Latest news with #Boardman
Business Insider
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Business Insider
The UK is training Ukrainian soldiers to make 'every shot count'. They don't have ammo to waste.
This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Western training for Ukrainian soldiers includes trying to make them as "lethal as possible" while also preserving ammunition, as they lack the deep ammo stores of their Russian foes. Col. Boardman, the commanding officer of the UK-led training program Operation Interflex, told Business Insider that the training is designed to ensure that Ukraine's soldiers use every shot that they have as effectively as possible. "The Ukrainians don't have the luxury of a huge amount of ammunition in the way the Russians do," he said. It means Ukraine needs to "make best use of the ammunition they've got." Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a grinding fight that has consumed mountains of ammunition. With a much smaller arsenal, Ukraine has often found itself at a disadvantage and grappling with critical shortages. A Ukrainian soldier in the back of a vehicle. Fermin Torrano/Anadolu via Getty Images Fighting effectively while at that disadvantage has been baked into the training, which has been provided by the UK and 13 other allied nations to more than 56,000 Ukrainians. "We are focusing on making sure the soldiers that we train are as lethal as possible," Boardman said of the efforts to train them on small arms like rifles "Making every shot count in a literal sense is really important for the Ukrainians," he said. "So we spend quite a lot of time on the range coaching the marksmanship of the guys we're training to make sure that they do make every shot count when they get to the front." He explained that they're "trying to make the soldiers not only able to survive in the environment but also be as lethal, be as effective as they can be." Ukraine has a booming defense industry, but it still gets much of its weaponry and ammunition from Western partners. It's faced shortages as partner stockpiles are strained and as the US, previously a major supplier of war aid, sometimes pauses support amid political drama. Ukrainian soldiers take part in Operation Interflex in England. Alastair Grant / POOL / AFP Those shortages have, at times, meant that Ukraine's soldiers have to ration ammunition, leaving them unable to prosecute targets in their sights, Western soldiers who have fought for Ukraine in this war have told Business Insider. Related stories Business Insider tells the innovative stories you want to know Business Insider tells the innovative stories you want to know Big wars eat up a lot of ammunition Ukraine's ammunition struggles have been a serious wake-up call for Western militaries, which are closely watching the war to see what sort of weapons and tactics are needed for modern war against a great power adversary. Western countries are sounding the alarm over not having enough ammunition. The West is behind in solving that problem. Last month, the head of the NATO alliance warned that Russia produces as much ammunition in three months as NATO does in a year and called for a "quantum leap" in how Europe defends itself. Both large defense companies and startups are trying to solve this issue, but there's a huge gap to bridge. The shortage is just one indication of how this war is different from those the West has experienced in the last few decades. Those have been fights like counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency operations against adversaries that Western militaries had outgunned. Russia, by contrast, has one of the world's largest militaries, and the war is one marked by the resurgence of old methods, like trench warfare, along with advanced technology like drones. It is a long and grinding fight with hundreds of thousands of war dead. Drones have played a huge role in Russia's invasion of Ukraine and Ukraine's fightback. REUTERS/Sofiia Gatilova Ukraine is experiencing a fight unlike any the West has seen recently and passing lessons to Western partners that are not directly involved. That unusual dynamic is reflected in the Western trainings of Ukrainian soldiers, Boardman said. Some of the soldiers trained already have front-line experience. So, for example, when they are being taught trench clearance, they "know very well how to clear a trench because they were doing it a few weeks ago." They sometimes push back on what the instructors tell them to do, saying it won't work in this conflict. Boardman said that feedback is welcome. What happens, he said, is that NATO best practices and the Ukrainians' direct combat experience get combined. There is a "really rich mutual understanding going on," and the training ultimately "ends up with the sum being much greater than the parts, which is really valuable for us." Boardman said that even though the UK has "spent 20 or so years in the counterinsurgency focus," the training for Ukrainians is largely similar to what is given to the UK's own basic recruits, just with some specific focuses tailored to their war, like mines, drone warfare, and electronic warfare. "We probably teach them more than we would teach our British Army recruits because our British Army recruits don't go straight to war off the back of their basic training," he said. Boardman said the UK and its allies benefit from training Ukrainians too, getting direct feedback about how to fight Russia for their soldiers. He said trainers are "learning a lot from the Ukrainians," and "we are also feeding all that knowledge into the British Army." The UK hosts trainings for Ukrainian troops under its Operation Interflex program. HENRY NICHOLLS/AFP via Getty Images Boardman praised Ukraine's soldiers, saying its new recruits pick up on "how to operate a weapon incredibly quickly." He said that Ukraine's military focuses on the quality of its soldiers, choosing that as its strategy because it "hasn't got the size, the sheer mass of the Russian military." He said Ukraine decided to increase the length of Interflex training from 35 days to almost 50. "I'm really impressed, frankly, that they've done that because they could easily have said, 'We need recruits quickly. We just need numbers. Can we shorten the course a bit? Can you get through to us faster?' But they've done the opposite," Boardman said.
