the Coalition was an unequivocal success, allowing Coalition aircraft to fly at medium and high altitudes over Kuwait and Iraq with impunity.  The only losses Coalition aircraft suffered to Iraqi air defenses after the first two days occurred when they operated at low altitudes, primarily conducting close air support or other missions to assist ground forces.

Operation Allied Force

The bombing campaign of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia during mid-1999, dubbed Operation Allied Force, was an overall success for NATO forces, but the mission to suppress Yugoslav air defenses proved to be more difficult than prior operations during the Gulf War. SEAD operations for NATO were principally carried out by the US Air Force, with fifty F-16CJ Block 50 Fighting Falcons, and the US Navy and Marines, with 30 EA-6B Prowlers; additional support was provided by Italian and German Tornado ECRs, a purpose-developed SEAD model. Many NATO aircraft were furnished with new towed decoys designed to lure away any missiles fired at them, and reportedly for the first time cyberwarfare was used to target Yugoslav air defense computer systems.

However, a number of deficiencies in NATO's SEAD operations were revealed during the course of the bombing campaign. The US Air Force had allowed its electronic warfare branch to atrophy in the years after the Gulf War, resulting in greater response times to engaging a SAM threat. Airspace restrictions and rules of engagement limited where NATO aircraft could fly and what targets they could hit, leaving some air defense systems untouched. Kosovo's mountainous terrain also made it difficult for NATO to locate and target Yugoslav air defenses, while at the same time the region's poor infrastructure limited where Yugoslav SAM and AAA sites could be placed. Furthermore, according to a post-conflict US intelligence report, Yugoslavia had a spy in NATO's headquarters in Brussels who in the early part of the conflict leaked flight plans and target details to the Yugoslav military, allowing Yugoslav military assets to be relocated to avoid detection; NATO responded by limiting the number of people with access to its plans, which appeared to be successful.

Yugoslavia had a much smaller IADS than Iraq during the Gulf War, but took greater steps at preserving it from NATO's bombing campaign. The Yugoslav integrated air defence system (IADS) was extensive, including underground command sites and buried landlines, which allowed for information to be shared between systems; thus, active radar in one area could target NATO aircraft for SAMs and AAA in another area with no active radar, further limiting NATO's ability to target air defences. By focusing on its operational survival, Yugoslav air defenses ceded a certain amount of air superiority to NATO forces. Yet the persistence of their credible SAM threat forced NATO to allocate greater resources to continued SEAD operations rather than conducting other missions, while Yugoslav AAA and MANPADS forced NATO aircraft to fly at  or higher. NATO reportedly fired 743 HARMs during the course of the 78-day campaign, but could confirm the destruction of only three of the original 25 SA-6 batteries. At the same time, over 800 SAMs were fired by Yugoslav forces at NATO aircraft, including 477 SA-6s and 124 confirmed MANPADS, for the downing of only two aircraft and several more damaged.  That one of the two aircraft shot down was an F-117A Nighthawk marked the first combat loss ever of a stealth aircraft and typified some of the issues NATO faced during the campaign.

2003 US invasion of Iraq

At the onset of the Iraq War, Iraq's IADS was a fraction of what it had been during the Gulf War, though it was still one of the densest defense networks in the world. Over 200 SAM systems were still operational, mainly the older SA-2s, SA-3s and SA-6s, along with over 2,000 MANPADS and large numbers of AA guns. Improvements had been made to Kari, including greater usage of fiber optic cables, and more advanced equipment such as GPS guidance jammers were acquired. In addition to the ADOC and four original SOCs, a fifth SOC was created in Baghdad and specifically assigned to defend Saddam's palaces, the Republican Guards, and key security facilities.

Still, the defense network was relatively outdated and thus unable to seriously challenge the Coalition's dominance of Iraqi airspace, which had not only succeeded in suppressing Iraqi defenses during the Gulf War but continued to do so during the enforcement of Iraqi no-fly zones. Starting on March 1, aggressive "enforcement" of the no-fly zones accounted for the destruction of as many as a third of Iraq's missile launchers and radars by the time the invasion commenced on March 20. Numerous aircraft, such as the Panavia Tornado fighter-bomber, penetrated Iraqi airspace to conduct bombing raids during the opening phase of the conflict, striking at Iraqi installations.

During the course of the invasion, there were 1,660 reports of SAM launches and similar numbers of AAA firings, for the loss of very few aircraft. While Iraq largely failed to shoot down many Coalition aircraft, the sheer numbers of their air defenses still made them dangerous until the final stages of the invasion. This was true in particular for its large number of short-range missile and AAA weapons, which made low-altitude missions deadly and were harder to suppress.  Where possible, Coalition forces conducted stand-off strikes from outside the range of these defenses. The unsuccessful 2003 attack on Karbala exemplifies the dangers faced by aircraft operating at low altitudes around air defenses.

2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

Many Ukrainian air defence facilities were reportedly destroyed or damaged in the first days of the invasion by Russian air strikes. On 5 March 2022, the Russian Air Force (VVS) declared that it had achieved air superiority, 11 days after the beginning of the invasion,  but not air supremacy. However, that same day, Russia lost at least ten aircraft. On 11 March 2022, retired United States Air Force Lieutenant General David Deptula stated in The New York Times that the Russian Air Force had not achieved air superiority, noting that supposedly vulnerable Ukrainian drones had continued to operate against Russian forces.

While several early air strikes on Yavoriv in Western Ukraine were performed by Russian bombers, their munitions were firing from a distance while flying within Russian air space, rather than entering Ukrainian air space; on 13 March 2022, dozens of air-launched cruise missiles were launched from within Russia to reach Western Ukraine, because it was allegedly too dangerous for the Russian Air Force to fly over Ukrainian space due to Ukrainian air defenses. Ukrainian mid-range SAM sites forced planes to fly low, making them vulnerable to Stinger and other shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles, while a lack of training and flight hours for Russian pilots allegedly rendered them inexperienced for the type of close ground support missions typical of modern air forces. On 18 May 2022, near Izyum, a Russian Zhitel electronic warfare apparatus was detected, located, and disabled by Ukraine's ground and air forces.

On 30 August 2022, Command of Ukrainian Air Force (KpsZSU) released a video of its MiG-29 jets firing AGM-88 HARM missiles against Russian air defenses, one day after an alleged attack on Russian radar site for S-400 SAM batteries near Sevastopol in Russian-occupied Crimea. Earlier in the Summer, multiple Russian SAM batteries has been hit and the remains of AGM-88 missiles had been found on site. The U.S. government acknowledged the previously undisclosed transfer of AGM-88 missiles to Ukraine on August 8, 2022.

