For some of the biggest names in movies, television, and politics, their first big audition was for the United States military.

We collected the best photos we could find of celebrities in uniform that most are used to seeing on a red carpet or elsewhere. Here they are, along with their service branch and dates of service.

1. Drew Carey, US Marine Corps Reserve, 1981-1987

2. Elvis Presley, US Army, 1958-1960

3. Al Gore, US Army, 1969-1971

4. Bea Arthur, US Marine Corps Womens Reserve, 1943-1945

5. Bill Cosby, US Navy, 1956-1960

6. Bob Ross, US Air Force, 1961-1981

7. Chuck Norris, US Air Force, 1958-1962

8. Dan Rather, US Marine Corps, 1954 (was medically discharged shortly after his enlistment)

9. Ed McMahon, US Marine Corps, 1941-1966

10. George Carlin, US Air Force, 1954-1957

11. Hugh Hefner, US Army, 1944-1946

12. Jackie Robinson, US Army, 1942-1944

13. Jimi Hendrix, US Army, 1961-1962

14. Jimmy Stewart, US Army Air Force, 1941-1968

15. John Coltrane, US Navy, 1945-1946

16. Johnny Cash, US Air Force, 1950-1954

17. Kris Kristofferson, US Army, 1960-1965

18. Kurt Vonnegut, US Army, 1943-1945

19. Leonard Nimoy, US Army Reserve, 1953-1955

20. Maynard James Keenan, US Army, 1982-1984

21. Mel Brooks, US Army, 1944-1946

22. Montel Williams, US Marine Corps and US Navy, 1974-1980

23. Morgan Freeman, US Air Force, 1955-1959

24. Paul Newman, US Navy, 1943-1946

25. Rob Riggle, US Marine Corps Reserve, 1990-2013

26. “Shaggy” (Orville Burrell), US Marine Corps, 1988-1992

27. Tom Selleck, US Army National Guard, 1967-1973

SEE ALSO: This is what the first 36 hours of Marine boot camp is like

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Take a tour of the $367 million jet that will soon be called Air Force One

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army is far more heavily engaged around the world than projected when it began slashing force size several years ago, and its commitments will be hard to maintain in the long run as troop numbers shrink, General Ray Odierno said on Friday.

Odierno, the Army chief of staff, said decisions about cutting the size of the force from 570,000 to the current 490,000 were made several years ago when Pentagon planners expected a peaceful Europe, a declining commitment in Afghanistan and no return to Iraq.

Instead, he said, the Army is regularly using three brigades in eastern Europe because of concerns about Russia's support for rebels in Ukraine. It has another three brigades in Afghanistan, a brigade in Iraq, a brigade in Kuwait and is rotating a brigade to South Korea, Odierno added.

"These are all pretty significant requirements. If they do not reduce, it will be hard for us to maintain that over a long period of time," he told reporters.

Odierno, who is due to leave office in a few weeks, said he thought insecurity in eastern Europe and the fight against Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria were both long-term problems.

He predicted defeating Islamic State could take 10 to 20 years, far longer than the administration has projected. But without some relief, either in budget cuts or the breadth of commitments, the Army may not be able to sustain the pace.

"At some point we're going to have to say what we're not going to do because we're not going to be able to do everything we're being asked to do right now," he said.

Odierno said he had been warning for two years that tight budgets would require the Army to cut the active-duty force to 450,000 troops from the current 490,000. He said he was surprised by the recent outcry when the service specified which bases would be hit in the coming years.

"We've been very clear that the Army will have to move down to 450,000 with the current budget we have," he said, noting that a further reduction to about 420,000 could be required if spending reductions continue.

The Pentagon is currently trying to absorb nearly $1 trillion in projected cuts to spending over a decade. The reductions were ordered as part of the Budget Control Act passed in 2011.

Join the conversation about this story »

The shooting that killed four Marines at two military facilities in Chattanooga, Tennessee has prompted questions about how best to protect these centers from potential attacks.

Rand Corporation terrorism and security expert, Brian Michael Jenkins told the New York Times Friday that facilities like the military recruiting center targeted by a 24-year-old gunman Thursday are deemed "soft targets," and are "no more protected than a shoe store in a shopping mall."

Jenkins says the people working there "are in uniform, but unarmed."

That vulnerability has led Oklahoma governor, Mary Fallin (R) to issue an executive order authorizing full-time military personnel to arm themselves at military facilities in the state, KOKH-TV reports.

"It is unfathomable that [unarmed Marines] should be vulnerable for attack in our own communities," Fallin said in a statement Friday.

FBI spokesman Ed Reinhold said the shooting in Chattanooga is being investigated "as an act of terrorism until we can confirm it is not."

It's another in a string of similar attacks against military outposts in the US since 2009. In that period, three different attacks on military installations in the US have left 26 people dead.

Not all of the attacks, however, were a result of homegrown extremism — but such motives have been on the rise, according to analysis from New America, a nonpartisan think tank.

In a July report, the organization found 313 individuals have been charged with jihadist extremism within the United States since 2001.

SEE ALSO: US Army chief of staff: Troop commitments 'will be hard to maintain' for much longer

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Scientists are astonished by these Goby fish that can climb 300-foot waterfalls

The US Army is far more heavily engaged around the world than projected when it began slashing force size several years ago, and its commitments will be hard to maintain in the long run as troop numbers shrink, General Ray Odierno said on Friday.

Odierno, the Army chief of staff, said decisions about cutting the size of the force from 570,000 to the current 490,000 were made several years ago when Pentagon planners expected a peaceful Europe, a declining commitment in Afghanistan and no return to Iraq.

Instead, he said, the Army is regularly using three brigades in eastern Europe because of concerns about Russia's support for rebels in Ukraine.

It has another three brigades in Afghanistan, a brigade in Iraq, a brigade in Kuwait and is rotating a brigade to South Korea, Odierno added.

