Hillsboro OregonUnited States-Member since August 2019
Sacrifice for Israel, 1967 Battle for Old City of Jerusalem
by Col. Mike Howard
Earlier this year, I had the privilege of meeting General Avigdor Kahalani, one of Israel’s most distinguished tank commanders and hero of the Golan Heights in the 1973 Yom Kippur War. His magnificent works The Heights of Courage and A Warrior’s Way are well known in the US military. The meeting was set up by a close friend of mine, David Noy, a retired Israel Air Force pilot who flew F-4 Phantoms (the IAF more accurately and affectionately calls it the ‘Kurnass’ – Sledgehammer in Hebrew). Knucklehead US Marine that I am, I did not realize the full story until we arrived at the impressive Tel Aviv “Beit Halochem” (House of the Warriors). It was here at the IDF Disabled Veteran’s Organization, that the full story dawned on me. The real connection and person I needed to thank in meeting Gen Kahalani was David’s older brother Aliz Noy. It became obvious to me that Aliz and Avigdor are close friends. This was another reminder to me of what I love about Israel, it is one extended family and connections of the heart are at the center of everything.
I had learned from my good friend and award winning author Laura Hillenbrand (Seabiscuit & Unbroken), that often you come across a fascinating topic while working on an earlier one. So is was here with the Noy Family. In their gracious hospitality in connecting me with one of my all-time career heroes, I was meeting another! I soon realized that Aliz Noy is one of the most friendly, humble, sincere men I’ve been blessed to meet.
Israel’s Six Day War (5-10 June 1967) forever changed the Middle East. After being forced into a pre-emptive strike by her Arab neighbors (who had closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping & mobilized their armies), Israel moved to defend herself. When the dust settled, Israel had conquered and occupied the Sinai Peninsula, the Old City and Eastern section of Jerusalem, the West Bank (Judea-Samaria), and the Golan Heights. Outnumbered five to one in troops, four to one in aircraft, and three to one in tanks, Israel defeated an alliance of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and other Arab allies.
The Israeli capture of the Old City and East Jerusalem commenced on 7 June, when Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan ordered his troops to move east and encircle the eastern half of the ancient city. Many of Jerusalem’s historic Jewish sites, particularly the Western Wall of the Jewish Temple and the Jewish Quarter, had been captured by Jordanian forces in the 1948 War of Independence. Many Jews had been forced to leave these portions of the city after many centuries of having lived there.
While Israeli forces were fighting in the Sinai, West Bank, and Golan Heights, two elite Israeli paratroop battalions went into action moving east along the northern boundary of Jordanian forces in Jerusalem. They attacked the Augusta-Victoria Hill which was the eastern high ground overlooking the Old City. One IDF battalion attacked Mount Scopus, and the other attacked from the valley between it and the Old City. While these units served to hold down the enemy and provide a base of fire and security from the rear, another parachute battalion, personally led by Israeli General Motta Gur, broke into the Old City. IDF armor units were not employed for fear of damaging the historically significant areas. They were soon joined by the other two parachute battalions who had completed their mission. There was Jordanian Army resistance, but the IDF paratroopers overwhelmed and defeated them. For the first time in 2,000 years, Jerusalem was now once again the united capital of Israel. The Jewish people had liberated the ancient City of David and could now worship at the Temple Mount. Powerful images were taken by film of Israeli troops in tears at the foot of the Western Wall, with an Army Rabbi and Torah among them. Yes, Biblical prophecies were fulfilled that day, 7 June 1967.
Not only was the Middle East and the history of Jerusalem changed this significant day, but so was the life of a 22 year old Israeli paratrooper. Lieutenant Aliz Noy was a platoon commander in this parachute brigade, and he had been badly hit by enemy fire while leading his troops.
In Aliz’ own words:
“Our forces broke through the Jordanian formation and advanced toward Jerusalem from the north. After a long night of fighting, at sunrise, we saw the holy places of Jerusalem for the first time, viewing the mosques on the Temple Mount glowing in the rising sun. None of us spoke. We were so moved. Tears choked our throats, overwhelmed and overjoyed. We all felt tremendous pride in having been chosen to take part in the liberation of the eternal capital of the Jewish people, our holiest of places as well as the sacred religious sites of all monotheistic religions.”
“But the joy and emotion was quickly shattered by the realities of the ongoing battle. On that very day quite a few members of my unit, including the commander, were killed, while I was severely wounded in the right leg. Luckily I was evacuated to a nearby hospital where I received urgent care that saved my life. But after two days, my condition left the doctors with no choice but to amputate my leg.”
Over fifty years later, Aliz has had plenty of time to reflect on these events. The Fiftieth Anniversary of the Six Day War had incredible meaning to him. He knew that fifty years prior to his being wounded, his Grandfather had fought in World War One. He had also been wounded in the right leg, and died from his wounds two years later. As Aliz said: “Does history repeat itself? Is it destiny? Fate? Who knows?”
On the same day that Aliz was hit and would later lose his leg, Israeli forces overcame Jordanian resistance and secured the entire Old City of Jerusalem. This was highlighted by the historic message that went out to all IDF units and eventually all of Israel: “Temple Mount is in our hands.”
To this day, Aliz shares: “Can you imagine what Jerusalem means for me, for my generation, for my people? For years we lived in a divided Jerusalem, where we on the Western side were fenced off from the Holy places. We could only dream of visiting the Temple Mount. Jerusalem, mine and Israel’s, our eternal Jewish capitol since the ancient days of the Bible (Editor’s Note: King David, 1,000 years BC or BCE) was divided and parts of it ruled by others. Then on that day, our dream of thousands of years had finally been realized. Jerusalem, after some 2,000 years, was re-united as the capital of Israel.”
Like many distinguished combat vets, Aliz does not consider himself a hero. What he had helped accomplish fills him with a sense of exhilaration, excitement, and a sense of pride. He views his injury and the heavy toll it exacted on his unit and friends, as a deeply personal sacrifice. A united Jerusalem was well worth it. He shares that this was also a source of strength for him during the painful, prolonged rehabilitation period that followed. It greatly helped him accept and live with his personal loss.
Following the Six Day War, Aliz was released from the hospital and re-entered active military service where he honorably served for another thirteen years. He retired at the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Aliz states that his injury and rehabilitation was a painful, time-consuming process, but ultimately a healthy one. He arose from the situation even more determined to make the most out of life. He has focused on living life to the fullest, never giving up, aiming for the top and never giving in to various difficulties. What I immediately noticed about Aliz Noy when he gave me a detailed tour of Beit Halochem, was that he is a tremendous encouragement to others, particularly younger veterans. He knows everyone in the huge complex by name, and they know him. He is greeted with a smile, hugs, and folks praise him for the work he does in serving others. I was really impressed with his extensive range of friends. As General Kahalani told me, Aliz should be the mayor!
In closing, Aliz shares that his amputated leg has become a true part of him. He is obviously reminded of it, sometimes painfully so, but it never gets in his way. He still has the heart of an IDF Paratrooper, and stays active doing plenty of extreme sports, hiking, off road biking and swimming. In the Marines, we would easily call him a “Gung-Ho Warrior” and battle buddy to all. His faith in God is evident in the pride he shows in being an important part of Jerusalem’s history, not to mention that of Israel and the Jewish people.
Aliz has a loving wife of over 50 years who married him right after his being wounded. They have three married sons with wonderful wives and “no less” than seven amazing grandchildren. He is thankful that his unique story lives on in this loving family who cherishes their heritage. They understand the blessings of family, friends, faith, flag and freedom, particularly when each year, their Dad gathers with his old “battle buddies” to remember and honor their friends who made the ultimate sacrifice on the ancient limestone rocks of Jerusalem, the sacred, united capital of Israel.
Thank you Lieutenant Colonel Aliz Noy, for what you did, and for sharing your story.
(originally termed by L. Carl Brown as 'The Eastern Question Game Rules')
The unique character of the region & special endemic problems. (Note: Providential History & Divine
Intervention transcend all of the following in accordance with I Samuel 17:47 "The battle belongs to the Lord.")
1.) Players combine & divide in shifting alliances. But Israel usually stands alone.
2.) Outsiders brought in until all involved (faith issues: Judaism, Christianity, & Islam).
a. "everything is related to everything else" (faith, politics, economics).
b. any initiative realigns other players ("kaleidoscope analogy").
3.) All boundaries are blurred (local, regional, national, & international).
4.) Political moves geared to reaction of outside world.
5.) Great power rivalries more important than rational regional interests.
6.) "Things never so good, nor so bad, as they seem" (rarely is one player all powerful).
7.) Special characteristics:
a. "fait accompli" / "quick grab" (unwillingness to change status quo).
b. everything interrelated (reluctance to establish priorities of sequence or substance).
c. preference for "reactive politics" (maneuver & exploit).
d. use of mediators & third parties.
e. tactics over strategy.
f. no compromise (not an Arab tradition, let alone an Arabic word).
Other Lessons (Recipe for Strategic Instability):
Limitations of "Checkbook Diplomacy" - massive amounts of oil money cannot buy security (Kuwait & Saudi Arabia vs. Iraq). Saudi Arabia, the 'Guardian of Islam' was in no position to guard anything. Where U.S. could not negotiate peace, tried to purchase it (Egypt-Israel, Iraq).
Arms acquisitions continue (defensive needs vs. offensive desires). Nukes on horizon.
Middle East states driven primarily by national self-interests, rather than regional.
Democracy is alien to Arab political culture (societies have yet to reach such a stage of development). Of 22 Arab states (radical or conservative), there is not one healthy democracy. Israel is the exception, not the rule in the region (West must realize: can't impose democracy as Sharia law incompatible with US Constitution & Western Civilization). Remember “Islam” literally means submission & surrender.
Please pass these on to our fellow Americans! We must learn from them!
Shalom through Superior Firepower!
Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
“Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it.” George Santayana
By William Cole
The remains of at least 22 Marines killed in the bloody 1943 Battle of Tarawa — a costly lesson in amphibious attack — were returned to American soil Wednesday night and honored in a ceremony at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.
An Air Force C-17 cargo aircraft transported the Marines from the Republic of Kiribati 2,400 miles southwest of Hawaii. Honor guards of six Marines wearing white gloves acted as pallbearers for each of 22 American flag-draped caskets that were carried into Hangar 19 at Hickam.
“Today we welcome home more than 20 American servicemen still unaccounted for from the Battle of Tarawa during World War II,” acting Secretary of Defense Richard Spencer said in a news release. “We do not forget those who gave the ultimate sacrifice, and it is our duty and obligation to return our missing home to their families and the nation.”
The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency will seek to make identifications of the fallen Marines at its lab at Hickam.
The Battle of Tarawa, waged from Nov. 20-23, 1943, was part of Operation Galvanic to capture Japanese-held territory in the Gilbert Islands. It was the first major seaborne assault launched against a heavily defended atoll — and the Marines paid a large price in lives for their ultimate success.
Over 76 hours, about 1,000 Marines and sailors were killed and more than 2,000 were wounded trying to take the heavilydefended Japanese outpost on the tiny isle of Betio, just a few miles long but bristling with dug-in troops, snipers and machine guns. Landing was made difficult by low tide and assault boats hung up on reefs.
Nearly all of the 4,800 Japanese defenders and Korean laborers were killed. The hard lessons learned would factor into every amphibious landing to come as the United States island-hopped across the Pacific.
The remains returned Wednesday are believed to belong to the 6th Marine Regiment, which fought hard taking out Japanese pillboxes and faced snipers and a “banzai” wave attack.
More than 150 Marines from Marine Corps Forces Pacific and service members with the accounting agency stood at attention as the caskets were brought in.
Lt. Gen. Lewis Craparotta, commander of Pacific Marines, said in remarks that, “As a Marine and perhaps for everyone who is present here tonight, it’s both an honor and a privilege as these Marines arrive back to the country that they loved.”
The Marines “gave their last measure so that we could live in peace,” he added.
Rear Adm. Jon Kreitz, deputy director of the accounting agency, said he was humbled to be there “to pay respects to these warriors who have finally begun their long-awaited journey home.”
Florida-based History Flight Inc., a nonprofit group, located the Marines and turned them over to the accounting agency in what the group said is the third largest recovery of missing Americans from Tarawa since major government repatriation work was finished in the 1950s.
History Flight turned over 24 sets of Tarawa remains in 2017, and 35 sets in 2015, including those of Medal of Honor recipient Marine Corps 1st Lt. Alexander Bonnyman Jr.
The group said that for many decades, few Americans were aware that over 500 Marines and a small number of Navy and Army personnel remained buried on or near Betio.
History Flight has a contract with the U.S. Defense Department worth $4.1 million for the recovery effort through July.
After the fighting, remains were hastily buried in trenches and other graves that were subsequently built over.
History Flight said it located over 100 individuals from in and around a site known as Cemetery 33. The latest recovery, which includes a total of more than 30 individuals, was partly underneath a building, said Executive Director Mark Noah.
The site was also below the water table.
“So the recovery work had to be done while pumping the local water table down to below the level that the burials are at, so it was very time-consuming,” Noah said in a phone interview.
“We’re very pleased to see the continued stream of successful recoveries from our partnership with DPAA,” Noah said.
Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence? Five signers were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army; another had two sons captured. Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War. They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. What kind of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated.
But they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty would be death if they were captured. Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags. Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him, and poverty was his reward. Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer, Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton. At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson Jr, noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed, and Nelson died bankrupt. Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months. John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying. Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his children vanished. A few weeks later he died from exhaustion and a broken heart. Norris and Livingston suffered similar fates.
Such were the stories and sacrifices of the American Revolution. These were not wild-eyed, rabble-rousing ruffians. They were soft-spoken men of means and education. They had security, but they valued liberty more. Standing tall, straight, and unwavering, they pledged: "For the support of this declaration, with firm reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." They gave you and me a free and independent America. The history books never told you a lot about what happened in the Revolutionary War. We didn't fight just the British. We were British subjects at that time and we fought our own government! Some of us take these liberties so much for granted, but we shouldn't.
So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and silently thank these patriots. It's not much to ask for the price they paid. Remember Yorktown where French sailors are led to rest because they fought for your independence. Never forget these names: Lafayette, Rochambeau, Du Mortier and the French navy transported reinforcements, fought off a British fleet, and protected Washington’s forces in Virginia. French assistance was crucial in securing the British surrender at Yorktown in 1781.
Remember: freedom is never free.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles.
by Lawrence P. Grayson
A World War II story of two Knights of Columbus inspired the blockbuster film by Steven Spielberg
Paratroopers poured from the sky before dawn on June 6, 1944, hurtling through fog and flak to the French countryside below. It was D-Day; the Allied invasion of Normandy had begun. In a few hours, 200,000 troops would land by sea, and the mission of these airborne units was to prepare the way.
Among those jumping into the dark were two members of the 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division: Father Francis L. Sampson, 32, the unit’s regimental chaplain and a member of the Knights of Columbus; and Sgt. Frederick “Fritz” Niland, 24, the youngest of four brothers serving in World War II.
The story of Sampson and Niland, brother paratroopers and eventually brother Knights, would later inspire Steven Spielberg’s epic film Saving Private Ryan.
On D-Day, Father Sampson parachuted into a river, cut off his gear and made his way to a French farmhouse where severely injured servicemen were being treated. As the area was about to be overrun by German troops, who were known to shoot prisoners, Father Sampson volunteered to stay with the injured.
Father Sampson was captured and put up against a wall. He was so frightened, he later said, that instead of praying the Act of Contrition, he kept repeating the Catholic blessing before meals: “Bless us, O Lord, and these thy gifts....” Incredibly, a Catholic German soldier recognized him as a priest, and he was spared.
As the Allied invasion continued, Father Sampson was allowed to stay at the aid station, where he shielded the wounded through a grueling artillery bombardment. Nominated for the Medal of Honor for his work tending to and evacuating these troops, he received the Distinguished Service Cross, the U.S. Army’s second highest award for valor.
Meanwhile, Niland had been forced to jump early after his plane was hit by enemy fire. He landed miles away from his target and was behind enemy lines for nine days. He eventually rejoined his unit with help from the French Resistance in time for a key battle to secure the town of Carenten and link Allied forces at Omaha and Utah beaches.
It was near Utah beach that Niland sought out the chaplain, distraught at learning that his brother Robert, a paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne, had been killed June 6 and was buried about 20 miles away. Only a few weeks earlier, Fritz’s oldest brother, Edward, had been shot down in Burma — missing in action and presumed dead.
The chaplain offered to help Fritz find Robert’s grave and drove him from cemetery to cemetery, searching. When Sampson came upon the grave of Preston Niland, he showed it to Fritz, thinking that it had been recorded in error. “Father Sampson,” the young man replied, “Preston was my brother, too.” Unknown to Fritz, 2nd Lt. Preston Niland had been killed just a day after Robert, fighting on Utah beach. A check of a nearby cemetery revealed Robert’s grave.
So, believing Fritz to be his family’s only surviving son, the chaplain notified the War Department and initiated the paperwork to have him brought home.
Niland’s parents, Michael and Augusta, must have been grateful to Father Sampson, but Fritz was not. Informed by Sampson that he was being sent back to the United States, Niland refused, saying, “I’m staying here with my boys.”
Sampson replied, “You can take that up with General Eisenhower or the president, but you’re going home.”
In late summer 1944, Niland returned to New York, where he served out the rest of the war as a military policeman.
Father Sampson’s role does not appear in Saving Private Ryan, as reality was somewhat less dramatic than the movie: Fritz was not lost, and there was no search for him. Reality was also less tragic than the movie: Fritz’s brother Edward had survived and was found about a year later when a Japanese POW camp was liberated.
Shortly after returning home, Fritz joined Twin City Council 413 in Tonawanda, N.Y., on Dec. 1, 1944. He earned a degree in oral surgery from Georgetown University and established a practice near his hometown. He married and raised two daughters, Cate and Mary, and in 1983, he died at age 63.
Today, Cate Niland Remme still has vivid childhood memories of her father talking about the war.
“I will never forget the look in his eyes when he would recount the story to me and my sister, Mary,” she said. “He told us, ‘Girls, never forget that it took a presidential congressional order to get me out of France.’”
During one of Cate’s last visits to her father, Fritz told her, “Make sure to honor all the men.”
“So that’s what we did at his funeral,” Cate said. “We read off all the names of Company H.”
Fritz was later interred at Fort Richardson National Cemetery in Anchorage, Alaska, where the 1st Battalion of the 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment is now stationed.
“We buried him on D-Day with full military honors,” Cate added. “I always felt good that he would rest in peace with the 501.”
LAWRENCE P. GRAYSON writes from Maryland where he is a member of Rock Creek Council 2797 in Bethesda, and Cardinal Patrick A. O’Boyle Assembly 386 in Silver Spring.
THE PARACHUTING PRIEST
THE PRIEST who “saved” Sgt. Fritz Niland had one of the most distinguished careers as a chaplain in U.S. military history.
A native of Iowa, Francis L. Sampson graduated from the University of Notre Dame in 1937 and was ordained in 1941. After serving for a year as a parish priest in Neola, Iowa, where he joined Neola Council 1115, he enlisted in the U.S. Army as a chaplain.
Sampson later admitted that he volunteered for airborne duty somewhat unwittingly.
“Frankly, I did not know when I signed up for the airborne that chaplains would be expected to jump from an airplane in flight. Had I known this beforehand,” he said, “I am positive that I should have turned a deaf ear to the plea for airborne chaplains. However, once having signed up, I was too proud to back out.”
Three months after his heroic efforts on D-Day, Father Sampson took part in an airborne assault on Holland, jumping behind enemy lines for the second time. The chaplain was later captured at the Battle of the Bulge and sent to a prison camp in Germany, where he spent six days in an overcrowded boxcar, sustained only by snow scraped from the top of the train. At his own request, Father Sampson was confined with the enlisted men, rather than the officers. James D. Alger, a fellow prisoner who later became a lieutenant general, said, “Father Sampson’s misfortune in being captured turned out to be a blessing for the men he served in Stalag II-A. … God knew he was sorely needed there.”
After the war, Father Sampson hung up his jump boots — but not for long.
In his 1958 memoir, Look Out Below!, he wrote that the life he briefly returned to in Iowa was in many ways ideal, but added, “I missed life in the Army; I missed most of all my soldier congregation.”
He returned to active duty in 1946 and later served as chaplain of the 187th Airborne Infantry Regiment during the Korean War.
“Combat truly was a perfect laboratory for a priest’s study and work,” he wrote. “All the artificialities and superficialities of civilian life were cut away. There remained nothing but bedrock character….”
In 1967, Father Sampson was appointed Chief of Chaplains of the U.S. Army with the rank of major general. During the Vietnam War, he annually spent Christmas with the troops, and was untiring in visiting hospitalized soldiers. He also served as president of the USO from 1971-1974.
A 55-year member of the Knights of Columbus, Msgr. Francis Sampson belonged to Big Sioux Council 5029 in Flandreau, S.D., at the time of his death in 1996 — two years before the release of Saving Private Ryan. His tombstone bears the words: “Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.”
— Lawrence Grayson
Introduction by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
Abraham Lincoln said it best: “Never bet against your country in the middle of a war.”
Snowflakes and fruitcakes need to wake up to the reality that America and the West are still at war. The moral majority of America must wake up and realize just what is going on with this leftist, socialist agenda. It is supported by self-serving, gutless, elitist lefties in government who demonize anyone who disagrees with them. They simply use the fake news media to print the lies. They cry ‘inclusiveness’ but ridicule anyone who disagrees with them in the self-proclaimed mantra of Nancy Pelosi, who borrowed this tactic from Joseph Goebbels and his tactics of 1930’s Germany. This current war to preserve Western Civilization is not by our choice, but by the evil thrust and manipulative intent of our enemies who attacked us on 9/11. To ignore this foreign and domestic ongoing threat is not just unpatriotic, it is self-delusional and dangerous to our existence. When you try to pluck the American Eagle a feather at a time, you’d better be prepared for the talons. And that goes for desecrating the American Flag, Betsy Ross to the present Old Glory.
God bless Coach John Krupinsky of Danbury, Connecticut! At least American Hockey and NASCAR get it right!
Colin Kaepernick and the Culture Jihadists Are Coming For Old Glory
By Todd Starnes
July 3, 2019
For the past year I have been researching the relentless attacks on American traditions for my upcoming book, “Culture Jihad: How to Stop the Left From Killing a Nation.”
The “culture jihadists” refer to a militant army made up of secularists, socialists and race agitators. They are committed to finishing what President Obama started when he promised to fundamentally change the nation.
They literally want to destroy the foundations of this great nation. They want to turn our traditions and our history into a heaping pile of rubble.
That’s why I was not very surprised when Nike decided to drop the historic Betsy Ross flag design from a shoe commemorating Independence Day.
Failed NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick took personal offense because he says the colonial flag represents slavery. This is the same man who launched a national campaign to disrespect the national anthem — supposedly to protest law enforcement. In reality, Kaepernick he just hates America. He’s nothing more than a glorified race agitator.
The narrative being advanced by Kaepernick and his fellow culture jihadists is that America is inherently a racist nation that is responsible for all of the world’s problems. And their argument is gaining traction.
It’s the same argument that was advanced at George Washington High School in San Francisco. The school board decided to cover up a fresco of our first president because he owned slaves. Lawmakers in Charlottesville, Virginia just used that argument to banish Thomas Jefferson Day.
It was the same argument used by culture jihadists in Philadelphia who successfully had a statue of Kate Smith removed from outside a sports venue because she once performed a song now considered to be racially offensive.
It’s the same argument used by leftists who successfully banned books like Huckleberry Finn, To Kill A Mockingbird and Little House on the Prairie.
And it is the same argument being used by leftists to ban conservatives from restaurants and justify attacking them in the streets.
Heaven forbid the culture jihadists take back control of Washington, D.C. Should that happen I have no doubt they will try to banish Old Glory and turn the Jefferson Memorial into a pile of rubble. And for that matter, don’t be surprised if they attempt to rename the nation’s capital city.
“Culture Jihad” is a call to arms for every freedom-loving American, Christians and Jews, straight and gay, black and white and brown. Happy warriors, all.
We are tasked with defending a noble cause and a noble faith. Sure, we’ve taken more than a few sucker punches and the enemies of freedom have us surrounded. No doubt that our numbers are dwindling, but we are still in the fight. Because we are Americans.
Lieutenant General Lewis Burwell “Chesty” Puller was the most decorated Marine in the history of the nation. To say that this leatherneck was a badass would be a great understatement.
His bravery and valor are legendary and still today Marines invoke his name.
Puller was also known for his quips and one in particular is appropriate for our political fight with the culture jihadists. Puller and his troops were surrounded by enemy fighters in Korea. He told his men, “All right, they’re on our left, they’re on our right, they’re in front of us, they’re behind us … they can’t get away this time.”
In other words, be men and women of courage. It is imperative that gun-toting, Bible-clinging patriots rise up with a mighty voice and declare that this Great American Experiment is worth saving.
And remember, our battle is not against flesh and blood. Our battle is against the rulers of darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
In closing, I leave you with these words, written by George Washington on July 2, 1776: “The fate of the unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army. Let us, therefore, rely upon the goodness of the cause and the aid of the Supreme Being, in whose hands victory, is, to animate and encourage us to great and noble actions.”
Onward to great and noble actions, my fellow countrymen. God speed, America!
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles...
'One Small Step for Man': Was Neil Armstrong Misquoted?
by Natalie Wolchover August 27, 2012 Human Spaceflight
Apollo 11 astronauts trained on Earth to take individual photographs in succession in order to create a series of frames that could be assembled into panoramic images. This frame from Aldrin's panorama of the Apollo 11 landing site is the only good picture of mission commander Neil Armstrong on the lunar surface.
Upon taking a "small step" onto the surface of the moon in 1969, Neil Armstrong uttered what would become one of history's most famous one-liners. But strangely, what he actually said is far from clear.
Listeners back on Earth heard, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." But Armstrong, who died at the age of 82 on Saturday (Aug. 25), maintained afterwards that he actually said something slightly different: "That's one small step for a man..."
"It's just that people just didn't hear [the 'a']," Neil Armstrong told the press after the Apollo 11 mission.
That little indefinite article makes a big difference, semantically speaking. Without it, "man" abstractly represents all of humanity, just like "mankind." Thus, the quote is essentially, ''That's one small step for mankind, one giant leap for mankind.”
Despite his initial sureness that he got the grammar right by including the indefinite article, Armstrong acknowledged at a 30-year anniversary event in 1999 that he couldn't hear himself utter the "a" in the audio recording of his moonwalk transmission, according to the Associated Press.
But then, in 2006, computer programmer Peter Shann Ford might have vindicated Armstrong. Ford downloaded the audio recording of the moon man's words from a NASA website and analyzed the statement with software that allows disabled people to communicate via computers using their nerve impulses.
In a graphical representation of sound waves of the famous sentence, Ford said he found evidence that the missing "a" had been spoken after all: It was a 35-millisecond-long bump of sound between "for" and "man" that would have been too brief for human ears to hear.
"I have reviewed the data and Peter Ford's analysis of it, and I find the technology interesting and useful," Armstrong said in a statement. ''I also find his conclusion persuasive. Persuasive is the appropriate word."
And so was "a," whether spoken or not.
Note: This story was provided by Life's Little Mysteries, a sister site of SPACE.com.
March 7, 2012 clear photo by Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera of Apollo 11 landing site on the moon. Image even shows the footsteps of Neil Armstrong & Buzz Aldrin around the Lunar Module. Image: NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles....
by Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal, 25 May 2019
Each generation is tested, from the Army Rangers of #DDay to the college graduates of 2019.
The Greatest Generation was forged at ‘Pointe du Hoc’ Normandy. President Reagan addresses the surviving U.S. Army veterans of the assault against Pointe du Hoc on June 6th, 1984 in Normandy, France. The assault on Pointe du Hoc was a key battle of the D-Day invasion.
A friend trying to help me work through a problem once told me the story of life is competition: Everyone’s trying to beat everyone else, and I should give more weight to this fact. There’s some truth in what he said, yet I thought his comment contained more autobiography than wisdom: He was the most competitive person I’d ever known, and he usually won. I lean toward the idea a lot of us are running our own races, trying to rise to the occasion and beat some past and limited conception of ourselves by doing something great. The paradox is that you’re running your own race alongside others running theirs, and in the same direction. You’re doing something great together.
This holiday weekend I find myself reflecting again on the boys who seized back the continent of Europe, and the boys and girls now graduating college and trying to figure out what history asks of them.
The week after next marks the 75th anniversary of the Normandy invasion. People will be thinking of D-Day and seeing old clips of the speechifying that marked its anniversaries. I will think of two things. One is what most impressed Ronald Reagan. He spoke at the 40th anniversary, on June 6, 1984, at the U.S. Ranger Monument, and seated in the front rows as he spoke were the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
“Forty summers have passed since the battle that you fought here,” he told them. “You were young the day you took those cliffs; some of you were hardly more than boys.” Many were old now and some wept to remember what they had done, almost as if they were seeing their feat clearly for the first time.
Reagan spoke with each of them afterward, and what moved him most wasn’t all the ceremonies. It was that a bunch of young U.S. Army Rangers had, the day before, re-enacted the taking of the cliffs, up there with ropes and daggers, climbing—and one of the old Rangers who’d been there on D-Day and taken those cliffs 40 years before got so excited he jumped in and climbed along with the 20-year-olds.
“He made it to the top with those kids,” Reagan later told me. “Boy, that was something.” His eyes were still gleaming. Doesn’t matter your age, if you really want to do it you can do it.
A second thing I think of: My friend John Whitehead once told me, in describing that day, of a moment when, as a U.S. Navy ensign, he was piloting his packed landing craft toward Dog Red sector on Omaha Beach. They’d cast off in darkness, and when dawn broke they saw they were in the middle of a magnificent armada. Nearby some light British craft had gone down. Suddenly a landing craft came close by, and an Englishman called out: “I say, fellows, which way to Pointe du Hoc?”
Jaunty, as if he were saying “Which way to the cricket match?”
On John’s ship they pointed to the right. “Very good,” said the Englishman, who touched his cap and sped on.