There are also suspicions of M31A1 GMLRS guided rockets firing from M142 HIMARS rocket artillery been used by Ukrainian military against Russian air defense systems.

On 15 February 2023 the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) wrote that neither the Russian Air Force (VVS) nor the Ukrainian Air Force (KpsZSU) have gained air superiority.

Weapons

The weapons most often associated with this mission are anti-radiation missiles (ARMs), which work by homing in on radio emission sources like radar antennae.  These missiles are equipped with relatively small warheads, limiting collateral damage, but can easily destroy radar antennae and thus cripple an enemy's air defense system.  Early examples of ARMs could be fooled by turning off the radar system, which would cease emitting radiation for the missile to track; more recent missiles are fitted with fire-control systems which "remember" where the source was and continue towards that location. Anti-radiation missiles proved particularly effective during the Vietnam War where, despite the small number carried relative to other munitions, they accounted for 46% of all SA-2 batteries destroyed.

However, a weapon need not be designed specifically for SEAD missions to be used to damage or destroy a component of an air defense system. A Paveway LGB for example is not a SEAD-specific munition, but when used to destroy a radar antenna it still achieves the desired effect.  The American AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon is a valuable SEAD weapon due to its fairly long standoff range which allows the launching aircraft to avoid being threatened by all but the longest-range missiles, and its relatively large area of destruction against lightly armored targets.

Possibly the most effective type of unguided ("dumb") weapon used during SEAD strikes are cluster bombs. This is due to the fact many SAM sites are dispersed over a fairly wide area (in order to increase the difficulty of inflicting serious damage on the battery) and the relative "softness" of the targets (unarmored missile launchers, exposed radar antennas, etc.). The Mk-20 Rockeye II anti-armor cluster munition and the CBU-87 general-purpose cluster munition are typical examples of these types of weapons.<ref>Owen, Robert C., Deliberate Force: A Case Study in Effective Air Campaigning, Air University Press, 2000, p. 265.</ref>

Artillery is also used to conduct SEAD missions. After World War II, the combined arms nature of warfare meant an increased role in ground forces performing SEAD missions in support of air operations.  During the Cold War the American military developed a joint definition of SEAD responsibilities, with the Army responsible for all SEAD missions within the range of observable fire and the Air Force for all missions further away. The Soviet Union placed less emphasis on using artillery to conduct SEAD missions, although where possible artillery would be used to clear a path for attack helicopters.  Because of their superior range, rocket artillery such as MLRS are the ideal weapon for conducting SEAD operations.The Multiple Launch Rocket System . Warfare History Network. 30 October 2018.

Loitering Munitions and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) play an increasingly vital role in conducting SEAD missions. Due to the dangerous nature of attacking air defenses, the use of UAVs can provide a more cost-effective and less risky method of conducting SEAD.  This is especially true since the pilot is not directly at risk and so a commander may be more willing to sacrifice UAVs to accomplish the mission. The first UAVs used in the SEAD role occurred during the Vietnam War, when versions of the Lightning Bug were adapted to carry chaff and other electronic countermeasures.  Modern examples of SEAD-specific loitering munitions include the IAI Harpy which loiters over areas with potential SAM activity, searches for SAM activity, and then crashes (with in-built warhead) into the target.

By country

 Africa

 Egypt
 F-16 equipped with AGM-88

 Morocco
 F-16 equipped with AGM-88 (B/C/E variants)

 America

 Brazil
 AMX International equipped with the Brazilian MAR-1 missile

 United States

 USAF
In the US Air Force, the aircraft designed for these missions is known as the "Wild Weasel". It describes aircraft tasked with SEAD missions with anti-radiation missiles. Several platforms have fulfilled this role by the past.
 Wild Weasel I, based on the F-100 Super SabreHobson p. 43 The first Wild Weasel squadron ever was the 354th Tactical Fighter Squadron based in Thailand, for missions over North Vietnam.
 Wild Weasel II, based on the F-4C Phantom It was a very short period as it wasn't a performant platform for this mission.
 Wild Weasel III, based on the F-105F and G (two-seat variant), operational from 1965 to early 1984  It was known as the "Thud" by the crew. It was a well performing variant. It is the first SEAD dedicated platform of the USAF.
 Wild Weasel IV, based on the F-4C Phantom II known as the EF-4C  An order for the modification of 36 Phantom II in Wild Weasel IV dedicated variants was made because of the attrition of the F-105 Wild Weasel III.
 Wild Weasel V, based on the F-4E Phantom II, known as the F-4G, operational from 1978 until 1996.  134 F-4E were modified for the SEAD mission.
 Wild Weasel VI, based on the F-16 C/D – Block 50/52, known as the F-16CJ/DJ and operational since 1991, and it remains the dedicated SEAD variant, using the AGM-88 HARM.

 US Navy
 EA-6B Prowler
 F/A-18A/B/C/D Hornet
 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
 Boeing EA-18G Growler

 US Marine Corps
 F-18 A/B Hornet
 McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II

 Asia

 Bahrain
 F-16 Block 70 equipped with AGM-88F, refurbished from 50 AGM-88B

 China
 Xian JH-7 equipped with YJ-91 anti-radiation missiles
 Chengdu J-10 equipped with YJ-91 anti-radiation missiles
 J-11BS (2-seat variant)  equipped with  CM-102 anti-radiation missiles

 Pakistan
 JF-17 equipped with MAR-1 missiles, and the LD-10

 Saudi Arabia
 Panavia Tornado equipped with the ALARM missile

 Europe

 France
 No aircraft in the French military is currently equipped with an anti-radiation missile, there is no proper SEAD capable aircraft.
 The Mirage III was equipped with the Martel missile.
 The Mirage F1 was equipped with the Martel missile, but the missile was retired in 1997.

 Germany
 Panavia Tornado ECR equipped with AARGM missiles and electronic warfare capabilities, operational since 1990. Germany manufactured 35 new Tornado for this mission
 Eurofighter T2, T3 and T4 equipped with AGM-88E

 Greece
 Older F-16 equipped with AGM-88B Block IIIA and ADM-88E
 Modernised F-16V to be equipped with AARGM that have been ordered

 Italy
 Panavia Tornado ECR equipped with AARGM missiles and electronic warfare capabilities, operational since 1990. taly modified 16 of its Tornado IDS.

 Netherlands
 F-35A to receive AARGM-ER on order

 Spain
 EF-18 equipped with AGM-88 HARM and currently in use

 United Kingdom
 The former Panavia Tornado GR4 was equipped with the ALARM missile for its SEAD missions.
 The former British Aerospace Sea Harrier was equipped with the AS37 Martel missile, later with the ALARM missile.