"These are all pretty significant requirements. If they do not reduce, it will be hard for us to maintain that over a long period of time," he told reporters.

Odierno, who is due to leave office in a few weeks, said he thought insecurity in eastern Europe and the fight against Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria were both long-term problems.

He predicted defeating Islamic State could take 10 to 20 years, far longer than the administration has projected. But without some relief, either in budget cuts or the breadth of commitments, the Army may not be able to sustain the pace.

"At some point we're going to have to say what we're not going to do because we're not going to be able to do everything we're being asked to do right now," he said.

Odierno said he had been warning for two years that tight budgets would require the Army to cut the active-duty force to 450,000 troops from the current 490,000. He said he was surprised by the recent outcry when the service specified which bases would be hit in the coming years.

"We've been very clear that the Army will have to move down to 450,000 with the current budget we have," he said, noting that a further reduction to about 420,000 could be required if spending reductions continue.

The Pentagon is currently trying to absorb nearly $1 trillion in projected cuts to spending over a decade. The reductions were ordered as part of the Budget Control Act passed in 2011.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's how the world's most notorious drug lord escaped from his high-security prison cell

The shooting that killed five Marines at two military facilities in Chattanooga, Tennessee has prompted questions about how best to protect these centers from potential attacks.

Rand Corporation terrorism and security expert, Brian Michael Jenkins told the New York Times Friday that facilities like the military recruiting centertargeted by a 24-year-old gunman Thursday are deemed "soft targets," and are "no more protected than a shoe store in a shopping mall."

Jenkins says the people working there "are in uniform, but unarmed."

That vulnerability has led the governors of at least four states to change that. Oklahoma governor, Mary Fallin (R) issued an executive order Friday allowing personnel to arm themselves at military facilities in the state, KOKH-TV reports.

"It is unfathomable that [unarmed Marines] should be vulnerable for attack in our own communities," Fallin said in a statement Friday.

And on Saturday, the governors of Texas, Florida and Indiana authorized similar orders for National Guard members and recruiting offices.

Six National Guard storefronts in Florida will be relocated to armories.

Florida governor Rick Scott (R) was cited in a Reuters report, saying "Guard members who do not carry weapons should get them and obtain expedited concealed weapon permits, if necessary."

Speaking about the fatal attacks in Chattanooga, Texas governor Greg Abbott (R) said in a news release, "our military personnel must have the ability to defend themselves against these type of attacks on our own soil."

FBI spokesman Ed Reinhold said the shooting in Chattanooga is being investigated "as an act of terrorism until we can confirm it is not."

It's another in a string of similar attacks against military outposts in the US since 2009. In that period, three different shootings at military installations on US soil have left 26 people dead.

Not all of the attacks, however, were the result of homegrown extremism — but such motives have been on the rise, according to analysis from New America, a nonpartisan think tank.

In a July report, the organization found 313 individuals have been charged with jihadist extremism within the United States since 2001.

SEE ALSO: US Army chief of staff: Troop commitments 'will be hard to maintain' for much longer

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: See 240 years of US Army uniforms in 2 minutes

A former military aide-de-camp shares the 21 habits his bosses exhibited that led them to success.

I was privileged in my 23-year Army career to work directly with four very successful general officers.

The lessons I learned from them can be applied to both military and civilian leadership at every level and I promised my peers that one day I would write down what I saw.

As an aide-de-camp, or executive assistant-plus, a few too many times, I discovered the Army left the job rather ill-defined.

Every general gets to set the parameters of the job. Some generals treat their aide-de-camps like slaves and use them to take care of the little stuff they don’t have time for or don’t want to do, while others use them as confidants and advisors and even bring them to high-level meetings to take notes or contribute to the discussion — on top of all the little stuff they don’t have time to do.

My bosses fell into the latter category, which enabled me to meet and observe their interactions with senior political, diplomatic, intelligence, non-governmental, and defense leaders around the world. In my notebooks over the years, I tracked all the activities and techniques that these generals exhibited to succeed in time-sensitive missions and high-profile positions. Below is a list of some of those attributes.

1. Respect others.

People worked hardest and gave the most respect to generals who treated everyone like a human being — an adult human being, not a child. You only get one chance to show your teammates that you value them and regaining their loyalty is nearly impossible once lost. Be a team player.

2. Look first at capability, not rank.

Sometimes the smartest voice in the room is one of the most junior people. Smart generals listen to all advice and ideas and go with the best idea regardless of the source. Often the other high-ranking people have lost the edge on creative solutions.

3. Counsel in private; praise in public.

If you must tell someone about their deficiencies do it away from others. Anytime you can, especially with their peers present, publicly reward your people with a kind word or actual award. Give credit where credit is due.

4. Acknowledge the people behind the scenes.

Hundreds of nameless people enable the daily activities of senior leaders in a given day. Remembering to thank and recognize those people inspires them to do their often thankless jobs. Treating them like servants ensures you a painful experience next time you see them. This goes for your staff as well — don’t let them mistreat others; in the end they are a reflection of you.

5. Give a clear vision.

No one can read minds (well your aide-de-camp better be able to), so frequently and concisely explain your vision about how to achieve the mission at hand. If your vision changes let people know. If people on your team are not doing tasks that achieve the mission, let them know.

6. Trust your subordinates.

Once your team has a clear vision of the overall strategy; empower them and let them do their part. Back them up when they make an honest mistake trying to achieve your vision. Highlight their success to others when someone really gets it right so others may emulate. If you can’t trust them, then maybe they shouldn’t be working for you or you might not be leading them well.

7. Be honest with superiors.

Never sugarcoat your reports about the progress of the mission. Never hold on to bad information — like fish, it only stinks more with passing time. Be respectful, but be honest so that they never accuse you of being a liar or disloyal.