John remembered the moment with an air of “Life is haphazard, a mess, and you’re in the middle of a great endeavor and it’s haphazard, a mess. But you maintain your composure, keep your spirit. You yell to the Yank, ‘Which way to Pointe du Hoc?’ and you tip your hat and go.’ ”
He would think of the Englishman for the rest of his life, and wonder if he’d survived. But of course he survived in John’s memory, then in mine, and now, as you read, in yours.
Now to the young today, the college graduates beginning their hazardous climbs. I was with some of them last weekend, at Notre Dame in South Bend, Ind. They were so impressive. They have grown up in a fairly strange country in a fairly strange era, yet their personal joy and optimism were almost palpable. The students of architecture wore on top of their graduation hats foot-high buildings, rockets and what looked like a cathedral; when their school was called they shot off sparkling confetti, and everyone cheered.
The young men were vibrant, smart. The young women have a 4.0 in neuroscience, are on their way to Cambridge, and look like movie stars.
But they’re earnest, all of them, like people who can surprise you—can surprise themselves—by meeting a historical test. And surely they’ll be given one, given many.
I’d been invited to give the commencement address, and for me this had a certain weight. I had never been to Notre Dame, but it has lived in my head since I was a child watching on television the movies of the 1930s and ’40s. And so in my mind Notre Dame is Knute Rockne and the Four Horsemen, it’s the Hail Mary pass and Touchdown Jesus. It is the Golden Dome.
The day before commencement I went over to see the intended stage, and walked through the shadowed Rockne Tunnel with the banners above marking the championship years. To emerge from that tunnel and walk out onto that field—all I could say was: Wow.
In the unseen circularity of life, Notre Dame is a place deeply associated with my old boss, who early in his career played George Gipp, and ever after was called the Gipper. It is the first school he visited, in May 1981, after he was shot in March. Notre Dame that day, having a sophisticated sense of what he’d been through, wore its heart on its sleeve.
In his speech he had touched on great themes of 20th-century conservatism—America was economically bound down and needed unleashing. I would speak on 21st-century conservatism—America is culturally damaged and needs undergirding.
Before I spoke a friend teased me: Reagan would be proud. I said I thought so but actually I thought of Nancy, who would have given me a look with three layers in it and said: “Good.”
The day before commencement I met with scholars at the university’s Center for Ethics and Culture, which is devoted to the Catholic intellectual tradition within all disciplines. The students and teachers were learned, steeped in the meaning of things. I told the students the most important thing to remember as they enter the rough old world: Keep your faith. If you lose it, get it back. It is the thing you will need most, the thing without which nothing is real. “Everything good in your life will spring from it.”
“You were born into a counterculture. It is the great gift of your life. The world needs this counterculture because even the world knows it needs something to counter itself.” Halfway through I realized I didn’t have to say this, because they already knew.
Now they push off, into whatever challenges history gives them. And what’s inside them, from sheer attitude to mere style, will affect all outcomes.
Which way to Pointe du Hoc? It’s the question for them and for all, isn’t it? What will our great achievement be? And who will be there with us, climbing alongside, as we seize crucial terrain together?
More Salute Targets coming soon!
by Melissa Reed
Introduction by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret): My wife and I recently hosted a large surprise 70th Birthday Party & BBQ for a dear friend and Montana Ranch girl. Naturally, our gun ranges were open and there was a lot of positive conservative camaraderie. It was a large group and one of the new folks I met was a young mother of two who had a fascinating story about romance and common values. Thankfully, she agreed to let us run with this unique story. It restores my hope in the future of America!
So here is Melissa’s story …
In the era of on-line dating, you could say Chris and I met the good old way ... through a mutual friend. I had recently moved back to rural Yamhill, Oregon, where I grew up, and was looking for a new hobby. One of my long-time guy friends invited me to the Verboort Gun Club to try trap shooting.
Wielding one of my Dad's trusted shotguns, a reliable pump-action Mossberg, I showed up on a Wednesday night with my friend. I was soon hooked. After repeatedly showing up over the following several weeks, the question finally came up as to my dating status. Of course the thought (assumptions by the guys present) was that I was involved with the guy I had been attending with, or I was the wife of another guy friend, both of whom I had grown up with and considered to be more like brothers than someone I would be involved with as a boyfriend.
Amidst all this speculation, there WAS someone I had casually noticed and become interested in. I finally worked up the courage to approach Chris, telling him he had the most beautiful eyes. I do remember laughing at his gun though ... a stubby shotgun resembling a sawed-off coach-gun from some old gangster or western movie. Eventually, our mutual friend, Nikki, exchanged our phone numbers and we started texting. We began dating in 2012 and were married September 26, 2015. We now have two beautiful daughters: Oakley (yes, named after Annie Oakley, of course, the first American female shootist & rockstar) and Parker (historically named after Bonnie Parker of Bonnie & Clyde). Yes, two American women who could handle weapons well!
Chris eventually bought me a better gun for trap shooting, a Remington 1100, and my first handgun, a Smith & Wesson .38 Special. We still enjoy shooting, but being dedicated parents and working hard, we don't get out as often as we would like on shooting dates!
I must confess to the reader that I am a VERY competitive person. Many times throughout our trap shooting seasons I walked off the line saying "I quit". Yet every time, Chris worked his magic and was there to patiently encourage me and make suggestions as to how I could improve. With each suggestion, from my now husband and other shooters, I would smile, listen to what they had to say, think to myself "yeah right", and vow that I would not show up the next week. But the next Wednesday, practice night would come around and I'd pack my stuff and walk back out onto the line hoping to be more successful. With practice, I improved. I still have not out-shot my husband, but hope to someday. We women are a very patient, focused breed. And motherhood further instills in us a sense of positive perspective and hope.
As a 2nd Amendment American shooting couple, we plan on bringing up and teaching our girls gun safety and the heritage they are blessed with in this nation. In their futures, we would love for them to appreciate and enjoy taking up shooting in some or all of its many aspects. Whether the simple pleasure of plinking, competitive shooting, or the crucial right to self-defense, they will understand their rights and responsibilities.
“I ain’t afraid to love a man. I ain’t afraid to shoot him, either.” Annie Oakley (Phoebe Ann Mosey of Ohio, 1860-1926)
Closing Comments by Col Howard: As the father of four grown daughters who all shoot, I intend to offer Melissa my wife’s copy of “Warrior Women” (3000 Years of Courage and Heroism), by Robin Cross & Rosalind Miles, Metro Books, New York, 2011.
Among my Favorites:
- Eleanor of Aquitaine
- Joan of Arc
- Elizabeth I
- Molly Pitcher
- Jacqueline Cochran
- Golda Meir
- Margaret Thatcher
Sadly they left out frontier American classic patriot shooter: Hannah Duston.
Make sure you look Hannah up!
More Salute Target articles coming soon!
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
Tactical Audacity: Michael Wittmann at Villers-Bocage, 13 June 1944
"At this point, enemy tanks have ceased to be a strain on my nerves." Wittmann
Michael Wittman was unquestionably the greatest and most daring tank commander the world has ever seen. He was also an un-repentant Nazi. During his German panzer career, he recorded at least 138 confirmed tank kills (Soviet & Allied), 132 anti-tank gun kills, and destroyed hundreds of trucks, carriers, artillery, and hundred at least of Soviet and Allied personnel. Wittmann was innovative and completely focused on the fight. He was a calm, cool headed commander who controlled his fears. He was skilled and dangerous, capable of killing anything on the battlefield. He was a combat leader who trained, looked out for, and kept his men motivated. A tank crew is all about teamwork, and he knew this better than anyone. He was an accomplished armor combat commander, a skilled tactician, and a deadly, indomitable, worthy adversary. That is why he is studied even today by most armor forces and training commands.
Michael Wittmann was born on 22 April 1914 in Vogelthal, Bavaria, Germany. In 1934, he joined the German Army. In October 1936, Wittmann transferred and joined the Waffen SS. He fit in well with this ardent, if not fanatical organization, and on 5 April 1937, he was assigned to the regiment, later division Leibstandarte SS Adolph Hitler (LSSAH). A year later, he participated in the German annexation of Austria and the occupation of the Sudetenland. Following these events, Michael Wittmann made the decision to official join Hitler’s Nazi Party.
The massive invasion of Russia was one of Hitler’s most important decisions. As a consequence of this Operation Barbarossa, Wittmann's unit was transferred to the Eastern Front in the spring of 1941.Wittmann was assigned to the elite SS Panzer Regiment 1, an armor, where he initially commanded a StuG III assault gun/tank destroyer, later transferring to a Panzer III medium tank. By 1943, based on his outstanding performance, he received command of a coveted Tiger I tank, unquestionable the most capable and feared tank in the world. By Operation Citadel, the Battle of Kursk, he was a platoon leader in charge of four Tiger tanks. Attached to the LSSAH, Wittmann's platoon of Tigers reinforced the division's reconnaissance battalion to screen the division's left flank. His four Tigers were credited with destroying a large number of Soviet tanks. Of note was his Tiger surviving a high-speed collision with a burning Russian T-34 tank.
On 14 January 1944, in recognition for his superlative service, Wittmann was awarded the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross. The presentation was made by his divisional commander SS-Oberfuhrer Theodor Wisch, who in addition, nominated Wittmann for the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves. Wittmann was awarded the Oak Leaves on 30 January for the destruction of 117 tanks, making him only the 380th member of the German armed forces to receive this rare award. Wittmann received the award from Adolf Hitler personally at the Wolf's Lair, Hitler's headquarters in Rastenburg, on 2 February 1944. He was then given orders which moved him to France, in expectation of the coming invasion by the western Allies.
Following D-Day the Allies struggled to expand their Normandy bridgehead against desperate German counter-attacks. British efforts focused on Operation Goodwood, a major armored offensive southwest of Caen. On Tuesday 13 Jun 1944, the British 7th Armoured Division “The Desert Rats” moved its Cromwell and Sherman tanks through the French village of Villers-Bocage on Route Nationale 175 toward the eastern high ground. Watching from Hill 213 on the village outskirts was Waffen SS 1st Lieutenant (SS-Obersturmfuhrer) Michael Wittmann. Following the news of the D-Day landings, he had arrived with a platoon of his company’s (2 Kompanie, SS Panzer Abteilung 101) Tigers the night before. A German “Abteilung” (heavy tank battalion) normally consisted of 45 tanks divided into three companies of 14 each (4 per platoon with 2 as Co HQ), with 3 in the Bn HQ element. The past week of rapid road march (from Gournay at 0200 on 7 June via Paris toward Normandy) had resulted in many Tiger mechanical breakdowns. This 7-13 June evolution covered some 250 miles, evading Allied air attacks. By dawn on 13 June, 6 Tigers (the first had arrived late the night before) of the second company were in their combat assembly area just east of Villers-Bocage (10 more Tigers of the first company were ten miles further east). Shortly after dawn, Wittmann and the lead element of Tigers noticed the British armor moving east toward Caen. As the British column briefly halted, hemmed in with a tree-lined hedge on one side and an embankment and low wall on the other, Wittmann sensed a unique opportunity. He climbed into Tiger 222 (his own Tiger was broken down so he took that of Unterscharfuhrer Kurt Sowa) and ordered it forward into action at 0900. Breaking cover and racing parallel toward the British column 50 yards away, he had Corporal Woll, his gunner, place their first two 88mm high velocity rounds into two British tanks (one a Sherman Firefly) at the front of the column. They next destroyed a Cromwell tank at the rear of the formation. With these vehicles destroyed and in flames, the British column was hemmed in, unable to move. Wittman’s Tiger now methodically slammed rounds into the flanks of the vulnerable British tanks, half-tracks, and Bren carriers. Among these were the command element of the 4th County of Yeomanry Regiment, XXX Corps, 7th Armoured Division. Other German Tigers of Abteilung 101 had now joined Wittmann. Villers-Bocage and 13 June 1944 marked one of the very worst days and single actions for any British tank unit in WWII. Over 25 British tanks and armored vehicles had been destroyed. “Operation Goodwood” had ground to a halt, with total British losses in Sherman tanks exceeding 400. Despite an eventual stubborn rear-guard action by British infantry and anti-tank guns, 7th Armoured Division was forced to retreat from Villers-Bocage to the west. The German defense at Caen (which British Field Marshall Montgomery had predicted would fall on D-Day) held out for over a month. For his tenacious actions, Michael Wittman was promoted by the Fuhrer and awarded the Swords to his Knight’s Cross. Villers-Bocage proved that in a desperate situation, one brave, innovative leader and his faithful small team can make a real difference.
Captain (SS-Hauptsturmfuhrer) Michael Wittmann’s stellar “leading tank ace” reputation was short lived. On 8 August 1944, Wittmann, his four man crew, and their Tiger (numbered 007) were destroyed outside Cintheaux, France, as they (among seven Tigers) charged across an open field parallel to the Caen-Falaise road toward Gaumesnil and a line of British Shermans to the east and Canadian Shermans to the west. Their Tiger took two successive hits from a British VC Firefly tank (an up-gunned 17-pounder or 76.2mm Sherman), commanded by Sergeant Gordon and his gunner, Trooper Joe Ekins, of No. 3 Troop, A Squadron, Northamptonshire Yeomanry. This engagement alone, in which Ekins destroyed three (& possibly four) Tigers, made him the leading British “Tiger Killer” of WWII. By this date, and certainly highlighted by this event, the Battle for Normandy was a decisive Allied victory. The German hero of Villers-Bocage was now a legend, remembered by fellow tankers, tacticians and military historians as the leading tank ace of history (138 tanks & 132 anti-tank gun kills). No one epitomized the mission of armor better than Wittmann: “To close with and destroy the enemy using firepower, maneuver, and shock effect.”
On 8 August 1944, Anglo-Canadian forces launched Operation Totalize. Under the cover of darkness, British and Canadian tanks and soldiers seized the tactically important high ground near the town of Saint-Aignan-de-Cramesnil. Here they paused, awaiting an aerial bombardment that would signal the next phase of the attack. Unaware of the reason the Allied forces had halted, Kurt Meyer, of the SS Hitlerjugend Division, ordered elements of his command to counterattack and recapture the high ground.
Wittmann led a group of seven Tiger tanks, from the Heavy SS-Panzer Battalion 101. Supported by additional tanks and infantry, his group of Tigers, crossing open terrain towards the high ground, was ambushed by tanks from "A" Squadron 1st Northamptonshire Yeomanry and "B" Squadron 144th Regiment Royal Armoured Corps sited to the right or northeast. Also part of this ambush were the Canadians of "A" Squadron Sherbrooke Fusilier Regiment, situated broadside to the left or west. During the ambush, Allied shells fired from either the British or Canadian tanks penetrated the hull of Wittmann's Tiger, igniting the ammunition. The resulting explosion and fire engulfed the tank and blew off the turret, killing Wittmann and his entire crew immediately.
The dead German crewmembers of the destroyed Tiger were buried alongside the road north to Caen in an unmarked grave. In 1983, the German war graves commission located the burial site. Michael Wittmann, and his Tiger 007 crew, were reinterred together at the La Cambe German war cemetery in Normandy, France.
Thus ended the story of Germany’s top WWII tank ace, a legend in tactical audacity and courage.
Facts & Reflections that Humble Me
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
“by 1024…the Japanese were certain they had won the battle and the war. This was their high tide of victory. #Japan had been on top…(but) by 1030, her carriers were flaming death.”
“…the threescore young aviators who met flaming death that day in reversing the verdict of battle. Think of them … every Fourth of June. They and their comrades who survived changed the whole course of the Pacific War.”
Samuel Eliot Morrison,
The definitive WWII US Naval Historian,
of the men of USS Enterprise, USS Hornet,
USS Yorktown and Midway’s Marine Air
Group 22 (with old Brewster Buffalos).
"Midway was the most stunning and decisive blow in the history of naval warfare." - John Keegan, Military Historian
- all 15 of Hornet's VT-8 torpedo planes were shot down (old TBD Devastators)
- 12 of 14 of Enterprise’s VT-6 torpedo planes were shot down (Devastators)
- 10 of 12 of Yorktown’s VT-3 torpedo planes were shot down (Devastators)
- and 15 Marine Corps VMF-221 (of MAG 22) fighters were shot down (F2A-3 Buffaloes)
Bottom line: Of the 41 American Devastators launched against Japs on 4 June, 37 were lost.
All three US Navy torpedo squadrons (VT-8, VT-6, & VT-3) were destroyed.
American sacrifice consumed Jap fighters and gave US dive bombers free rein for attack.
Jap carrier losses of 4 June 1942 (all four ships had attacked Pearl Harbor on 7 Dec 1941):
(note: Admiral Nimitz kept a photo of all six behind his desk & crossed them off as sunk).
- Akagi (Red Castle): sunk by 2 bombs from Enterprise (Dauntless SBDs)
- Kaga (Increased Joy): sunk by 4 bombs from Enterprise (Dauntless SBDs)
- Hiryu (Flying Dragon): sunk by 4 bombs from Enterprise (Dauntless SBDs)
- Soryu (Green Dragon): sunk by 3 bombs from Yorktown (Dauntless SBDs)
Final American revenge - of the two remaining Jap carriers that had attacked Pearl Harbor:
- Shokaku (Flying Crane): sunk 19 June 1944, Philippine Sea, 4 torpedoes, USS Cavalla.
- Zuikaku (Lucky Crane): sunk (25 October 1944, Leyte Gulf) by 9 bombs, 7 torpedoes from
USN aircraft. This was final American “payback” for Pearl Harbor.
The Battle of Midway
One of Japan’s main goals during World War II was to remove the United States as a Pacific power in order to gain territory in East Asia and the southwest Pacific islands. Japan hoped to defeat the US Pacific Fleet and use Midway as a base to attack Pearl Harbor, securing dominance in the region and then forcing a negotiated peace.
Primary Image: The USS Yorktown is hit on the port side by a torpedo launched from a plane off the Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryu during the Battle of Midway on June 4, 1942. (Image: National Archives and Records Administration, 80-G-414423.)
BREAKING THE CODE
The United States was aware that the Japanese were planning an attack in the Pacific (on a location the Japanese code-named “AF”) because Navy cryptanalysts had begun breaking Japanese communication codes in early 1942. The attack location and time were confirmed when the American base at Midway sent out a false message that it was short of fresh water. Japan then sent a message that “AF” was short of fresh water, confirming that the location for the attack was the base at Midway. Station Hypo (where the cryptanalysts were based in Hawaii) was able to also give the date (June 4 or 5) and the order of battle of the Imperial Japanese Navy.
Early on the morning of June 4, aircraft from four Japanese aircraft carriers attacked and severely damaged the US base on Midway. Unbeknownst to the Japanese, the US carrier forces were just to the east of the island and ready for battle. After their initial attacks, the Japanese aircraft headed back to their carriers to rearm and refuel. While the aircraft were returning, the Japanese navy became aware of the presence of US naval forces in the area.
TBD Devastator torpedo-bombers and SBD Dauntless dive-bombers from the USS Enterprise, USS Hornet, and USS Yorktown attacked the Japanese fleet. The Japanese carriers Akagi, Kaga, and Soryu were hit, set ablaze, and abandoned. Hiryu, the only surviving Japanese carrier, responded with two waves of attacks—both times bombing the USS Yorktown, leaving it severely damaged but still afloat. (A Japanese submarine later sank the Yorktown on June 7.) On the afternoon of June 4, a USS Yorktown scout plane located the Hiryu, and the Enterprise sent dive-bombers to attack. That attack left the Hiryu burning and without the ability to launch aircraft before it finally sank.
Over the next two days, the US troops at sea and on Midway continued their attacks, forcing the Japanese to abandon the battle and retreat. The Japanese lost approximately 3,057 men, four carriers, one cruiser, and hundreds of aircraft, while the United States lost approximately 362 men, one carrier, one destroyer, and 144 aircraft.
This critical US victory stopped the growth of Japan in the Pacific and put the United States in a position to begin shrinking the Japanese empire through a years-long series of island-hopping invasions and several even larger naval battles.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles...
- Normandy, France, 6 June 1944
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
“… the first 24 hours of the invasion will be decisive … the fate of #Germany depends on the outcome … for the Allies, as well as Germany, it will be the longest day.” Erwin Rommel
“This operation is not being planned with any alternatives. This operation is planned as a victory, and that’s the way it’s going to be. We’re going down there, and we’re throwing everything we have into it, and we’re going to make it a success.” General Dwight D. Eisenhower, Senior Allied Commander, #DDay
“There is one great thing that you men will all be able to say after this war is over and you are home once again. You may be thankful that twenty years from now when you are sitting by the fireplace with your grandson on your knee and he asks you what you did in the great World War II, you WON’T have to cough, shift him to the other knee and say, ‘Well, your Granddaddy shoveled shit in Louisiana.'” General George S. Patton, Jr. to his troops on June 5, 1944
It has been 75 years. The largest amphibious invasion ever launched was done on this day in 1944. It was accomplished by the dedicated efforts of American, British, Canadian and other Allies against Adolph Hitler’s Nazi “Festung Europa” (Fortress Europe). The Allies of World War II launched this huge invasion when they assaulted across the English Channel at Normandy, on the northern coast of France. The Allied forces were able to establish a beachhead on German-occupied French soil. Officially, the Allied landings were called Operation Overlord. The term “D-Day” was simply the first day of the landing, with each successive day being called D+1, D+2. etc.
The main Allied land forces came from the United States, Britain, and Canada. There were also Free French forces which played an important political role in stating that free French were liberating Nazi-occupied France. In addition to this, there were smaller Allied contingents that landed later: Polish forces and contingents from Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Greece and the Netherlands. These all contributed to the Allied ground campaign. They also provided selective air and naval support alongside Allied elements of the Royal Australian Air Force, the Royal New Zealand Air Force, and the Royal Norwegian Navy.
Kicking off the D-Day invasion at Normandy were overnight parachute and glider landings, massive air attacks and naval bombardments. The first wave of Allied combat troops faced the heaviest and most dangerous German fire, particularly on “Bloody Omaha”. All of the first waves landed before and at daybreak in the early morning hours. The main amphibious landings commenced on five key beaches running from west to east on the Normandy beaches. These were codenamed Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword. US combat troops landed on Omaha and Utah, Britain landing on Gold and Sword and Canada landing on Juno. During the second evening night, the remaining elements of the airborne divisions landed. The main D-Day forces sailed from bases on the south coast of England, particularly Portsmouth.
The Planning for D-Day was incredible. Allied forces rehearsed months before the invasion. On 28 April 1944, in south Devon on the English coast, 749 U.S. soldiers and sailors were killed when German E-boats using torpedoes & guns surprised one of these landing exercises.
For months prior to D-Day, Allied forces conducted a deception operation, Operation Fortitude (centered around Gen Patton), aimed at misleading the Germans with respect to the place and date of the landings. This was successful as the Germans initially believed that Normandy was a diversionary attack.
From a weather standpoint, only ten days a month were suitable for landings. A full moon was needed both for illumination during the hours of darkness and for the spring tide. These served to illuminate navigational landmarks for the crews of aircraft, gliders and landing craft, and to expose defensive obstacles placed by the Germans in the surf on the approaches to the beaches. A full moon occurred on 6 June. The weather was mixed. The crucial pre-invasion meeting was held on 5 June. Eisenhower's chief meteorologist (British Group Captain J.M. Stagg) forecast a brief improvement for 6 June. British General Bernard Montgomery and Eisenhower's Chief of Staff General Walter Bedell Smith wished to proceed. On the strength of Stagg's forecast, Eisenhower ordered the invasion to proceed with the short comment: “Gentlemen, we’ll go for it.”
Poor weather played a key factor in the Germans believing that the invasion would not take place at this time. Some German units stood down and many senior officers were away for the weekend. One key German commander, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, took a few days' leave to return to Germany to celebrate his wife's birthday. Dozens of German division, regimental and battalion commanders were away from their posts conducting war games.
The actual Codenames for D-Day are fascinating with Overlord assigned to the establishment of a large-scale Allied seizure of the Normandy portion of France. Stated at the D-Day Museum:
“Operation Overlord was the codename for the Allied invasion of northwest Europe. The assault phase of Operation Overlord was known as Operation Neptune. Operation Neptune began on D-Day (6 June 1944) and ended on 30 June 1944. By this time, the Allies had established a firm foothold in Normandy. Operation Overlord also began on D-Day, and continued until Allied forces crossed the River Seine on August 1944.”
Of note regarding the stiff German defense was the Normandy city of Caen. It was to be seized the first day of the invasion, but held out until late July despite repeated Allied attacks.
Here is a general list of the major units landed on D-Day (6 June 1944).
• British 3rd Infantry Division & British 27th Armoured Brigade.
• 3rd Canadian Infantry Division, 2nd Canadian Armoured Brigade
• British XXX Corps, British 50th Infantry Division and British 8th Armoured Brigade.
• British 79th Armoured Division
• U.S. V Corps, U.S. 1st Infantry Division and U.S. 29th Infantry Division.
• U.S. VII Corps, U.S. 4th Infantry Division, U.S. 101st Airborne Division, U.S. 82nd Airborne Division.
The Allied total number of troops landed on D-Day was approximately 156,000, roughly half American and the other half from the Commonwealth nations. The Normandy area was defended by an estimated 50,000 German troops.
Following North Africa, Sicily and Italy, D-Day at Normandy, France, was a huge step in the long, hard struggle that finally brought the Anglo-American armies deep into Germany. Roosevelt and Churchill were convinced that a cross-Channel landing was the way to defeat Nazi Germany. Soon, just over a month following the D-Day landings, German Generals tried to kill Hitler with a bomb. It was now clear that they thought Hitler’s Nazi reign of terror also had to end.
So today, these 75 years later, our duty is to remember and pass on their story to future generations. The important thing for all of us to do who cherish freedom, is to remember and give thanks for their service and sacrifice. We must make what they accomplished on our behalf relevant and cherished by those who come after us. It is the legacy of all freedom loving peoples.
God bless their memory for the tremendous victory they achieved.
“They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate.” President Franklin D. Roosevelt
"I have full confidence in your courage and devotion to duty and skill in battle. We will accept nothing less than full Victory! Good luck! And let us beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking." General Dwight D Eisenhower
"These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. These are the heroes who helped end a war." President Ronald Reagan
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles...
Introduction by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
America and #Israel have always been blessed by a special friendship. This started in the very beginning when the first #Jewish families arrived in America in 1658. These first fifteen Spanish and Portuguese families arrived via Curacau and Surinam. They founded the Touro Synagogue of Congregation Jeshuat Israel, in Newport, Rhode Island. It was here on the morning of 17 August 1790, that George Washington (as first President) and Thomas Jefferson (Secretary of State) visited this first Jewish synagogue in America. Together, they affirmed the Jewish people being a part of the new nation.
“May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants—while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.” G. Washington
This would again be affirmed on 14 May 1948, when Harry Truman, President of the U.S., ensured that America was the first nation to recognize the new State of Israel.
I was reminded of this special bond of friendship in February 2003, when I stood on Kuwait soil and received the first four Israel Defense Force Armored D-9 ‘Dubi’ (Teddy Bear) Bulldozers to assist us on our soon to be launched march north to Baghdad. These were the first of many more, and saved countless American lives in battles such as Nasiriyah, Baghdad, Najaf and Fallujah.
“Those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse Israel will be cursed.” Genesis 12:1-3
This wonderful article clearly expresses this ongoing friendship …
The New Jewish-Christian Amity
Social changes lead to a confluence of worldviews between the Orthodox and the Evangelical.
By Abigail Shrier
Sept. 7, 2018
Soon after meeting the fellow who would become my best friend in law school, I confessed something to him: I’m pro-Israel. For Orthodox Jews, this allegiance isn’t simply a matter of politics. As close to my heart as any article of faith is the land God granted Abraham with the promise to multiply his descendants like stars in the sky.
I had reason to be nervous about broaching the subject. I’d spent the previous two years, 2000-02, as a graduate student in Europe, a period that coincided with the second intifada. I learned then—with every fire-bombed synagogue in France and the cries of the rabble that stormed Oxford carrying Israeli flags defaced with swastikas—that otherwise sensible people can transmogrify when the topic of Israel arises.
My new friend, one of only two Southern Baptists I’d known, let out a barking laugh. The North Carolina church where he’d worshiped as an undergraduate, he told me, had two flags: One American, the other Israeli. Supporting and loving Israel was part of his faith, too.
This was my introduction to the new friendship between Orthodox Jews and religious Christians. American evangelical Christians’ affinity for Israel and Jews is decades old. But the affection long went unrequited. Only a negligible percentage of Jews were Orthodox, and Jews of all denominations viewed religious Christians’ enthusiasm for them with suspicion, uncomfortable with its perceived predication on Jews’ conversion.
In 1999 the Southern Baptist International Mission Board published a prayer book that directed its practitioners to inform Jewish friends that they could accept Jesus Christ and remain Jewish. A coalition of leaders of all major rabbinical seminaries, Orthodox included, was so bothered by this deception that it sent a letter to the Southern Baptist president, Rev. Paige Patterson, asking him to stop. If you like us only because you’re trying to trick us into conversion or hope we will meet a fiery end—so the thinking went—you can take your friendship somewhere else.
In any case, we Jews didn’t need the Southern Baptists. America has long been a tolerant place, where Jews have enjoyed full acceptance. Israel benefited from broad bipartisan political support. If Jews found Christians’ conversion attempts or end-of-days plans disconcerting, we had other friends to choose from.
But over the past several decades, the American Jewish community has experienced profound demographic change. Reform and Conservative Jews have few children (1.7 births per woman), attend synagogue less often, increasingly intermarry with non-Jews, are less supportive of Israel, and are generally becoming less distinguishable from non-Jewish progressives.
Amid this decline, Orthodox Jews have staged an unlikely comeback. After near-eradication in Hitler’s Europe and predictions of their disappearance in the 1950s, they now make up 10% of the American Jewish population. That may not sound like much, but as Rabbi Mitchell Rocklin noted in Mosaic magazine last year, “because of their significantly higher fertility, especially when contrasted with the below-replacement birthrates among other, larger sectors of the community, they are on pace to double their share every generation.”