Business Insider
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Business Insider
Western trainers use amputee actors to prep Ukrainian recruits for the 'shock' of blown-off limbs and other war wounds
To prepare Ukrainian soldiers who come through the UK for training for the horrors of war with Russia, trainers have been employing amputees as wounded soldiers to make it feel real and introduce a bit of "shock." Col. Boardman, the commanding officer of the UK-led training program Operation Interflex, told Business Insider that the training for Ukrainian recruits includes a first aid course using actors. "Quite a lot of them are amputees," he said. "That adds a real sense of realism to the exercises: When you come across the casualty and it's someone with a leg missing at the knee and lots of theater makeup all over them." "And the idea is to bring a bit of shock and a little bit of reality to really get the recruit into the moment to make them really think it's a genuine casualty they're having to deal with." "Actually putting a tourniquet on a stump is different to putting a tourniquet on a healthy leg," he said. For the training, fake blood and burn makeup create the perception of a severe war injury. The UK and partner nations have trained more than 56,000 Ukrainians to fight against Russia's invasion as part of Operation Interflex. Ukrainians have come to the UK to learn from the militaries of the UK and 13 other allied nations, including Australia, Canada, Denmark, and Lithuania. The training is provided to new recruits, as well as ones with combat experience. A dangerous, brutal war Drones that scream as they dive into vehicles and dismounted troops and explode, close-quarters combat in trenches, artillery raining down along the front, the war in Ukraine has been a grinding, horrific fight with tremendous losses. The UK Ministry of Defence said last month that Russia is estimated to have suffered around 1 million combat losses in Ukraine. Ukraine and its partners do not share figures for Ukrainian losses, but a recent study put its casualties at almost 400,000. Between combatants, the total war dead is in the hundreds of thousands. This war has been catastrophic. Warnings from Western generals in recent years have come true in Ukraine. They had warned that soldiers in modern warfare may no longer have the lifesaving " golden hour," the first 60 minutes after getting injured, the window when higher-level care and treatment can drastically increase chances of survival. Soldiers and combat medics in Ukraine previously told BI that the ability to receive trauma care during the so-called "golden hour" that Western militaries enjoyed in conflicts in recent decades simply doesn't exist in this war. Control of the air in Iraq and Afghanistan, for instance, meant warfighters could be medevaced to field hospitals and other facilities rather than, as it is in Ukraine, leaving troops dependent solely on first aid in the field, with proper care hours or even days away. An American veteran of the conflicts in the Middle East who also served in Ukraine said injuries that could be easily treated if soldiers could get proper medical care quickly often instead result in amputations and deaths. That puts pressure on combat medics, and fellow soldiers, to provide the best possible care they can in the field, making rigorous training crucial. Boardman said instructors try to integrate medical training throughout the training. The Ukrainians consistently say that "they'd like more of it because they're very conscious that it is literally lifesaving treatment." He said combat medicine is taught to Ukrainians from the very beginning, even in the course for new recruits. He explained that "it gives them enormous confidence in the event of themselves becoming a casualty or one of their colleagues." Training Ukraine's soldiers Boardman said that the course is structured around what any military recruit would need to survive and be effective, with some specifics for this war added, like drone warfare basics. "We probably teach them more than we would teach our British Army recruits because our British Army recruits don't go straight to war off the back of their basic training," Boardman said. He explained that "we're trying to make the soldiers not only able to survive in the environment but also be as lethal, as effective, as they can be." Much of the course is driven by what the Ukrainian soldiers say they need. For the Western trainers, the war that Ukraine is facing is unlike their own experiences. Ukraine is facing a major land war featuring trench warfare and artillery battles reminiscent of the World Wars mixed together with drone warfare unlike anything the world has seen before. The Ukrainians are battling a much larger adversary with key advantages in manpower, equipment, and industry. Boardman said that the dynamic is something instructors are aware of and act accordingly. He shared that Ukrainian commanders and sergeants often come from front-line units and "know very well how to clear a trench because they were doing it a few weeks ago. " Sometimes, the Ukrainians will push back on certain theories of war, noting that they didn't work when employed in combat. He said that the militaries doing the training hold institutional credibility from decades of experience, so "whatever the potential skepticism of experienced Ukrainian soldiers on arrival here, their chain of command, their senior headquarters have decided that it's worth their while to come here and be trained." But that doesn't mean it's rigid. The training is flexible and subject to changes based on feedback received even from the lower-ranking Ukrainian soldiers. "That wouldn't need to come as a letter from Kyiv to tell us to change that" Boardman shared. He said there is a "really rich mutual understanding going on" where the UK and partner countries carefully listen to the Ukrainians' experiences and share NATO doctrine in return, and "it ends up with the sum being much greater than the parts, which is really valuable for us." Boardman said the UK is approaching training "with a humility" and that the trainers are "learning a lot from the Ukrainians." Western nations, especially those in Europe, are increasingly concerned about the Russian threat, and their militaries are rapidly absorbing lessons from the war. "We are also feeding all that knowledge into the British Army," the colonel said.