8. Build teams slowly.

Don’t be in a hurry to build a new team for a new project. Hire the right people at the right time of the overall project. Having lots of people sitting around trying to figure out what to do is a recipe for disaster. Having a small team at the beginning that is full of self-starting, creative people you can trust completely will set the entire project up for success.

9. Keep calm and carry on.

Don’t freak out. If you are calm in the midst of chaos the mood will be calm. If you fly off the handle every time something doesn’t go your way, people will stop being honest with you. Everyone is watching you, always.

10. Let incompetent people go.

Be honest with teammates who are not keeping up with the team. Sometimes they lack training and sometimes they have reached their maximum potential. Let them go in the best way possible if they are trying hard. If it’s an ethical issue, then getting them what they deserve is the key.

11. Share information.

Some of the best bosses not only kept almost all information in the public domain, they even cc’ed and bcc’ed them on nearly every email. Use your discretion, but the flatter you can make your organization, the more nimble it can be. Someone you include on your email might already have the answer to the problem; hell, they might have already solved the problem that you are just hearing about for the first time.

12. No one is too busy for correspondence.

I have heard crap generals say they are too busy for email. I guess they are too busy to communicate and likely their people are often guessing what they are thinking. Even if they need their aides to draft multiple daily emails for them, the best generals know how to write well and quickly and communicate constantly in multiple mediums.

13. Always increase your network size.

Never be happy with your circle of contacts and always look for others who you can help or can help you achieve your mission.

14. Help connect people who can help each other.

If you see two people in a day who don’t know each other but should, take time to introduce them. Do this constantly throughout your career.

15. Mentor and coach.

Your job as a leader of two or 200,000 people is to build the next generation of leaders. My bosses took time to teach me the simplest and most complex concepts daily. They did it for everyone they could.

16. You are never off the clock.

Your days as a leader often go into the night and that is okay sometimes. Your people might need you for something important and you need to accept that. Also you can never assume you are free to “be yourself” because you are being watched as a leader. Constantly be your best self and be disciplined.

17. Don’t forget your family.

Here is the sometimes part. You must take care of your family and friends or they will not be there when you need them. Teach your teammates to do this as well.

18. Put the mission first.

Never put personal gain above mission success. It shouldn’t even be a thought. You will be rewarded for a job well done or you won’t. If you are truly a selfless leader, rewards shouldn’t matter. Just do your best.

19. Drop everything you are doing to help a friend.

If a friend asks you to help them, it’s because it’s important and you should immediately help them even if it inconveniences you. They will repay you.

20. Choose your friends wisely.

If you have selected poor friends, then number 19 might ruin your career, so choose well and be honest with yourself about who your friends are, and who might be trying to use you for selfish reasons.

21. Know when you are tired.

There will come a point or a series of moments when you are mentally or physically exhausted. Sometimes you just need to push through like you ask your teammates to do. Sometimes you need to take a break or you will stop being able to live by the previous 20 rules. Your people will know when you need a break so when a trusted friend tells you to take a knee, do it.

Did my bosses exhibit all these traits all the time? They didn’t, but each was great at a majority of these habits allowing them to achieve results while fostering more great leaders.

Are all generals great leaders? No. Some I observed closely wouldn’t make it as a dog catcher. But most exhibit at least some of these skills. Do military and civilian leaders always reward this type of leadership? They don’t. Often military institutions reject great leaders. Sometimes civilians are nervous about having great military leaders around, maybe because great leadership is easy to spot and might lead to comparison.

Nevertheless, if more leaders use these concepts and build the next great generation, we can achieve a majority that upholds Dr. Martin Luther King’s idea of leadership: Don’t worry about being safe, political, or popular nor make decisions out of cowardice, expediency, or vanity; but simply take actions your conscience tells you are right.

SEE ALSO: At age 60, Gen. Stanley McChrystal still wakes up at 4 every morning for an intense workout

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: See 240 years of US Army uniforms in 2 minutes

Basic Training can be incredibly challenging for new recruits, and nothing tests a future soldier’s resolve like the tear gas chamber.

The US Army recently released a video of one cadet’s valiant endurance during tear gas chamber training as a #TBT to last year’s Cadet Basic Training.

The video shows Class of 2018 Cadet Bradley Gibson not only powering through the tear gas like a champ, but reciting the Soldier’s Creed as he does it. Talk about dedication.

The Soldier's Creed goes as follows:

I am an American Soldier.

I am a warrior and a member of a team.

I serve the people of the United States, and live the Army Values.

I will always place the mission first.

I will never accept defeat.

I will never quit.

I will never leave a fallen comrade.

I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and proficient in my warrior tasks and drills.

I always maintain my arms, my equipment and myself.

I am an expert and I am a professional.

I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy, the enemies of the United States of America in close combat.

I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.

I am an American Soldier.

Watch the video here:

SEE ALSO: Daily News goes nuclear on Donald Trump for using 'a foot boo-boo to dodge Vietnam'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: See 240 years of US Army uniforms in 2 minutes

Members of the military have a special language that is very much their own. Here's a cheat sheet on what some of their coolest phrases mean. 

Produced by Eames Yates. Original reporting by Jeremy Bender. Special thanks to Graham Flanagan. 

Follow BI Video: On Facebook

Join the conversation about this story »

The US is committing a "strategic blunder" by removing nearly 3,000 Army personnel from the Arctic as Russia continues its push to militarize the region, Senator Dan Sullivan (R—Alaska) told Anchorage-based KTVA on Sunday. 

"This is a strategic mistake, a strategic blunder in my view by the Department of Defense," Sullivan told KTVA. As part of the US Army drawdown from a force of 490,000 to 450,000 active-duty soldiers, the Army set to remove 2,600 troops from the US's largest state. 

This reduction comes as Russia is aggressively increasing its military presence in the Arctic region. The Kremlin has listed the Arctic as one of three key geopolitical regions for the country's security and has started develop military ports and bases throughout Russia's vast Arctic coastline.