When we talk about American Jews, we often think of loyal Democrats who prefer the cultural aspects of Judaism to the religious strictures. I grew up in the Conservative movement, a version of Judaism in which observance is generally less strict and more egalitarian than Orthodoxy. I loved our synagogue, camps and schools. But year by year I watched with dismay as traditionalism and Torah too often gave way to political progressivism. There are still religiously committed Jews of liberal denominations—but too few. Most are dissolving into the waters of a secular America that, by and large, describes itself as having no religion at all.
Orthodox Jews may one day become the majority of all affiliated American Jews. And, according to a 2015 Pew Research Center report, they “more closely resemble white evangelical Protestants than they resemble other U.S. Jews.”
In July the New York Times published an interactive online map, displaying granular detail of voting precinct results from the 2016 presidential election. I searched out many of the Orthodox neighborhoods of the New York area: Borough Park, Brooklyn; Rockaway, Queens; Lawrence and Woodmere, Long Island; Monsey, N.Y.; Ocean Township, Lakewood, and Paramus, N.J. I know people from many of those places, and the map confirmed what I suspected: They may talk like New Yorkers, but they vote like Nebraskans.
This is new. In 2000 most Jews—Orthodox included—still faithfully voted Democrat, preferring Gore-Lieberman to Bush-Cheney. But by Mr. Bush’s second term, the Orthodox communities had shifted rightward, partly because of the second intifada, which made them more grateful for Christian Zionism. They’ve never really looked back. According to the AJC Survey of American Jewish Opinion 2017, Orthodox Jews preferred Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton by a margin of 2 to 1.
Unlike secular and non-Orthodox Jews, who still tend to view religious Christians’ affection with suspicion, Orthodox Jews are less concerned by the theological reasons for the support. Whether it stems from eschatology or God’s promise to Abraham in Genesis 12 (“I will bless those who bless you and curse him who curses you”), we simply appreciate the friendship. As Ambassador David Friedman noted at the dedication of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, evangelical Christians “support Israel with much greater fervor and devotion than many in the Jewish community.”
When Pew reported last year that a minority of American Jews view evangelical Christians favorably, the Coalition for Jewish Values, a right-wing political organization of Orthodox rabbis, released a statement: “When people wish us well in this world, observant Jews recognize that this is generally a good thing, and trust that God knows how to sort everything out in the next.” This particular sentiment is widely held by Orthodox Jews: critiquing Christians’ theology isn’t our business, and God only knows what they’d make of ours. As for conversion to Christianity, it is all but unheard of among Orthodox Jews.
At a time when kindness and common cause can seem so hard to come by in America, this growing fellow-feeling is something to celebrate. Evangelical Christians and Orthodox Jews send our children to religious schools, attend regular prayer services, are leery of secular universities that would teach our children to deplore our values, and fear government intrusions into our religious life. It is, one might say, a match made in heaven. When former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee spoke last year to a packed sanctuary at my synagogue, the largest Orthodox congregation in the Western United States, he received a standing ovation.
I could hardly accuse George Washington of lacking vision for the country he helped found. But in 1790, he wrote a letter to the Jews of Newport, R.I., in which he offered this blessing: “May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants—while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.” With this friendship, America has done much better than that.
Ms. Shrier is a writer living in Los Angeles.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles...
On November 24, 1940, Slovakia signed the Tripartite Pact with Hitler. Within months, Germany asked the new pro-Nazi Slovak Republic to join in their invasion of Poland. From 1942 to 1944 the Slovak 1st Division, attached to German units on the Eastern Front, was kept on the front-line, fighting the Russians in the Caucasus area and later in the southern Ukraine. They would pay a heavy price for fighting alongside Hitler.
Back in Slovakia, most Slovak Jews fled to the British Mandate in Palestine. By September 1941, the ‘Jewish Code’ (resembling the Nazi Nuremberg Laws) was passed requiring Jews to wear yellow Star of David armbands which prohibited them from intermarriage, government service, and most jobs. Their properties were systematically vandalized and seized. By October 1941, some 15,000 Jews were rounded up in Bratislava and sent to labor, concentration, and eventually extermination camps. The large scale official deportations of Jews from Slovakia started on March 25, 1942. Prior to this, some 58,000 Jews had already been deported. The Hlinka Guard (with training from the German SS) headed increasing deportations of Slovak Jews directly to the Nazi concentration and extermination camp at Auschwitz. Throughout 1942-1945, the Hlinka Guard would regularly make round ups of Jews in the spring and summer months. Deportation of the Jews by Hlinka Guards was also motivated by the lucrative confiscation of Jewish homes, farms, factories and other property. These were distributed by the Hlinka Guards and other government agencies among themselves. Over the course of time, the Hlinka guardsmen greatly prospered financially but their zeal for stolen wealth never abated. For the 354,000 Jews in the former Czechloslovakia, most were killed in the Holocaust. For the Jews of Topolcany, almost all were evicted from their homes by pro-Nazi Slovaks and taken to the nearby train station of Novaky, where they were shipped to ‘Operation Reinhard’ (named for Nazi SS overseer for Jewish extermination Reinhard Heydrich) camps, primarily Auschwitz. Heydrich and Adolph Eichmann had orchestrated Hitler’s ‘Final Solution’ at the Wannsee Conference outside Berlin on 20 January 1942. One result of this was that Slovakia would pay Germany the equivalent of 500 Nazi Reichmarks per Jew deported from Slovakia. Some Jews managed to avoid Nazi Einsatzgruppe H of the Sicherheitspolizei, the SD, and Slovak collaborators by hiding for the duration of the war in the Carpathian Mountains to the east.
Later in the war, 8 German Wehrmacht divisions (half of them SS) would try to hold Slovakia against the Russians. They, and their Slovak collaborators, were eventually crushed by the Spring of 1945. Soviet General Malinovsky and his Russian forces marched into Bretaslava on April 4, 1945. Josef Tizo was soon captured by the US Army while escaping to Austria, returned to Slovakia, and tried and hung in Bretaslava in 1947.
In all, German and Slovak authorities deported about 71,500 Jews from Slovakia; about 65,000 of them were murdered or died in concentration camps. The overall figures are inexact, partly because many Jews did not identify themselves, but it is conservatively estimated that at least 105,000 Slovak Jews, or 77% of their prewar population, died during World War II. Slovakia had played a sad, ruthless roll in Hitler’s Final Solution for the extermination of the Jewish people.
Topolcany was forever changed by the horrible events of World War II. The Jewish culture that had helped build it was destroyed, and the bitter after affects continued because of Nazi-collaboration by Slovaks in the crimes committed against the Jews. It would take generations for the guilt, hatred, accusations and recriminations to take place and subside. But Jews were not a part of this sordid process. Those who remained at all connected by history were now alive and thriving in the new state of Israel. Like David Noy changing his name from Neumann in 1972, they had left the past behind them.
Most of Topolcany’s pre-WWII businesses had been owned by Jews, but were taken over by Slovaks during the war. Of the estimated 3,200 Jews in Topolcany prior to WWII, a mere 550 who hid out among the countryside or immigrated to Israel, survived. Those Jews who survived the Holocaust and returned to their homes found themselves strangers in their native town, without property and in many cases without citizenship. Because most of the Jews in Topolcany spoke Hungarian or German, they had declared their ethnicity in the last pre-war Czechoslovak census as Magyar or German rather than Jewish or Slovak. After World War II, most Hungarian and German speakers, both Jews and Christians, were expelled. The last Jews that survived the war fled after the Topolcany pogrom of September 24, 1945. All the remaining Jewish population were forced to emigrate.
Today, Topolcany is predominantly inhabited by Slovaks, with small minorities of Romany (Gypsies) and Hungarians. In 2004-05 there were also a number of Czechs and Poles living in the town, as Topolcany was the host of a joint Slovak-Czech-Polish military operation intended to prepare Slovakia for joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
The majority of the population is now Roman Catholic (there are two churches of this denomination including one on the central square), and there are also a minority of Protestants (one church). Sadly, the historic Jewish synagogue was destroyed by fire during World War II.
What makes this WWII tragedy into a reason for hope, is that the people of Topolcany, Slovakia, have finally come to terms with their horrific past. The fact that they would reach out to Israel and invite the descendants of Jewish families that had once lived among them. They desired reconciliation and restoration from the sins of their fathers and grandfathers. They solemnly accompanied these Israelis to the ancient Jewish cemeteries and helped them in repainting the lettering of the Hebrew headstones. They broke bread and spent time in new friendship and fellowship.
The past cannot be undone, but it can be remembered.
The Holocaust (Shoah in Hebrew) must always be remembered.
Today there is a special, heartfelt tie between Moshav Avihail and Topolcany, And it has grown between Israel and Slovakia.
Yes, it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target Articles...
Col Michael C. Howard US Marines (Ret)
An #Israeli Family, the Noys (originally Neumann) of Moshav Avihail, Retraces its Jewish WWII #Holocaust past History in Slovakia, at the heartfelt invitation of a special town seeking closure. As the old Jewish saying goes: “Better to light a candle than curse the darkness.”
I have traveled the world in my 32 years of US Marine service, but this is the most beautiful and powerful story I’ve ever heard.
It begins in an Italian restaurant off of Embassy Row in Washington D.C. where I’ve been staying at the Fairfax Hotel the past week courtesy of the Israeli Embassy and the fine folks at the Israeli company MIFRAM, headquartered north of Haifa. It is early October 2018. I am solid friends with these folks as they are directly connected with my dear IDF combat engineer buddies. Together they helped me get many badly needed D-9R armored combat dozers into Kuwait for our March-April 2003 500 kilometer assault on Baghdad for the opening of Operation Iraqi Freedom. What I love and cherish about Israel and the Jewish people are their sense of family, teamwork and faithfulness. Despite being a ‘Gentile Zionist’ (I do have very old Sephardic Jewish blood from Spain), I feel as if I have been grafted into the family. Yes, America has one solid ally we can always count on, and that is Israel. All one has to do is simply look at the history of United Nations votes. Israel has a long history and memory, and they remember America and the steadfast righteous Gentile Harry Truman being there for them on the crucial UN vote of 1947. “Give ‘em Hell Harry” defied the Pentagon & State Department in first recognizing Israel. I can’t help but think of Genesis 12:1-3 “… those who bless you will be blessed.”
I am sitting at a quiet table with my dear friend David Noy, and we are sipping his favorite red wine: Nero De Avola from Sicily. It has been a good week at the annual Association of the United States Army (AUSA) exposition. I have been working with MIFRAM in the Israel Pavilion and connecting with old US Marine and Army buddies who fought in Iraq. It was MIFRAM barriers and other security products that saved a lot of our US troops from VBIEDs. We have also made new friends with several former German fighter pilots from their AUSA area. It has been good sharing history, culture, religion, art, music, equipment, politics, business and many other mutual interests. My favorite topic was comparing tactics in the Battle of Britain … I have always liked the Bf-109 Emil while our German friends prefer the Spitfire! And both German & Israeli pilots have flown Russian MIG-21s and MIG-29s (courtesy of Arab Air Forces and former east Germany) so there is much maneuvering with the hands. Yes, it has been a good conference.
I have known David for a long time. I met him through a good mutual friend right after I returned from Iraq a second time and retired. We have met David in Israel, and he and his bride Esti have visited us outside Portland, Oregon. We have talked about everything I can imagine … but tonight is a special time. David has a unique family story and trip to share with me.
It is about his family surviving the Holocaust, or as the Israelis say in Hebrew, The Shoah. David is a quiet, precise, no-nonsense, happy warrior. A man of the utmost character and professionalism, I know something important is comping when he takes a long sip of wine and leans across the table to say that he wants to share a very personal story of family WWII heritage with me.
David and the entire Noy family had recently been invited to come to Slovakia. Their original name was Neumann but he and his brothers “Hebrew-ized” it in 1972 when he joined the Israel Air Force & finished flight school. David’s father, Joseph Eugene Neumann, came to Israel in 1939, just as Europe was literally going to hell at the hands of the Nazis. He said goodbye to his father Meir Neumann and left his entire family, never to be seen again. All but one would be among the estimated 350,000 Jews of this region who were slaughtered in German death camps. One distant aunt would survive Auschwitz.
The invite was from the town of Topolcany, Slovakia, a town of about 28,000 located in western Slovakia, about an hour and a half drive to the northeast of Bratislava, the Slovakian capitol. This unique invitation to Jews in Israel with a background traced to Topolcany resulted in a series of trips being made by the extended Noy Family from Israel to Slovakia in 1996, 2013, 2015, and 2018.
Topolcany was founded in the 9th century. The actual name comes from both the Slovak word ‘topol’ meaning Poplar tree (those who live among the Poplar groves) and the Old Slavonic word ‘topol’ meaning ‘hot’ (referring to the then nearby hot springs). From the beginning, there appears to have been a Jewish population in this town and area. By Jewish law it takes ten families to make a synagogue, and Topolcany had one until the Nazis and World War II. There is confirmation in cemeteries and other records and artifacts that Jews were a growing indigenous ethnic group by the 11th century. By the 14th century there were an estimated 800 Jews living in the nearby capitol Bratislava.. Located on the western bank of the Nitra River, Topolcany was established as a regional market center throughout most of the Middle-Ages (up through 1500). As a regional crossroads of trade routes, the Jewish population there thrived on trade, banking and financing.
During much of its history, Topolcany weathered the transitions from one regional feudal ruler to the next. It was ethnically mixed. Being in the lowland, the town was never able to build effective walls for defense but its historic Topolcany Castle was built about 18 kilometers northwest of the town in the 1300s. This challenging history continued in the 16th and 17th centuries. Because the town was only 60 km north of the border between the Ottoman Empire and the Habsburg Monarchy, Topolcany was often raided by the Ottoman Turks during the Ottoman wars in Europe. Specific threats were in the years 1599 and 1643, when many citizens were killed or taken into slavery by the Moslems.
The Slovak urban population consisted mainly of Carpathian Germans, Jews and Magyars. More Jews immigrated to the town during the 16th-18th centuries. This ethnic mix came to an end in the first part of the 20th century, as industrialization attracted Slovaks from the surrounding areas and the number of Magyars decreased after the creation of Czechoslovakia following World War I.
With the rise of Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Party, Europe began its inevitable slide into hell throughout the 1930s and 1940s. Czechoslovakia was one of Hitler’s first victims when the German speaking minorities were used as an excuse to carve up the nation and add it to the Nazi Third Reich. A pro-Nazi Slovak Republic was created in March 1939 under President Jozef Tiso, a Catholic priest. On October 29, 1938, he formed the Hlinka Guard as the official internal state para-military security organization to locate, isolate and attack Jews and other ‘domestic enemies of the state’. Seeing the handwriting on the wall, some 5,000 Jews left Topolcany and the region surrounding it before war broke out in 1939.
Armed Forces Day is for those who wear the uniform
Veteran’s Day is for those who wore the uniform
#MemorialDay is for those who never got to take the uniform off.
Introduction & Reflections by Mike Howard, Col, US Marines (Ret). Iraq War Vet.
Americans should always remember this on Memorial Day.
To Veterans, it is something we remember every day. We honor our battle buddies and friends who did not return from being in harm’s way. We remember the stories of service and sacrifice from our veteran fathers and grandfathers.
Since the opening salvos of the American Revolution, nearly 1.2 million American patriots have died in the defense of Liberty. Countless more were wounded in action. Tens of millions more have served honorably, surviving without physical wounds. These numbers, of course, offer no reckoning of the inestimable value of their service or the sacrifices borne by their families.
We acknowledge that the value of Liberty extended to their posterity, to all of us, is priceless.
In May of 1962, retired General Douglas MacArthur addressed the cadets of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, delivering his memorable farewell speech, "Duty, Honor and Country." As a WWI, WWII & Korean War veteran, he described the legions of uniformed American patriots as follows: "Their story is known to all of you. It is the story of the American man at arms. My estimate of him was formed on the battlefields many, many years ago and has never changed. I regarded him then, as I regard him now, as one of the world's noblest figures -- not only as one of the finest military characters, but also as one of the most stainless."
His name and fame are the birthright of every American citizen. In his youth and strength, his love and loyalty, he gave all that mortality can give. He needs no eulogy from me, or from any other man. He has written his own history and written it in red on his enemy's breast.
But when I think of his patience under adversity, of his courage under fire, and of his modesty in victory, I am filled with an emotion of admiration I cannot put into words. He belongs to history as furnishing one of the greatest examples of successful patriotism. He belongs to posterity as the instructor of future generations in the principles of liberty and freedom. He belongs to the present, to us, by his virtues and by his achievements.
In twenty campaigns, on a hundred battlefields, around a thousand campfires, I have witnessed that enduring fortitude, that patriotic self-abnegation, and that invincible determination which have carved his statue in the hearts of his people.
From one end of the world to the other, he has drained deep the chalice of courage. As I listened to those songs of the glee club, in memory's eye I could see those staggering columns of the First World War, bending under soggy packs on many a weary march, from dripping dusk to drizzling dawn, slogging ankle deep through mire of shell-pocked roads; to form grimly for the attack, blue-lipped, covered with sludge and mud, chilled by the wind and rain, driving home to their objective, and for many, to the judgment seat of God.
I do not know the dignity of their birth, but I do know the glory of their death. They died unquestioning, uncomplaining, with faith in their hearts, and on their lips the hope that we would go on to victory. Always for them: Duty, Honor, Country. Always their blood, and sweat, and tears, as they saw the way and the light.
Duty. Honor. Country … these are not for bargain sale or discount.
Reflect: "Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends.” (John 15:13)
World War II Veteran Dies on ‘Honor Flight’ on Return from May 2019 D.C. Trip
Salute to U.S. #Veterans #HonorFlight
"Trained men who will stand and fight are never obsolete. It was not the bowman, but the long bow, not the cavalryman, but the horse, which vanished from the scene. Men - the man, the individual who is the Marine Corps symbol and stock in trade - constitute the one element which never changes."
Col Robert Debs Heinl, 1962
Our Time In Hell
by Lawrence Mascott
Wherever we went, we went together.
Whatever we did we did together.
Whenever we suffered, suffered as one.
Joined together, trained together, sang together.
Of Montezuma, and Tripoli, and all the rest.
Same squad, same ship, same hell, together.
And if one of us needed help, we rose together.
And if one of us were hurt, brought him back together.
And if he died, cried together.
We lived and fought and died together, and for each other.
What is esprit de corps?
Well, now hear this and pass the word:
The word is brotherhood.
Leaving with dignity, in the company of close friends, yea, even brothers, many of whom he'd just met …
Frank Manchel, 95, a WWII US Army Soldier, passed suddenly on his flight home from an all-expenses-paid trip for veterans to the World War II Memorial in Washington, DC.
Surrounded by fellow patriots and accompanied by his son, Manchel was happy and laughing in the last moments of his life. “It was almost instantaneous,” said Dave Smith, founder of Honor Flight San Diego. “He was laughing, chatting, having a good time — and then he collapsed.” His son is a physician, and he and another on board attempted to revive Manchel with no success.
“My father’s passing was the ending to the most amazing weekend, surrounded by his newest best friends,” Dr. Bruce Manchel said in a statement on Monday. “We thank all of you — Honor Flight San Diego, American Airlines, San Diego International Airport, friends, and supporters for your concern and for allowing the weekend to be so special for all of us to share together.”
San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman, daughter of another veteran on board, led the entire plane in a chorus of “God Bless America” in remembrance. Manchel was shrouded in an American flag, and his fellow heroes saluted him as they disembarked.
Manchel is the seventh veteran to have died on the trips provided by the Honor Flight organization. “We know this is a potential situation,” said Smith. “We want to honor these veterans, but this is one of our worst fears that this might happen. We do everything we can to make sure these veterans are safe.”
Zimmerman had nothing but praise for Manchel and the way he was treated. “He was 100 percent engaged, proud, humble — as these veterans are,” she said. “You could just tell how proud they all were of him. It was just wonderful, a loving, loving family.”
An Honor Flight is conducted by non-profit organizations dedicated to transporting as many United States military veterans as possible to see the memorials of the respective war(s) they fought in Washington, DC, at no cost to the veterans. Currently these organizations are focused on bringing veterans of World War II to the National World War II Memorial, and any veteran with a terminal illness to see the memorial of the war they fought in. Organizers plan to "naturally transition" their programs to focus on veterans of the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and subsequent wars as the veterans of those wars get older.
Honor flights arrive at all three of the Washington's area airports: Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, and Washington Dulles International Airport. The veterans are generally escorted by volunteer guardians, who help them on the flight and around DC After landing, the taxiing airplane may be saluted by fire trucks, and passengers are often met by cheering crowds in DC or upon their return flight home.
The Honor Flight Network is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization which works as an umbrella organization with local chapters and various subgroups.
The Honor Flight Network reports that it has flown over 159,000 veterans to the Washington, DC, memorials since 2005]
The network was co-founded by Earl Morse, a physician assistant and retired Air Force captain, and Jeff Miller, a small business owner and son of a WWII veteran. Morse worked in a Department of Veterans Affairs clinic in Springfield, Ohio, where he saw many patients who were World War II veterans. After the National World War II Memorial in Washington was completed in 2004, he asked many of his veteran patients if they were going to see it, and most said yes. "I would see my World War II veterans some three, six months later," Morse said, "and I'd ask them if they'd gone to see it. Three hundred of them, and not one of them had been to it. Reality set in. They were never going." Morse offered to fly with two veterans to Washington to see the memorial, and after seeing them break down and cry and graciously accept the offer, he pitched his idea to a local aeroclub of 300 private pilots at a local Air Force base, proposing that the pilots would pay for the flights for the veterans to Washington and personally escort them around the city. Eleven volunteered, and the network was formed; by 2005, a board was formed, funds were raised, and volunteers had joined.
The first honor flight took place in May 2005, when six small planes flew 12 veterans to Washington, DC. Due to high participation, the program began using commercial flights. At the end of 2005, the program had transported 137 veterans to the memorial. In late 2005, Jeff Miller, a dry cleaning company owner in Hendersonville, North Carolina, inspired by Morse's vision, had a similar idea but on a larger scale. Miller, the son of a World War II veteran and nephew of a B-24 bomber pilot who died in the war, had been a charter member of the National World War II Memorial Foundation. Like Morse, Miller lamented that many World War II veterans would be unable to visit the memorial. The seed that Morse had planted grew to a veritable forest of volunteerism, fundraising and goodwill toward the Greatest Generation veterans, who had been too busy building their communities to demand recognition for wartime service. On 23 and 24 September and 4 November 2006, HonorAir flew more than 300 World War II veterans from the Asheville Regional Airport to Washington, free of charge. HonorAir provided everything: a medical doctor and several EMTs, guardians who would attend to the needs of three to four veterans each, tour buses to take them the World War II Memorial and other national memorials, and a box lunch. Ticket agents and passengers lined the ropes as veterans emerged from the charter jets into the terminal. CBS Sunday Morning aired a moving feature about the HonorAir effort in September 2006. Bill Geist updated the story in 2007 because it was a story that was so important to him.
The Springfield group and HonorAir soon merged to form the Honor Flight Network. As of 2014, the Honor Flight Network is still headquartered in Springfield, Ohio. Both Jeff Miller and Earl Morse were awarded the Presidential Citizens Medal in 2008 for their extensive work with the program.
“A Few Good Men”
“Son, we live in a world that has walls and those walls need to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? … You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code and loyalty. We use them as the backbone of a life trying to defend something. You use them as a punch-line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the same blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.”
Colonel Nathan R. Jessup USMC
“A Few Good Men”
God Bless the last of our World War II Vets
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles....
MIFRAM & Salute Targets at International Security Conference Exposition
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
The latest International #Security Conference & Exposition just ended on a high note.
It ran April 10th, 11th & 12th 2019 at the Sands Exposition & Convention Center in beautiful 70s-80s weather. I’ve never enjoyed Las Vegas, Nevada, more.
What made the experience was a combination of old and new friends focused on a common mission. My old friend was LtCol Al Krumins US Marines (Ret) who I had served with in the 1980s at 1st Combat Engineer Battalion, 1st Marine Division. He was executive officer (XO) of 4th Combat Engineer Battalion when 9/11 took place and we prepared our unit of 960 Marines for deployment to the Middle East. Between us, we both had multiple tours in the Iraq War.
Al is now retired in Las Vegas, so proved to be an outstanding source for “hosting & orienting” us on Las Vegas and its many expositions. As to ‘new’ friends, we had Amos Klein, his wonderful wife Michal, and their three grown, dedicated children (Noam, Roie, & Yotam) who have all grown up operating with MIFRAM Security, outside Haifa, Israel. Founded in 1962, MIFRAM is a family built and operated security company that holds a special place in the hearts of many US military who deployed to the Iraq War from 2003 to 2011. That is because MIFRAM builds an amazing piece of counter-mobility gear that many of us, particularly combat engineers, used throughout Anbar Province (what we Marines referred to as “The Wild West”) and around Baghdad. The gear we highlighted in Las Vegas at ISC-West, is known as the MVB, or Modular Vehicle Barrier. It is a simple, rugged, highly effective anti-ram vehicle barrier that saved countless lives in our battle against enemy Jihadi VBIEDs (Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Devices). It is an amazingly engineered piece of gear that allows a wide range of barrier designs to be employed in a custom design to defeat enemy attacks.
Amos and I were honored to be able to share its history when interviewed recently by Kathy Ireland on her FOX Business News show.
The International Security Conference & Exposition (also known as ISC West), happens to be the largest security event in the US. It is focused on the physical security industry and covers a wide range of areas like access control, alarms and monitoring, barriers, biometrics, drones of all types, internet protocol security, closed-circuit tv, video surveillance, networked security products, robots, protection of real estate, airports, bases, businesses, and stadiums, and much more. Here in one Las Vegas location was a collection of all the world’s newest security products and security technology, plus those that are projects and the defensive capabilities for detection and protection. ISC-West provided all attending an opportunity to network with colleagues, the competition, security professionals, plus gain valuable security industry training and knowledge.
This year, there were over 30,000 attending and visiting at least 1,000 booths and exhibits.
In my assessment after having talked with ISC-West vets of previous years, there were a lot of new technologies on display. I know that our MIFRAM products were new and there was nothing that came close to them on the floors. There were also some tried and true solutions that have stood the test of time and were back on display. I was also appreciative of the fact that MIFRAM allowed me to place several of my Salute Targets on display within their booth. We had a lot of interest and activity regarding our top-of- the-line reactive steel targets.
As someone noted, more mature products have the benefit of being “fully vetted and battle-tested”, which may make them a safer and more comfortable choice for security customers. It was really up to the exhibitors to make the case at the show about the advantages, and possible drawbacks, of new products. To the average customer “new” can also be translated as “risk”. The key word here is to educate. Like our MIFRAM products, this was essential. An educated customer can make a better decision about risk verses reward. As a college history major, I was reminded of the innovative Royal Navy of Britain, which overcame its own conservative planners and produced and famous HMS Dreadnought which was built in 1905 and when launched in 1906. Upon her launch, she immediately outclassed and placed every other warship in existence into outdated obsolescence!
ISC-West hours ran from 1000 in the morning to 1700 in the afternoon. That is a long day when you are standing on your feet! But it could have been worse. This at least allowed you to get back to the hotel, shower, change, enjoy a nice dinner and sleep in a bit (by US Marine standards) in the morning.
MIFRAM was fortunate to be on a major avenue in the main hall and we were literally swamped the first day. Fortunately, Al, who as a Las Vegan has attended hundreds of these trade shows, had the foresight to have a great “Plan B” … he had experienced additional support from the local USAF base gun club! We were blessed with some talented and attractive young ladies who fit right in with our Israeli team and knew how to handle the large, mostly American crowd.
It was an exciting atmosphere which continued all three days, but I have to admit that the last day was a welcome change to both attendees and exhibitors with s more relaxed and slower pace. This was a time when there were thoughtful and reflective conversations taking place and the sharing of ISC experiences. I heard no complaints of slower booth traffic as most felt this period maximized the value of face time with old and new friends. It was good to make sure you had exchanged business cards with those who you wanted to stay connected to.
Al told me, and this was confirmed by officials there, that ISC attendance has slowly been growing from year to year. And with 2019, it was confirmed that at exceeding 30,000, this was the largest show yet. For any one-stop shopping enthusiast, I can highly recommend it as the largest security show in the United States, if not the world.
I also want to salute the great Sands Expo Center folks who hosted us exhibitors and made the convention work so well. As an example were the outstanding series of classes offered throughout the facilities at a wide range of times. I was fortunate enough to attend a definitive 3 hour class entitled “Stadium of the Future” which covered all sorts of security aspects up to and including Super-Bowls. It was a real eye-opener which made me truly appreciate the thought and planning that a wide range of organizations, private and governmental, place into the safety of the general public. This is extremely impressive.
My personal assessment from a prior military background was that overall, what I saw at ISC-West I would describe as evolutionary more than revolutionary. This is good as I know that attendees found much of interest to build upon, not panic over.
I was reminded of a former Commandant of the Marine Corps who reminded us Marines of an old Chinese story about what to do when confronted by the inevitable “dragon of change”. You can confront and fight the dragon … but it will wear you down and eat you. You can run from the dragon and it will chase you down and eat you. You can freeze up with fear or indecision and stand before the dragon and it will easily devour you. So the real challenge and trick is to carefully mount the dragon and try to direct it in the way you want it to go.
Customers need to understand new technologies. The goal is to get them from where they are to where they need to be. It is like a bridge to understanding. And ISC gives us all a bridge to new understanding of what is out there and what is coming. Education is the bridge to better security. And MIFRAM, growing up in a very dangerous part of this world, gets it.
This is the reason I would recommend that one attend the International Security Conference – West of 2020.
Stay tuned for more Salute Targets articles...
Robert Coram, in “Brute,” singled out one particular member of the Chowder Society—LtCol Lyford Hutchins, USMCR, a veteran of WW II, and later, Korea and Vietnam. Coram des cribed him as “a shadowy fgure who sometimes disappeared for days on end. When he reappeared, he would empty a briefcase onto Krulak’s desk, and out would tumble documents so sensitive that Krulak would wonder whether they had been purloined. It was Hutchins who obtained a copy of the JCS 1478 papers that gave Krulak the blueprint for Army unifcation.”