The Hill
02-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Colorado gets new Trump portrait after he balked at last one
Colorado's Democratic lawmakers said Thursday they would temporarily replace a $11,000 portrait of President Trump in the state Capitol with a painting donated by the White House after he previously criticized the original artwork. Former state Sen. Lois Court (D), chair of the Colorado Capitol Building Advisory Committee, made the decision to decommission Sarah Boardman's portrait of the president following his outspoken criticism of the image. The new portrait created by Vanessa Horabuena of Tempe, Ariz., is 'currently being framed' Court told The Colorado Sun. Trump has requested that the painting be printed with a golden border so it would catch the light and 'glimmer,' The Guardian reported. The Colorado Capitol Building Advisory Committee is expected to discuss which Trump portrait will permanently hang in the Capitol by September. 'Nobody likes a bad picture or painting of themselves, but the one in Colorado, in the State Capitol … was purposefully distorted to a level that even I, perhaps, have never seen before,' Trump wrote about Boardman's painting in a March post on Truth Social. 'In any event, I would much prefer not having a picture than having this one,' he added. After his comments, state Republicans urged leaders to remove the painting, which Colorado's former senate president Kevin Grantham (R) raised thousands to commission for 'tourists, visitors, and Colorado history buffs' to enjoy. Boardman, who painted former President Obama's portrait in the Capitol, said her painting of Trump is historically neutral. 'My portrait of President Trump has been called thoughtful, non-confrontational, not angry, not happy, not tweeting. In five, 10, 15, 20 years, he will be another president on the wall who is only historical background and he needs to look neutral,' she told Art News. The image was unveiled in 2019 and Boardman says she has since faced financial repercussions due to the president's criticism, according to The Colorado Sun.
Time of India
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Trump's lawyer says no immediate deportations under birthright citizenship order, as judges to decide on challenges
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Also Read: US Supreme Court may rule on allowing enforcement of Trump birthright citizenship limits Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Popular in NRI Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads President Donald Trump 's administration will not deport children deemed ineligible for US citizenship until his executive order curtailing birthright citizenship takes effect on July 27, a government lawyer said on Monday after being pressed by two federal separate hearings in lawsuits challenging Trump's order, US District Judges Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland, and Joseph LaPlante in Concord, New Hampshire, set expedited schedules to decide whether the order can be blocked again on grounds that the US Supreme Court 's ruling on Friday curbing the ability of judges to impede his policies nationwide does not preclude injunctions in class action judges asked US Department of Justice lawyer Brad Rosenberg, who represented the government in both cases, for assurances that the Trump administration would not move to deport children who do not have at least one parent who is a US citizen or legal permanent resident at least until the executive order takes said it would not, which Boardman and LaPlante respectively asked him to confirm in writing by Tuesday and the Maryland case, immigrant rights advocates revised their lawsuit just a few hours after the 6-3 conservative majority US Supreme Court on Friday ruled in their case and two others challenging Trump's executive order. The New Hampshire lawsuit, a proposed class action, was filed on Supreme Court ruling did not address the merits or legality of Trump's birthright citizenship order, but instead curbed the ability of judges to issue "universal" injunctions to block the Republican president's policies while the Supreme Court restricted the ability of judges to issue injunctions that cover anyone other than the parties appearing before them, Justice Amy Coney Barrett's opinion held out the possibility that opponents of a federal policy could still obtain the same type of relief if they instead pursued cases as class Powell, a lawyer for immigration rights groups and pregnant non-citizen mothers pursuing the case, told Boardman at a hearing on Monday that an immediate ruling was necessary to address the fears and concerns migrants now face as a result of the Supreme Court's decision."They want to see how fast we can get class relief because they are afraid about their children and their babies and what their status might be," Powell executive order, which he issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of US-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" Friday's ruling, the high court narrowed the scope of the three injunctions issued by federal judges in three states, including Boardman, that prevented enforcement of his directive nationwide while litigation challenging the policy played judges had blocked the policy after siding with Democratic-led states and immigrant rights advocates who argued it violated the citizenship clause of the US Constitution's 14th Amendment, which has long been understood to recognize that virtually anyone born in the United States is a rights advocates in the hours after the Supreme Court ruled swiftly launched two separate bids in Maryland and New Hampshire to have judges grant class-wide relief on behalf of any children nationally who would be deemed ineligible for birthright citizenship under Trump's Supreme Court specified the core part of Trump's executive order cannot take effect until 30 days after Friday's ruling. Boardman on Monday pressed Rosenberg on what it could do before then."Just to get to the heart of it, I want to know if the government thinks that it can start removing children from the United States who are subject to the terms of the executive order," Boardman said at the end of the scheduled further briefing in the case to continue through July 9, with a ruling to follow. LaPlante scheduled a hearing for July said the Trump administration objected to the plaintiffs' attempt to obtain the same relief through a class action. He stood by the administration's view of the constitutionality of Trump's order."It is the position of the United States government that birthright citizenship is not guaranteed by the Constitution," he said.