This growing interest in the Arctic as a strategic frontier is a partial result of the environmental transformation of the region as a result of climate change. As ice coverage decreases, Arctic shipping lanes will become more heavily trafficked and massive reserves of natural resources will become exploitable.

The US estimates that a significant proportion of the Earth’s untapped petroleum — including about 15% of the world's remaining oil, up to 30% of its natural gas deposits, and about 20% of its liquefied natural gas — is stored under the Arctic seabed.

Sullivan noted that Alaska's geographic proximity to Russia makes the state even more important, as tensions with the Kremlin continue to simmer over Russian policy in Ukraine. Sullivan believes that the US should place more than just Army forces in Alaska, calling for an increased number of "Coast Guard, icebreakers, and a naval presence [in the state]."

Currently, the US only has two heavy diesel icebreakers and one medium icebreaker compared to Russia's dozen icebreakers in service. While these are not a direct military tool, the vessels play a multifaceted role in any nation's Arctic strategy. The vessels allow a range of other merchant, survey, and military ships to ply through the Arctic ice safely year-round.

The difference in icebreaker strength also highlights Russia's special focus on the militarization of the Arctic. As the US reduces military personnel in the far north, Moscow has undertaken a construction blitz across the Arctic to establish military superiority in the region. Russia is constructing ten Arctic search-and-rescue stations, 16 deepwater ports, 13 airfields, and ten air-defense radar stations across its Arctic coast. 

Moscow has also created a Joint Strategic Command North from components of its Northern Fleet in order to maintain a permanent military presence in the region. 

SEE ALSO: US Coast Guard chief: We are 'not even in the same league as Russia' in the Arctic

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We went inside a secret basement under Grand Central that was one of the biggest World War II targets

The Army has made substantial changes to its uniforms over the years, with more on tap for this year.

In 1775, soldiers put together makeshift hunting shirts to distinguish themselves from the British at the Siege of Boston. Today, they wear sophisticated digital camouflage patterns that help them blend into the mountains of Afghanistan.

Here’s a look back at how Army uniforms have changed over time. This isn’t an exhaustive list, but for a full, in-depth treatment of the subject, check out this great paper from US Army History.

Not surprisingly, the blue Continental Army uniform adopted during the Revolutionary War was similar in style to the British red coat.

After a brief period of Army “uniform confusion” during The War of 1812, the US Army began issuing blue coats such as the ones below in 1813. These remained in service until about 1820, though a shortage of blue wool would lead some state militias and the service academies to use gray.

In 1821, the Army dropped the “tombstone” cap and replaced it with the “bell crown” cap for company officers and enlisted soldiers. The hole in the front was for a colored pompon, a feather-like device which would distinguish what branch of service the soldier belonged to, such as artillery or infantry.

Also in that year, Army regulations introduced the use of epaulets and shoulder wings, which were “generally used to designate the soldier’s rank or some other aspect of status,” according to the Army Quartermaster Museum.

This is what a typical artillery sergeant looked like in 1836.

In 1847, non-commissioned officers were authorized to display chevrons on both sleeves, above the elbow.

Significant changes to the uniform came in 1851, one which would stick with the Army for years to come. Soldiers began wearing the “frock” coat, and colored accents distinguished among branches, with blue indicating infantry and red meaning artillery, for example.

Changes in 1858 and 1860 would define the look of Union soldiers during the American Civil War. This period saw the adoption of brass branch insignia and different hats, although the various regulations of state militias, substitute items, and homemade garments make it hard to nail down the “typical” uniform of the day.

According to the Army History Division, the period between the 1870s to 1880s saw a lack of uniformity among soldiers, due to a uniform shortage and changes to regulations that some soldiers despised.

During the Spanish-American war of 1898, soldiers were issued khaki uniforms for the field.

Soldiers in World War I wore similarly-styled uniforms, though they were olive drab in color. They also wore spiral puttees around their legs.

The US also purchased hundreds of thousands of “Brodie helmets” from the British for Army troops fighting in Europe.

Soldiers in World War II wore olive drab uniforms in the field, along with their newly-designed M1 helmets.

There were also a variety of specialty items introduced, such as cold weather flying jackets for members of the Army Air Force, or coats made specifically for airborne troops.

Prior to World War II, soldiers only wore marksmanship badges, ribbons and service medals. But during and after the war, a number of new specialty awards and badges were created for parachutists, aviators, and infantrymen.

Between the 1940s and 1970s, there were big changes to Army rank structure. Staff sergeants were eliminated in 1948 and made sergeants, only for the rank to be brought back ten years later. In 1954, the Army created the Specialist rank, with different levels that could be obtained, although these were later phased out.

In 1952, The Army adopted its olive green shade utility uniform, which would see use in the wars in Korea and Vietnam.

During the Korean war, some units directed soldiers to sew white name tapes and/or “US Army” onto their uniforms, though it was never universal. In 1953, the Secretary of the Army made the wearing of “US Army” official on uniforms, as a result of negotiations for the end of hostilities with the North Koreans.

While most soldiers in Vietnam wore the standard olive drab uniform, some specialized units — like long range reconnaissance patrol members — were given the Army's Engineer Research and Development Lab-made camouflage pattern, also called the ERDL pattern, although some used a tiger stripe pattern that local south Vietnamese forces had been wearing. In the photo below, a soldier wearing the tigerstripe uniform is in the foreground, while the soldier in the background is wearing the ERDL.

In 1981, the Army adopted its woodland camouflage battle dress uniform. It would become the main field uniform of the Army and the other services until the mid-2000s.

There were also desert-colored versions that soldiers used during Operation Desert Storm in 1991, and the post-9/11 conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Following the Marine Corps’ adoption of a digital-style uniform, the Army introduced its Army Combat Uniform (ACU) in 2004, which was used in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In 2010, soldiers headed to Afghanistan were issued Operation Enduring Freedom Camouflage Patter (OCP) uniforms, better known as “multicam.”