The Chowder Society was anything but a team. Krulak said, “There were times when we were more like a log foating down stream with a thousand ants on it—each of them convinced that he was steering. At best, we were a group of in dividuals who had a reasonable understanding of the problem and shared similar goals.”
Caution was the order of the day. “There was no reason to treat [the 1478 document] with that high degree of sensitivity but, so long as it was thus classifed, we would be unable to use the 1478 papers to show what the other services were planning for the Marines’ future,” according to Krulak. Nonetheless, they had decided to confront the Army head on. Krulak said the unifcation debate was in reality a “cat fght where the stakes are the preservation of the existing U.S. military structure as well as the survival of the Marine Corps as a national institution.” Gen Vandegrift had been called to testify before the Senate Naval Affairs Committee. Twining and Krulak had worked up a response that Twining insisted be tough and truthful. It would be “clear and unequivocal” and would focus on Army motivation.
The Commandant gained everyone’s full attention by saying the unifcation bill was fundamentally fawed, and the Army was deliberately seeking to usurp congressional authority. He then added: “This bill gives the War Department a free hand in accomplishing its expressed desire to reduce the Marine Corps to a position of military insignifcance.”
He emphasized a crucial point that placed a burden on Congress. “In its capacity as a balance wheel, the Cong ress has on fve occasions since 1928 refected the voice of the people in casting aside a motion that would damage or destroy the Marine Corps. Now I believe the cycle has repeated itself and that the fate of the Marine Corps lies solely with the Congress. “The Marine Corps thus believes it has earned this right—to have its future decided by the legislative body which created it—nothing more. … The bended knee is not a tradition of our Corps. If the Marine as a fghting man has not made a case for himself after 170 years, he must go. But I think you will agree with me that he has earned the right to depart with dignity and honor, not by subjugation to the status of uselessness and servility planned for him by the War Department.” The secrecy cover was lifted off the Army’s plan, and the Army was ridiculed by the media. President Truman was furious, accord ing to Coram, but publicly held his tongue. Leaders of the Senate and the House said the Army bill would not pass if it meant stripping the Marine Corps of its historic functions. Privately, however, the president gave the Commandant “a brutal tonguelashing.”
Accompanied by BGen Thomas and BGen Edson and Secretary of the Navy Forrestal, Gen Vandegrift, according to J. Robert Moskin, author of “The U.S. Marine Corps Story,” went to see Pres ident Truman and “argued for a Con gres sion al charter for the Corps. [GEN] Eisen hower, now the Army’s Chief of Staff, opposed having ‘two land armies’ and reco mm ended that the Marines be limited to units of regimental size. He told [Gen] Vandegrift that the Army dreaded the Corps’ expan siveness ever since the publicity over Belleau Wood [in WW I].”
Vandegrift assured Eisenhower that the Corps had no ambition to be a second army and wanted to remain an amphibious partner with the Navy.
The battle, however, continued, but according to Twining, “The public began losing interest in our cause.” Members of the Chowder Society marched into Congress “without any idea of what they were supposed to accomplish,” but they talked the Corps’ case to whoever would listen. Twining said, “Within 72 hours, President Truman was on the phone to Vandegrift—‘Get those lieutenant colonels of yours off the hill.’ ”
For a long time, there was little doubt among military handi cappers that BGen Edson, with his war record and record of service to the Corps, eventually would become Commandant of the Marine Corps. However, when he was ordered not to oppose unifcation in public, Edson retired to rouse support for the Marine position.
In an article titled “PowerHungry Men in Uniform,” he wrote that he disliked “an American replica of the Prussian general staff system.” Immediately after his retirement, he said, “I am a military man and proud of it, but when we reach the point where the military are directing, rather than supporting our country’s policies, we are far along the road to losing what this country has always stood for. It was because of this trend of events that I finally reached the very difficult decision to resign.”
Twining later wrote, “Edson sacrifced himself by openly challenging the Army attempt. A selfess act but regrettable … and we lost our greatest hope for the future.”
In “Semper Fidelis: The History of the United States Marine Corps,” author Allan R. Millett writes, “The 1949 hearings and press coverage of the interservice rivalry over roles and missions, however, stirred Corps champions in Congress, particularly Carl Vinson, the powerful chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. … Vinson introduced legislation to curb the [Joint Chiefs of Staff] powers over roles and missions and to put the Commandant on the JCS. Similar proposals would also have set the Corps’ strength at 6 percent of America’s uniformed manpower and created an assistant secretary of the Navy to represent the Corps.
Such congressional advocates as Donald L. Jackson, Paul H. Douglas, Mike Mansf eld, George A. Smathers (all [Marine veterans]), and … Clare Hoffman flled the Congres sional Record with pro-Marine testimonials and released the suspect JCS 1478 papers to public views. Fifty-fve members of the House endorsed legislation protecting the Corps.”
Despite the opposition of the second Secretary of Defense, Louis A. Johnson, the Commandant sought a place on the Joint Chiefs of Staff for disc ussion of matters affecting the Marine Corps. Secretary Johnson “had little love for the Navy and none for the Marine Corps. Unopposed by a complaisant Secretary of the Navy [John L. Sullivan], he directed sharp cuts in Fleet Marine Force strength for fscal years 1949 and 1950,” according to BGen Edwin H. Simmons, USMC (Ret) in his book, “The United States Marines, 1775-1975.”
“In a public relations gaffe of the frst magnitude,” according to Millett, “President Truman himself handed Corps champions a new opportunity.” In response to a letter from Representative Gordon L. McDonough about legislation that would entitle the Corps to be fully recognized as a major branch of the Armed Forces, he wrote on Aug. 29, 1950: “The Marine Corps is the Navy’s police force, and as long as I am president, that is what it will remain. They have a propaganda machine that is almost equal to Stalin’s.”
The media also received the letter, and the public’s response did not support the president’s position. Postal sacks stuffed with hostile letters made their way to the White House and what stung most were the unsolicited rebukes from citizenry, most of them from the Marine Corps family.
Less than a week later, the president apologized to the CMC. “I sincerely regret the unfortunate choice of language, which I used in my letter of Aug. 29 to Congressman McDonough concerning the Marine Corps,” wrote President Truman in a Sept. 6, 1950, letter to Gen Clifton B. Cates. For all intents and purposes, the Corps’ fght for survival ended on July 26, 1947, when President Truman signed the National Security Act organizing the military under a single secretary of defense and establishing the Air Force as a separate arm. The Act was especially important to the Corps, according to Moskin, as it “formalized in law for the frst time the Corps’ special amphibious function. The Corps was assigned the mission of seizing and defending advanced bases and engaging in land operations related to a naval campaign.” The Fleet Marine Force was retained and the Commandant also had a seat on the Joint Staff. “The Corps did, in fact, remain virtually a ‘second army’ with a manpower ceiling of 400,000.”
Coram writes: “On the evening that the National Security Act was passed, members of the Chowder Society met as a group for the frst time. The meeting was at Krulak’s house where the offcers celebrated the fact that America and their Corps had prevailed in a great battle. … Almost everyone drank too much as they replayed various skirmishes of the long battle. Then the Chowder Society was dissolved.”
According to Krulak, President Truman, in his conversation with Gen Vandegrift had asked quizzically, “You Marines don’t trust anybody, do you?” Krulak noted, “The President was right.” And he warned future generations of Marines, “I believe the triumph [in the 1947 National Security Act] was due to, more than anything else, the quality of apprehensive vigilance that has characterized the Corps since its birth.”
More Salute Target articles coming soon...
Part I | by R.R. Keene
The American blood that was spilled on the World War II battlefields of Europe and the Pacifc had not yet dried when plots were hatched in the halls of the nation’s Capitol to bring the Marine Corps into tow and gut its combat capabilities. Enter a deceptively inauspicious band of Marine offcers willing to risk everything for their Corps.
“The raising of that fag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next 500 years,” said Secretary of the Navy James V. Forrestal to Lieutenant General Holland M. “Howlin’ Mad” Smith, in the command ship USS Mount Olympus (AGC-8) off the island of Iwo Jima the morning of Feb. 23, 1945. The grandfatherly looking Smith, a tenacious battlefeld commander, was not such a romanticist, and when Forrestal was out of hearing range, said, “When the war is over and money is short, they will be after the Marines again, and a dozen Iwo Jimas would make no difference.”
When the Japanese signed surrender documents aboard USS Missouri (BB-63) in Tokyo Bay, Sept. 2, 1945, the Marine Corps and its sister services faced a massive task of downsizing their numbers and reorganizing.
“To demobilize a Corps of [500,000] offcers and men and ‘get the boys home’ under pressure of a wave of home-town hysteria that temporarily crippled our foreign policy and is embarrassing to remember,” writes historian Colonel Robert Debs Heinl Jr., in “Soldiers of the Sea: The United States Marine Corps, 1775-1962,” Congress authorized 107,000 offcers and men as the peacetime strength of the Corps in order “to confront ill-defned but disturbing pressures for extensive reorganization of the defense establishment, which boded nothing but trouble for the Marine Corps.”
Heinl asserts that the authorization also was “to respond professionally to the chorus of doubts and unanswered questions inspired by the advent of the atom bomb, especially prophecies that ‘there would never be another amphibious landing.’ ” The latter was a swipe at the Corps by Army General Omar N. Bradley. The efforts to reduce the Marine Corps started as far back as 1943 while the country was at war. In November of that year, GEN George C. Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, signed off on a memorandum that proposed the Air Corps be separated from the Army and that the Armed Services be unifed under the Department of War, with a single chief of staff and an Armed Forces general staff.
By 1945 the Army plan was confdently presented to Congress by War Department spokesman Army Brigadier General J. Lawton “Lightning Joe” Collins.
While the Collins plan was being debated on Capitol Hill, a debate with far more direct bearing on the Corps was taking shape, according to Heinl. Initially, GEN Marshall; the Commanding General, Army Air Forces, Gen Carl A. “Tooey” Spaatz; and Army Chief of Staff GEN Dwight D. Eisenhower “saw the overweening ambition inherent to their plan,” writes Robert Coram in “Brute: The Life of Victor Krulak, U.S. Marine,” “because when they codifed their ideas into a series of papers known as the JCS 1478 papers, the papers, in arbitrary and unnecessary classifcation, were stamped ‘TOP SECRET,’ ” and closely held.
When Krulak saw the plan, he said it “would isolate the president, as commander in chief, from broad military advice. A single secretary would counsel the president supplanting both the civilian secretaries of the military departments and chiefs of the services. The new defense secretary would have the responsibility of formulating a single military budget, which the service chiefs would be called upon to defend, but which they would not have had a hand in creating.” Navy Secretary Forrestal believed the plan was “fundamentally against the spirit and genius of American institutions.” Naval offcers gasped in the realization that it “meant the end of the naval establishment and all it had stood for.”
Gen Spaatz and GEN Eisenhower outlined the War Department’s plan for the Corps. The Marines would fight “only in minor shore combat operations in which the Navy alone is interested.” Their size would be limited to “lightly armed units, no larger than a regiment, to protect U.S. interests ashore in foreign countries, and to prov ide interior guard of naval ships and shore establishments.” The total strength of the Corps would be limited to 60,000 with no expan sion in time of war; the Marine Corps Reserve would be abolished. Marine units would be held below the size requiring the combining of arms.
Marine aviation would be merged into what might be left of naval aviation or be transferred outright to the Air Force. Mar ines were to be restricted to the “water borne aspects of amphibious operations” (duty as landing craft crews and beach labor parties).
Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Chief of Naval Operations, read the proposal, fumed and said it was no more than an effort “to eliminate the Marine Corps as an effective combat force.”
The 18th Commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen Alexander A. Vandegrift, wrote to retired LtGen Thomas Holcomb (the 17th CMC), “The Army is back on the job in full force trying to absorb the Navy and with it the Marine Corps.” The War Department was unfazed. According to Heinl: “A Senate bill (S.2044) was introduced … that included authority that would permit the new Sec retary of Defense to prescribe by fat, with out congressional check, the roles and missions of the Armed Services. This would remove the Marine Corps from the protection of Congress where it had stood since 1798 and would enable accomplishment of the War Department program by the stroke of a staff offcer’s pen.”
Sensing victory, the rhetoric got nasty. Army BG Frank Arm strong, a spokesman for the War Department, said during a speech, “As for the Marines, you know what Marines are. They are a small, fouled-up Army talking Navy lingo. We are going to put those Marines in the regular Army and make effcient soldiers out of them.”
Enter the Little Men’s Chowder & Marching Society. The Chowder Society was a group of offcers under LtGen Merrill B. Twining who were the intellectual impetus behind the Corps’ efforts to remain a separate service.
It got its name from a popular comic of the day, “Barnaby.” The title character was short and bore a resemblance to thenCol “Brute” Krulak, one of the principals in the Twining effort. Barnaby had a fairy godfather named Jackeen O’Malley, and he belonged to a club called the “Elves, Leprechauns, Gnomes and Little Men’s Chowder & Marching Society.” Col James D. Kerr hung a copy of the cartoon on Krulak’s offce in Quantico, Va., with Little Men’s Chowder & Marching Society underlined and Barnaby labeled “Krulak.” In later years, Twining would write to Marine Corps historian Benis M. Frank, “I knew … that a government offcial appointed by the President must act in accordance with the precepts emanating from the White House. Any organized opposition to its dictates is in effect conspiratorial except, and then only arguably, when he is responding to questioning by the legislative branch.
“The Chowder Society con ducted its operation with that thought uppermost in order to prot ect General Vandegrift, from a single moment of sorrow emanat ing from our efforts. We de liberate ly, and at my insistence, operated on a totally collegial basis. In other words, we operated without formal organization.”
The Navy, however, organized and was, according to Twining, “soon inv olved in scandal and detection. They destroyed themselves. We were also constantly under scrutiny, but our method of operation enabled us to avoid detection in ‘fagrante delicto [being caught in the act].’ ”
Who were these “Little Men”? The senior was LtGen Twining, a Naval Academy graduate and infantry offcer with a back ground in law. He had helped prepare and execute plans for the Guadalc anal cam paign. He also was the nephew of RADM Nathan C. Twining and brother of Air Force Gen Nathan F. Twining.
BGen Gerald C. Thomas, another veteran of Guadalcanal, was also a highly decorated and experienced combat veteran of WW I, Haiti and China. He was smart enough to have taught intelligence and history at Marine Corps Schools Quantico, and, according to Krulak, had “solid grounding in the origins of the Corps.” He “could see through a problem with lightning speed.” He was a man “whose solutions were practical and strong, and whose ability to express himself in clear and persuasive terms was legend.” When briefed on the Army’s unifcation plan, he described it to Krulak as “pure militarism in the German image and a direct threat to the Corps.”
Others in the group included BGen Merritt A. “Red Mike” Edson, leader of Edson’s Raiders and recipient of the Medal of Honor on Guadalcanal; Colonels Robert E. Hogaboom and James E. Kerr; Lieutenant Colonel James C. Murray, who, according to Krulak, “had an innovative brain, an agile pen, and a great capacity for work”; and LtCol James D. Hittle, “an articulate writer and a tireless lobby ist whose Capitol Hill contacts were critical.” Others were Lieutenant Colonels DeWolf Schatzel, Samuel R. Shaw, Robert D. Heinl and Edward H. Hurst, Major Jonas M. Platt and reserve offcers Russell Blandford (who later retired as a major general), Arthur Hansen and William McCahill.
Editorial Note by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
Old Neanderthal, Knuckle Draggin’ Gunsite Grad.
Dear faithful followers of Salute & Gun Rodeo.
This was passed to me by a fellow hard-charging #Iraq War battle buddy who often shares vintage “Vet Net” non-PC material. It is important to keep these classics circulating. God Bless America and you!
A world history lesson…...lest we forget.
The quintessential reason why Grandpa carries a gun. Please take time to read this and pay particular attention to "A Little Gun History" about half way down.
Why Carry a Gun?
My old Grandpa said to me, "Son, there comes a time in every man's life when he stops bustin' knuckles and starts bustin' caps and usually it's when he becomes too old to take an ass whoopin'."
I don't carry a gun to kill people; I carry a gun to keep from being killed.
I don't carry a gun because I'm evil; I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the World.
I don't carry a gun because I hate the government; I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.
I don't carry a gun because I'm angry; I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.
I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone; I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.
I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man; I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.
I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate; I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.
I don't carry a gun because I love it; I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.
Police protection is an oxymoron: Free citizens must protect themselves because police do not protect you from crime; they just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.
Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take a whoopin'!
A LITTLE GUN HISTORY...
PLEASE DON'T THINK FOR A MOMENT, THAT THIS COULDN'T HAPPEN IN OUR COUNTRY ALSO !
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control: From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control: From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
Germany established gun control in 1938: From 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935: From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964: From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970: From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956: From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
56 million defenseless people were rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun control laws adversely affect only the law abiding citizens.
With guns, we are 'citizens'; without them, we are 'subjects'.
During WW II, the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
Gun owners in the USA are the largest armed forces in the World!
If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.
The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either.
SWITZERLAND ISSUES A GUN TO EVERY HOUSEHOLD!
SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT ISSUES AND TRAINS EVERY ADULT IN THE USE OF A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT'S A NO BRAINER! DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL law abiding CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.
I'm a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!
If you are too, please forward this. If you're not a believer, please reconsider the true facts.
This is history; not what's being shown on TV, sanctioned by our illustrious delusional leaders in Washington.
Pass it on..........
Keep America Great
More Salute Target articles coming soon!
by Karl Rove, Wall Street Journal, 10 April 2019
Abolishing the Electoral College is a fashionable campaign pledge for Democrats running for president. Declaring “every vote matters,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren says we should “get rid” of it. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand proclaims American democracy “can’t function” until that happens. Sen. Cory Booker, former Rep. Robert Francis O’Rourke and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro support ending it, as do Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (“archaic”) and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg (“it’s gotta go”). Sen. Bernie Sanders calls the Electoral College “a little bit weird” and wants to “rethink” it, while Sen. Kamala Harris is “open to the discussion,” along with Sen. Amy Klobuchar.
Yet there’s zero chance this happens. To abolish the Electoral College, Congress would have to propose a constitutional amendment by a two-thirds vote in both houses—and then three-fourths of the states would need to ratify it. Since the Electoral College gives a larger voice to less-populated states, there will be more than enough opposition to block such a move.
Still, it’s worth contemplating what would happen if the Electoral College disappeared. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in its defense in Federalist No. 68: “If the manner of it be not perfect, it is at least excellent.” Despite infrequent challenges, the Electoral College has given the U.S. remarkable stability. Eliminating it would hardly usher in an era of democratic satisfaction.
Opponents focus on the 2016 election. Hillary Clinton received 2,868,686 votes more than Donald Trump, a margin of 2.09 points. Yet Mr. Trump eked out narrow victories in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and defeated Mrs. Clinton 304-227. This was a rare divergence. In 58 U.S. presidential elections, the winner trailed in the popular vote in only five (1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016). And there were extenuating circumstances for three of them.
Winning GOP candidates may have fallen short in the popular vote in 1876 and 1888 only because the black Republican vote in the South was being extinguished by violence. In 2000, all the TV networks called Florida—and with it, the election—for Al Gore by 8:02 p.m. Eastern Time, while votes were still being cast in the Panhandle. Turnout rose from 1996 to 2000, but it’s no coincidence that the increase was a quarter less in states where the polls were open when the media declared the race over. While many Western Democrats turned out to seal their wins triumphantly, Republicans were more likely to be discouraged and stay home, probably costing George W. Bush several hundred thousand votes and two states, New Mexico and Oregon.
The two remaining elections in which the winner failed to achieve a popular-vote plurality were the mess in 1824—none of the four candidates had an Electoral College majority, so the House decided the race for John Quincy Adams—and 2016.
In contrast, imagine how many recounts there would be if the popular vote decided it all. Even safely Republican and solidly Democratic states would order recounts, as each party tried adding to its national numbers.
They’d have every reason to: James Garfield’s popular-vote margin in 1880 was only 1,898 ballots, or 0.09% of the nationwide vote. John F. Kennedy won in 1960 by 0.17%, Grover Cleveland in 1884 by 0.57%, Richard Nixon in 1968 by 0.7%, James Polk in 1844 by 1.45%, and Jimmy Carter in 1976 by 2.06%. In each of these six instance, the winner had a healthy Electoral College margin.
Then consider the 19 contests—nearly one-third of all presidential races—in which the president came into office with less than 50% of the popular vote. It was their substantial Electoral College victories that provided mandates to govern.
Abolishing the Electoral College would import the worst aspects of European politics. The number of third-party candidates would multiply, the cost of campaigns would rise, and America would become even more divided as personalities and platforms jockeyed for influence and one of the final match’s two slots. Advocates of one-person, one-vote would likely assert that only a runoff in which someone receives an absolute majority could create a legitimate president. This would be a disaster. Consider, for example, a 1968 runoff between Nixon and Hubert Humphrey, competing for George Wallace’s voters.
In a popular-vote system, candidates would focus on big cities and mostly ignore small states and their interests. But that pales in comparison to the instability it would cause. Ending the Electoral College could plunge America into one of its worst political crises since the Civil War.
The Founders knew what they were doing. Abolishing the Electoral College is an awful idea.
[Mr. Rove helped organize the political-action committee American Crossroads and is author of “The Triumph of William McKinley” (Simon & Schuster, 2015)
Stay tuned for more #general Salute Target articles....
The Law: Summary and Analysis
Editorial Note by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
Here are the words of an influential Frenchman I greatly admire. These are the compiled highlights of his life’s work. It is the essence of what has made America great. It is also a reminder of how we can lose it all. Credit should also be given to two other Frenchmen: Alexis de Tocqueville and Charles Montesquieu. Many Americans know of DeToqueville’s brilliant ‘Democracy in America’ but it was Montesquieu who had a powerful influence on our Founders including 3 distinct branches of government in our #Constitution. Their work is timeless because human nature does not change.
The Law, a work written by the French political philosopher and economist Frederic Bastiat in 1850, investigates what happens in a society when the law becomes a weapon used by those in power to control and enslave the population.
What is the Purpose of Law?
Laws should be set to prevent certain actions which harm individuals and their property. It should not be used to compel or force people to act in a certain way.
“When law and force keep a person within the bounds of justice, they impose nothing but a mere negation. They oblige him only to abstain from harming others. They violate neither his personality, his liberty, nor his property. They safeguard all these. . . But when the law, by means of its necessary agent ,force, imposes upon men a regulation of labour, a method or a subject of education, a religious faith or creed — then the law is no longer negative; it acts positively upon people.” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
Since individuals are not allowed to force individuals to behave in certain ways, groups of individuals (governments, organizations, corporations) also should not be allowed by law to force individuals to act in certain ways.
“Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
“If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over all.” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
Legalized Plunder: The Dangers that Occur when those in Power use the Law as a Weapon of Force
“The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
One of the main ways in which those in power use the law as a weapon of force is through ‘legalized plunder’. One of the most accepted and prevalent forms of legalized plunder is taxation.
“When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it – without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud – to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed. I say that this act is exactly what the law is supposed to suppress, always and everywhere. When the law itself commits this act that it is supposed to suppress, I say that plunder is still committed. . .” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
“. . .when the plunder is abetted by the law, it does not fear your courts, your gendarmes [police], and your prisons. Rather, it may call upon them for help.” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
The Spread of Legalized Plunder
Legalized plunder has been so prevalent throughout history because often groups who are initially the victim of legalized plunder try to gain power not to put an end to it, but so they can use the law to take the property of others.
“Men naturally rebel against the injustice of which they are victims. Thus, when plunder is organized by law for the profit of those who make the law, all the plundered classes try somehow to enter – by peaceful or revolutionary means – into the making of laws.” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
Greed: Reason #1 Why do those in Power use the Law to take the property of others (perform legalized plunder)
Bastiat believed that many in power use the law to commit “legalized plunder” because of pure greed. It is easier to take wealth from others instead of working to gain wealth.
“Now since man is naturally inclined to avoid pain – and since labor is pain in itself – it follows that men will resort to plunder whenever plunder is easier than work. History shows this quite clearly.” (Bastiat)
False Philanthropy: Reason #2 Why do those in Power use the Law to take the property of others
Some use the law to engage in ‘legalized plunder’ not for selfish reasons but because they believe by taking wealth and property from others they’ll be able to help those in need.
“When a politician views society from the seclusion of his office he is struck by the spectacle of inequality that he sees. He deplores the deprivations, which are the lot of so many of our brothers, deprivations, which appear to be even sadder when contrasted with luxury and wealth. Perhaps the politician should ask himself whether this state of affairs has not been caused by old conquests and lootings, and by more recent legal plunder. . . But the politician never gives this a thought. His mind turns to organizations, combinations, and arrangements – legal or apparently legal. He attempts to remedy the evil by increasing and perpetuating the very thing that caused the evil in the first place: legal plunder.” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
Bastiat believed that philanthropy could be achieved by a society without the use of legalized plunder. In other words, just because he was against legalized plunder to help those in need, did not mean he was against helping those in need.
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
“We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state of religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
Would a society that didn’t engage in legalized plunder (taxation) help others through voluntary means?
Bastiat suggested that the belief that only governments are capable of providing certain services arises from a perverse view of humanity – a view which maintains that free individuals lack the compassion, concern, and capability to help those in need.
“If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good?” (The Law, Frederick Bastiat)
Stay tuned for more Salute Targets articles....
(predicted nearly 200 years ago)
Editor’s Note by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
Here are some great illustrations collected by Bill Federer, who recounts outstanding points made by the famous French historian who traveled America.
On April 16, 1859, French historian Alexis de Tocqueville died.
After nine months of traveling the United States, he wrote “Democracy in America” in 1835, which has been described as: “the most comprehensive … analysis of character and society in America ever written.”
Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: “Upon my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention. … In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of #freedom marching in opposite directions. But in #America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country. …”
Tocqueville continued: “The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other. … They brought with them into the New World a form of Christianity which I cannot better describe than by styling it a democratic and republican religion.”
In Book Two of “Democracy in America,” Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: “Christianity has therefore retained a strong hold on the public mind in America. … In the United States … Christianity itself is a fact so irresistibly established, that no one undertakes either to attack or to defend it.”
In the 1840s, Alexis de Tocqueville traveled twice to Algeria. He wrote to Arthur de Gobineau, Oct. 22, 1843 (Tocqueville Reader, p. 229): “I studied the Koran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Mohammed. So far as I can see, it is the principle cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.”
Alexis de Tocqueville stated in “Travail sur l’Algerie dans oeuvres complètes” (1841): “I came back from Africa with the pathetic notion that at present in our way of waging war. … If our sole aim is to equal the Turks, in fact we shall be in a far lower position than theirs: barbarians for barbarians, the Turks will always outdo us because they are Muslim barbarians.”
In “Democracy in America,” 1840, Vol. II, Book 1, Chapter V, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: “Mohammed brought down from heaven and put into the Koran not religious doctrines only, but political maxims, criminal and civil laws, and scientific theories. The Gospels, on the other hand, deal only with the general relations between man and God and between man and man. Beyond that, they teach nothing and do not oblige people to believe anything. That alone, among a thousand reasons, is enough to show that Islam will not be able to hold its power long in an age of enlightenment and democracy, while Christianity is destined to reign in such age, as in all others.”
In “Democracy in America,” Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: “In the United States the sovereign authority is religious. … There is no country in the whole world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature than that its influence is powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth.”
In 1895, Josiah Hotchkiss Gilbert compiled “The Dictionary of Burning Words of Brilliant Writers,” which included the statement from Alexis de Tocqueville: “Christianity is the companion of liberty in all its conflicts – the cradle of its infancy, and the divine source of its claims.”
Alexis de Tocqueville predicted how Americans would lose their freedom. It would happen a little at a time, as he wrote in “Democracy in America” (Vol. 2, 1840, The Second Part, Bk 4, Ch. VI): “I had noted in my stay in the United States that a democratic state of society similar to the American model could lay itself open to the establishment of despotism with unusual ease. … It would debase men without tormenting them … Men, all alike and equal, turned in upon themselves in a restless search for those petty, vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls. … Above these men stands an immense and protective power. … It prefers its citizens to enjoy themselves provided they have only enjoyment in mind. It restricts the activity of free will within a narrower range and gradually removes autonomy itself from each citizen. …”
Tocqueville continued: “Thus, the ruling power, having taken each citizen one by one into its powerful grasp … spreads its arms over the whole of society, covering the surface of social life with a network of petty, complicated, detailed, and uniform rules. … It does not break men’s wills but it does soften, bend, and control them. … It constantly opposes what actions they perform. … It inhibits, represses, drains, snuffs out, dulls so much effort that finally it reduces each nation to nothing more than a flock of timid and hardworking animals with the government as shepherd … a single, protective, and all-powerful government. … Individual intervention … is … suppressed. …”
Tocqueville added: “It is … in the details that we run the risk of enslaving men. For my part, I would be tempted to believe that freedom in the big things of life is less important than in the slightest. … Subjection in the minor things of life is obvious every day. … It constantly irks them until they give up the exercise of their will … and enfeebles their spirit. … It will be useless to call upon those very citizens who have become so dependent upon central government to choose from time to time the representative of this government. …”
Alexis de Tocqueville concluded: “Increasing despotism in the administrative sphere … they reckon citizens are incompetent. … It is … difficult to imagine how men who have completely given up the habit of self-government could successfully choose those who should do it for them. … The vices of those who govern and the ineptitude of those governed would soon bring it to ruin and … revert to its abasement to one single master.”
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles....
Kathy Gilsinan, The Atlantic
The Golan is Israel
Special Note by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret), Historian –
I want to emphasize that #Israel has a legitimate claim to not just the Golan Heights, but also to the area east based on sound Biblical archaeological facts going back some 3,000 years. It was known to Josephus (Ant., XIII, xv, 3). It formed the eastern boundary of Galilee. Note that there is an ancient Jewish synagogue south of Katzrin.
Go'-lan (golan), (Gaulanitis): Golan was a city in the territory allotted to the Israelite tribe of Manasseh in Bashan, the most northerly of the three cities of refuge East of the Jordan River (Deuteronomy 4:43 Joshua 20:8); assigned with its "suburbs" to the Gershonite Levites (Joshua 21:27 1 Chronicles 6:71).