 Systems in development

 Aircraft
 Eurofighter Typhoon ECR:  It is the successor of the Panavia Tornado ECR / SEAD for the German Air Force. The program is known in Germany as LUWES ("Luftgestätze Wirkung im Elektromagnetischen Spektrum"''). It is planned to reach its IOC by 2029.  It is a 2-seat Eurofighter. Airbus Defence is the leading company for the development of the aircraft. In the SEAD/DEAD configuration it is planned to be equipped with:
 2 GaN Escort Jammer Pods from Saab, based on the Arexis system, with a 360° coverage
 Emitter Location System
 6 missiles SPEAR EW
 4 long-range air-to-air missiles Meteor
 2 short range air-to-air missiles IRIS-T
 3 fuel tanks
 F-35
 US Air Force  The F-35A will be the future "Wild Weasel" of the Air Force, it will therefore replace the F-16CJ Fighting Falcon. A program for a new missile is ongoing (look at the section "Missiles" below). Some structural modifications were needed to integrate sensors and the new munition planned. Those modifications were applied to the Lots 14 in 15 of F-35 production.
 British Armed Forces  The F-35B will fulfil the SEAD role with the integration of the SPEAR EW missiles as describes below.

Missiles
 Spear EW : It is a new missile being developed by MBDA UK designed for SEAD missions. It is targeting integrated ground air defence (static and mobile), as well as the radar systems of ships.  It uses next-gen miniature electronic warfare payloads (jammer and decoy). It is based on the SPEAR physical and electrical systems, but the seeker is replaced, the warhead is smaller, it embarks more fuel, and a modular EW payload with loitering capabilities.  It will equip the British F-35B, 4 missiles will be able to fit in the missile bay.
 Stand-in Attack Weapon (SiAW) program : A new program of the US Air Force for a new SEAD / DEAD weapon. Contracts have been issued to fund the initial development with Lockheed Martin, L3 Harris Technologies and Northrop Grumman that are in competition. During the Phase 1, the USAF is aligning the capabilities of the missile systems to the needs of the air force and to the technical requirements of the F-35.  The end goal is 3,000 SiAW missiles for USD $8.6 billion.
 Northrop Grumman is offering the AARGM-ER, the latest variant of the AGM-88 HARM that is being developed for the US Navy after having been selected. Its low rate initial production started, and it is being integrated to the F-35C.
 Lockheed is starting the program from scratch with a new digital design. Lockheed leverages the advanced digital solutions developed by Skunk Works for other programs in this project. The concept is an open, agile, digital weapon.
 L3 Communications, part of L3 Harris acquired a radar / sensor supplier back in 2017, Mustang Technology Group LP, and with the new consolidated competence center, it is developing its new offer for this program.
 AARGM-ER:   It is the latest variant of the AGM-88G HARM missile, and it is being integrated to the US Navy aircraft F-18 E/F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler. The Australian government approved the purchase of 60 missiles for $431 million in August 2023. The Netherlands Air force announced the purchase of the missile in June 2023 for its F-35A.

Notes

References

External links

 U.S. Department of Defense definition
 Description of SEAD environment over Kosovo
 A 1976 discussion of differing opinions on (then) future threats to western aircraft

Aerial warfare strategy
Aerial warfare tactics
Military doctrines
Military operations involving the United States
United States Air Force

Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses


Àngel Fabregat Morera (* 13. August 1965 in Belianes) ist ein spanischer Schriftsteller.

Er studierte an der  Polytechnischen Universität Madrid und der Offenen Universität Katalonien.

Ehrungen/Preis
 Premi Gabriel Ferrater 1988 de Poesia. Premis Literaris Baix Camp per a joves d'Òmnium Cultural.
 Premi de Poesia Club d'Amics de la Unesco de Barcelona 1988.
 Premi Literari "Sant Jordi" (1989) der Generalitat de Catalunya.
 Premi Ateneu Igualadí 1990.
 Premi e-poemes de La Vanguardia 2009.
 Premi de Poesia Miquel Bosch i Jover 2010.
 Premi de Poesia Josefina Oliveras 2010.
 Premi de Poesia Francesc Candel 2010.
 Premi de les Lletres Vila de Corbera 2010.

Werke
 Antologia d'un Onatge. Ed. Columna, 1990.
 Llampecs d'Espurnes. 1991, ISBN 978-8-477-84981-0 (197 Seiten).

Mitautor
 Sol de Violoncel. Ed. Reus, Òmnium Cultural Baix Camp, 1988.
 Paisatges amb Solitud. Ed. Reus, Òmnium Cultural Baix Camp, 1989.
 Els Mars Tancats. Ed. Reus, Òmnium Cultural Baix Camp, 1991.

Weblinks
 Goigs a la Mare de Déu de l'Incendi de Rossend Perelló (PDF; 501 kB)

Einzelnachweise

Autor
Literatur (Katalanisch)
Person (Katalonien)
Spanier
Geboren 1965
Mann

Àngel Fabregat


Osman ef. Kozlić (Zenica, 14. kolovoza 1966.) bošnjački je teolog, bivši muftija Mešihata Islamske zajednice Bošnjaka u Zapadnoj Europi. Prije toga bio je muftija banjalučki.

Životopis
Osman ef. Kozlić je rođen u Zenici, 14. kolovoza 1966. godine. U Sarajevu je završio Gazi Husrev-begovu medresu 1985. godine, a Fakultet šerijatskog prava na Sveučilištu El-Emir Abdul-Kadir za islamske studije u Constantine 1992. godine. Magistrirao je na Sveučilištu Muhamed V., odnosno na Filozofskom fakultetu u Rabatu, odsjek islamske znanosti 1997. godine. Doktorirao je na Fakultetu islamskih znanosti u Sarajevu 2013. godine.

U periodu od 1997. do 1998. godine je radio kao imam u Tuzli, a od 1998 do. 1999. godine kao profesor predmeta Fikh i Hadis u Behram- begovoj medresi u Tuzli. Od 2001. godine je član Ustavnog suda Islamske zajednice u Bosni i Hercegovini, a 2008. godine je izabran za predsjednika Ustavnog suda Islamske zajednice u Bosni i Hercegovini. Godine 2014. je imenovan muftijom banjalučkim i u njegovom mandatu je otvorena obnovljena Ferhadija džamija u Banjoj Luci, te postavljen kamen temeljac za obnovu
Arnaudije džamije u tom gradu. Godine 2018. reis-ul-ulema Husein ef. Kavazović ga imenuje za glavnog imama u Njemačkoj, te prvog muftiju novoosnovanog Mešihata Islamske zajednice Bošnjaka u Zapadnoj Europi. Na tim dužnostima se nalazio do 2020. kada ga je s tih dužnosti razrješio reis-ul-ulema Husein ef. Kavazović. Razlozi za njegovo razješenje su propusti u radu koje je napravio dok je obavljao dužnost banjalučkog muftije. Ti propusti su uzrokovali ozbiljnu materijalnu štetu na imovini muftiluka i medžlisa Islamske zajednice u Banjoj Luci, što je opredijelilo reis-ul-ulemu da donese odluku o razrješenju.