In July, the Army started its transition to the Operational Camouflage Pattern, which the Sgt. Maj. of the Army admits will lead to mixed uniform formations over the course of a slow introduction process. “We will still be the most lethal fighting force the world has even known even if our belts don’t match for the next few years,” he told CNN.

 There were many uniforms not mentioned here, due to the huge diversity of items and stylings that the Army has gone through over the years. If you’d like to see a very in-depth look at army uniforms and weaponry, check out this paper from the US Army’s History Division.

SEE ALSO: Senator: The US is committing a 'strategic blunder' by removing troops from the Arctic as Russia digs in

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: See 240 years of US Army uniforms in 2 minutes

It is one thing to admire a 125 pound Belgian Malinois Military Working Dog from a distance. It is quite another to let it attack you for an Air Force training exercise.

Freelance writer Justin W. Coffey was brave enough to take the road less traveled. After visiting the K-9 kennel on the U.S. Air Force base in Japan where he lives, a Security Forces Commander asked if he was interested in letting one of the animals try and rip him to shreds. Intrigued, he conceded, and wrote about his adventure so readers like us could experience the incident without actually getting throttled by a killer dog.

It was 95 degrees out, so donning the heavily padded safety suit felt like putting on a sauna. After my first encounter with Fritz, I was happy to be wearing it. Sh–, I’d have worn two if it was possible.

The first thing they had me do was hold my arm out while the dog sat there, patiently awaiting its orders. It’s an odd feeling to have an animal as powerful as this one look at you in anger.

And suddenly, before you can even blink, he’s on you, with his teeth sunk into the suit’s arm. They told me to fight, to throw my arm back and forth, to pull up if I could. The idea is to try and prevent the dog from “typewritering,” moving his bite up and down your arm. Being that Fritz is just 25lbs shy of my weight, his bite and subsequent thrashing threw me around like a rag doll.

“Fight back!” The handlers screamed. “Keep him from biting your hand!” It was all in vain; I was typewritered.

They shouted some abrupt orders that I couldn’t understand and Fritz let go, tongue wagging, eagerly awaiting his next command.

“Say something mean to the dog and then run away!” The handlers instructed. “You need to provoke him, it’ll make the pursuit more realistic.”

Alright. “F–k you Fritz!” And I ran, as fast as I could.

SEE ALSO: Here's how the US military's uniforms have changed over the past 250 years

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watching This Dog With Deformed Legs Run For The First Time Will Make Your Day

The American experience in Vietnam was a long and painful one for the nation.

For those against the war, it appeared to be a meat grinder for draftees, unfairly targeting the poor, the uneducated, and minorities.

For those in favor of the war and those who served in the military at the time, the American public and media were (and still are) misled about what happened during the war and so feel betrayed by many at home (Jane Fonda is the enduring symbol of the cultural schism).

The facts not in dispute by either side are just as harrowing: Over 20 years, more than 58,000 Americans were killed in Vietnam and more than 150,000 wounded, not to mention the emotional toll the war took on American culture.

The war ended the Presidency of Lyndon Johnson and left a lasting impression on Richard Nixon’s. It was the backbone to the most tumultuous period in American history since before the Civil War one century prior.

The other facts are not so clear. We are at the fifty year mark for the start of the war, so soon more and more government documents from the period will be declassified. We will learn a great deal about this time in American history. Right now, however, the misinformation, cover-ups, and confusion about Vietnam still pervade our national consciousness. Right now, we can only look back at the war and take stock of what we know was real and what was B.S. from day one.

1. The U.S. first got involved in Vietnam in 1954

Sort of. The official line is the United States sent only supplies and advisors before 1965. Looking back before the fall of French Indochina, Vietnam’s colonial name, the end of World War II saw a briefly independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam under President Ho Chi Minh. Minh even gave a nod to the visiting American OSS agents by paraphrasing the Declaration of Independence in his own Independence speech: “All men are created equal. The Creator has given us certain inviolable rights, the right to life, the right to be free, and the right to achieve happiness.”

Almost as soon as Minh realized the Western allies were going to restore French rule, Chinese advisors and Soviet equipment began to flow to North Vietnamese guerillas. After the Vietnamese Gen. Võ Nguyên Giáp handed the French their asses at Dien Bien Phu, the French left and Vietnam would be split in two. In 1954, an insurgency sprang up, but was quelled by the government of the new South Vietnam, led by Ngô Dình Diem. Unfortunately Diem was as dictatorial as Ho Chi Minh and as Catholic as the Spanish Inquisition.

2. U.S. and South Vietnamese Presidents were shot in 1963, and this would be significant

They were also both Catholic, but that’s where the similarities end. This also may be the death of coherent containment strategy in the country. Diem was shot in an armored personnel carrier on November 2, 1963. At the time, there were 16,000 U.S. advisors in Vietnam. President Kennedy was said to be shocked at the news. Then-Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara said he “had never seen the President more upset.” Both men knew the U.S. government was responsible “to some degree.”

The Pentagon Papers leak explicitly stated the U.S. clandestinely maintained contact with Diem over-throwers and the U.S. government gave the generals in Vietnam the green light to start planning a coup. Twenty days later, Kennedy would himself be shot in the back of a vehicle.

3. Kennedy wanted to get the U.S. military out of Vietnam but couldn’t figure out how

President Kennedy was a fervent believer in the policy of containment and believed in the Domino Theory, but not so much as to wage unending war with the Communists in Vietnam. During his Presidency, he and McNamara actively pursued a way to leave Vietnam, while still maintaining their commitment to a free South through financial support and training. Kennedy wanted all U.S. personnel out by the end of 1965.