In 1891, the Agudat Ahim society headquartered in Yekatrinoslav, Russian Empire, acquired 100,000 dunams of land in Saham al-Jawlan for Jewish agricultural settlement. Due to the Turkish ban on land purchase by Palestinian Jews, the permits were acquired by Baron Edmond de Rothschild. In 1895, the village of Tiferet Binyamin was established on the land, but the Jews were forced to leave in July 1896, when the Ottomans evicted 17 non-Turkish families and issued an order that led to the expulsion of all East European Jews from the Golan Heights
Saham al-Jawlan (Arabic: Saḩam al Jawlān), also known as Saham el-Golan, is a Syrian village in the Daraa Governorate. It is believed to be the ancient biblical city of Golan (Hebrew: גּולן)
According to the Bible, the Israelites conquered Golan, taking it from the Amorites approximately 1200 BC. From this date on, the Amorites disappeared from the pages of history. But the Jewish people still remain!
Donald Trump once again overturned decades of U.S. policy via Twitter when he declared on Thursday that the United States should recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, a disputed territory Israel seized in the 1967 war with Syria. The area, he wrote, is “of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!”
The timing of the announcement, ahead of Israeli elections on April 9, drew immediate accusations that it was aimed to benefit Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who faces a competitive campaign as well as a looming indictment over alleged corruption. Following the move of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem last May, it was the second time Trump reversed long-standing U.S. positions on Israel, appearing to offer a major gift to the Israeli prime minister without any obvious concessions in return. Yet the push for Trump to make such a move has been going on for more than a year, due to parallel efforts by Israeli officials and members of Congress.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz was already drafting a plan to reinforce Israel’s control over the territory, which it effectively annexed in 1981, last summer. The rationale reported at the time had less to do with Israeli politics than with Iran, which was consolidating strength in Syria via its proxy Hezbollah and directly threatening Israel’s borders. At the same time, the issue was being discussed at the highest levels of the State Department and the National Security Council, according to Mark Dubowitz, who cowrote a February 2017 op-ed calling for the Golan recognition and was engaged in the discussions. The National Security Council would not comment on internal discussions, and the State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In the meantime, the Cruz plan was rolling along, and was introduced as a Senate resolution cosponsored by the Republican Tom Cotton in December. That was only days before Trump announced, also via tweet, his intention to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria. Trump has since partially reversed that policy and the administration now says it intends to keep around 400 troops in Syria.
And though U.S. troops’ stated mission there was the defeat of ISIS, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has also said that the U.S. will stay until “every last Iranian boot” was out of Syria. The question of who would ensure this with the bulk of U.S. troops leaving, and how Iranian proxies could be kept from Israel’s borders, suddenly looked more urgent. In February Cruz, Cotton, and Representative Mike Gallagher introduced a bill to make it policy that the U.S. recognized the Golan Heights as part of Israel, though Israel’s annexation of that territory was never internationally recognized, and U.S. policy since the Reagan administration has not done so.
Senator Lindsey Graham, a cosponsor of the bill, went to the area with Netanyahu earlier this month. Netanyahu is also set to visit Trump next week, when the annual policy conference of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee takes place. He hailed Trump’s announcement on Twitter “at a time when Iran seeks to use Syria to destroy Israel.”
Much like with the embassy move, the announcement is awkward for Washington’s Western and Arab allies, whose support the administration will need when the White House unveils its long-awaited peace plan. The plan is expected to be unveiled sometime after the Israeli elections. A British Foreign Office spokesperson said, for example: “The UK views the Golan Heights as territory occupied by Israel. This has not changed.”
As for the Syrians, who are still in the midst of a civil war, the move is another blow. “It really puts the moderates in an impossible position,” Bassma Kodmani, a member of the negotiating team for the Syrian opposition, told The Atlantic. “If [Trump] is fighting Iran and radicalism, he thinks he’s just defeated Daesh [ISIS] and is containing and suffocating Iran ... I think he has just reversed that trend ... Assad will mobilize with the help of Iran and justify the presence of Iran, and the presence of militias, and the aggressive posture of Iran in the region,” she predicted. Syria’s mission at the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment.
Randa Slim, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, raised similar concerns, saying the move would eliminate any restraint Assad and Iran felt about allowing the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps freedom of maneuver near Israel’s border.
For the policy’s backers, however, declaring Israeli sovereignty over the Golan is a recognition of reality in the same way that Trump’s earlier decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, was a recognition that the city is Israel’s capital despite its contested status. But it’s not just that. At a joint appearance with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Jerusalem this week, Netanyahu said the Israelis had just discovered efforts by Hezbollah to “build a terror network” in the territory. “And I can say that all of you can imagine what would have happened if Israel were not in the Golan,” he remarked. “I think it’s time that the international community recognize Israel’s stay in the Golan, the fact that the Golan will always remain part of the state of Israel.”
Just this morning, however, Pompeo demurred when asked if such a shift was imminent. A recent human rights report from the State Department had contained a telling shift in language, from referring to the Golan Heights as “Israeli-controlled” rather than “Israeli-occupied” as it had been in previous drafts. Asked about it, Pompeo said that the changed reference to the Golan Heights was deliberate, but did not signal a shift in policy. A few hours and less than 280 characters later, that shift seems to be happening.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles....
(GPR Model 3 of March 2019)
“I love a man who grins when he fights.” Churchill
(and shooting this target will make you grin)
It is with great confidence and satisfaction that Salute Targets announces a significant improvement and upgrade of one of its finest and most popular targets: the Gravity Plate Rack (GPR). So much so that we have determined that this “Mod 3” GPR version be called the “Leonidas” GPR, as it will stand beside the indomitable reputation of the ancient Spartan King who held Thermopylae. Like his Hoplites, these targets will withstand fire and steel from both sides. They will more than meet the needs of the discerning shooter. This is based on weekly sustained fire over many decades. Our estimate is that it will handle at least a million plus round impacts in its average operational lifetime! Note that we still have our original GPR from a decade ago out on the Salute Test Range which has just over a million impacts on it … plus has never been brought in from the Winter rain, sleet, snow or ice.
Yes, a decade ago, we invented our original GPR. We were so proud of it not needing a rope, cable, or chain for resetting … as it reset itself. It was innovative and very original. We had a complex “key system” that locked each plate into place with the idea that these could be rotated depending on pistol (no facial plate damage) and rifle (facial damage at close range for carbine & rifle under 100 yards). The locking key system was too over-engineered and fragile and broke depending on freezing weather and heavy vibration of rifle fire. These worked well for five years or so. But based on the requests or our military and law enforcement heavy users, our “Mod 2” removed the complex key pin so that each plate was now locked into its support tubing. This was great for high volume fire, but it meant that most customers needed one target for pistols (close range) while a second one for carbine & rifles (ranges where 5.56, or other very high speed) rounds moving over 3,000 fps would place small “divots” in the face of the armor plate. Our faithful Salute Research & Development folks (Chris Granat, Robert Estep & Brandon Flores) continued to seek an all-around (pistol & rifle) solution in a series of test prototypes. After much thought, work and testing, we now have it.
This Salute Leonidas Gravity Plate Rack™ helps you bring it all together, and like all Salute Targets, it is built for safety & rugged dependability. It is American made, so you don't have to worry about foreign welds & inferior steel. Targets are now fully reversible so you can reliably shoot both sides to prolong target life (use one side for pistols & the other for higher velocity carbines & rifles). And like all Salute Targets, no tools required! One simple hand screw, combined with a series of durable 500 pound gate hinges, plus brass fittings, make for reliable, smooth functioning. The only preventative maintenance needed is along with an annual new paint job in the spring, a shot of spray lubricant for flawless rotation!
Bottom Line: Salute perfected the Leonidas GPR with a better rotating design, reversible plate system, improved hanging angle, and superior center of gravity. The round plate targets flip up when hit, lock into place, and a shot upon the rectangular red reset paddle drops them back into the optimal shooting position. Simple and fun!
- No interruption needed to go downrange and reset. Very safe.
- Great for any gun - Pistol, Shotgun, Carbine and Rifle.
- Reversible plate targets. Use one side for clean pistol impacts, the reverse for all others. No tools required.
Gravity Plate Rack Options: Standard (for experienced shooters) or Armored (recommended for military & police recruit training ranges)
- Target is made of 3/8 inch thick special AR500 Armor Plate Steel.
- 41 inch Tall | 52 inch wide | 31 inch Deep | 90 Pounds. Legs can be shortened.
- Comes with 5 (5”) plate targets, and 1 red reset (10” x 5”) plate (more like a paddle).
- Packages are based on options for standard or armored legs (the latter recommended for heavy volume Rifle fire). Four armor leg plates are 23” x 5”).
- MSRP: $1,499.00 Armored or $1,099.00 Standard.
All of our targets are made of the highest quality steel that survives the elements. They’ll last through rain storms, high temperatures, multiple coats of paint, and just about every caliber you can aim at them (over 100 yards) short of .50 cal.
Salute Targets immediately confirm your increasing speed and accuracy with the bullet’s plinking sound against the metal, to give you instant satisfaction and accurate assessment of your marksmanship.
They are designed for protection and safety, built with angles that deflect most bullet fragments to the ground or side, and not towards the shooter. So enjoy your Phalanx of targets on the Leonidas!
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
It is said that “Sheva”, the Hebrew word for Seven, is the number for completeness and perfection in the Bible.
I actually looked it up on Bible Study Organization (an Evangelical Christian website) and Learn Torah (a Jewish website):
From ancient Judaism I learned that the number 7 in Hebrew is one of the most spiritually significant numbers throughout all of Torah. It is a foundational number, from which many spiritual gates become unlocked. This certainly got my attention.
I also learned that the number 7 is used at least 735 times (54 times in the book of Revelation alone), and that the number 7 is the foundation of God's word. Seven is the number of completeness and perfection (both physical and spiritual). It derives much of its meaning from being tied directly to God's creation of all things. The word 'created' is used 7 times describing God's creative work in Genesis. And there are 7 days in a week and God's Sabbath is on the 7th day. The Bible, as a whole, was originally divided into 7 major divisions: 1) the Law; 2) the Prophets; 3) the Writings, or Psalms; 4) the Gospels and Acts; 5) the General Epistles; 6) the Epistles of Paul; and 7) the book of Revelation.
This is all very heady theological stuff for an old US Marine, so I will simply say that I now believe that “7” is indeed very important. And I have my recent trip to Israel to prove it. It was every bit as wonderful as my first in 1974, which resulted in my taking my new bride Lynn there in 1977 for our honeymoon.
So what personally makes a trip wonderful? It was the sense of Family, Friends, Faith, Flag and Freedom … What we tell our Marines are the things worth serving and dying for in life.
The Family & Friends were my being invited by a unique Israeli company named MIFRAM, which resides in the northern part of Israel in an area known as Kiriat Bialik, in between Akko & Haifa. MIFRAM stands for “Mivnay Pladah Rituch Michun” which I’m told by Israelis I trust as meaning approximately “structural steel welded machinery” in Hebrew. What I do know is that it is a highly reputable, innovative company established by the Klein family in 1962. And from a personal standpoint, they build a wide range of security related equipment that in my case saved American lives during the Iraq War.
I was first introduced to Amos Klein, president of MIFRAM, while on a previous trip to Israel in 2008. A dear old friend, Eitan Lidor, met me in Akko and drove me to Kiriat Bialik, the HQ of MIFRAM. Eitan and I were fellow Combat Engineers who had met in 1984 at 1st Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, California, when I was assigned at his US sponsor. We became solid friends, and it was Eitan who later played a key role in getting Armored Combat D-9 Dozers for us (and the US Army) immediately prior to the Iraq War. These saved a lot of our US Marines and US Army Soldiers in places like Nasiriyah, Baghdad, Najaf and Fallujah. We had also been blessed to have MIFRAM’s Modular Vehicle Barriers (MVBs) which were highly mobile, rugged and very effective at stopping VBIEDs (Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Devises).
I was really impressed with Amos and his passion for leadership and engineering at MIFRAM. Our meeting led to my consulting and representing them at a number of arms and security expositions across the US. From the start, I was also blessed to become good friends with David Noy, a retired Israel Air Force F-4 Phantom (the Israelis affectionately called it the “Kurnass” – Sledgehammer) pilot who was the Operations officer for MIFRAM. Not only did we enjoy working together, but our wives also hit is off and we exchanged visits in Israel and Oregon. MIFRAM really is a “family team” in many ways.
A real highlight was last December 11th, when Amos & I met in LA and drove up to Santa Barbara to be interviewed by Kathy Ireland for FOX World Business News. It was good to be able to share with Kathy, an American patriot, and her audience, all about MIFRAM and the important role they play in our joint US-Israel Global War On Terrorism. MIFRAM is dedicated to solving many other engineering security challenges and I’m proud to be a part of their family team as they continue to set the standard. Amos and David have a saying at MIFRAM that I really like as a hard charging Marin. It is that: “Difficult projects are our standard, Impossible Projects take a bit more time.” This is Jewish “Hutzpah” in its modern humorous best!
So on February 10th, I found both myself and my old 4th Combat Engineer Battalion Executive Officer, Lieutenant Colonel Albert Krumins US Marines (Ret) on board a non-stop El Al flight from LA to Tel Aviv. As Marines, we were looking forward to our mission: touring and training at MIFRAM on their new line of products.
David Noy, as he has done before, greeted us at Ben Gurion and wisked us away up the Israel coast past Netanya to the special place called Moshav Avihail. There we were greeted by our beautiful and gracious hostess Esti (Esther), who gave us the Israeli Spanish equivalent of “Mi Casa es Su Casa” (My House is Your House). Al was taller so I gave him the room with the bigger bed … and we were now part of the Noy Family. This became official on the next Shabbat (Sabbath) large family gathering when we learned the full meaning of “Balagan” (a Hebrew word adopted from the Russian equivalent) … “Happy Chaos” with all the children and grandchildren!
For the next week, most of our days were spent working at MIFRAM, meeting their friendly, helpful staff, and learning more about their wide range of updated products. We talked about partnering with Salute Targets and applying Israeli combat innovativeness. We dined in ancient Caesarea, toured Crusader fortress Akko, and went out to dinner with Eitan and Ziva Lidor in Tel Aviv. Poor David, an IAF pilot, having to put up with three combat engineers! But then he had a surprise up his sleeve … for at 0900 on Friday the 15th of February 2019, both David and his brother Aliz took us to Beit Ha Lochen “The House of the Warriors” where we were introduced to my all-time greatest Israeli hero: General Avigdor Kahalani. Here was the commander of OZ77, the tank commander who held the center of the IDF line, against vastly superior Syrian odds, on Golan Heights in the 1973 Yom Kippur War. What an honor and privilege for us two Marines to meet Gen Kahalani and share with him. Aliz Noy, himself a hero during the 1967 Six Day War, where he lost a leg as a paratrooper taking the Old City (and Western Wall) of Jerusalem, then took us on an extensive tour of the beautiful IDF VA facility.
David Noy then took us to Jerusalem, where Al got to see the historic Temple Mount and Western Wall for the first time. We also visited the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the Hurva Synagogue, Christ Church, and exciting David and Mamilla Mall Streets. And of course we stopped at Israel’s superior equivalent of Starbucks: “Aroma” where you get coffee and chocolate! Jerusalem really is a very special place to so many … truly the City of Gold.
Our time in Israel was sadly drawing to a close. But David, our indomitable MIFRAM Operations man, IAF pilot, and dear friend, had yet one more special tour for us: Galilee and the Golan Heights. We got to see my good friends at Poriya, above Tiberius (Tveria), visit his old home at Ha Moshava, see Kibbutz Degania, Yardinet on the Jordan River, and drive up to the Golan Heights while watching a thunderstorm come down off the Golan and move across the Kinneret (Sea of Galilee). I had never seen the Galilee area so green and beautiful before.
As we headed back home on our El Al flight, I knew we were blessed and reminded Al of a saying Israelis have: “When you leave Miami Beach, you have sand in your shoes. But when you leave Israel, you have a new special place in your heart.”
Yes, “7” - is the number for wonder and completeness, particularly when visiting Israel.
Stay tuned for more articles by Salute Targets.
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
By now, most of our loyal Salute Target followers know that I have a special place in my heart for Israel. It has been a privilege and honor to share special stories in these blog articles about a unique country who stands closely by America, and has had such a positive, influential impact on Western Civilization and world history. But Israeli is personal for me. I spent most of my sophomore year 1974-1975 at St Olaf College, participating in an outstanding foreign studies program at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. I made some important life decisions there regarding the Bible and my personal faith. I later took my wife there in 1977 for our honeymoon. Based on my experience there, I was assigned in 1984 while at 1st Combat Engineer Battalion, 1st Marine Division, to be a sponsor for an Israeli officer. He had just returned from combat in Lebanon during Operation Peace for Galilee. I will never forget what he shared with our US Marine officers, fellow combat engineers (in the IDF they are called “Handassah Kravit”). Someone asked what it was like encountering the mysterious new Soviet T-72 with the Syrian armor forces outside Beirut. To which my friend Eitan Lidor calmly responded: “It burns just like any other Russian tank.” We became good friends, and he invited me to visit their Combat Engineer School in Ado Reim, in the Negev Desert in 1987. It was my first time seeing a Merkava tank, and attending a commissioning ceremony atop Masada. I would return to Israel in 2002, where now as a General, Eitan helped us line up support of IDF Armored D-9 Dozers for US forces preparing for combat in the Middle East. At places like Nasiriyah, Baghdad, Najaf and Fallujah, these gifts from Israel saved a lot of US Marines and US Soldiers.
Another great piece of Israeli gear that saved a lot of American lives was made by a unique security company near Haifa, called MIFRAM (Hebrew for “Mivnay Pladah Rituch Michun” or English: structural steel welded machinery). Some wonderful American logistician (I owe him a case of beer) in either the U.S. State or U.S. Defense Departments, had ordered these for us and they arrived in Iraq. We employed them as Marines in Anbar Province against enemy VBIEDs (Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Devices). They are called “MVB”s for Modular Vehicle Barriers. Simple, robust, mobile and effective.
Amos Klein, the president of MIFRAM, and I recently had the opportunity to appear on Kathy Ireland FOX World Business to share about the company and what it offers regarding security solutions.
Kathleen Marie Ireland is a remarkable women … model, actress, wife, mother, entrepreneur, businesswoman, and author. Born in Glendale, California on March 20, 1963, there is not a lazy bone in her body and I was truly impressed with her warmth, sincerity, faith and professionalism. Through a mutual connection, an appointment was set up north of LA in Santa Barbara. The story of MIFRAM was important to her. We had a great opportunity to meet with Kathy before the filming a review some of the questions and topics that were to be covered. It was a special time for me in several ways as I had grown up in this area, Ventura County, and I’d learned that Kathy and I had several old connections: she had been good friends with actress Elizabeth Taylor, who my Dad had dated in college as bother their sets of parents were good friends. There was a connection here between horses, horse racing, and the champion Seabiscuit, who my family had owned. There was also a mutual family link here between Elizabeth Taylor and William Ruser, who opened a famous jewelry shop in Beverly Hills after WWII. I was also aware that Kathy has a niece with Down syndrome, which my son Nathan “Nate” has. These children are a real blessing and it was great to know that Kathy’s personal faith also holds these children in a special regard. I also learned that she has been to Israel and is a strong supporter of the Jewish state and her people, whose ancestors have faithfully preserved our Bible throughout the ages. Kathy Ireland, as an international ambassador, has also filmed a promotional documentary for the Friends of Sheba Medical Center titled “Holy Land Heroes”, which reveals the service done for wounded soldiers and terror victims. It was a unique and special time to be able to share. I believe the video clip says it all and I hope you sincerely enjoy it.
Yes, MIFRAM is a special security company and I am privileged to be a part of it. It is a unique team of people who offer a wide range of innovative protective solutions for not just America and Israel, but the rest of the free world.
It had been a great day with Kathy Ireland in Santa Barbara, and on our way back south through Thousand Oaks, we even had time for me to surprise Amos and take him to another special place: the Ronald Reagan Memorial Library in Simi, California. From the actual memorial and burial site, we could look northward toward Moorpark and see the actual horse ranch where I had grown up. It was here that I had been brought up with a heritage of appreciation for our Judeo-Christian values and firm understanding that freedom isn’t free. Amos and I compared our childhoods, one in America and one in Israel, and realized that we were both blessed with a shared heritage based on freedom.
What a day celebrating American liberty, Israeli loyalty, and the classic values of Western Civilization: capitalism, free speech, representative government, the right to bear arms, faithful alliances and friendships!
The 188th Barak Brigade was no more. The Syrians were poised to overrun the Golan headquarters at Nafakh and, seemingly, the entire Golan. That final stand, however, was enough to buy a few crucial additional minutes. While the Syrians paused to regroup after their final opposition had been neutralized, the first Israeli reserve units began reaching what had become the front lines. Finding Syrian tanks milling about their command headquarters, the Israelis immediately opened fire and attacked, dispersing the Syrians.
The arrival of the Israeli reservists spelled the beginning of the end for Syria. For both sides, the war had been about time–the Israelis doing all they could to buy time until their reserves arrived, and the Syrians racing against the clock to achieve their objectives before the Israeli mobilization. While many more bloody battles would take place, those first reserve units coming up the Golan and engaging the Syrians at Nafakh meant that the tide had turned.
The reservists found the Syrians enjoying nearly free reign in the Golan’s southern sector. With Syrian tanks advancing along the routes down toward the Jordan River, the critical situation allowed no time to organize divisions and brigades. Instead, platoons and companies of tanks and other units were rushed off to battle as quickly as the forces could be mustered, at times being thrown in against Syrian battalions and even brigades. The fresh Israeli reserve units halted the near–and, in some cases, actual–retreat of what remained of their front-line forces and set about checking the Syrian advance. By midnight on day two of the war, the reserves had managed to stabilize what had been a disintegrating front–with the Syrians having penetrated to areas a mere 10-minute drive from the Jordan River and Sea of Galilee and to less than a kilometer from El Al on the southern access road.
Those gains had not come easily. In spite of their superior numbers, the Syrians’ supply lines, extending great distances from their rear areas to points deep into the Golan, had been decimated by the Israeli defenders, and they could no longer replenish and support their forces. Convoys of supplies and reinforcements were under constant attack by the IDF/AF, as well as IDF armor and other ground forces, severely straining the Syrian advance. While the Syrians dug in to consolidate their gains, the Israelis went on the offensive.
Brigadier General Moshe Peled led a division up the Ein Gev road into the center of the southern sector while Maj. Gen. Dan Laner’s division moved up the Yehudia road farther to the north–a parallel advance that boxed in the 1st Syrian Armored Division and effectively brought the Syrians’ brief conquest to an end. The Syrians fought viciously to free themselves from that pincer movement. A major confrontation near Hushniya camp, which the Syrians had captured the previous night and turned into a forward supply base, ended with hundreds of wrecked, burning and smoldering Syrian tanks and armored vehicles and other vehicles littering the landscape.
By October 10, the Israelis had forced the Syrians back to the antebellum cease-fire line in the southern sector. Well aware of the strong Syrian defensive preparations in the south, Israel chose the northern Golan, with its more difficult, less-defended terrain, as the launching area for its counterattack into Syria itself. Among the units joining the counterattack was the reincarnated Barak Brigade. Since 90 percent of its original commanders had been killed or wounded, Barak’s remnants were joined by replacements, reorganized and returned to fighting strength for the counteroffensive that penetrated deep into Syria–until a United Nations-sanctioned cease-fire came into effect on October 23, officially ending hostilities.
Although the war ended with Israeli forces on the move toward the Syrian capital, the Yom Kippur War–or Ramadan War, as it is known to the Arabs–shattered the myth of Israeli invincibility. The Syrians’ success in maintaining the element of surprise and its forces’ discipline in executing its attack helped that country regain much of the honor it had lost in the debacle of 1967. The victorious Israelis, on the other hand, had won a Pyrrhic victory. Horrible losses had been suffered, epitomized by the obliteration of the 188th Barak Brigade. While the war reaffirmed the Israeli defense doctrine of relying on the reserves’ arrival within 24 hours to defeat a numerically superior enemy force, there was no time for celebration as the country buried the 2,222 soldiers who had paid the ultimate price for their country’s survival and attended to its 7,251 wounded.
This article was written by Gary Rashba and originally published in the October 1998 issue of Military History magazine.
Special Background Notes:
The brute statistics of war point to an Israeli victory. The Arabs lost 5 aircraft for every 1 Israeli. They lost 6 tanks for every 1 Israeli, nearly 10 killed soldiers for every 1 Israeli. 34 Arab naval vessels were sunk without a single Israeli loss. The Israelis also captured nearly 10,000 POWs (mostly Egyptian). Israel captured 500 Sq Km from Syrian and 1,600 Sq. Km. from Egypt. Israel’s west bank (Judea-Samaria) salient more than made up for any territorial loss on the east bank. Bottom line: Israel Defence Forces were at the gates of both Damascus and Cairo at the end of the Yom Kippur War. Egypt’s forces on the Suez Canal (east & west banks) were completely cut off and starving. Syrian ground force resistance had ceased to exist. The only pro-Arab activity was in the UN & Moscow.
Thanks for reading and stay tuned for more Salute Targets articles....
Those last few tanks fought until they were down to their last rounds. Then, just as the 7th Brigade tanks were finally starting to pull back, they were suddenly augmented by an impromptu force of some 15 tanks. The Syrians believed the clock had run out and that the first of the fresh Israeli reservists had arrived, and the Syrian offensive ran out of steam. In truth, it was a motley force of repaired tanks crewed by injured and other crewman, which had been mustered by Lt. Col. Yossi Ben-Hanan, a veteran commander who, upon hearing about the outbreak of war, had hurried home from his honeymoon overseas. By virtue of its timing, that force proved to be the 7th Brigade’s saving grace. As individual tanks began to augment the Israeli forces, the Syrians, exhausted from three days of continuous fighting and unaware of how close to victory they actually were, turned in retreat. Hundreds of destroyed tanks and APCs littering the valley below the Israeli ramparts were testimony to the horrible destruction that had taken place there, leading an Israeli colonel to dub it the ‘Valley of Tears.’
Note: For the story of Avigdor Kahalani & his OZ77 Battalion, please read “Heights of Courage” & see the links below.
River and into the Israeli hinterland. The second prong of the Syrian attack, spearheaded by the 46th Armored Brigade of the 5th Infantry Division, moved south from Rafid on the southern access road toward El Al, with units breaking off toward the north in the direction of the Arik Bridge at the northern tip of the Sea of Galilee. Some 600 tanks were now engaged in the southern Golan, against which stood 12 tanks and isolated units that had been cut off near the various fortifications along the line.
Night offered no respite from the Syrian advance as they capitalized on their advantage of sophisticated night-vision equipment. The Israeli crews’ long-distance firing efficiency was hampered by their lack of adequate night-fighting equipment. They did their best to overcome this obstacle by ordering illumination rounds to light up the sky, in conjunction with the xenon light projectors mounted on their tanks. Those were no match for the Syrians’ infrared searchlights, so the Israelis did what they do best–improvise. They directed small tank units to carry out stopgap blocking actions against the far superior enemy forces–a tactic that may have prevented the Syrians from overrunning the entire Golan.
One of those lethal holding actions that have become legend was led by a young lieutenant named Zvi Gringold, affectionately known as ‘Lieutenant Zvicka,’ whose hit-and-run tactics are credited with single-handedly holding at bay a major thrust by almost 50 tanks. His guerrilla-style tactics on the route leading toward his brigade’s HQ caused the Syrians to believe they were up against a sizable Israeli force. After more than 10 of its tanks were destroyed, the Syrian column withdrew, its commander deciding to hold off and deal with the Israeli force in daylight. Gringold continued to engage the Syrians throughout the night and following day, destroying upward of 30 tanks, until injuries, burns and exhaustion caught up with him and he was evacuated. Gringold recovered and was subsequently awarded Israel’s highest decoration, Ot Hagvura, for his heroic defense of Nafakh.
Another blocking force operating in the south, albeit attached to the 7th Brigade, was ‘Force Tiger’ under Captain Meir Zamir. Force Tiger’s seven tanks were sent to block a column of some 40 Syrian tanks that had broken through at Rafid and was heading north–a move that threatened to cut off and isolate the 7th Brigade. Force Tiger laid an ambush that succeeded in destroying half the Syrian tanks during the wee hours of the morning. When 20 tanks escaped, Zamir prepared a second ambush that succeeded in finishing off the Syrian battalion just after dawn the next morning.
Yet another Syrian thrust by two brigades was advancing rapidly on the southern access road in that wide-open sector and inexplicably stopped short in its tracks just before reaching El Al. While some of its units fanned off toward other objectives to the north, a large part of the Syrian force failed to press its advantage, a move that in effect meant that the Syrians just waited for the Israeli reserves to arrive and engage them. A number of theories abound as to why the Syrians would halt their advance in the midst of their momentum, including fear of an ambush on what certainly should have been a heavily defended route, lack of flexibility and initiative once their objectives had been achieved, overextended supply lines and the more far-fetched fear of an Israeli nuclear reprisal in that critical hour. Whatever the true reason, their lack of initiative at a critical moment robbed the Syrians of the chance to reach the Jordan River–and perhaps beyond–virtually unopposed.
In the morning, the Syrians pressed their attack yet again. The few remaining defenders of the Barak Brigade pleaded for air support, which again suffered heavy losses. Ironically, the Syrians helped solve the problem of foiling the anti-aircraft missile threat. After the Syrians fired rockets at Israeli civilian areas, the Chel Ha’Avir (Israel Defense Forces/Air Force, or IDF/AF) responded with reprisal attacks on Syrian infrastructure in Damascus and beyond. To defend against these attacks, the Syrians pulled back some of their missile batteries from the Golan front. Overall, it took the IDF/AF several days to develop tactics and gain experience in defeating Syrian air defense systems, and 27 Israeli aircraft were lost on the Golan front in ground-support missions, as well as scores of others suffering various degrees of damage.