Osman ef. Kozlić govori arapski i engleski jezik. Služi se francuskim i španjolskim jezikom.

Izvori

Vanjske poveznice
 Osman ef. Kozlić

Životopisi, Zenica
Bošnjačke muftije

Osman Kozlić


أوستفول (ب: Østfold، أي الجهة الشرقية لخليج أوسلو، من Øst أي الشرق، وFold وهو الاسم القديم لخليج أوسلو) مقاطعة تقع بجنوب شرقي النرويج.

أعلام
 جون أنكر
 هانس نيلسن هاوغ

مراجع

دول وأقاليم انحلت في 2020
أماكن مأهولة انحلت في 2020
انحلالات سنة 2020 في النرويج
مقاطعات النرويج
مقاطعات سابقة في النرويج

أوستفولد


{| class="infobox" align="right" style="width: 20em;"
|- style="text-align: center;"
!style="background: #fffe97;" colspan=3|Tales From The Twilight World
|- style="text-align:center;"
|colspan=3|
|- style="text-align:center;"
!style="background: #fffe97;" colspan=3|Blind Guardian Albümü Albümün Adı: Tales From The Twilight World
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
|Albüm Yılı
|colspan=2|1990
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
|Türü
|colspan=2|Power metal
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
|Uzunluğu
|colspan=2|40:45
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
|style="padding-right:1em;"|Firma
|colspan=2|Virgin
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
|Prodüktör
|colspan=2|Kalle Trapp
|- style="text-align:center;"
|- style="text-align:center;"
!style="background: #fffe97;" colspan=3|Blind Guardian albüm kronolojisi
|- style="text-align:center; font-size:smaller;"
|style="width: 33%;"|Follow the Blind(1986)
|style="width: 33%;"|Tales from the Twilight World(1988)
|style="width: 33%;"|Somewhere Far Beyond(1989)
|}Tales from the Twilight World', Blind Guardian grubunun 1990'da çıkardığı albümdür.

 Grup Üyeleri
 Vokal ve Bas Gitar: Hansi Kürsch
 Lead Gitar ve Arka Vokal: André Olbrich
 Ritm Gitar ve Arka Vokal: Marcus Siepen
 Davul: Thomas "Thomen" Stauch

 Şarkı Listesi
 Traveler in Time 5:59 Welcome to Dying 4:47 Weird Dreams 1:19 Lord of the Rings 3:14 Goodbye My Friend 5:33 Lost in the Twilight Hall 5:58 Tommyknockers 5:09 Altair 4 2:26 The Last Candle 5:59 Run for the Night | Run for the Night (live) 3:39''

Dış bağlantılar
 The Releases Of Blind Guardian

Blind Guardian albümleri
Power metal albümleri
1990 albümleri

Tales from the Twilight World


Torshi, cunoscut din ترشی de la Torsh în rom. murătură, Turshu, Turshiya, Turschija, sau Turșu (chrilică туршия, greaca modernă τουρσί), sunt legume murate în oțet-sare-saramură, de origine din Persia; de multe ori cu usturoi, care astăzi este răspândit în Europa de Sud-est, Asia mică, în Caucaz și în Orientul Mijlociu .

Ingredientele tipice sunt varza, conopida, fasole verde, morcovi, vinete, ardei, ardei iute, verde, roșii, napi, castraveți și dovleac. Exista un aperitiv tradițional și anume Meze. La început, aceste legume erau consumate în timpul iernii, pentru a substitui legumele proaspete, astăzi sunt oferite pe tot parcursul anului.

În Turcia,  în același mod, este preparat Hamsiturșu (de la Hamsi) cu hering prăjit.

Note
 Ghillie Basan, Orientul Mijlociu Bucătărie
 Nesta ramazani a fost fotograf, persană de Gătit: O Masă de Delicii Exotice

Link-uri

Bucătăria balcanică
Bucătăria turcă
Bucătăria iraniană

Torshi


Die Hogeschool Gent (abgekürzt: HOGent) ist eine niederländischsprachige Hochschule in der belgischen Region Flandern mit Einrichtungen in Gent, Melle und Aalst.

Lage
Der Verwaltungshauptsitz befindet sich am Kortrijksesteenweg 14 in Gent.
Die Campus-Einrichtungen Schoonmeersen, Hoogpoort, Bijloke, Vesalius, Academiestraat, Ledeganck, Mercator - Henleykaai und Mercator - Groot-Brittanniëlaan/Abdisstraat sind über das Stadtgebiet von Gent verteilt. Die Campus-Einrichtungen Melle und Bedrijfskunde Aalst befinden sich in Melle bzw. Aalst.

Entstehungsgeschichte
Zwar gehen die Anfänge der Vorgängereinrichtungen der heutigen Hochschule mit der Koninklijke Academie voor Schone Kunsten (KASK) bis ins Jahr 1741 zurück, die jetzige Hochschule entstand jedoch erst 1995 im Zuge der flämischen Hochschulreform durch Zusammenlegung von 13 vorher unabhängigen Hochschulen. Die Koninklijke Academie voor Schone Kunsten (KASK) und das Koninklijk Conservatorium (KC) wurden dabei zur School of Arts zusammengefasst. Später kamen noch zwei weitere Hochschulen hinzu, so dass heute insgesamt 15 ehemals unabhängige Hochschulen unter dem gemeinsamen Namen HoGent firmieren. Im Jahr 2009 hatte die Hochschule 16 429 Studenten und lag damit hinter der KU Löwen und der Universiteit Gent an dritter Stelle hinsichtlich der Studentenzahlen in Flandern. Die Studenten verteilen sich auf die oben genannten zehn Campus-Einrichtungen in Gent sowie Melle und Aalst.

Aufbau
Die HoGent ist eine sogenannte multisectorale instelling, das heißt unter ihrem Dach sind sehr unterschiedliche Studiengänge vereint, die untereinander zum Teil nur sehr wenige oder gar keine Verbindungen bzw. Überschneidungen aufweisen.