Many people refute this theory using a quote Kennedy gave Walter Cronkite: “These people who say we ought to withdraw from Vietnam are totally wrong, because if we withdrew from Vietnam, the communists would control… all of Southeast Asia… then India, Burma would be next.” The only problem with this quote is while Kennedy was in office, there was no open warfare in Vietnam and U.S. involvement was limited. Their strategy was to bring the North to heel using strategic bombing and limited ground attacks. Recordings between Kennedy and McNamara were since released to attest to their efforts in getting out of Vietnam.

4. The Gulf of Tonkin Incident only sort of happened.

The Gulf of Tonkin Incident is the catalyst for the escalation of American action in Vietnam. It refers to two incidents in August 1964. On August 2, the destroyer USS Maddox was shelled by NVA torpedo boats. The Maddox responded by firing over 280 rounds in return. There was no official response from the Johnson Administration.

The pressure mounted however, with members of the military, both in and out of uniform, implying Johnson was a coward. On August 4th the second incident was said to have happened, but Secretary McNamara admitted in Errol Morris’ 2003 documentary The Fog of War the second attack never occurred. The Pentagon Papers even implied the Maddox fired first in an effort to keep the Communists a certain distance away.

SEE ALSO: Here's how the US military's uniforms have changed over the past 250 years

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Stunning video captures Vietnam like you've never seen it before

Intelligence

Augmented reality combat goggles—such as those being developed by Israeli Defense Forces and for the U.S. Special Operations Command’s Tactical Assault Light Operator Suit (TALOS)—will record everything a soldier sees. They will also provide an information overlay: The projected data could include navigation instructions, intelligence on enemy sites, and real-time translations of local languages.

Protection

Next-generation body armor will use layered scales, like those on a fish, for light, flexible protection. Scientists from MIT and the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology are designing a material that would fuse hard plates to a soft, pliable substance, just as actual fish scales anchor to tissue. The eventual armor could be fine-tuned to specific roles, with more scales on the chest and back, and fewer at the joints.

Performance

Exoskeletons will not resemble Iron Man’s, at least not in the near term. Instead, DARPA’s Warrior Web program is developing an exo light and agile enough to fit underneath a soldier’s clothing. Using springs and actuators at joints, the suit, which is now in tests, could help soldiers carry extra weight and boost their endurance. The goal? “A four-minute mile,” says Lt. Col. Joe Hitt, the former program manager.

Surveillance

The PD-100 Black Hornet is an 18-gram “pocket drone” recently tested by the U.S. Army. Made by Prox Dynamics, the hummingbird- size craft can be carried in a pocket for fast deployment and fly about a mile, beaming back full-motion video and snapshots as it goes.

Ammunition

Self-guided bullets use tiny sensors and fins to change direction midflight. In February DARPA’s Extreme Accu­racy Tasked Ordnance (EXACTO) program ran live-fire tests with modified .50 caliber bullets (popular among snipers). The bullets swerved to hit moving or accelerating targets.

Firepower

With more than 100 million made, the AK-47 accounts for one-fifth of all the world’s firearms. It’s a good bet that its replacement, the AK-12, will appear on future battlefields. Its upgrades include an optical scope mount, swappable barrels, grenade-launcher attachment, and telescopic folding stock. In burst mode, it can fire at a rate of 1,000 rounds per minute.

SEE ALSO: Watch the F-35 test its onboard cannon for the 1st time

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: See 240 years of US Army uniforms in 2 minutes

Fighting at sea level is tough, but it doesn’t get any easier thousands of feet up a mountain.

The military prepares for fights at altitude by training extensively in challenging weather and terrain.

Here are 15 photos that show what it’s like.

SEE ALSO: These are 4 of the weirdest military failures in recent memory

1. Narrow passes of ice-covered rocks

2. Getting down the mountain is faster – but more dangerous – than climbing up.

3. Helicopters can make a big difference when they’re available.

Few groups in the U.S. military are as revered as Army Special Forces. They slip into other countries and work with the locals to build up friendly forces and take down enemies. Here’s what it looks like when they strike a compound.

SEE ALSO: This is the FBI's dream team of elite counterterrorism operators

1. Operators prepare for the insertion, rehearsing if possible, before getting into their vehicles or transportation.

2. The soldiers then move to the target area. Walking allows them to move up quietly, but riding in ground vehicles or helicopters can allow them to strike quickly without warning.

3. The Special Forces soldiers insert as quickly as they can, trying to get into a combat footing before the enemy can respond to their arrival.

When the stakes are high, only the best can get the job done. These are 5 of the most elite special forces around the world.

Produced by Lamar Salter. 

Follow BI Video: On Facebook

Join the conversation about this story »

Here’s a question for you: Do you control your day or do you simply react to it? Or to put it another way—how often do you feel like all you did was keep your head above water? 

Nodding along right now? You’re not alone.

When transitioning from being in the army to a 9-to-5 desk job, time management and feeling in control of my work day was one of the hardest challenges I had to overcome.

That was, until I applied a trick from my military training to my office job. The great part about it is that it’s so easy to do, anyone can do it (without holding a a loaded weapon)! 

The trick

Once upon a time, before emails and office life, I was a sniper in the Army. As a sniper, I was trained to go into a dangerous area, collect reconnaissance, and get out without ever being seen. This is the hardest part of the job. Most people think it’s all about shooting from really far away, and while that’s certainly an important skill, it’s not the most difficult.

Staying virtually invisible, while moving from point to point with 75+ pounds of gear in extreme weather, while being completely exhausted, requires a tremendous amount of focus. The fatigue, the discomfort, the racing thoughts are all distractions that can throw off your focus and your cloak of invisibility that keeps you alive. 

So how do you brush off distractions and maintain your focus? 

Well, when the external stimuli take over and you begin to lose focus on your priorities, my sniper instructors taught me an extremely simple and profound trick to regain control. 