AsiaOne
01-07-2025
- Politics
- AsiaOne
Trump lawyer says no immediate deportations under birthright citizenship order, as judges to decide on challenges, World News
President Donald Trump's administration will not deport children deemed ineligible for US citizenship until his executive order curtailing birthright citizenship takes effect on Sunday (July 27), a government lawyer said on Monday after being pressed by two federal judges. During separate hearings in lawsuits challenging Trump's order, US District Judges Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland, and Joseph LaPlante in Concord, New Hampshire, set expedited schedules to decide whether the order can be blocked again on grounds that the US Supreme Court's ruling on Friday curbing the ability of judges to impede his policies nationwide does not preclude injunctions in class action lawsuits. Both judges asked US Department of Justice lawyer Brad Rosenberg, who represented the government in both cases, for assurances that the Trump administration would not move to deport children who do not have at least one parent who is a US citizen or legal permanent resident at least until the executive order takes effect. Rosenberg said it would not, which Boardman and LaPlante respectively asked him to confirm in writing by Tuesday and Wednesday. In the Maryland case, immigrant rights advocates revised their lawsuit just a few hours after the 6-3 conservative majority US Supreme Court on Friday ruled in their case and two others challenging Trump's executive order. The New Hampshire lawsuit, a proposed class action, was filed on Friday. The Supreme Court ruling did not address the merits or legality of Trump's birthright citizenship order, but instead curbed the ability of judges to issue "universal" injunctions to block the Republican president's policies nationwide. But while the Supreme Court restricted the ability of judges to issue injunctions that cover anyone other than the parties appearing before them, Justice Amy Coney Barrett's opinion held out the possibility that opponents of a federal policy could still obtain the same type of relief if they instead pursued cases as class actions. William Powell, a lawyer for immigration rights groups and pregnant non-citizen mothers pursuing the case, told Boardman at a hearing on Monday that an immediate ruling was necessary to address the fears and concerns migrants now face as a result of the Supreme Court's decision. "They want to see how fast we can get class relief because they are afraid about their children and their babies and what their status might be," Powell said. Trump's executive order, which he issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognise the citizenship of US-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. In Friday's ruling, the high court narrowed the scope of the three injunctions issued by federal judges in three states, including Boardman, that prevented enforcement of his directive nationwide while litigation challenging the policy played out. Those judges had blocked the policy after siding with Democratic-led states and immigrant rights advocates who argued it violated the citizenship clause of the US Constitution's 14th Amendment, which has long been understood to recognise that virtually anyone born in the United States is a citizen. Immigrant rights advocates in the hours after the Supreme Court ruled swiftly launched two separate bids in Maryland and New Hampshire to have judges grant class-wide relief on behalf of any children nationally who would be deemed ineligible for birthright citizenship under Trump's order. The Supreme Court specified the core part of Trump's executive order cannot take effect until 30 days after Friday's ruling. Boardman on Monday pressed Rosenberg on what it could do before then. "Just to get to the heart of it, I want to know if the government thinks that it can start removing children from the United States who are subject to the terms of the executive order," Boardman said at the end of the hearing. Boardman scheduled further briefing in the case to continue through July 9, with a ruling to follow. LaPlante scheduled a hearing for July 10. Rosenberg said the Trump administration objected to the plaintiffs' attempt to obtain the same relief through a class action. He stood by the administration's view of the constitutionality of Trump's order. "It is the position of the United States government that birthright citizenship is not guaranteed by the Constitution," he said [[nid:719410]]