On the morning of October 7, Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan toured the Golan front and recognized how critical the situation truly was. Not only were the access routes into the Golan threatened, but also the entire north of Israel. Grasping the very real prospect of a Syrian breakthrough into integral Israel, the minister of defense considered a retreat to a line just forward of the escarpment overlooking the Jordan Valley for a major defensive stand–in effect putting his forces’ backs against a wall.
Israel prepared to destroy the bridges over the Jordan River to prevent a Syrian breakthrough.
The Syrian 1st Armored Division was advancing up the route toward the Golan HQ at Nafakh. Colonel Yitzhak Ben-Shoham, the Barak Brigade’s commander, realized his brigade was for all intents and purposes destroyed. He therefore organized and led a small group of surviving tanks in a holding action that slowed the Syrian advance on his HQ for several hours until he and the rest of the defenders were killed. With the brigade commander dead, no reserves in sight and two Syrian brigades advancing toward the Golan HQ–and with some units having bypassed the base on both flanks–the situation could only be described as grave. Lead elements of the Syrian brigades actually reached Nafakh and broke through the base’s southern perimeter. One Syrian T-55 crashed into General Eitan’s HQ, only to be knocked out by the last operational tank in Gringold’s platoon.
At that point, Eitan evacuated his headquarters to an improvised location farther to the north. Those left to defend the base manned two trackless Centurions from the camp repair depot and fired bazookas in a final stand that knocked out several Syrian tanks until those last Israeli tanks were destroyed.
Special Intro by Col Mike Howard, Col US Marines (Ret)
This is one of the better articles on the 1973 Dual for the Golan Heights. Halfway through you will see the additional links I have added to give you more details, particularly those of the determined defense put up by the OZ77 (Strength 77) IDF Armor Battalion of Avigdor Kahalani. Meeting him personally and being able to interview him for several hours was one of the greatest honors and privileges I’ve ever experienced in my many trips to Israel. What a humble gentleman, warrior and practical philosopher. He is also a man of faith, and continued devotion to his men and the youth of Israel. Make sure you read his classics: Heights of Courage and The Way of the Warrior.
“It wasn’t our tanks that made the difference, it was our men.” Avigdor Kahalani
Defeat seemed to be imminent for the state of Israel. The Syrians’ Soviet-style massive frontal assault was too much to bear, and the Israeli front lines had already collapsed. The Israeli general in charge of the entire front had abandoned his nearly surrounded headquarters (HQ) and retired to a makeshift command post a few kilometers back. With two Syrian brigades advancing on the headquarters and no Israeli reserves in sight, defending the headquarters–left in the hands of infantrymen supported by only two trackless tanks mustered from the camp’s repair depot–seemed almost futile.
On October 6, 1973, during Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, a Syrian armored force of 1,400 tanks backed by more than 1,000 artillery pieces and supporting air power began a coordinated assault along the 36-mile-long Israeli-Syrian border in the Golan Heights in the north of Israel. That attack coincided with a similar onslaught by Egyptian forces along the Suez Canal, suddenly forcing Israel to fight a two-front war.
Israeli defense doctrine relies on the standing army to hold the line with air support while the reserves are mobilized. Therefore, the two Israeli brigades that stood in the Syrians’ way in the Golan had the daunting task of holding off the onslaught long enough for Israel’s reserve mobilization to kick in. The 7th Armored Brigade’s epic defense of the northern Golan has come to be widely regarded as one of the finest defensive stands in military history. Less publicity has been given to the heroism of the shattered fragments of the 188th (Barak) Brigade in slowing the Syrian advance in the south. In some respects, however, the Barak Brigade’s story is more incredible, considering the fact that hundreds of Syrian tanks had overrun its sector and were held off by only a handful of tanks.
The 1973 conflict was as much about honor as it was about real estate. In the Six-Day War of June 1967, Israel had seized the Golan Heights, which Syria had turned into one large network of bunkers and artillery positions. For years, Syrian gunners, shooting at random and without provocation, would fire on Israeli fishermen plying their trade on the Sea of Galilee or at Israeli farmers in the Hula Valley below. In a costly uphill battle, the Israelis swept out the Syrian defenders and put an end to the harassment. The loss of the Golan Heights in 1967, however, had been humiliating to Syria.
Between 1967 and 1973, there were frequent skirmishes along the cease-fire line. For months leading up to its attack, the Syrian army had been fully mobilized and on war alert. Since the Israelis were accustomed to seeing those forces at battle strength, the Syrians were able to make final attack preparations without sending noteworthy warning signals. Furthermore, with tensions escalating between the two countries, Israeli leadership feared that strengthening its defenses might be misconstrued as preparation for a pre-emptive strike, thus provoking the Syrians to attack.
The Golan Heights are made up of a 480-square-mile volcanic (basalt) rock plateau perched above the Hula Valley to the west and Jordan Valley to the south. It rises gently from 600 feet in the south to 3,000 feet in the north, with abrupt escarpments dominating the valleys to the west and south. It is transected in some areas by impassable canyons, limiting the number of routes leading up from the valleys to the heights. Since the heights’ geography restricted defensive mobility, Israel continued its advance against the routed Syrians in 1967 until a defensible line was reached–a string of extinct volcano cones that commands strategic views of Damascus on one side and of all northern Israel on the other.
Israeli defenses were based on 17 fortified observation posts. The Purple Line, as the 1967 cease-fire line was known, marked the end of the no man’s land separating Syria from the Golan. Lacking a true defensive barrier, the Israelis had dug a 20-mile-long anti-tank ditch along the border from Mount Hermon to Rafid, an obstacle Syrian armor would be forced to cross under fire from Israeli tanks positioned behind ramparts. At the outbreak of hostilities in 1973, the Golan Heights were defended by two armored brigades: the 7th, which had only been dispatched to the northern sector on October 4, and the 188th (Barak) Brigade, a regular fixture intimately familiar with the area’s terrain, in the south. The modified Centurion and M-48 Patton tanks fielded by both brigades were fitted with the 105mm NATO gun and modern diesel engines.
Considering the faulty Israeli intelligence assessment that, at most, armed skirmishes with the Syrians would break out, the 170 tanks and 70 artillery pieces in the Golan were thought to be enough to meet any Syrian threats, at least until the reserves would arrive.
Against that comparatively small force, the Syrian army fielded five divisions for its attack: two armored and three mechanized infantry, including some 1,400 tanks. Approximately 400 of those tanks were T-62s, the most modern Soviet-bloc tank at the time, equipped with a 115mm smoothbore gun and infrared night-fighting capability. The balance were T-54s and T-55s armed with 100mm guns. The Syrian plan called for its 5th, 7th and 9th mechanized infantry divisions, in BTR-50 armored personnel carriers (APCs) supported by 900 tanks, to breach the Israeli lines, opening the way for the 1st and 3rd armored divisions to move in with their 500 tanks to capture the entire Golan Heights before Israel had a chance to mobilize.
At 2 p.m. on October 6, Syrian gunners opened up a tremendous barrage along the entire front as a prelude to their two-pronged attack–a northern one in the vicinity of the Kuneitra-Damascus road and one in the south where Rafid bulges into Syria.
Facing Colonel Avigdor Ben-Gal’s 7th Armored Brigade in the Golan’s northern sector were the Syrian 3rd Armored Division under Brig. Gen. Mustapha Sharba, the 7th Mechanized Infantry Division and the Assad Republican Guard. When the Syrian assault began, mine-clearing tanks and bridge-layers led the way to overcome the Israeli obstacles. Naturally, those engineering vehicles were the 7th’s first targets, but Syrian infantrymen, braving intense fire from the heights, rushed forward and used their entrenching tools to build up enough earthen causeways for their tanks to negotiate the Israeli anti-tank ditches.
While the Israelis took out every Syrian vehicle they could get into their sights, the sheer mass of some 500 enemy tanks and 700 APCs advancing toward their lines ensured that the defenses would be overwhelmed. The number of defenders dwindled as Israeli tanks were knocked out, yet the vastly outnumbered Israelis managed to take a heavy toll on Syrian armor. In spite of their heavy losses, the Syrians pressed their attack without letup, yet the overexerted 7th managed to hold its ground, throwing stopgap blocking actions wherever the Syrians were on the verge of breaking through.
When darkness fell, the Israelis had nothing to match the Syrians’ night-vision gear and had to allow the enemy armor to advance to ranges effective for night fighting. In the close fighting, the Syrians succeeded in seizing some of the high ground, but a counterattack by the small group of persistent defenders forced them back. When some Syrian tanks did overrun the Israeli lines, the 7th’s gunners would rotate their turrets to destroy them and then immediately turn their attention back to other oncoming tanks. It amounted to an armored version of hand-to-hand combat.
The battle raged for two more days as the Syrians, seemingly oblivious to their heavy losses, continued their assault without letup. By the afternoon of October 9, the 7th Brigade was down to six tanks protecting what was for all intents and purposes a clear path into Israel’s north.
An Israeli Hero
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
I recently returned from my seventh extended trip to #Israel as a guest of MIFRAM Security. MIFRAM is the #Hebrew abbreviation for: “Mivnay Pladah Rituch Michun” (structural steel welded machinery). It is a family owned company established in 1962 that has a very professional, dedicated and experienced history at providing security solutions to a wide range of challenging issues. Friends from MIFRAM and the Israel Defense Force had greatly assisted our US Marine Combat Engineer community in both Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. This was a great opportunity to be hosted at Moshav Avihail and see the actual headquarters in Kiriat Bialik near Haifa. But the one event that I will never forget, is getting to meet Avigdor Kahalani at the famed Beit Ha Lochem (House of the Warriors) in Tel Aviv. Life is all about friendships and networking!
Avigdor Kahalani is one of Israel’s greatest living heroes. He certainly is mine! As a young US Marine officer in the 1970s, I read and studied his masterpiece “Heights of Courage” in Quantico, Virginia, at both Officer Candidates School (OCS) and The Basic School (TBS). His story was part of our instruction following the desperate events of the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Kahalani was born on June 10, 1944 in Ness Ziona during the British mandate era prior to Israel’s War of Independence (1948-1949). His parents, Moshe and Sarah Kahalani, were Jews who immigrated from Sana’a, Yemen. He studied mechanics at the ORT School (ORT is a Russian acronym for Association of Vocational Crafts) in Jaffa. He gained a BA in History from Tel Aviv University and an MA in Political Science from Haifa University. He also attended the US Army Command & General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and graduated from Israel's National Defense College.
Kahalani’s Israel Defense Force career began in 1962. Following basic training, he was assigned to the 7th Brigade of the IDF Armor Corps. Joining as a reservist, he initially completed the tank commander's course with honors and then completed the main IDF officer's course at Bahad 1, with honors, thus qualifying as a career regular officer. Kahalani took part as a member of the IDF delegation to West Germany, when in 1964, Israel began the process for receiving its first M48 Patton tanks. These would initially be handled by Bahad 5 of the IDF Armored Corps training base command.
The major event for Israel in 1967, was the Six Day War (June 5-10). Kahalani was in command of a company of Patton tanks from the 79th Battalion operating in the Sinai. As a result of combat operations here, he was awarded the Israel Medal of Distinguished Service for excellence. To date, only 601 of these have been awarded. True to his beliefs in combat leadership and leading from the front, his tank was always at the head of the advancing column. Kahalani was badly wounded here, and two members of his devoted crew killed, when his tank was hit by enemy rounds and set on fire. He barely made it out of the tank alive, rolling in the sand to extinguish the flames that engulfed his uniform.
In 1973, Israel was badly surprised with the onset of the Yom Kippur War. Major Syrian offensives were launched on the Golan Heights while Egyptian forces managed to cross the Suez Canal and breach the Israeli Bar Lev defensive line. Kahalani, 29 years old, was a Lieutenant Colonel commanding an IDF tank battalion on the Golan, the 77th Armored Battalion of the 7th Armored Brigade. His unit was code-named “OZ77” (Strength 77) and was equipped with upgraded Centurion tanks with 105 mm guns known as the “Shodt” (Whip) in the IDF. Their mission was a simple but desperate one: hold the Golan Heights against vastly superior numbers of Russian made T-55s and T-62s of the Syrian Army. If the Syrians over-ran the IDF positions, they would be able to descend upon the Galilee. Kahalani's “OZ77” battalion, along with other elements of the 7th Armored Brigade, engaged in fierce defensive fighting against a vastly superior Syrian Army mechanized force of multiple divisions. Together on the Golan, the IDF 7th & 188th Armored Brigades initially mustered less than 80 Israeli tanks, vs. an estimated 1,500 Syrian tanks backed by some 50,000 infantry. The battle where Kahalani’s unit made its stand proved to be one of the turning points of the war. Despite heavy losses, “OZ77” managed to break the main effort of the enemy attack. The far outnumbered Israeli forces were able to buy precious time until fully mobilized IDF units made it up the Golan to reinforce them and take the offensive to the Syrians, eventually pushing to the gates of Damascus. In fact, the area where “OZ77” made their stand became known as the Valley of Tears (“Emek Ha-Bacha”), due to the hundreds of burned out and abandoned Syrian tanks and other armored vehicles that littered the landscape. For his cool leadership and heroism in combat during the Yom Kippur War, Kahalani received the highest military decoration of Israel: the Medal of Valor, dated 9 October 1973. To date, only 40 of these awards have been made during the history of modern Israel, and Kahalini’s was one of only 8 awarded during the Yom Kippur War. And his is only one of two for the defense of the Golan Heights. The other was to Captain Zwi “Zvika” Greengold, a fellow tanker, for delaying a Syrian armor column on 6 October, 1973. This award is made for "Performing a supreme act of valor while facing the enemy and risking one's life"
Avigdor Kahalani later shared his story and that of his unit in the powerfully written and highly popular autobiography “Heights of Courage”. This masterful story of combat leadership has been translated into seven languages.
Kahalani would later serve as an armor brigade commander during Operation Peace for Galilee in Lebanon in 1982, commanding 7th Armored Brigade. Following this, he also commanded the 36th Division.
After retiring from the IDF in 1992 with 30 years of active service, Kahalani volunteered to enter politics. In Israel, this can be worse than war. He was elected deputy mayor of Tel Aviv. He was then elected to the Knesset as a member of the Labor Party, serving on the Foreign Affairs and Defense, and the Education and Culture committees. He also participated on the Committee for the Rescue of Jews from Yemen, and served as Chairman of the Golan Lobby. He has always devoted extra time and effort to his fellow veterans in a wide range of capacities. He later served as Minister of Internal Security.
Lately, Avigdor Kahalani continues to write, teach youth, oversee history and memorial preservation efforts at “OZ77” on the Golan Heights overlooking the Valley of Tears. His main passion aside from family and friends is working with Israeli youth in the areas of leadership development.
His outstanding works “Heights of Courage” (1975) and “A Warrior’s Way” (1989) continue to be taught and translated into many different languages by many modern military studies programs. He is currently finishing yet another book “Follow the Warrior’s Footprints” (still yet to be translated into English).
As a US Marine, it was a real honor to meet with Avigdor Kahalani at 0900 on Friday morning the 15th of February 2019 at Beit Ha Lochem (“House of the Warriors”) in Tel Aviv. It was two incredible hours of sharing his life and parallels with combat leadership that I had experienced in Iraq. He has a rich sense of humor and gracious sense of hospitality. In the informal setting and seclusion of the cafeteria, over cups of coffee, he graciously answered my prepared questions and the many that resulted from his answers. He thanked us for taking Baghdad in 2003 and getting rid of Saddam Hussein (payback for launching SCUDs on Israel during Desert Storm). We laughed at the stories which kept us smiling and positive during the tough times, and he framed it all with humor in drawing a parallel between the “way of the warrior” and how civilians look at us and war. He said that some things are just too personal to understand. He reminded me that there is an appropriate old Israeli saying about this regarding a nation where everyone serves in the military, and how the outside world will never “get it”. He smiled and closed with this, shaking my hand: “You know there is a reason why we don’t have sex in the streets. It is because everyone nearby would stop and offer us advice.”
Special thanks to Aliz & David Noy for setting up this special meeting at Beit Ha Lochem (“House of the Warriors”) in Tel Aviv, Israel.
by David Hein
On VIP Funerals & George C. Marshall's Humble Witness
Elaborate VIP funerals are often in the news. Certainly they serve important purposes, as well as expressing the intentions of the deceased, who may have wished to convey a final message through his or her memorial service. No one should disparage these rituals. They provide occasions for remembrance, for the channeling of grief, and for collecting the essential elements of a notable person's manifold contributions. Anything less would seem careless and disrespectful, ungrateful and incomplete.
Or would it?
Consider the life and death of George C. Marshall, whose many years of service to his country included the posts of chief of staff of the U.S. Army (1939–1945), secretary of state (1947–1949), and secretary of defense (1950–1951). During the Second World War, he was the key military strategist and manager among the American service chiefs, deploying more than eight million men in nine theaters around the world. No wonder that Winston Churchill, at war's end, named him the "organizer of victory."
As secretary of state, Marshall initiated the massive economic intervention in western Europe whose combination of liberal internationalism and defensive realism paved the way—alongside a strategic military alliance under the North Atlantic Treaty—for a secure, just peace and a new democratic order: more than seven decades of the Pax Americana.
As secretary of defense, facing conflict on the Korean peninsula, he once again built up the U.S. armed forces—and participated in the removal of a general with a decidedly different temperament, Douglas MacArthur, whom President Harry S. Truman replaced with a Marshall protégé, the less flamboyant but more effective Matthew Bunker Ridgway.
Marshall's contemporaries incorporated their estimates of his value into their comparisons of him to other statesmen and warlords. For instance, on June 5, 1947, when, as secretary of state, Marshall spoke at Harvard University and announced the European Recovery Program, which others came to designate the Marshall Plan, his honorary degree citation referred to him as "a soldier and statesman whose ability and character brook only one comparison in the history of the nation"—that is, to General Marshall's own leading exemplar, George Washington. And on the day of Marshall's funeral, October 20, 1959, former President Truman referred to this soldier-statesman as "the greatest general since Robert E. Lee" and "the greatest administrator since Thomas Jefferson."
In recognition and gratitude, the American people were fully prepared to give this selfless leader a state funeral as resplendent as the one provided for another Army great, General John J. Pershing, in 1948. Indeed, Marshall was thoroughly familiar with these rites because he had drawn up the outline for them. Pershing's body lay in state in the U.S. Capitol; mourners and marching troops processed behind the caisson in sweltering heat from the Capitol to Arlington Cemetery; airplanes flew overhead; and so forth.
But as Marshall biographer Forrest C. Pogue has commented: "Nothing about a state funeral was to Marshall's taste." In instructions written out in 1956, the general made his wishes clear: He forbade a funeral in the Washington National Cathedral. He rejected lying in state in the Capitol rotunda. He ruled out invitation lists for special dignitaries and long lists of honorary pallbearers. He asked that no eulogy be included in his burial service.
After his death, his widow, Katherine, altered his plan in only one particular: her husband's closed coffin rested overnight in the National Cathedral's Bethlehem Chapel. Visitors filed by, paying their respects, as representatives from the armed forces joined cadets from Marshall's alma mater, the Virginia Military Institute, to compose the guard of honor.
On a beautiful fall day, Marshall's funeral rites took place at the Fort Myer Chapel, in Arlington, Virginia, and then graveside, just down the hill from the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, in Arlington National Cemetery. The form used was the Order for the Burial of the Dead, from the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer (1928), a text largely unchanged from its 1789 American version.
A sincere Christian, Marshall wanted the same burial service that would be held for prince or pauper. No eulogy meant two things: First, the focus would be on the meaning of the service itself. Second, according to this service, ranks and titles and résumés do not matter: if an anonymous street person died, he or she would receive exactly the same rite as that used for a head of state.
The burial order began:
I am the resurrection and the life, saith the Lord: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live. . . . We brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.
In fact, the only mention of Marshall's name occurred toward the end of the service, when Canon Luther Martin, who had been chief of chaplains at the close of the Second World War, included it in a place where the first name of the deceased was typically inserted:
Most merciful Father, who hast been pleased to take unto thyself the soul of this thy servant George; Grant to us who are still in our pilgrimage, and who walk as yet by faith, that having served thee with constancy on earth, we may be joined hereafter with thy blessed saints in glory everlasting; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
An Apt Correlative
This service nobly fulfilled its purpose and also achieved what was not its main purpose: providing an apt correlative to Marshall's whole life and career. He lived the paradox that in self-sacrificial service of a good cause, he found himself. Then, having risen to the highest ranks of his profession, he, like George Washington, practiced the patience of power. He did not cash in by writing his memoirs or by serving on corporate boards. The old-fashioned moral strength known as self-mastery meant both striving and self-restraint. General Marshall exemplified the virtues of temperance, prudence, hope, faith, gratitude, and humility.
Imagine what a message an austere, downright counter-cultural ceremony like George C. Marshall's would send today! And yet Marshall had no intention of sending a message. In the instructions he provided, he was simply being himself.
Almighty and ever-living God, we yield unto thee most high praise and hearty thanks, for the wonderful grace and virtue declared in all thy saints, who have been the choice vessels of thy grace, and the lights of the world in their several generations. . . . —The Order for the Burial of the Dead, The Book of Common Prayer (1928)
David Hein is Professor of Religion and Philosophy at Hood College, in Frederick, Maryland. His many books include C. S. Lewis and Friends: Faith and the Power of Imagination (co-edited with Edward Henderson; SPCK and Cascade) and Archbishop Fisher, 1945-1961: Church, State and World (co-authored with Andrew Chandler; Ashgate). His most recent World War II-related essay is "Vulnerable: HMS Prince of Wales in 1941," in the Journal of Military History (2013).
Stay tuned for more Salute Targets articles....
At first glance, this looks like an ordinary day in a small village with people enjoying the sun outside. But underneath this peaceful town was a big military secret: a Boeing factory. During #WWII , the U.S Army designed a whole neighborhood to throw off possible air attacks.
On the roof of #Boeing Plant 2, camouflage trees and structures were shorter than a person. Trees were made of chicken wire and feathers.
A street sign plays off the fake neighborhood at the corner of Synthetic Street and Burlap Boulevard. Suzette Lamoureaux and Vern Manion examine one of the miniature bungalows in the Boeing Wonderland.
Structures that look like cars from overhead are parked along a fake street. An aerial view of the camouflage on top of Boeing Plant 2 shows that the streets were aligned with real residential neighborhoods nearby.
Joyce Howe, and behind her Susan Heidreich, walking over the camouflaged Boeing Plant 2. Boeing plant aerial photo was taken from around 5000 feet. This was taken in either 1944 or 1945.
Thousands of Boeing workers gather in front of Boeing Plant 2 for ceremonies marking the changeover from B-17 to B-29 production on April 10, 1945.
The first B-52A is rolled out at Boeing's Seattle plant on March 18, 1954. In order to clear the hangar doorway, the plane's 48-foot-high tail had to be folded down. Boeing Plant 2. 5000th celebrations. Boeing Plant 2. B-17G Flying Fortress cockpits under construction. B-17F production line, Boeing Plant 2, July 14 1942.
Our tasks are demanding, and debasing the standards we must meet, including providing special treatment, is not in the national interest—rather the contrary. Further, though Mac Donald makes a strong case, the problems wrought by “gender equality” are even worse than she describes. For what passes for “gender equality” is frequently the opposite. One marine told me that he knew of a female counterpart who got promoted before he did even though he deployed repeatedly into combat in the Middle East, while the female never left her desk job back in the States. Female marines have their own grooming and uniform regulations. They can wear earrings, make-up, and nail polish in uniform. They are not required to cut their hair in the military style. Official policy allows them special uniforms, including those for pregnancy.
Not only does the Marine Corps bend over backwards to accommodate women in the ranks; it requires annual training on Equal Opportunity to ensure that all male marines develop the appropriate sensitivity toward their female counterparts. Battalions are required annually to fill out climate surveys that ask anonymously whether any marines have heard language deemed degrading or offensive to women and minorities.
First Lieutenant Virginia Brodie, one of the first female artillery officers in the Corps, demonstrates this zeal for language policing in her article for Task and Purpose, “Hey! You Shouldn’t Address A Bunch of Marines As ‘Gentlemen’ When the Group Includes Female Marines.” Brodie slams her former Battalion Commanding Officer for addressing a group of Marines as “gentlemen” when females were present. Of course, for a Lieutenant to make such a public denunciation of a Lieutenant Colonel, and her own CO to boot, would usually be a career disaster. And yet, in the current climate, it was the Battalion Commander who might well have feared for his career. Improper deference is a sign of heresy. The Marine Corps has no room for the heterodox. As Brodie explains, “He knew I was there, but it seemed as if my presence was being disregarded. A commanding officer is responsible for setting the tone of the entire unit and, without words, he made women feel unwelcome.” A mortal sin indeed.
Dedication to political correctness and equality, says Brodie, demands that the vast majority of marines change not only the way they speak but also the way they think: “This year marks 100 years of women in the Marine Corps. For the marines who served their entire career in units with only men, the habit of only saying ‘gentlemen’ must be broken. Words matter.” Brodie’s strident feminism show why women should not be in the Marine Corps in the first place. She says that she feels “vulnerable” correcting men for not using the right language, going on to explain that she relies on her Platoon Sergeant—a man—to correct other men when she feels “powerless” and “disregarded.”
To repeat, this female officer is of such a moral fiber that she feels helpless when called by the wrong greeting. Our enemies surely quake at the news.
If only the Marine Corps cared as much about winning wars as it does about policing language—then we might actually have something to show for the last two decades of blood and treasure spent in the Middle East!
The double standards and censorship wrought by the Left evidence the corruption their ideology inflicts in our ranks. The Marine Corps, like the rest of the American military, no longer places winning wars and defending the nation at the top of its priorities. If it did, how can we explain the insistence on special privileges for an entire class of physically and spiritually inferior “warriors?”
Consider the effort required to place female sailors on the aircraft carrier USS Eisenhower in the 1990s. In his book Men, Women & War, Martin Van Creveld writes that on the first mixed gender cruise 39 women, 10% of the total amount, became pregnant. All of them had to be returned home via special flights. This trend continues today. Though the phenomena are rarely noted outside the military, those who have served at sea know only too well that both sex and pregnancy are common occurrences aboard naval vessels, as they are throughout the military. Sex and pregnancy, along with women’s greater healthcare needs in general, cost the military a good deal of money, with no gain in performance to justify it.
Such a state of affairs belies the supposed seriousness of our armed forces. As Van Creveld suggests in his book, the very presence of women throws into question the purpose of having such a large and expensive military at all. Since 1945, no two nuclear-armed powers have fought a conventional war. The possibility of annihilation makes such a conflict singularly undesirable. Thus, absent real necessity, America’s armed forces have become the playground of social justice. To argue America needs women to fill roles that men will not is patently absurd. This is not Germany in 1945, when 60-year-old men were forced into the Volksstrum to fight off ravaging hordes of Soviets. The attempt to shoehorn women into a naturally male profession is the result of ideological enthusiasm, not rational policy making.
Despite the absence of conventional threats, the United States still faces the possibility of serious conflict. As our misbegotten adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrated, we can be defeated. By forcing women into a male domain, the Left eviscerates the culture of war so necessary to success in battle. How is the military supposed to concentrate on inculcating the necessary hardness of soul required to face death in war if it is more worried about ensuring female Lieutenants always feel included by public greetings?
The advent of the nuclear age did not spell the end of war. Conflict did not go away; it merely changed forms. Today, our wars are abroad. We can afford defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan. The 1st Taliban Camel Division is in no danger of seizing DC. But this relative peace shows signs of ending. The ongoing populist backlash in Western nations signals that the state itself faces a crisis of legitimacy.
This crisis, if not resolved, could lead to ruinous conflict. A Distant Mirror, Barbara Tuchman’s excellent study of 14th century France after its defeat at the Battle of Poitiers, gives historical precedence for what such a breakdown of social order might look like. If anarchy comes to our nation, the armed forces will be needed, not for foolish wars of empire around the globe, but to preserve America itself. With its slavish appeasement of “marginalized peoples,” women especially, our military has shown that it is unable to think clearly and confront serious threats.
If we do not reject the ideological insanity brewing in our military institutions, we may lose more than our martial virtue; we may lose America itself.
by William Boyd
#Liberal ideology holds the American #military in a vice grip, squeezing the very lifeblood of warlike virtue from its veins. Nowhere is this spiritual corrosion more evident than in the integration of women into our armed forces. Like the Marxists before them, the contemporary Left dismisses reality out of hand. “Nature we will teach—and freedom we will reach.”
Winning wars be damned.
What follows is a compendium of my own personal observations as a Marine Corps officer, as well as an exploration of official policies that reveal the Leftist corruption of our military institutions.
Liberal ideology holds the American military in a vice grip, squeezing the very lifeblood of warlike virtue from its veins.
Like academe and the mainstream media, the American military bows before the altar of political correctness, offering up sacrifices of its very being and purpose in order to satisfy this jealous god. The indoctrination into the sacred rites begins early in a Marine’s career. For me, it started at The Basic School (TBS), the 6-month initial training for newly commissioned Marine Lieutenants. Throughout the course, the new officers attend a variety of social mixers with senior Captains and Majors in different occupational fields in order to discern which job they wish to be selected for at the end of the training.
The staff of TBS and the Infantry Officer Course (IOC) set aside one of these mixers for women and minorities only, so they could plead with these groups to join the combat arms—artillery, infantry, and tanks. While the staff fêted the “oppressed,” the white males returned to barracks to clean.
After the mixer, the Commanding Officer of IOC made an appeal to our class as a whole to join the infantry, while reiterating the need for women and non-whites as platoon commanders for the grunts. In his words, “Without diverse leadership that looks like America, future marines would not respect their officers.”
This kind of favoritism for “marginalized peoples” was manifest throughout my entire instruction. The treatment of women was especially egregious. Female marines rarely carried squad or platoon gear such as radios, machine guns, or batteries. They were more likely to fall out of hikes. Their injury rate was higher overall. During one hike, I witnessed a male Lieutenant, one of the largest in our platoon, carry not only his pack but that of a diminutive female officer who had been injured in the course of the march. While she limped along in tears, he plodded with her gear on top of his own in order to prevent her from falling out.
At one point, I witnessed a fellow officer holding the hand of one of his female peers during a hike in order to keep her with the platoon on a steep hill. On another occasion, two male officers physically stopped a female from falling out so that she would not fail the event. The Marine Corps is, quite literally, pushing women through some of its toughest physical training in order to ensure the “correct” level of diversity.