SLLS: Stop, Look, Listen, and Smell

They said, “When the heat, weight, and fatigue take your focus off moving in silence and invisibility, take a SLLS break — Stop what you are doing. Look around. Listen to your surroundings. Smell your environment.” 

The purpose of this is to take a timeout and refocus. This allows you to stop reacting to the external stimuli, be mindful of your environment, and focus on what really matters. 

Yes, it works. It helped me be invisible as a sniper. And later on, at my desk job, I discovered that it helped me regain control of my workday when all I was doing was reacting to emails and other people’s priorities.

One particular day, I was attempting to buckle down and knock out several hours of important, but monotonous work. It was crucial I completed it that day, but my mind was struggling to stay focused, and my attention bounced around from other people’s conversations to my phone to anything but what I needed to do. Time for a SLLS break! After five minutes of stopping and refocusing with SLLS, I was able to sit down with resolve and accomplish my work.

Bonus: It even helped me in my personal life to be more mindful and focused. I was able to soak up and fully experience a recent backpacking trip to the Yucatan peninsula.

So, how do you use this trick to immediately make an impact and help you regain control of your workday and personal life?

The challenge

Set a recurring alarm on your phone for every two hours, between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., that simply says “SLLS.” This is your cue to take a SLLS break. Stop whatever you’re doing, look around, listen to your surroundings, and smell your environment. Whether it’s for 30 seconds or five minutes, take as long as you need to regain clarity on the present moment. 

By doing this you’ll stop the reaction cycle and be able to focus on the present — allowing your mind to breathe and enter a higher state of thinking where you decide what’s important and worthy of your time. You’ll regain mindfulness and purpose by taking back control of those elusive thoughts that usually escape you during stressful moments.

The every-two-hour alarm is just a starting point. Practice this until it’s a habit, then turn off the alarm. Use this trick whenever you’re feeling overwhelmed, when you’re just reacting to the world around you, and when you want to take control of your day and your life.

SEE ALSO: What being a Navy SEAL taught me about excellence

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 11 ways to avoid distractions and stay focused

Warfighting gear has dramatically improved over the past 15 years.

It goes by many names: Deuce gear, TA-50, or 782 gear. Whatever the nickname, load-bearing equipment is some of the most important kit carried by infantry, special operations, and anyone else whose job is to fight on foot.

Since the advent of modular lightweight load-carrying equipment and the accompanying pouch attachment ladder system in the late 1990s, the commercial and government gear market has rapidly grown, particularly since the onset of operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. “Tactical nylon” companies are not just producing innovations in load-bearing gear, but uniforms and footwear as well. Here’s a few areas where troop gear has gotten better.

1. Armor protection

The development of lighter ceramic armor plates like the enhanced small arms protective insert plate has marked a shift toward the plate carrier as the preferred option for individual protection. The newest plate carriers the Army currently issues include the soldier plate carrier system and the improved outer tactical vest, while the Marines use the improved scalable plate carrier and improved modular tactical vest.

Commercially, there are dozens of companies producing plate carriers, with models from Crye Precision, London Bridge Trading, and Eagle Industries popular among special operations units and others able to use non-issued gear.

One recent innovation has come in the design of armor plate itself. A soft armor backing is often required to protect the wearer from “spalling” debris that may break off a plate if it is struck by incoming rounds. But some companies are now offering standalone plates with “Level IV” protection, which is the highest protection rating given by the U.S. Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice; making it even easier to get maximum protection in one package.

2. New materials

A lot of tactical gear nowadays is moving beyond cordura nylon. Laser-cut fabrics and laminates are shaving more weight off, resulting in sturdy load-bearing gear that weighs in at under a pound. That’s crucial considering the increased load of armor, communications, and ammo that has become the norm over the past 15 years of war.

These new materials also help protect gear from abrasions, water damage, and chemical degradation. Polymer gear has also become popular. Thermoplastic holsters and carriers provide better retention of items like sidearms and magazines, while allowing easier access compared to older closed flap and bungee pouches.

3. Adaptability

The advent of modular lightweight load-carrying equipment meant a more modular system for attaching gear to a load-bearing platform. But anyone who’s spent time weaving MOLLE pouches onto a vest knows how laborious it can be. MOLLE has given the end user more options, but switching between those options isn’t a fast process. Recently, gear companies have begun to offer solutions that allow the user to quickly change loadouts.

Velcro-backed panels and chest rigs combined with quick-detach buckles allow for fast changes between different combat loads. Adjustable pouches can carry a wider variety of magazines, tools, radios, and other equipment. There are now even plate carriers built from the ground up to have adaptable components. All this makes it even easier to use one load-bearing platform for multiple roles.

4. Lowered visibility

The War on Terror’s unconventional insurgent battlefield created requirements for operating among the civilian population. As a result, there evolved a new need for low-visibility kit that wouldn’t overtly advertise ammo and equipment, especially among special operations troops and private military contractors.

Companies have released “slick” armor carriers and belts that allow the user to carry a basic load of ammo, communications, and medical supplies while maintaining a undercover posture. This is a huge benefit for special reconnaissance, surveillance, and VIP security operations.

5. More first-line equipment

The pistol belt has seen a resurgence in recent years, and has evolved into several new styles of products. Padded belts with MOLLE capability, often called “battle” or “war” belts, have shifted focus to the “first line” — the basics that allow one to move and fight. A good belt setup can carry water, first aid, and ammo; these are the baseline of the fighting load. Another evolution has come with addition of velcro, allowing for an inner belt system that keeps the outer belt from shifting around when the user runs or changes stance. This has also allowed for lower-profile belt carriage that is suited for low-visibility operations.

6. Fighting footwear

Even the simple boot has seen some major development. Over the past decade, commercials hiking boots have gained popularity among troops. Companies have taken notice and are now offering hiking-style footwear specifically aimed at the military market. A good pair of boots can really make all the difference during an extended patrol or field operation.