Es folgt eine Übersicht über die einzelnen Fakultäten:

 Mens en Welzijn (Ausbildungs-/ Sozial-/Gesundheitssektor)
 Natuur en Techniek (Holz-/Agro-/Bio-/Chemo-/Textiltechnologien)
 Bedrijf en Organisatie (Betr.wirtschaft/Informatik etc.)
 School of Arts (KASK-Koninklijk Conservatorium) (Musik/Drama/Bildende Kunst Audiovisuelle Technik)

Die meisten "akademischen" Studiengänge sind 2013 zur Universität Gent verschoben worden:

 Toegepaste ingenieurswetenschappen (Baukunde/Elektronik/Chemie/Vermessung etc.)
 Toegepaste Bio-ingenieurswetenschappen (Biochemie/Garten- und Landschaftsbau/Ernährungswissenschaften)
 Toegepaste Taalkunde (Mehrsprachiges Kommunizieren/Übersetzen/Dolmetschen)
 Handelswetenschappen en Bestuurskunde (Verwaltungskunde/Unternehmensführung)

Abschlüsse
Die Studien können abhängig vom jeweiligen Studiengang mit einem Bachelor bzw. mit einem Master abgeschlossen werden. Weiterhin besteht die Möglichkeit eines sogenannten Postgraduaat in bestimmten Studiengängen sowie zusätzliche Weiterbildungen speziellerer Art.

Partnerhochschulen
Die HoGent ist eine Partnerhochschule der Hochschule Hannover (University of Applied Sciences and Arts) und es werden in diesem Rahmen für Gaststudierende spezielle Programme angeboten.

Mitgliedschaften und Auszeichnungen
 Die HoGent ist Mitglied in dem Verband AUGent (Associatie Universiteit Gent)
 Im Jahr 2009 teilte die Europäische Kommission mit, dass das die Übersetzungsabteilung der HoGent als einzige Einrichtung in Flandern in der Master-Ausbildung (ndl.: "Master in het vertalen") ein Teil des Netzwerkes European Master's in Translation (EMT) bildet. Damit gehört der Ausbildungsgang zu den 34 besten Ausbildungen in insgesamt 27 europäischen Ländern auf diesem Gebiet.

Weblinks
 hogent.be - Die Webseite der Hochschule (niederländisch)
 Eine Karten-Übersicht der Campus-Einrichtungen (niederländisch)
  Liste aller Hochschulen in Flandern
 Informationen der Abteilung Übersetzen und Dolmetschen   (Toegepaste Taalkunde) auf deutsch
  Erfahrungsbericht eines ehemaligen Studenten der HoGent (deutsch) (MS Word; 973 kB)
 School of Arts: KASK en Kon. Conservatorium (englisch)
 HoGent Conservatorium (niederländisch)
 HoGent Conservatorium - Ghent Conservatory (englisch)
 Gesang Studium am "Koninklijk Conservatorium" der "School of Arts"
 Ein Video der School of Arts über die Arbeit am Koninklijk Conservatorium auf englisch: MUSIC PRODUCTION Royal Conservatory Ghent
 Hogeschool Gent Conservatorium: der YT-Kanal von ConsHogent
 De Beren Gieren, eine Jazzformation, die sich 2009 am Konservatorium in Gent gebildet hat.

Fußnoten

Niederländischsprachige Hochschule in Belgien
Bildung in Gent
Melle (Belgien)
Aalst
Organisation (Gent)
Gegründet 1995

Hogeschool Gent


Leyraud est un patronyme porté notamment par :

 André Leyraud (1786-1865), homme politique français ;
 Jean-Louis Leyraud (1951-), pilote de rallye néo-calédonien.

Leyraud


39566 Carllewis este un asteroid din centura principală de asteroizi.

Descriere
39566 Carllewis este un asteroid din centura principală de asteroizi. A fost descoperit pe  la Geisei de Tsutomu Seki. Asteroidul prezintă o orbită caracterizată de o semiaxă mare de 2,34 ua, o excentricitate de 0,22 și o înclinație de 5,3° în raport cu ecliptica.

Vezi și
 Lista planetelor minore: 39001-40000
 Centura de asteroizi

Referințe

Obiecte astronomice descoperite în 1992
Centura de asteroizi

39566 Carllewis


Sömürgecilik; kolonicilik, kolonyalizm ya da müstemlekecilik, genellikle bir devletin başka ulusları, devletleri, toplulukları, siyasal ve ekonomik egemenliği altına alarak yayılması veya yayılmayı istemesidir.

Sömürgeciler genellikle sömürdükleri bölgelerin kaynaklarına, iş gücüne, pazarlarına el koyar ve aynı zamanda sömürgeleri altındaki halkın sosyo-kültürel, dinî değerlerine baskı uygularlar. Sömürgecilik ile emperyalizm kimi zaman birbirleri yerine kullanılan terimler olmakla birlikte emperyalizm, şekli olduğu kadar şekli olmayan alanlarda da kontrolün hakim gücün elinde bulunduğu durumlarda kullanılmaktadır. Sömürgecilik terimi aynı zamanda bu sistemi meşrulaştırmak veya yaymak için kullanılan bir dizi inanca da işaret etmektedir, zira Sömürgeciler kendilerinin sömürdükleri insanlardan daha üstün olduklarına inanırlar. Sömürdükleri insanları gelişmemiş toplumlardan seçerler. Dünya bu sömürgecileri, gelişmemiş toplumları refaha kavuşturmak ve gelişmelerinde katkıda bulunmak amacıyla baskı altında tuttukları şeklinde algılar veya algılanması sağlanır. Bir bakıma iyimserlik havası estirilir. Sözde bilimsel teorilerle de desteklenmeye çalışılan bu tip inançlar daha çok 19. yüzyılda Avrupa'da yayılmış ve Avrupalıların tüm dünyada sömürgeci güç olarak yayılmasının da sözde meşru dayanağı olmuştur.

Avrupa sömürgeciliği kabaca iki büyük dalgaya ayrılabilir. İlki keşiflerle başlamış ikincisi de 19.yüzyılın ikinci yarısında başlayan dönemidir.

Sömürge türleri
Sömürgecilerin büyük kentlerdeki halkları sömürdükleri topraklara taşıdıkları tipe örnek ABD'nin ilk on üç eyaleti, Kanada, Avustralya, Yeni Zelanda, Arjantin ve Sovyet döneminde Sibirya'da gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sömürgeciler sömürdükleri topraklardaki yerli halkı kontrol etmesi veya güçle tehdit etmesi için İngilizlerin Hindistan'da, Mısır'da, Hollandalıların uzak doğuda ve Japonların sömürge imparatorluklarında yaptıkları gibi yöneticiler atarlar. Bazen Latin Amerika ülkelerinde olduğu gibi sömürgeci gücün kendi topraklarından getirdiği halklar yerli halklarla karışır ki çoğunlukla olan budur; Fransa'nın yönetimi altındaki Cezayir'de veya Güney Rodezya'da olduğu gibi ırken ayrı topluluklar halinde yaşamaya devam ederler.