Basic School instructors, mine included, liked to say that in the Marine Corps “there is only one standard, the Marine Corps standard.” This is a lie. There are two standards: one for men and one for women. Thus, on the annual Physical Fitness Test, required of all Marines, a perfect score for a 21-year-old male is 23 pull-ups, 110 crunches, and a 3-mile time of 18 minutes. For a female of the same age a perfect score is 9 pull-ups, 105 crunches, and a 3-mile time of 21 minutes.
Women also receive special benefits for family life. After giving birth, female marines receive 42 days of non-chargeable leave and can take an additional 12 weeks of maternity convalescent leave. “Secondary caregivers”—that is, fathers—only get 14 days. Female marines can take the 12 weeks of leave at any time in the year after giving birth. Although their duties are interrupted by taking leave, that cannot be used as a factor in determining whether women shall be promoted.
I am not unsympathetic to the needs of new mothers. The plain truth, however, is that women are utterly out of place in the military. Heather Mac Donald, in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, notes that:
In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training---unsurprising, since men's higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.
Introductory Note by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret) - My personal Honorable TV Mentions: Wagon Train, The Rifleman, Sugarfoot, High Chaparral, Laramie, The Big Valley, Lancer, The Wild Wild West, and F Troop.
And who can forget the cinematic #TVclassics & masterpieces that inspired and accompanied these: Stagecoach, Ft Apache, She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, Rio Grande, The Professionals, The Magnificent Seven, Hondo, The Searchers, High Noon, The Man from Laramie, Night Passage, Gunfight at the OK Corral, The Hanging Tree, Rio Bravo, El Dorado, Rio Lobo, The Alamo, Sons of Katie Elder, How the West was Won, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, McLintock, The War Wagon, The Hallelujah Trail, True Grit, Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid and Silverado.
2016 by Steve Metcalf
The death of Hugh O’Brian (2016) has put me in a nostalgic mood for the great TV Westerns of yesteryear.
O’Brian, as readers of a certain age will recall, played the title character in the series, “The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp.” The TV show debuted in 1955 and lasted for six years.
My nostalgia is not so much for the shows themselves as for their theme songs, which as a group constitute a distinguished and underappreciated little subset of late 20th century American music.
As a rule, they were written not by hacks, but by Hollywood and Tin Pan Alley’s most accomplished songwriters, most of whom had classical training.
There were dozens of them. Here, in no particular order, are the ones I consider to be the most enduring:
"The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp"
To begin with O’Brian’s show, the theme – a jaunty little waltz, no less – was certainly one of the more inspired and memorable of the genre.
As well it might have been: the music was by the great Harry Warren, the Oscar-winning Hollywood veteran whose portfolio includes “The More I See You,” “You’ll Never Know,” “Lullaby of Broadway,” “An Affair to Remember,” “Chattanooga Choo Choo” and “Jeepers Creepers,” among many others.
An example of the rarefied category of TV themes that became independent pop hits (#19, Billboard, in 1961). Written by Jay Livingston and Ray Evans, the team that gave us “Silver Bells,” “Mona Lisa,” “Que Sera, Sera” and “Tammy.” Their other TV series contribution was a perhaps less inspired specimen: the theme from “Mister Ed.”
A particular gem, with lyrics by 17-time Oscar nominee (and three-time winner) Paul Francis Webster, who also gave us “Love is a Many Splendored Thing,” “A Certain Smile,” “The Shadow of your Smile,” and “Secret Love.” Music by David Buttolph, whose other bid for TV theme immortality, not entirely successful, was “77 Sunset Strip.”
"The Roy Rogers Show"
The theme here, of course, was “Happy Trails to You,” the work of Roy’s wife, Dale Evans. Although Dale is often identified as a lifelong songwriter, the muse seems to have visited her only sporadically, and nothing she wrote before or after approached the success of “Happy Trails.”
Despite a somewhat overwrought original rendering by Frankie Laine (I guess that’s a redundancy), the “Rawhide” theme became a true standard, attracting cover artists ranging from Liza Minnelli and Johnny Cash to the Dead Kennedys and the Jackson Five. Lyrics by Ned Washington (“When You Wish Upon a Star,” et al.), who deftly rhymes “rollin’” with “swollen.” Music by the prolific Dimitri Tiomkin (“High Noon,” “Town Without Pity,” “The High and the Mighty,” and on and on.)
You get the idea. Other worthies: “Gunsmoke,” “Have Gun, Will Travel,” “Bat Masterson,” “Wagon Train,” “The Rebel.”
And in a category unto itself, let us also remember “The Lone Ranger.”
The theme “song” was the final, onrushing section of Rossini’s overture to his opera “William Tell.” The TV show made that overture the hands-down most instantly recognizable piece of classical music of all time for millions of kids of my generation.
But nothing lasts forever: a few years ago, a veteran conductor told me a story about how he always used that overture as the finale to his orchestral children’s concerts. The kids would roar their recognition and walk out happy. But after doing this successfully for many years, he said that abruptly one day, the kids responded with blank silence.
Apparently “The Lone Ranger” just suddenly dropped out of syndication, or video games took over, or kids just somehow moved on. Rossini, overnight, was just Rossini again.
by Larry and Stacey Madgett
We each have a duty to ourselves, our loved ones, our neighbors, our community, our city, our state and our country to resist criminals. Reasoning with a thug who believes that his failures are because of people just like you is not likely to be helpful. Pleading with a #terrorist who has been taught from birth that his salvation depends on murdering people like you is a doomed plan. Resist!
Resist! His #gun may not be real. After you are tied up it will not matter. His gun may not be loaded. After you are tied up it will not matter. He may not know how to operate his gun. After you are tied up it will not matter. Resist!
Statistically if you run and your assailant shoots at you he will miss. Statistically if you run and he shoots and hits you, you will not die. Bad guys shooting at the police miss 90 percent of the time. The odds are on your side. Better to die fighting in place than to be tied up, doused with gasoline and burned alive. There are things worse than death. Surrender to a criminal or a terrorist and you will learn what they are. Resist!
If you resist with a commitment to win you may well prevail, especially if you are armed and trained. If you lose it is still better to die fighting in place than to be taken prisoner and have your head cut off with a dull knife while your screams gurgle through your own blood as we have witnessed on numerous videos from the “Islamic practitioners of peace,” as well as the Mexican drug cartels.
Some who have refused to surrender.
History is filled with brave people who refused to surrender. Some of these men and woman have won their battles despite what seemed to be insurmountable odds. Others have gone down fighting and avoided being tortured to death. Some fought to the death to help or save others. Many have fought to the death for an idea or a belief.
When General Santa Ana (also the President of Mexico at the time) ordered 180 “Texicans” to surrender the Alamo, Col. Travis answered with “a cannon shot and a rebel yell.” Eventually General Santa Ana was able to build his troop strength to ten thousand. The Mexicans then swarmed the defenders and killed them all.
The battle of the Alamo delayed the Mexican Army long enough for Sam Huston to build his Texican Army, which met and defeated the Mexican Army and captured General Santa Ana. General Santa Ana traded Texas for his life and the sacrifices of the Alamo defenders changed history.
Frank Luke was a heroic aviator in WWI. Shot down and wounded he refused to surrender when confronted by a German patrol. He killed 4 German soldiers with his 1911 Pistol before being killed. Luke was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.
When his unit was pinned down by German Machine Guns and all of the Officers and non commissioned officers in his company were killed or wounded, Alvin York never considered surrendering. Instead, he attacked hundreds of German soldiers killing about 25 with his rifle and pistol and then captured 132 others by himself!
Most of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto (Poland) surrendered to the German Army. They were taken off to death camps and murdered. Between 400 and 1,000 Jews refused to surrender and armed with only a few pistols, revolvers and rifles, they held off the German Army for three months before dying in battle.
During the “Battle of the Bulge,” the 101st Airborne was surrounded by the German Army and ordered to surrender. Faced with overwhelming odds, the Commanding Officer of the 101st sent this reply to the Germans. “Nuts.” The Americans refused to surrender and they stopped the German advance. Most of the Americans troops survived.
On Sept 2, 2010, 40 armed criminals took over and robbed a train in India. Some of the robbers had guns, others used knives and clubs. When they began to disrobe an 18 year old girl for the purpose of gang raping her, one of the passengers decided to fight. He was a 35 year old retired Gurkha soldier. He drew his Khukasri Knife and attacked the 40 robbers. He killed three of the robbers and wounded 8 more despite his being wounded in this 20 minute fight. The remaining criminals fled for their lives leaving their stolen loot and eleven comrades dead or wounded on the floor of the train. The eight wounded robbers were arrested.
How does one man defeat 40? How does he summon the courage to fight such odds? He utilized all of the Principles of Personal Defense: Alertness, Decisiveness, Aggressiveness, Speed, Coolness, Ruthlessness, and Surprise. He was skilled in the use of his weapon. Most importantly, He refused to be a victim and allow evil to triumph!
If this one inspirational soldier can defeat 40 opponents using his knife, it would seem that we should all be able to defeat a group of armed criminals by using our firearms if we are professionally trained as was this heroic Gurkha soldier.
How will you respond if you are confronted by evil as some of us have been in the past and some of us will be in the future? If you have not decided ahead of time what you will do, you will likely do nothing. Those who fight back often win and survive. Those who surrender never win and often die a horrible death. Have you made your decision? Remember, no decision is a decision to do nothing.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles....
by Larry and Stacey Mudgett
The first phase of surrender is failing to be armed, trained and committed to fight. We are prepared to surrender when we are unprepared to resist. The second phase of surrender is failing to be alert. You must see trouble coming in order to have time to respond. The warning may be less than one second but it will be there and it must be recognized and acted upon immediately.
The Third phase of surrender is giving up your weapons.
The last phase of surrender is up to the monsters who have taken control of your life and perhaps the lives of your loved ones. The last phase of surrender is out of your hands.
Surrender During War
During the #AmericanRevolution 12,000 Colonists captured by the British died in captivity on prison ships, while only 8,000 died in battle. Had the 12,000 who surrendered continued to fight, many would have survived and they could have done great damage to the British and likely shortened the war.
#CivilWar prisoners were treated so badly that some 50,000 died in captivity. More Americans have been killed by Americans than by any foreign army in any war. Six hundred and eighteen thousand Americans died in the Civil War.
As many as 18,000 captured American and Pilipino prisoners died or were murdered at the hands of the Japanese during the six days of the “Bataan Death March.” Had most of these soldiers slipped into the jungle and fought as guerrillas they could have tied up elements of the Japanese Army for months or years and perhaps more of them would have survived the war.
Of the Americans who actually reached Japanese prison camps during the war, nearly 50,000 died in captivity. That is more than 10 percent of all the American military deaths in the entire war in both the Pacific and European theaters combined.
In addition to the 50,000 captured Americans who died in Japanese prison camps an additional 20,000 were murdered before reaching a prison camp. If those 70,000 Americans had continued to fight, they could have provided time for the United States to build and maneuver its forces, perhaps shortening the war and saving even more lives. Some of them would have likely survived the war. If they had all died in battle their fate would have been no worse.
During the early stages of the “Battle of the Bulge” American soldiers were massacred by the German troops who captured them.
During the Vietnam conflict many American Prisoners Of War were tortured daily for years by the Communist North Vietnamese. Many Americans died during the process. Only Officers (Airmen) held in North Vietnam were ever repatriated. Enlisted Americans captured in South Viet Nam were routinely tortured, mutilated and murdered by the Communists. As a combat soldier and knowing my fate should I be captured, I was committed to fighting to the death. I made specific plans to force the enemy to kill me rather than allow myself to be captured.
In recent years, American troops captured by Islamic terrorists groups have virtually all been tortured and murdered in gruesome fashion. If I were fighting in the Middle East, I would make a similar vow and plan to fight to the death. Under no circumstances would I allow myself to be captured by our Islamic enemies.
Death by Government
RJ Rummel, who wrote the book, “Death by Government” states that prior to the 20th Century; 170 million civilians were murdered by their own governments.
Historians tell us that during the 20th Century perhaps as many as 200 million civilians were murdered by their own governments.
Some of the Nations where the mass murder of civilians occurred during the 20th Century include Russia, Ukraine, Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, The Congo, Uganda, Armenia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Nigeria, Laos, China, Cuba, Manchuria, Iraq, Iran, Biafra, Rwanda and many others. The slaughter of civilians by governments appears to be as common as not.
Most of these slaughters were only made possible by disarming the victims before killing them. Had these people resisted, their fate would have been no worse and perhaps better. Resistance is much more difficult after the government has already taken the means of resistance away from the people. Planned genocide has been the primary reason for weapon confiscation throughout history.v
Jews and others who surrendered to the Nazis were murdered in slave labor camps by the millions. Had all the Jews in Europe resisted when the Nazis started rounding them up they could have made the Nazis pay an enormous price for the holocaust. The fact that Hitler confiscated guns in 1936 made resistance far less feasible.
Had the Jews in Germany resisted, the outcome may have been the same but the world would have learned about the holocaust years earlier and may have intervened. Most people would prefer to die fighting and trying to kill their oppressor, than be taken off to a death camp and starved to death or murdered in a gas chamber.
William Ayers, former leader of the Terrorist organization “The Weather Underground,” and close friend of Barack Obama, told his followers in the Weather Underground, “When we (Communist Revolutionaries) take over the United States, we will have to kill 25 million Americans.” He was referring to those who would never submit to a Communist takeover. Those who would refuse to deny and reject the Constitution would have to be murdered. If this sounds impossible, remember that Genocide by Government was the leading cause of death in the last Century.
Surrendering to Criminals
The “Onion Field Murder” in California was a wakeup call to Law Enforcement Officers everywhere. On March 9, 1963, two LAPD Officers were taken prisoner by two criminals. The Officers submitted to capture and gave up their weapons. They were driven to an onion field outside of Bakersfield.
One Officer was murdered while the other Officer managed to escape in a hail of gunfire. The surviving Officer suffered serious psychological problems, having been unable to save his partner. As a result of this incident, the LAPD policy became, “You will fight no matter how bad things are.” “You will never ever surrender your weapons or yourself to a criminal.”
Consider the Ogden, Utah record store murders. Read the book if you do not know the story. The manner in which the criminals murdered their young victims cannot be described here. Resistance might have been futile. Compliance was definitely and absolutely futile.
The courts in this country have ruled that the police have no legal obligation to protect anyone. Why do Law Enforcement Officials always tell civilians not to resist a criminal, while they tell their Officers to always resist and never surrender? Police administrators fear being sued by a civilian victim who gets hurt resisting. Furthermore, the police, like all government agencies derive their power by fostering dependence.
According to Professor John Lott’s study on the relationship between guns and crime, a victim who resists with a firearm is less likely to be hurt or killed than a victim who cooperates with his attacker. His book is titled “More Guns, Less Crime.”
The Doctor and his family in Connecticut complied and cooperated, meeting every demand of the home invasion robbers to whom they had surrendered. The Doctors wife and daughters were tortured, raped, doused with gasoline and burned alive. How did surrender and cooperation work out for them?
In another home invasion robbery, a kindly couple with 9 “adopted, special needs children,” surrendered to the robbers. The victims opened their safe and did not resist in any way. When the robbers where finished ransacking the home and terrifying the children, they shot both parents in the head several times before leaving. How did surrender and complete cooperation work out for them?
Handing over your life by surrendering to someone who is in the process of committing a violent crime against you is a form of suicide. Some survive but many do not. The monster gets to decide for you.
We have heard brutalized victims say, “The robber said that he would not hurt us if we cooperated.” Why would you believe anything that someone who is committing a crime against you says? He will be lying if he speaks. As we say in law enforcement, “If a criminal’s lips are moving while he is speaking, he is lying.” Criminals by definition are dishonest and should never be trusted or believed.
You have no doubt heard friends say, I would not resist a criminal, after all why would he kill me? This is stupid and naive. In law enforcement, we call these people “Victims by Choice” (VBC). There could be a long list of reasons why a criminal would kill you despite your cooperation.
You may be of a different race, thus a different tribe. Only members of his tribe are actually human in his mind. He may feel hatred toward you because you have more than he does. Gratification from being in a position of total power is reason enough for some.
Criminals are sometimes members of a Satanic Cult who worship death such as the “Night Stalker” in California. Eliminating a potential witness is often cited as a reason to kill a victim. Sometimes criminals simply enjoy causing suffering and death. There are people who are in fact, pure evil. I have heard criminals say, “I killed her just to watch her die.”
A victim who begs for mercy can give his attacker a tremendous feeling of power which many criminals seem to enjoy. You cannot expect mercy from someone who does not know what mercy is.
“America had many allies during the Vietnam War, but none were more loyal, faithful and dedicated than the Montagnard people. As one US Green Beret said: They were our best friends.”
Col Michael C. Howard US Marines (Ret)
Throughout the long #VietnamWar, there was one particular group of people who stood bravely alongside American forces. They are today known by most officially as Degar, but back then by their original French Indo-China given name Montagnard. The latter name is still preferred by many of them. They are the indigenous peoples of the Central Highlands of Vietnam. During the Vietnam War, their population was approximately one million. Over 40,000 served alongside American troops. Despite Communist North Vietnamese persecution. Today, the Degar people number approximately four million.
As earlier stated, the term Montagnard literally means "people of the mountain" in French and is a carryover from the French colonial period in Vietnam. In Vietnamese, they are known by the term người Thượng (Highlanders) - this term now can also be applied to other minority ethnic groups in Vietnam or Người dân tộc thiểu số (literally, "minority people"). Earlier they were referred to pejoratively as the mọi.
The term "Degar" is generally used only by people connected with Kok Ksor and the Degar Foundation. Most of those living in America refer to themselves as Montagnards, while those living in Vietnam refer to themselves by their individual tribe.
In 1962, as US involvement in Vietnam began to grow, the population of the Degar people in the Central Highlands was estimated to number as many as one million. Today, the population is approximately four million, of whom about one million are Degars. The 30 or so Degar tribes in the Central Highlands comprise more than six different ethnic groups who speak languages drawn primarily from the Malayo-Polynesian, Tai, and Austroasiatic language families. The main tribes, in order of population, are the Jarai, Rade, Bahnar, Koho, Mnong, and Stieng.
Originally inhabitants of the coastal areas of the region, they were driven over time to the uninhabited mountainous areas by invading Vietnamese and Cambodians beginning prior to the 9th century. They continue to be persecuted and forcibly relocated even today. But they are a proud people who have endured. The hard times have made them strong.
French missionaries converted some Degar to the Catholic Church in the nineteenth century, but American missionaries converted more to Protestantism in the 1930s. Of the approximately one million Degar, close to half are Protestant, and around 200,000 are Roman Catholic. This made Vietnam's Communist Party suspicious of the Degar, particularly during the Vietnam War, since it was thought that they would be more inclined to help the predominantly Christian American forces.
In 1950 the French government established the Central Highlands as the Pays Montagnard du Sud (PMS) under the authority of Vietnamese Emperor Bảo Đại, whom the French had installed as nominal chief of state in 1949 as an alternative to Ho Chi Minh's North Vietnam. In the mid-1950s, the once-isolated Degar began experiencing more contact with outsiders after the Vietnamese government launched efforts to gain better control of the Central Highlands and, following the 1954 Geneva Accord, new ethnic minorities from North Vietnam moved into the area. As a result of these changes, Degar communities felt a need to strengthen some of their own social structures and to develop a more formal shared identity. When the French withdrew from Vietnam and recognized a Vietnamese government, Degar political independence was drastically diminished.
The Degar have a long history of tensions with the Vietnamese majority. While the Vietnamese are themselves heterogeneous, they generally share a common language and culture and have developed and maintained the dominant social institutions of Vietnam. The Degar do not share that heritage. There have been conflicts between the two groups over many issues, including land ownership, language and cultural preservation, access to education and resources, and political representation.
In 1958, the Degar launched a movement known as BAJARAKA (the name is made up of the first letters of prominent tribes; similar to the later Nicaraguan Misurasata) to unite the tribes against the Vietnamese. There was a related, well-organized political and (occasionally) military force within the Degar communities known by the French acronym, FULRO, or United Front for the Liberation of Oppressed Races. FULRO's objectives were autonomy for the Degar tribes.
As the Vietnam War began to loom on the horizon, both South Vietnamese and American policy makers sought to begin training troops from minority groups in the Vietnamese populace. The U.S. Mission to Saigon sponsored the training of the Degar in unconventional warfare by American Special Forces. They were adept at this and their contempt for Communism made them fierce fighters and loyal allies to US forces. In particular, these newly trained Degar were seen as a sound, reliable ally in the Central Highlands area to stop Viet Cong activity in the region and a means of preventing further spread of Viet Cong sympathy. Later, their participation would become much more important as the Ho Chi Minh trail, the North Vietnamese supply line for Viet Cong forces in the south, grew. The U.S. military, particularly the Special Forces, developed base camps in the area and recruited the Degar. Because of their loyalty, quiet resolve and skills in tracking, roughly 40,000 fought bravely alongside American Soldiers and Marines. Unquestionably, they became a major part of the U.S. military effort in the Highlands and I Corps, the northernmost region of South Vietnam.
In 1967, the Viet Cong slaughtered 252 Degar in the village of Dak Son, home to 2,000 Highlanders, known as the Đắk Sơn massacre, in revenge for the Degar's support and allegiance with South Vietnam. In 1975, thousands of Degar fled to Cambodia after the fall of Saigon to the North Vietnamese Army, fearing that the new government would launch more reprisals against them because they had aided the U.S. Army. Many American combat veterans had a strong sense of faithful loyalty to whom they remembered fondly as Montagnards. The U.S. military resettled some Degar in the United States, primarily in North Carolina, but these evacuees numbered less than 2,000. In addition, the Vietnamese Communist government in Hanoi has steadily displaced thousands of villagers from Vietnam's central highlands, stealing their land, to use the fertile land for Communist controlled coffee plantations.
Montagnard and Chinese officers from 1976 and 1979 were purged from the Vietnam People's Army.
Sadly, Vietnam's south and center highlands were subjected to systematic state backed colonization by ethnic Vietnamese Kinh and the Central Highlands people experienced ruin and brutality during the Vietnam War.
The predominant native inhabitants of the Central Highlands are the Degar (Montagnard) peoples. In 1975, North Vietnam conquered and invaded the area during its "march to the south" (Nam tiến). All of Vietnam was thus forcibly united under the Communist North in Hanoi. Ethnic Vietnamese (Kinh) people now outnumber the indigenous Degars after state sponsored colonization directed by both the government of South Vietnam and the current Communist government of unified Vietnam. The Montagnards have fought against and resisted all Vietnamese invaders, from the anti-Communist South Vietnamese government, the Vietcong, to the Communist government of unified Vietnam. But they are outnumbered, under-equipped and under financed to stop encroachments and seizures of their ancestral lands.
Outside of Southeast Asia, the largest community of Montagnards in the world is located in Greensboro, North Carolina, USA.
The Montagnards are an amazing people who have withstood and endured much. They cherish their freedom and unique culture and they were certainly loyal, dedicated allies to America throughout the Vietnam War. They have paid a steep price for this and it is something that God willing, Americans never forget. I know that our Vietnam Vets (Army, particularly Green Berets, Navy Seabees, US Marines, USAF and other US civilians) will always appreciate their genuine friendship, sacrifices and loyal commitment...
"We live in a dangerous world. It is impossible to predict an Armed Church Intruder situation. And the enemy intruder is intent on killing. Don’t confuse with a friendly active shooter who could be an armed citizen or off-duty law enforcement member of the congregation. The good guys are the real First Responders, not the Police who arrive later as Second Responders. Victims are often selected randomly, the event evolves quickly. When seconds count, the police are minutes away so a gun in a friendly hand beats a cop on the phone! So if a Predator intrudes to do evil, be a vigilant Sheepdog, not a compliant, defenseless Sheep. The main way to stop a bad person with a gun is by a good person with a gun.”
Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
(Please note that I have condensed and edited this article regarding some tactical comments. This is based on being a frequent church attender in my life, my 32 years as a US Marine, two combat tours in the Iraq War, graduating from Massad Ayoob’s Lethal Force Institute, and being a Gunsite Academy graduate. This outstanding school in Paulden, Arizona, was established in 1976 by Col Jeff Cooper, the definitive American specialist and gun guru on armed self-defense)
Preparing for an Active Shooter at Church
It's vital that churches have a protocol in place for keeping their congregation safe in the event of an active shooter intent on killing. Keith Loria | Apr 24, 2018
The latest FBI Hate Crimes Statistics report revealed there were 6,121 hate crime incidents in 2016, with 21.0 percent of those motivated by a religious bias. "Houses of Worship can be targeted because of the religion they practice or simply because of the demographic makeup their congregation, such as a race-based attack because they are a historically black church," says Wayne North, a consultant with Overwatch Risk Solutions, LLC, Tallahassee, Fla., which offers a free, basic, two-hour security assessment and consultation service to churches.
"Unfortunately, churches are attractive, soft' targets because of their open design, relative lack of physical security (especially during services) and the very nature of being open and welcoming to everyone."
Chuck Chadwick, founder and president of Security Services, Denton County, Texas, trains volunteers from church communities willing to play a bigger role in protecting their worship space. They could be anyone from ushers, to greeters, to people who work with the children’s programs. "Being unprepared for an active shooter situation leads to a situation where massive loss of life is probable if the shooter goes unchecked," says Chadwick. Dialing 911 and waiting is a fool's game. Quick thinking and a plan of action are great, but having someone who is trained and capable of stopping the shooter already at the church is what we call an Initial (or First) Responder.' On average, these attacks are over in just a few minutes."
Chadwick admits that having an active law enforcement officer at a church is preferable, but the cost can be is prohibitive. His ‘Gatekeeper Program’ covers much the same training as law enforcement but in an abbreviated fashion. The six-day program has trained and certified hundreds of members of church security teams. It trains and certifies participants in the legal use of force, conflict resolution, pastoral protection and firearms.
"We teach from a perspective of protecting the church pastors and congregation. Our instructors have served Christian ministries as personal protection officers for many years." A church today must have protocols in place. Every house of worship should have a comprehensive risk assessment done by a competent security professional.
"Written plans and policies regarding security and incident response are a must. Policies on physical security, lockdown procedures, active shooter mitigation and response, are just a few of the key ones," North says. "Church staff must know these polices and then practice the incident procedures ahead of time."
William A. Stack, pastor of Salem Full Gospel Church, in Salem, Missouri, and a Gulf War Veteran, says it's important for a church to be prepared due to the unfortunate realities of society today. "While it is not often possible to prevent someone with ill motives from showing up, having procedures in place can help minimize or negate the threat," he says. "Nobody plans to fail, many fail to plan."
A church should focus on recruiting law enforcement and military veterans as part of its safety & security team. They should first be screened by the church. They should have obtained their CCW permits, attended marksmanship training, practiced reaction drills, and know the church safety plan. Periodic review is essential. Study the church external & internal avenues of approach.
Should anyone view an armed assailant, they are taught to shout "gun" and lay on the floor seeking cover. This minimizes injuries to congregants from shots fired by the assailant or security team members, and helps security team members identify the assailant. "If someone suspicious shows up, we are friendly and kind, but also have someone from the security team keep an eye on the person (unbeknownst to them)," Stack says.
"We also make the security team aware of potential domestic issues, if a congregant becomes involved in a bitter dispute with a spouse/ex." Discussions and training with the security team may be done out of public view. Warning: some in the congregation may be upset or stressed with such outward preparations and training.
Brian McAuliffe, CFO and director of operations at Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, Illinois, says the church armed intruder plans were prepared and members have also gone to similar training sessions. Looking at the data, they believe the best plan seems to be to get people to evacuate quickly but safely.
When an active shooter first enters a church, Chadwick says the first protocol should be to try to isolate him. Armed or physical resistance, evacuation, locking down areas, notifying law enforcement, should be a simultaneous response. Teamwork is crucial. North says someone should immediately sound an alarm so others know there is a threat. "This is where pre-planning comes in," explains North. "Having a distress code that staff and volunteers recognize allows a rapid response and getting people to safety."
While churches want to be inviting, anyone that sees something of concern must communicate it to the security team. "We advocate the use of radios or cell phones to notify security of behavior that is out of the ordinary," Chadwick says. "We offer policies and procedure templates that churches can use to model their own set of guidelines for their security teams and ministries." North says it really comes down to planning, training and instituting a security mindset. "Ushers and greeters are the first line of defense inside the church. Proper training on even simple things like what body language and behavioral cues to look for is extremely important," he says. "Look for what is out of place and what doesn't belong. Beware of strangers, which is almost the opposite of what a faith community does." Anyone working with children has the added responsibility of protecting those that are most vulnerable so it is crucial they understand how to handle emergency situations and get children to safety immediately. Beware of the big mistake in having a mindset that the police will get there in time to neutralize an active shooter. History shows that while law enforcement minimizes the legal liabilities, they usually arrive too late. Counting the bodies and making reports is the sad reality. Keep things simple, Stark says. Complex plans fall apart and are forgotten in high-stress environments. Simple, intuitive responses are more effective in high-stress, crisis situations. "The biggest mistake is assuming it won't happen to them and fail to prepare," North says. "It can happen anywhere and at any time. It's just an unfortunate fact of the world we live in today."
So Start Now:
Have a Church Safety Plan of Action
"A good plan now beats a perfect plan later." - Gen George Patton
Stay tuned for more #selfdefense articles by Salute Targets....
Photo by: US Army/Staff Sgt. Nelia Chappell
The #USArmy wants a cannon that can fire a round over 1,000 miles, with the aim to blow a hole in #Chinese #warships in the South China Sea should a conflict occur, according to Army senior leadership.
"You can imagine a scenario where the Navy feels that it cannot get into the South China Sea because of Chinese naval vessels, or whatever," Secretary of the Army Mark Esper revealed Wednesday, "We can - from a fixed location, on an island or some other place - engage enemy targets, naval targets, at great distances and maintain our standoff and yet open the door, if you will, for naval assets or Marine assets."