7. Comfort

Combat is undoubtedly never comfortable, but there have been major strides taken in reducing some of the discomforts that come with wearing kit for extended periods of time. The “combat shirt,” designed to provide more ventilation when worn under armor, is now a common sight for deployed service members.

Integrating kneepads into uniform pants helps to eliminate the “ankle pad” syndrome that traditional strap designs often suffer from. Aftermarket helmet liners and retention systems ensure a more comfortable fit. Some advances go beyond mere comfort. Uniforms like the Marine Corps’ fire resistant organization gear and its replacement, the enhanced flame-resistant combat ensemble are designed to prevent the burn injury prevalent in victims of improvised explosive device strikes.

8. Availability

There are only so many ways the make a magazine pouch, so many of tactical nylon companies are offering similar products. This is not inherently a bad thing; it gives end users more options and ensures that their needs will be met even if their first choice of equipment is not available. As the tempo of overseas deployments and urgent gear requirements slows, it will become more difficult for so many companies to eke out an existence in a shrinking market. For the time being, however, troops have plenty of options to meet their needs and preferences for combat kit.

The gear market has produced rapid innovation in a remarkably short period of time that has transformed the way infantrymen, special operations, and anyone else who carries firearms for a living carries their equipment. The future remains unclear, with powered exoskeletons and improved armor being some surmised improvements. What is certain is that for every new piece of equipment or technology, troops will need a way to carry it.

SEE ALSO: Here is what it's like when Special Forces raid a compound

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How the US military spends its billions

An ominous photo an American soldier took during the Iraq War is shaping up to be one of the conflict's most iconic images for the members of one US Army, according to two veterans writing in The New York Times.

The photo shows Lt. Col. Rod Coffey holding a flag his unit captured after clearing insurgents from a location in Iraq's Diyala Province.

The flag is almost identical to the one now widely known as the banner of the Islamic State terror group (also known as ISIS, ISIL, and Daesh).

"Colonel Coffey stands with the flag in his right hand, his trademark cigar dangling in his left and the look of a man resolved to defeat militants whose barbarism today is ever so disturbingly documented by the media," Joe Myers and Tim Hsia write in the Times.

"There is little doubt in our minds that the enemy our unit fought and defeated that winter would eventually become part of the Islamic State."

Coffey's unit lost soldiers in Diyala Province; capturing the insurgent flag "was gratifying to him and a fitting tribute to his fallen brethren," Myers and Hsia wrote.

Their column highlights why ISIS' rampage across vast swaths of Iraq and Syria is especially gut-wrenching for many veterans. Some of the territory ISIS has seized in the Middle East was once liberated from jihadist insurgents by American soldiers, and at a high cost.

ISIS began as Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), an incredibly brutal jihadist insurgent group that steadily gained power in the wake of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Al Qaeda's central leadership became increasingly uncomfortable with AQI's tactics, which included frequent massacres and suicide bombings, along with sectarian attacks on Shia civilians. Al Qaeda central expelled ISIS from the global terrorist organization in February of 2014.

Western forces in Iraq significantly diminished AQI by the end of the US-led campaign in Iraq. Many Sunnis aligned with US forces to combat AQI, a Sunni terror group, in the "Awakening" movement in 2007, a development that enabled the US "surge" strategy that stabilized the country. But Iraq's sectarian divide persisted.

Many promises of Sunni inclusion ultimately weren't fulfilled after the US campaign in Iraq ended, something which alienated Sunnis from an increasingly despotic government in Baghdad and from their former US partners.

AQI eventually rebranded as the Islamic State of Iraq, then the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Shams (ISIS), a title which includes the Arabic name for the geographic region that includes Syria. The group regained strength as Syria deteriorated and fighters flowed into newly available safe-havens across the border.

The Iraqi state wasn't in a strong position to protect itself after US troops withdrew in 2011. ISIS thrived in the power vacuum that was left behind, leading to an ongoing region-wide crisis.

Read the full story at The New York Times >

SEE ALSO: ISIS just received a 'gift' — and now 'there's a lot of opportunity for high drama'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: More trouble for Subway's Jared Fogle...

An Army Green Beret from Rhode Island has been killed in Afghanistan just a month after he was honored at the historic Fourth of July parade in his hometown of Bristol.

The 7th Special Forces Group to which he was assigned said Sunday that Master Sgt. Peter Andrew McKenna Jr., 35, died Friday in Kabul during an attack on a NATO facility. The Pentagon said he was struck by enemy small-arms fire.

McKenna, a 17-year Army veteran, had also served in Iraq and been awarded the Bronze Star with V device for heroism in combat operations, as well as the Meritorious Service Medal and the Army Commendation Medal. He was serving at the operations rank of first sergeant during his deployment in Afghanistan.

US Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, who announced McKenna's death Saturday night, had joined state Rep. Raymond Gallison at the Bristol parade, one of the nation's oldest Independence Day celebrations, to present McKenna with a US flag flown over the Capitol.

Reed called McKenna "an extraordinary young man with a big heart and a dedicated, distinguished soldier."

Gallison told The Providence Journal that McKenna's death was "absolutely devastating to the family and the entire town of Bristol."

McKenna is survived by his parents, Peter and Carol McKenna of Bristol.

Gov. Gina Raimondo ordered flags flown at half-staff beginning Tuesday through his funeral services. "All Rhode Islanders are grateful for his service, and our prayers are with his family and loved ones," she said.

The Army said McKenna began his service in 1998 as an infantryman, qualifying for Special Forces in 2002. He was assigned to the 7th Special Forces Group, now based at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, as communications sergeant in 2003. He earned a bachelor's degree in strategic studies from Norwich University last year.

SEE ALSO: Gunfire at US consulate in Turkey as wave of attacks kills 8

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Afghanistan's first lady explains why she doesn't do politics