Bir başka türde de Barbados, Saint-Domingue ve Jamaika gibi ülkelerdeki geniş çiftliklere (plantasyon) beyaz sömürgeciler siyah köleler getirerek çalıştırırlar. Bir diğer sömürge türünde ise sömürgenin asıl amacı bölgenin daha geniş bir şekilde kolonize edilmesi değil ticarettir.

İlk Avrupa sömürgeciliği

Doğu ve Batı yarımkürelerindeki Avrupa sömürgeciliğinin kökleri, baharat ticareti için kaynak bulmak ve masalsı krallıkların varlığını keşfetmek isteyen Portekiz kaşiflere kadar geri gider. Avrupa dışındaki ilk ayak izi Ceuta'nın 1415'te fethedilmesiyle atılır. On beşinci yüzyılda Portekizli denizciler 1488'de Bartolomeu Dias'ın Ümit Burnu'nun çevresinden dolanarak Afrika kıtasının aşılabildiğini gösterip Vasco da Gama'nın 1498'de Hindistan'a ulaşmasına yol açana dek Atlantik adalarını ve tüm Afrika sahillerini keşfetmişlerdir.

Portekizli denizcilerin başarıları Kristof Kolomb'un 1492'de İspanyol finansmanıyla batı kıyılarına doğru yeni bir keşif rotasına çıkmasının önünü açmıştır. Kolomb Japon sahillerine vardığı inancıyla günümüzde Bahamalar denilen yere ulaşmış ancak gerçekte Amerika denilen yeni bir kıta keşfetmişti.

İlk sömürgecilikte şirketlerin rolü
Batı sömürgeciliği başından bu yana kamu-özel girişimin ortaklığıyla yürütülmüştür. Kolomb'un Amerika seyahatlerinin masrafı kısmen İtalyan yatırımcıları tarafından karşılanmıştır. İngiltere, Fransa ve Hollanda sömürgelerde ticari yatırım gerçekleştiren Doğu Hindistan Şirketleri ve Hudson's Bay Şirketine ticari tekel hakkı tanımış ve ticaret, sömürgedeki zenginlikleri sömüren ve Avrupa ülkelerine taşınması şeklinde gerçekleştirilmiştir.

Afrika'nın sömürgeleştirilmesi

Afrika'nın Sömürgeleştirilmesi, 15. yüzyılda köle ticareti ile başlamış ve uzun yıllar sürmüştür. Bunu en iyi anlatan terim İngilizce bir deyim olan "Afrika'ya hücum"dur.

Afrika'yı bir köle kaynağı olarak görenler, şimdi onunla hem hammadde kaynağı, hem de pazar olarak ilgilenmeye başladılar. Ama bunun için Afrika'da çalıştıracak işgücüne ihtiyaçları vardı. Köleciliğin yasaklanması doğrudan bununla ilişkiliydi. Afrikalıların kurtuluşu olarak ilan edilen bu yeni süreç, köleliğin yeni bir biçiminden başka bir şey değildi. Köle tacirleri, madenlere ya da çiftliklere işçi temin eden kuruluşlar halinde örgütlendi.

İspanyol sömürgeleri

Kuzey ve Güney Amerika başta Güney Amerika'nın pek çok bölgesi, Orta Amerika, Meksika, Karayiplerin bazı bölgeleri ve ABD'nin büyük bir kesimi olmak üzere İspanya'nın hakimiyeti altına girmişti.

İlk dönemde Konkistadorlar (İspanyolca bir kelimedir ve sömürge askerleri, kaşifleri vs. ifade etmektedir) ile kraliyet otoritesi arasında çekişme yaşanmıştır. Konkistador asker ve memurlara ücret karşılığı olarak geniş topraklar ve yerli işçi çalıştırma hakkı verilmişti.

Britanya sömürgeciliği

Britanya İmparatorluğunun denizaşırı bölgelere yerleşmesinin kökleri 1485-1509 tarihleri arasında tahtta bulunan İngiliz Kralı VII. Henry'nin denizcilik alanıyla ilgili politikalarında yer almaktadır. Selefi Kral III.Richard'ın başlattığı ve 1707 sonrası Britanya sömürgeciliği için büyük önemi olan British East India Company gibi şirketlere de öncülük eden yün ticaretine yönelik deniz ticareti sistemi kurmuştu. Henry aynı zamanda küçük deniz kuvvetlerini genişletmiş ve Britanya'nın İlk denizaşırı kolonisini kuran İtalyan denizci John Cabot'un -Kral Henry adına Newfoundland'da koloni kurmuştur 1496 ve 1497 yılındaki seyahatlerinin de sponsorluğunu yapmıştı.

VIII. Henry babasının başlattığı işi devam ettirmiş ve Britanya deniz kuvvetlerini geliştirmeye devam etmişti.

Kraliçe I. Elizabeth döneminde Sir Francis Drake kuzey California'ya ayak basmış ve İngiliz Kraliyeti adına buraya Nova Albion (Albion İngiltere için kullanılan antik bir isimdi) adıyla yönetimi altına almıştı. İngiltere'nin Avrupa dışındaki bölgelere ilgisi gittikçe artmış ve ilk defa John Dee tarafından "Britanya İmparatorluğu" ifadesi öne sürülmüştü. Denizcilik konusunda uzman olan John Dee imparatorluk kavramına ilişkin bakış açısını Dante'nin "Monarchia" kitabından almıştı.

Humphrey Gilbert Cabot'u izlemiş ve 1583'te Newfoundland'ı sefer düzenlemiş ve 5 Ağustos'ta bölgenin Britanya kolonisi olduğunu ilan etmişti. Sir Walter Raleigh ise Kuzey Carolina'da Roanoke Adalarında 1587'de ilk koloniyi kurmuştu. Gilbert'in Newfoundland ve Roanoke'deki kolonilerinin ömrü yiyecek kıtlığı, hava koşulları gibi sebeplerle kısa olmuştu.

Fransız sömürgeciliği

Fransız sömürge imparatorluğu 17.yüzyılda başlar ve 1960'lara kadar sürer. 19.ve 20 yüzyıllarda Fransız sömürge imparatorluğu İngiliz İmparatorluğu'nun ardından gelen ikinci büyük sömürge imparatorluğuydu ve en geniş sınırlarına 1919 ve 1939 arasında ulaşmış, ikinci Fransız sömürge imparatorluğu 13.000.000 km²'yi aşmıştı. Bu rakam dünya toprağının 8.7%'dir.

Fransız sömürge yayılmacılığı 16.yüzyılın başlarında Giovanni da Verrazzano ve Jacques Cartier'in seyahatleriyle başlar. Ancak İspanya'nın Amerika kıtası üzerindeki tekelini koruması ve Din Savaşları Fransa'nın koloniler kurma çabalarını engellemişti. Fransanın ilk koloni kurma teşebbüsü 1555'te Brezilya'da Rio de Janeiro'dadır (o dönemde Fransız Antarktiki olarak adlandırılıyordu). 1612'de São Luís'de Portekiz ve İspanyol engeliyle karşılaştığı için başarısız olan Fransa Florida'da da benzer teşebbüslere girişmişti.

Fransız ve İngiliz sömürgeleri
Fransızlar sömürdükleri bölgelerdeki halklara çok daha acımasız davranırken İngilizlerin kolonilerine bir müttefik gibi davranması Fransızları sömürge savaşında geri düşürmüştür.

Fransızların sömürge halklarına alt sınıf muamelesi yapmaları sömürgeleri fakirleştirmiştir ve fakirleştikleri için Fransa'ya daha az yarar sağlamışlardır. Örneğin eski İngiliz sömürgeleri olan Yeni Zelanda, Avustralya, Kanada bugün gayet zengin devletlerken Fransız sömürüsüne maruz kalan Cezayir, Suriye, Vietnam oldukça yoksul durumdadır.

ABD yayılma siyaseti

ABD'nin yayılmacı siyasetinin arkasında şu nedenlerin yattığı gösterilmektedir:

 ABD'nin endüstri ve ziraati ihtiyacın ötesinde büyümüştü. James G. Blaine gibi iş camiası ve siyasetin önde gelen figürleri daha fazla ekonomik büyüme için yabancı pazarların gerekli olduğu ve bunun için de saldırgan bir dış politika izlenmesi gerektiğine inanmaktaydılar.
 Ernst Haeckel'in "biyogenik yasa"sına dikkat çeken John Fiske, Anglo-Saxon ırki üstünlüğü teorisini öne sürmüş, Josiah Strong ise geri ulusları "medenileştirmek ve Hristiyanlaştırmak" gerektiği çağrısını yapmıştı. Bunlar Amerikan siyaset düşüncesinde bazı gruplarda giderek büyüyen Sosyal Darvinizm ve ırkçılığın da tezahürleriydi aynı zamanda.
 Frederick Jackson Turner'in geliştirdiği "Öncülük Tezi". Amerika'nın öncülüğü medeniyet için gereken yaratıcılık ve gücü (virility) taşımaktaydı. Çoğu insan Amerikan ruhunun sürdürülmesi için denizaşırı yayılmacılığının hayati olduğuna inanmaktaydı.
 Alfred T. Mahan'ın 1890'da yayımlanan "The Influence of Sea Power upon History" adlı eseri ABD'nin "dünya gücü" konumunun yükselmesi için gereken üç unsur olduğunu öne sürmüştü: Güney Amerika'da bir kanal inşası (Panama Kanalının inşası fikrinin de kaynağıdır), ABD deniz gücünün genişletilmesi ve Pasifik'de Çin ile ticareti geliştirmek için ticari/askeri bir yapı, karakol inşası. Bu yayın Roosevelt gibi başkanların politikaları ve daha güçlü bir deniz kuvvetlerinin kurulması konusunda etkili olmuştu.

Sömürgelerin bağımsızlığa kavuşması

Sömürge ülkelerde I. Dünya Savaşı sonrasında ulusal özgürlük hareketleri başlamasına karşın II. Dünya Savaşının sonuna kadar bu hareketler başarıya ulaşamamışlardı.

1952'de nüfus bilimci Alfred Sauvy, Soğuk Savaş sırasında Batı ile ittifak içinde olmamakla birlikte Sovyet Bloğuna da dahil olmayan ülkeleri tanımlamak için "Üçüncü Dünya" terimini ortaya attı. Bunu takip eden yıllarda sömürgelikten kurtulan ulusların sayısında artış oldu ve bu grup Birleşmiş Milletler'de temsil edilmeye başladı. Üçüncü Dünya'nın ilk uluslararası hareketi Hindistan'dan Nehru, Mısır'dan Nasır ve Yugoslavya'dan Tito'nun başını çektiği, 1955 yılında dünya nüfusunun yarısından fazlasına sahip olan 29 ülkenin bir araya gelerek gerçekleştirdiği Bandug Konferansı'dır.

ABD Başkan Wilson'un ilkelerinde de görülebileceği başta sömürge güçlerine karşı olduğunu ilan etmesine karşın Musaddık'ın İran petrolünü ulusallaştırmasına karşı çıkmış ve Şah'a baskı uygulamak için 1953 yılındaki darbeyi desteklemiş, bir sonraki yıl Guatemala başkanı Arbenz'in United Fruit'i ulusallaştırma çabasına karşılık Amerikan Gizli Servisi düzenlediği operasyonla yerine askerî cuntayı geçirmişti.

Bu müdahalelere rağmen sömürgelikten kurtulma süreci devam etmiş 1960'ta bazı ulusal kurtuluş hareketlerinden sonra Birleşmiş Milletler üye sayısı 99'a 1980'de 154'e 1990'da ise 159'a yükselmişti.

Yeni sömürgecilik

Dünya'da 1960-70'lerde sömürgecilik sona ermesine karşın eskiden sömürge olan ülkeler günümüzde hâlâ güçlü Batı etkisi altındadırlar. Devam eden bu Batı etkisi yeni sömürgecilik şeklinde adlandırılmaktadır. Bu durumun tek istisnası Doğu Asya Kaplanları denilen (Hong Kong, Singapur, Güney Kore ve Tayvan) ile Hindistan ve Çin'dir. Yine de sömürgecilik Hindistan'da 1984 yılında gerçekleşen Bhopal felaketi gibi birtakım izler bırakmıştır. Hindistan'ın Bhopal eyaletindeki böcek ilacı fabrikasındaki patlama 40 ton Metil Isocyanate'in (MIC) çevreye yayılmasına yol açmış ve çevre bölgedeki 150 bin ila 600 bin kadar insan bundan etkilenmiş, daha sonra en az 15 bin kadar insan da ölmüştür. Fabrikanın sahibi olan Union Carbide hiçbir zaman Birleşik Devletlerdeki korunma tedbirlerini uygulamamıştır.

Soğuk Savaş döneminde Rusya ve Çin, Birleşik Devletlerin ve NATO'nun çeşitli ülkelere müdahalesine karşı anti-emperyalist hareketleri desteklemişler buna karşılık Birleşik Devletler ve Fransa "Özgür Dünya" denilen bloktan Komünist bloğa kayma riskine karşı demokrasi yerine üçüncü dünyada diktatörlükleri desteklemişlerdir.

ABD'nin müdahalesi
Soğuk Savaş dönemi Rusya ve Çin'in antiemperyalist hareketleri desteklemekte, ABD ve diğer NATO ülkeleri de çeşitli ülkelerin iç işleri müdahale etmekteydiler. Bunların en bilinen örneği 1959 Küba Devrimi sonrasında Küba'ya karşı 7 Şubat 1962'de başlayan ambargo Domuzlar Körfezi Baskını, Küba Projesi gibi gizli operasyonların desteklenmesidir. ABD ve Fransa bu amaçla Üçüncü Dünya ülkelerinde demokrasi yerine diktatörlükleri desteklemiştir.

Fransa'nın müdahalesi
Fransa, Afrika'daki eski kolonilerin diktatörlük rejimlerini desteklemişti. Anti-neokolonyalist Survie NGO örgütü üyesi François-Xavier Verscha, Fransızların kıtaya yaptıkları müdahaleleri Françafrique olarak isimlendirmekte ve sömürge sonrası ülkelere gelişme yardımına bu yardımların yalnızca yeni sömürgeciliği, ülke içi yozlaşmayı ve silah ticaretine destek verdiğini söyleyerek karşı çıktı. Üçüncü Dünya ülkelerinin gelişmiş ülkelere borçlandırılması eski sömürgeci ülkelerin bu ülkeleri baskı veya kontrol altına alma yollarından biriydi.

Birleşmiş Milletler listesi (kendi yönetimine kavuşmamış bölgeler)

Daha önce listede yer alanlar

Bu listede daha önce geçmişte kendi yönetimini devralmayan bölgeler yer almaktadır.

Ayrıca bakınız
 Emperyalizm
 Antiemperyalizm
 Postkolonyalizm
 Yeni Sömürgecilik
 Addis Ababa Konferansı
 Fransız Sömürge İmparatorluğu

Dış bağlantılar
 Basic Statistics for United States Imperialism
 British Empire

Kaynakça
 Non-Self-Governing Territories  listed by General Assembly of the United Nations in 2002.

Sömürgecilik


2019 ඉන්දු–පාකිස්තානු අවුල යනු මතභේදකාරී කාශ්මීර ප්‍රදේශයෙහි සහ එහි අසල්වැසි පළාත් තුල දැනට සිදුවෙමින් පවතින හමුදාමය අර්බුදයකි. ජම්මු සහ කාශ්මීරය වෙතින් පැමිණි සටන්කාමියෙකු විසින් සිදුකල මරාගෙන මැරෙන බෝම්බ පිපිරවීමකින්, 2019 පෙබරවාරි 14 දිනදී, ඉන්දියානු  මධ්‍යම උප-සේවා පොලිස් බලකායෙහි සාමාජීකයන් 40 දෙනෙකු මිය යෑමෙහි සිද්ධිය මත මූලික වශයෙන් පදනම්ව මෙම අවුල ඇරඹී ඇත. පකිස්තානයෙහි-පදනම්ව සිටින ජයීෂ්-ඊ-මොහම්මද් නමැති සටන්කාමී සංවිධානය විසින් මෙම ප්‍රහාරයෙහි වගකීම භාරගන්නා ලදි. පකිස්තානු රජය විසින් ප්‍රහාරය හෙලා දුටු අතර, එය හා කිසිදු සම්බන්ධයක් නොමැති බව ප්‍රකාශ කලේය.

මෙයට ප්‍රතිචාරයක් වශයෙන්, ඉන්දියානු ගුවන් හමුදාව විසින් පෙබරවාරි 26 දිනදී කාශ්මීරයෙහි පාලන රේඛාව (එල්ඕසී) ඔබ්බෙහි ගුවන් ප්‍රහාර එල්ල කරන ලද අතර,  1971 ඉන්දු-පාකිස්තානු යුද්ධයට අනතුරුව සිදුවූ පළමුවන එවන් ගුවන් ප්‍රහාර විය. ඉන්දියානු රජය ප්‍රකාශ කලේ එය විසින්   ත්‍රස්තවාදී පුහුණු කඳවුරක් ඉලක්ක කොට ප්‍රහාර සිදු කල බවත් එය විසින් සටන්කාමීන් කිහිප දෙනෙකු මරා දැමුණු බවත්ය.  ඉලක්ක ගත ප්‍රදේශයෙහි දේශිය නිවැසියන් විසින් සහ  පකිස්තානු හමුදාවන් විසින් මෙම හිමිකම් පෑම ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කල අතර, එය විසින් කියාපෑවේ ආපාතිකයන් කිසිවෙක් නොමැති අතර යටිතල ව්‍යුහයන් වෙතට කිසිදු හානියක් සිදු නොවූ බවයි.

පෙබරවාරි 26 සහ 27 දින වලදී, ඉන්දියාව සහ පකිස්තානය විසින් එල්ඕසී හරහා වෙඩි හුවමාරු කර ගත්හ. සුළු සටන් වලදී ඉන්දියානු සොල්දාදුවන් දහ දෙනෙකු තුවාල ලදහ. ෂෙල් වෙඩි ප්‍රහාර වලින් පාකිස්තානු සිවිල් වැසියන් සතර දෙනෙකු මිය ගියහ.

පෙබරවාරි 27 දිනදී, පාකිස්තානය විසින් ඉන්දියානු-පරිපාලනය යටතේ පවතින කාශ්මීරය තුල ගුවන් ප්‍රහාර එල්ල කල අතර කිසිදු ආපාතිකයන් හෝ හානියක් හෝ එයින් සිදු නොවීය. පාකිස්තානය කියා සිටියේ පාකිස්තානු ගුවන් අවකාශය තුලදී ඉන්දියානු ජෙට් යානා දෙකක් බිම හෙලූ අතර ගුවන් නියමුවන් දෙදෙනෙකු අත් අඩංගුවට ගත් බවයි. ඉන්දියාව පැවසුවේ  මිග්-21 යානා එකක් පමණක් අහිමි වූ බවත් එහි නියමුවා වහා නිදහස් කල යුතු බවත්ය. පාකිස්තානු ඒෆ්-16 යානාවක් බිම හෙලූ බවට ඉන්දියාව විසින් හිමිකම් පෑ නමුදු, පාකිස්තානය විසින් එය නිෂ්ප්‍රභා කෙරිණි. එක් ඉන්දියානු නියමුවෙක්, අභිනන්දන් වර්තනාන්, පමණක් අත්අඩංගුවෙහි පසුවන බව පාකිස්තානය විසින් පසුව පැහැදිලි කර සිටි අතර, පසුව එනම් මාර්තු 1 දිනදී ඔහු නිදහස් කෙරිණි.

මූලාශ්‍ර

2019 ඉන්දු–පාකිස්තානු අවුල