The Army, relying heavily on the newly-established Army Futures Command, is undergoing its largest modernization program in decades, and it is doing so with a renewed focus on China and Russia, the foremost theats to US power in the National Defense Strategy.
A key priority for the new four-star command is Long-Range Precision Fires, a team which aims to develop artillery that can outrange top adversaries like Russia and China.
"Our purpose is to penetrate and disintegrate enemy anti-access and area-denial (A2/AD) systems, which will enable us to maintain freedom of maneuverability as we exploit windows of opportunity," Col. John Rafferty, head of the LRPF cross-functional team, explained to reporters last October.
The Chinese and Russians have made significant advancements in the development of effective stand-off capabilities. Now, the Army is trying to turn the tables on them.
"You want to be outside the range that they can hit you," Esper told Task & Purpose Wednesday.
"Why was the spear developed? Because the other guy had a sword. A spear gives you range. Why was the sling developed? Because the spear closed off the range of the sword," he explained. "You want to always have standoff where you can strike without being struck back. That's what extended-range cannon artillery gives us."
The ERCA is an ongoing project that may eventually create opportunities for the development of a supergun with the ability to fire a round over 1,000 miles. The extended-range cannon artillery currently has a range of 62 miles, which is already double the range of the older 155 mm guns.
The Army is also looking at adapting current artillery for anti-ship warfare.
During the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises last year, Army soldiers fired multiple rockets from High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) at the ex-USS Racine during a combined arms sinking exercise. The drill highlighted what a war with China in the Pacific might look like.
China has one of the world's largest navies, and there is significant evidence that it intends to use its growing military might to drive the US out of the region.
When Russians died in Syria … attacking US Marines and US Army Green Berets and their allies.
You did not get this from me. It was passed via a US Marine Vietnam Vet F-4 Pilot who has “low friends in high places”. He noted: “If you watch CNN, MSNBC, ABC News, NBC News, or CBS News, you are grossly miss-informed!” Col Mike Howard
On 7 February 2018, approximately 550 pro-Syrian forces composed of #Syrian Army infantry and a few hundred #Russian mercenaries attacked a US JSOC (Joint #SpecialOperations Command) outpost using artillery, tanks, and APCs in the assault.
The ‘mercenaries’ were believed to be and later confirmed to have been composed of members of a unique Russian private military organization known as ‘The Wagner Group’. It is a specialty of Vladimir Putin. The Wagner Group has been used in the past by the Russian government to conduct special operations Moscow doesn’t want to be associated with directly. However they are known to train at Russian bases, are composed mainly of former Spetsnaz, and are believed to be ‘advised’ by active duty Russian Spetsnaz. It would not be unfair to call them a Special Operations Force.
Prior to the battle, the forces deploying against the US camp were overheard on radios communicating routinely in Russian, and were known after the battle to have left Syria and reported directly to Moscow. They also used EW (electronic warfare) assets before and during the battle that are known to be sole proprietary assets of the Russian military. It did not go well for them.
Though the attacking troops and their artillery and armor were seen massing in a nearby town days before the assault, there was no indication that an attack on the American outpost in particular would take place. Normally great care is taken to keep Russian and US forces from clashing directly in Syria.
A team of about 30 Delta Force Soldiers, Rangers from the Joint Special Operations Command were working alongside Kurdish and Arab forces at a small dusty outpost next to a Conoco gas plant, near the city of Deir al-Zour in eastern Syria.
Roughly 20 miles away, at a base known as a mission support site, a team of Green Berets and a platoon of infantry Marines watched drone feeds and passed information to the Americans at the gas plant about the gathering fighters.
About 1500 hours, the Syrian force began moving toward the Conoco plant. By early evening, more than 500 troops and 27 vehicles (made up of tanks and APCs) had amassed.
In the American air operations center at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, and at the Pentagon, military officers and intelligence analysts watched the scene unfold. Commanders briefed American pilots and ground crews in support of the US forces in Syria, and air assets were placed on alert.
Back at the mission support site, the Green Berets and Marines were preparing a small reaction force, consisting of roughly 16 troops in four mine-resistant vehicles, to support the Conoco plant if they were needed.
About 2030 hours, three Russian-made T-72 tanks moved within a mile of the Conoco plant. Bracing for an attack, the Green Berets prepared to launch the reaction force.
At the Conoco plant, around 2000 hours, the American SOF troops watched as a column of Russian tanks and other armored vehicles turned and drove toward them. They came from a neighborhood of houses where they had earlier tried to gather undetected.
About 2030 hours, the Russian mercenaries and Syrian forces attacked.
The Conoco outpost was hit with a mixture of tank fire, large artillery and mortar rounds. The air was filled with dust and shrapnel. The American SOF operators took cover, then ran behind dirt berms to fire anti-tank missiles and machine guns at the advancing column of armored vehicles.
For the first 15 minutes, American military officials called their Russian counterparts and urged them to stop the attack. When that failed, American troops fired warning shots at a group of vehicles and a howitzer.
The attackers were not deterred. They kept coming.
Soon American Close Air Support aircraft began arriving and stacking in waves awaiting their go ahead. These included Reaper drones, F-22 stealth fighter jets, F-15E Strike Fighters, B-52 bombers, AC-130 gunships and AH-64 Apache attack helicopters. Each was accordingly given the green light. For the next three hours, dozens of American air assets pummeled enemy troops, tanks and other vehicles. Marine rocket artillery was also called in and fired from the ground.
The US reaction team sped toward the fight. It was dark, and the roads were littered with felled power lines and shell craters. The 20-mile drive was made all the more difficult since the trucks did not turn on their headlights, relying solely on thermal-imaging cameras to navigate.
As the Green Berets and Marines neared the Conoco plant around 2330 hours, they were forced to stop. The barrage of artillery was too dangerous to drive through until airstrikes silenced the enemy’s howitzers and tanks.
At the plant, the commandos were pinned down by enemy artillery and running low on ammunition. Flashes from tank muzzles, antiaircraft weapons and machine guns lit up the air.
About 0100 hours. with the Syrian artillery fire finally dwindling from the constant US air assault, the team of Marines and Green Berets pulled up to the Conoco outpost and began firing. At that point in the battle most of the air assets had returned to their bases to refuel and re-arm.
The US JSOC troops, allied Syrian troops, and Marines … roughly 50 in all … prepared for direct fire engagement as the Russian mercenaries left their vehicles and headed toward the JSOC outpost. The Russians and Syrians were assembled on foot in full-on frontal assault formations.
A handful of Marines ran ammunition to machine guns and Javelin missile launchers scattered along the berms and wedged among the trucks. Some of the Green Berets and Marines took aim from the exposed hatches of their vehicles. Others remained in their trucks, using a combination of thermal screens and joysticks to control and fire the heavy machine guns affixed on their roofs.
A few of the US troops, including Air Force combat air controllers, worked the radios to direct the next fleet of bombers flying in toward the battlefield. At least one Marine exposed himself to incoming fire as he used a missile guidance computer to find targets’ locations in the dark and pass them on to the troops calling in follow-on airstrikes.
The Russian mercenaries were effectively massacred in the battle.
An hour later, they started to retreat and the American troops stopped firing. From their outpost, the Special Operators and Marines watched the mercenaries and Syrian fighters return to collect their dead. The small team of American troops suffered no harm in the battle. One allied Syrian fighter was wounded.
What the Russians leading the attack had failed to appreciate was the US forces’ combat experience and expertise at battlefield management. They also turned out to be totally ill-equipped and inept at countering lethal US air assets. They thought it would be a cake walk given their armor, artillery, and outnumbering the US Special operators more than ten to one. They, and those who sent them there, were terribly wrong.
Semper Fi US Marines & God Bless our Army Green Berets & USAF Close Air Support
Proverbs 17:17 “A friend loves at all times, but a brother is born for adversity.”
Dear Fellow Americans,
There, I said it. Time for America to wake up in 2019.
Again: “Women should not be Infantry”.
I have four daughters. They are smart, aggressive, physical, patriotic and lettered in multiple high-school sports. But I would not want them serving in Infantry units. They would be more apt to get killed (through no act of cowardice) and get others killed, based simply on being female.
Call me a Neanderthal Marine. But I have served in combat. I have seen mud, blood and body bags up close. In rancid heat or numbing cold. I am a realist. Not a social idealist. Do we see women playing in the NFL? Will there be women in this year’s Super Bowl? How many women out of the general population are qualified to be a lineman on the average high-school football team, let alone college?
If we as Americans want to win on the football field, should we not have at least the same attitude for combat? This goes beyond sports and entertainment, this is about life and national survival.
The mission of our Infantry (Army or USMC) is: “To close with and destroy the enemy.” Close combat (physical melee) and fire (by aircraft or artillery) can be two far different scenarios. I am talking lethal, brutal, blood and guts, close combat. No debate. No negotiating. No festive role of the dice or draw of the cards. There is no feeling of pride and being macho when you are a dead, cold statistic.
Do we really want to continue to set our best women up for failure here, when there are so many other areas where they can make a real contribution for overall victory?
Please read this and pass it on.
Our next Secretary of Defense should come out and admit the truth!
End the mindless, prideful, political charade.
To the elitist, leftist feminists who have a political control agenda here, I challenge them to visit any Infantry unit in training for combat. You are not “pro-women”, you are whistling past the graveyard in the dark to make yourselves feel better and ignoring the inevitable reality of the future butcher’s bill.
Wake up! Show some integrity and backbone.
Like the American NFL Super-Bowl … let’s win!
Thanks & “Semper Fi”,
Knuckle Dragging, Old Fart, Neanderthal USMC (Ret)
(loving father of 4 indomitable daughters & their loving brother)
Truthful commentary. Facts not feelings. Combat is not a feel good social experiment. Time to be honest!
The military is watering down fitness standards because most female recruits can’t meet them.
The Obama-era policy of integrating women into ground combat units is a misguided social experiment that threatens military readiness and wastes resources in the service of a political agenda. The next defense secretary should end it.
In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training—unsurprising, since men’s higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.
Ignoring the Marine study, then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter opened all combat roles to women in December 2015. Rather than requiring new female combat recruits to meet the same physical standards as men, the military began crafting “gender neutral” standards in the hope that more women would qualify. Previously, women had been admitted to noncombat specialties under lower strength and endurance requirements.
Only two women have passed the Marine Corps’s fabled infantry-officer training course out of the three dozen who have tried. Most wash out in the combat endurance test, administered on day one. Participants hike miles while carrying combat loads of 80 pounds or more, climb 20-foot ropes multiple times, and scale an 8-foot barrier. The purpose of the test is to ensure that officers can hump their own equipment and still arrive at a battleground mentally and physically capable of leading troops. Most female aspirants couldn’t pass the test, so the Marines changed it from a pass/fail requirement to an unscored exercise with no bearing on the candidate’s ultimate evaluation. The weapons-company hike during the IOC is now “gender neutral,” meaning that officers can hand their pack to a buddy if they get tired, rather than carrying it for the course’s full 10 miles.
Lowering these physical requirements risks reducing the American military’s lethality. A more serious effect of sex integration has become taboo to mention: the inevitable introduction of eros into combat units. Putting young, hormonally charged men and women into stressful close quarters for extended periods guarantees sexual liaisons, rivalries and breakups, all of which undermine the bonding essential to a unified fighting force.
“If firearms are somehow inherently evil, as gun-banners suggest, were they not evil back then? Or has something else, not the presence and availability of firearms in society, changed?” - Mark A. Chesnut, Editor, America’s #1 Freedom, June 2009
“The Second Amendment … America’s original Homeland Security.” - NRA
"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again."
"I don't know why everyone does not share my delight with explosives. If they don't, it has to be some abhorrent character defect." - Ragnar Benson, from Ragnar's Guide to Home and Recreational Use of High Explosives, pg.110, 1988.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target #selfdefense articles....
“One man with a gun can control 100 without one.” - Vladimir Lenin
“Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” - Mao Zedong
"We don’t let them have ideas. Why should we let them have guns?" - Josef Stalin
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.” - Adolf Hitler
Stay tuned for more Salute Target #selfdefense articles....
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Cesare Beccaria
(On Crimes and Punishment, quoted by Thomas Jefferson in Commonplace Book)
“To disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” - George Mason
Stay tuned for more Salute Target #selfdefense articles
Great American Warrior
“A friend will help you move. A good friend will help you move bodies.” - Chris Dwiggins Gunsite, 2001
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
Remember Fr. Frog's Rules of External Ballistics:
- There ain't no magic bullets! (Although some are better than others for a particular purpose.)
- Divide the range at which someone claims to have shot their deer by 4 to get the real range.
- Always get as close as possible.
- Don't believe manufacturer's claims.
- Velocity erodes, mass doesn't
- In the battle between velocity and accuracy, accuracy always wins.
- Inconsequential increments are meaningless.
- Most gun writers are pathological liars.
Massad Ayoob: Lethal Force Institute
“The gun is not your weapon, your mind is.”
“I fired in self-defense as a citizen licensed to carry a gun.”
“Keep shooting…ammo’s cheap, life is precious.”
“Most street thugs (sociopathic predators) look upon women as a part of the food chain.”
“A criminal doesn’t fear a gun. A criminal fears an armed citizen willing to kill.”
“Shoot to stop (if he dies, he dies…)!”
“Friends don’t let friends carry mouse guns.”
“I would rather be a defendant in court (due to a justifiable shooting), than Exhibit A.”
“If worms had .45’s early birds would not mess with them.”
“There are wolves (predators) in this world. Don’t be a sheep. Be a sheep dog.”
“Live free or die.” - New Hampshire State Motto
"If you can't use a pistol round to stop a deer, don't use it on bad guys."
“When something happens, you are on your own.”
The Stupid Rule: “Don’t do stupid things. Don’t go to stupid places & don’t associate with stupid people.”
Clint Smith – Thunder Ranch
“The gun that’s with you is better than the one that’s home in the safe.”
“Carrying a gun is not supposed to be comfortable, it’s supposed to be comforting.”
Stay tuned for more Salute Target #selfdefense articles....
Cooper is best known for his revolutionary work in pistol training, but he favored the rifle for tactical shooting. He often described the handgun as a convenient-to-carry stopgap weapon, allowing someone the opportunity to get to a rifle. (Cooper's training methods are taught at Gunsite Academy in Paulden, Arizona.)
"Personal weapons are what raised mankind out of the mud, and the rifle is the queen of personal weapons."
"The rifle is a weapon. Let there be no mistake about that. It is a tool of power, and thus dependent completely upon the moral stature of its user. It is equally useful in securing meat for the table, destroying group enemies on the battlefield, and resisting tyranny. In fact, it is the only means of resisting tyranny, since a citizenry armed with rifles simply cannot be tyrannized."
"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."
—Jeff Cooper, The Art of the Rifle
More Salute Target #selfdefense articles coming soon....
Cooper advocated four basic rules of gun safety:
1. All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)
3. Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target. This is the Golden Rule. Its violation is directly responsible for about 60 percent of inadvertent discharges.
4. Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified.
More Salute Target #selfdefense articles coming soon....
The most important means of surviving a lethal confrontation, according to Cooper, is neither the weapon nor the martial skills. The primary tool is the combat mindset, set forth in his book, Principles of Personal Defense.
The color code, as originally introduced by Jeff Cooper, had nothing to do with tactical situations or alertness levels, but rather with one's state of mind. As taught by Cooper, it relates to the degree of peril you are willing to do something about and which allows you to move from one level of mindset to another to enable you to properly handle a given situation. Cooper did not claim to have invented anything in particular with the color code, but he was apparently the first to use it as an indication of mental state.]
- White: Unaware and unprepared. If attacked in Condition White, the only thing that may save you is the inadequacy or ineptitude of your attacker. When confronted by something nasty, your reaction will probably be "Oh my God! This can't be happening to me."
- Yellow: Relaxed alert. No specific threat situation. Your mindset is that "today could be the day I may have to defend myself". You are simply aware that the world is a potentially unfriendly place and that you are prepared to defend yourself, if necessary. You use your eyes and ears, and realize that "I may have to shoot today". You don't have to be armed in this state, but if you are armed you should be in Condition Yellow. You should always be in Yellow whenever you are in unfamiliar surroundings or among people you don't know. You can remain in Yellow for long periods, as long as you are able to "Watch your six." (In aviation 12 o'clock refers to the direction in front of the aircraft's nose. Six o'clock is the blind spot behind the pilot.) In Yellow, you are "taking in" surrounding information in a relaxed but alert manner, like a continuous 360 degree radar sweep. As Cooper put it, "I might have to shoot."
- Orange: Specific alert. Something is not quite right and has your attention. Your radar has picked up a specific alert. You shift your primary focus to determine if there is a threat (but you do not drop your six). Your mindset shifts to "I may have to shoot that person today", focusing on the specific target which has caused the escalation in alert status. In Condition Orange, you set a mental trigger: "If that person does "X", I will need to stop them". Your pistol usually remains holstered in this state. Staying in Orange can be a bit of a mental strain, but you can stay in it for as long as you need to. If the threat proves to be nothing, you shift back to Condition Yellow.
- Red: Condition Red is fight. Your mental trigger (established back in Condition Orange) has been tripped. "If 'X' happens I will shoot that person" - 'X' has happened, the fight is on.
The USMC uses condition Black, although it was not originally part of Cooper's Color Code.
Condition Black: Catastrophic breakdown of mental and physical performance. Usually over 175 heartbeats per minute, increased heart rate becomes counter-productive. May have stopped thinking correctly. This can happen when going from Condition White or Yellow immediately to Condition Red.
In short, the Color Code helps you "think" in a fight. As the level of danger increases, your willingness to take certain actions increases. If you ever do go to Condition Red, the decision to use lethal force has already been made (your "mental trigger" has been tripped).
The following are some of Cooper's additional comments on the subject.
Considering the principles of personal defense, we have long since come up with the Color Code. This has met with surprising success in debriefings throughout the world. The Color Code, as we preach it, runs white, yellow, orange, and red, and is a means of setting one’s mind into the proper condition when exercising lethal violence, and is not as easy as I had thought at first.
There is a problem in that some students insist upon confusing the appropriate color with the amount of danger evident in the situation. As I have long taught, you are not in any color state because of the specific amount of danger you may be in, but rather in a mental state which enables you to take a difficult psychological step. Now, however, the government has gone into this and is handing out color codes nationwide based upon the apparent nature of a peril. It has always been difficult to teach the Gunsite Color Code, and now it is more so.
We cannot say that the government’s ideas about colors are wrong, but that they are different from what we have long taught here. The problem is this: your combat mind-set is not dictated by the amount of danger to which you are exposed at the time. Your combat mind-set is properly dictated by the state of mind you think appropriate to the situation. You may be in deadly danger at all times, regardless of what the Defense Department tells you. The color code which influences you does depend upon the willingness you have to jump a psychological barrier against taking irrevocable action. That decision is less hard to make since the jihadis have already made it.
He further simplified things in Vol. 13 #7 of his Commentaries.
"In White you are unprepared and unready to take lethal action. If you are attacked in White you will probably die unless your adversary is totally inept.
In Yellow you bring yourself to the understanding that your life may be in danger and that you may have to do something about it.
In Orange you have determined upon a specific adversary and are prepared to take action which may result in his death, but you are not in a lethal mode.
In Red you are in a lethal mode and will shoot if circumstances warrant."
More Salute Target #selfdefense articles coming soon....
Cooper's modern technique defines pragmatic use of the pistol for personal protection. The modern technique emphasizes two-handed shooting using the Weaver Stance, competing with and eventually supplanting the once-prevalent one-handed shooting. The five elements of the modern technique are:
- A large caliber pistol, preferably a semi-auto
- The Weaver Stance
- The presentation
- The flash sight picture
- The compressed surprise trigger break
Cooper favored the Colt M1911 and its variants. There are several conditions of readiness in which such a weapon can be carried. Cooper promulgated most of the following terms:
- Condition Four: Chamber empty, empty magazine, hammer down.
- Condition Three: Chamber empty, full magazine in place, hammer down.
- Condition Two: A round chambered, full magazine in place, hammer down.
- Condition One: A round chambered, full magazine in place, hammer cocked, safety on.
- Condition Zero: A round chambered, full magazine in place, hammer cocked, safety off.
Some of these configurations are safer than others, while others are quicker to fire the gun (Condition 1). In the interest of consistent training, most agencies that issue the 1911 specify the condition in which it is to be carried as a matter of local doctrine.
Condition one is widely referred to as "cocked and locked" and condition three is known as "Israeli carry".
This firearm condition system can also be used to refer to other firearm actions, particularly when illustrating the differences between carry modes considered to be safe for various actions. For example, DA/SA is designed to be carried in Condition 2, which is not safe for 1911s without firing pin safeties.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target #selfdefense articles....
"Fight back! Whenever you are offered violence, fight back! The aggressor does not fear the law, so he must be taught to fear you. Whatever the risk, and at whatever the cost, fight back!" - Jeff Cooper, Nov 1993
"Remember the first rule of Gunfighting: Have a Gun." - Jeff Cooper
"The advantage of the pistol, which it shares with nothing else, is readiness. It is there on your belt. You do not have to go fetch it." - Jeff Cooper
"The first objective to winning a gunfight is hitting your target. You are only outgunned if you miss." - Jeff Cooper
"Owning a handgun doesn't make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician." - Jeff Cooper
"You are outgunned only if you miss." - Jeff Cooper
"I got into uniform because I knew I'd get a lot of ammo." - Jeff Cooper
(note: Military & Law Enforcement folks should have started as Civilians who love to shoot)
"Competence in self-defense in not a matter of equipment or training, but of desire." JC
“Remember ... Five boxes keep us free: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, the pulpit box and the cartridge box.” - Jeff Cooper
More Salute Target humor and #selfdefense articles coming soon....
Gunsite Color Code:
White: Helpless. Unready. Unaware. (Will die)
Yellow: Relaxed. Alert. Aware. Ready. (May have to use pistol today)
Orange: Specific Alert. Suspected Target. (Very difficult to take)
Red: FIGHT. Know what to do best of my ability. Exhilaration.
“If you win a fight, you’ll feel fine. If you lose a fight, you’ll feel bad or nothing at all.”
“An armed society is a polite society.”
“If you are prepared to shoot, you probably won’t have to.”
“Fighting: Tactics are an art, not a science.”
“There ain’t no second place in a gunfight.”
“Why do you hunt?”
“Because that’s what men do.”
“It’s natural – like seeing a pretty girl & wanting to pat her on the fanny.” - Col Jeff Cooper
“We are annoyed by the assumption on the part of certain public figures that the citizen should be able to prove the need to acquire a means of protecting himself. The citizen’s personal needs are no business of the state. Liberty, when in place, grants the right of the citizen to do what he chooses as long as he does not stamp on the rights of others. Nobody needs caviar or a pleasure boat or opera tickets. Whether he wants these things is, again, no business of the state.” - Jeff Cooper, August 2006
More Salute Target humor and #selfdefense articles coming soon....
"If violent crime is to be curbed, it is only the intended victim who can do it. The felon does not fear the police, and he fears neither judge nor jury. Therefore what he must be taught to fear is his victim." - Jeff Cooper
Gunsite: Four Basic Safety Rules (avoid firearms disasters)
1.) All guns are loaded.
2.) Never point muzzle at anything you don’t want to destroy.
3.) Keep finger off trigger until sites on target.
4.) Be sure of target (identify it and what is behind it). (2001)
“Mozambique Method” – 2 fast to chest, 1 slow to head. - On South African friend Mark Rousouw
The “African Big 5”: Lion, Leopard, Rhino, Elephant, & Cape Buffalo
“A man fights with his mind. Weapons are just tools.”
“First thing in a gunfight: Astonishment. To overcome astonishment, when putting on your weapon, know that you may have to use it. I knew this would happen and I know what to do.”
“You can’t be afraid in a gunfight because you’re too busy shooting.”
"One should always shoot as quickly as one can, but no quicker."
Stay tuned for more Salute Target humor and #selfdefense articles....
“Mr. Cooper… Doesn’t violence beget violence?”…Col Cooper response: “I sure hope so!” (Arizona, 2001)
“I am morally entitled to save my own life.”
“Liberals: If threatened with lethal violence, I’ll just stand up and die.”
“What do we sell at Gunsite? … Peace of mind with the world.”
“Object: To put you in charge of your environment.”
“Matter of mind, not weapon.”
“Draw Quickly Shoot Carefully! No one has ever been killed by a loud noise.”
More Salute Target Humor and #selfdefense articles coming soon...
John Dean "Jeff" Cooper (May 10, 1920 – September 25, 2006) was a United States Marine and the creator of what is known as "the Modern Technique" of handgun shooting, and one of the 20th century's foremost international experts on the use and history of small arms.
Early life and education
Cooper graduated from Stanford University with a bachelor's degree in political science. He received a regular commission in the USMC in September 1941. During WWII he served in the Pacific with the USMC Detachment aboard the battleship USS Pennsylvania. By the end of the war he had been promoted to major. He resigned his commission in 1949, but returned to active duty during the Korean War, where he was involved in combat training and development focus on ground combat, close combat training, counter-insurgency warfare and irregular warfare doctrine development. Here he was promoted to Lieutenant Colonel. After the Korean War, he transferred to the Marine Corps Reserve in light of forced downsizing. In the mid-1960s, he used his GI Bill in post-graduate education and received a master's degree in history from the University of California, Riverside.
In 1976, Cooper founded the American Pistol Institute (API) in Paulden, Arizona (later the Gunsite Training Center & eventually Gunsite Academy). Cooper began teaching shotgun and rifle classes to both law enforcement and military personnel, as well as civilians, and did on-site training for individuals and groups from around the world. He sold the firm in 1992, but continued living on the Paulden ranch. He was known for his advocacy of large caliber handguns, especially the Colt 1911 and the venerable .45 ACP cartridge. The cartridge was designed in 1904 by John Moses Browning of Colt, but the most influential person in selecting the cartridge was Army Ordnance member Gen. John T. Thompson. Thompson insisted on a real "man stopper" pistol, following the poor showing of the Army's .38 Long Colt pistols during the Philippine-American War (1899–1902). Both the pistol and round enjoyed considerable success and popularity with the average American fighting man in WWI, WWII, the Korean War, and Vietnam War. US military special operations units, many law enforcement departments, and a huge number of civilian shooters continue to embrace it.
Cooper died at his home on the afternoon of Monday, September 25, 2006 at the age of 86. He received a highly respectful military funeral from the United States Marine Corps, and was buried with full military honors there at his beloved Gunsite Academy, by a detachment from 6th Engineer Support Battalion, Marine Forces Reserve, Phoenix, Arizona.
Stay tuned for more Salute Targets #selfdefense blogs....
By Les Adams
Review by Col Michael C. Howard US Marines (Ret)
As Americans, we cherish our right to bear arms. This is just as important today as it was in April 1775 at Lexington and Concord.
This classic work by Les Adams, a good Virginia Republican (1996, Palladium Press of Birmingham, Alabama), and The Second Amendment Primer (auditory 2013 by Audible Inc.), explains the history behind this important legal right. Both Adam’s original classic and the auditory edition by narrator Kevin Henderson calmly and authoritatively presents a selection of historical documents and speeches alongside interpretive commentary. These will greatly aid listeners in understanding the basis of America’s past and current gun laws. It is important to point out that Henderson also convincingly advocates Adams' perspective against the "collectivist" interpretation of the Second Amendment. This helps provide us with substantial ammunition for listeners looking for evidence supporting their right to own a gun for the protection of home and family. Or as I tell my family and friends, Col Jeff Cooper taught me right at Gunsite Academy in Paulden, Arizona, that: “A gun in the hand beats a cop on the phone.”
Not only is this classic work published in a small, leather-bound edition that is durable and easy to carry with you, but it is authoritative in its no-nonsense, wise presentation. The Second Amendment Primer is a simple summary and guide to understanding your Second Amendment freedoms.
This works cuts through all the dull bureaucratic BS. So much of the debate about the Second Amendment is in scholarly journals and academic papers written by politicians, salesmen, scholars and judges, or directed towards other scholars, law professors, attorneys, and judges. Trying to wade through the extensive footnotes and references to legal cases and historical precedents known only to the academic elite is more than enough to make anyone feel hopeless. Trust me, as a ground pounding combat Marine, I love this book!
The average American patriot will really appreciate this fine work. With The Second Amendment Primer, Les Adams finally provides a practical, accessible discussion of the Second Amendment. It is a “primer” because it is elementary. Chronologically arranged, it traces the development of the right to keep and bear arms from its birth in ancient Greece to its addition in the U.S. Constitution. Additional sources and supplemental essays discuss the Second Amendment’s interpretation in today’s world from the viewpoints of both firearms enthusiasts, as well as those who would limit the amendment’s purview. It clearly places the latter liberals on the defense. Their arguments, emotions and feelings ring hollow when confronted with the true facts.
The magic of this outstanding booklet is that it connects with the new, young defender of democracy as much as the old seasoned patriotic veteran. Although The Second Amendment Primer is aimed at the average reader, Adams’s facts are detailed and well-documented for those who want to go deep. User friendly layout, reference margin notes, an extensive bibliography, and a comprehensive subject index showcase the author’s research and show more curious readers how to continue on their path to understanding exactly what the Second Amendment is saying. When you are headed for the range, defending your home, or going on vacation or a business trip, this is the one book next to the Bible that you want to take with you. It is timeless and always fascinating. It will prepare and motivate you for defending the freedom we must never take for granted. Using this “citizen’s guide” as a stepping stone, anyone can become a successful scholar of the right to bear arms.
Col Jeff Cooper used to remind us at Gunsite that: “When seconds count, the police are minutes away.” He always emphasized that we, not law enforcement, are the true first responders to any bad-guy active shooter situation. Next to a weapon and live ammo, The Second Amendment Primer will prepare you for any self-defense situation, whether in the field or in a debate! And above all, it is a vital educational tool for friends, family … and naïve foes who simply “don’t get it” yet!
You think you have lived a long life and know who you are, then along comes someone who blows it all to hell!
An old Marine Corp Pilot sat down at the Starbucks, still wearing his old USMC flight jacket and ordered a cup of coffee.
As he sat sipping his coffee, a young woman sat down next to him. She turned to the pilot and asked,
Are you a real pilot?
He replied, 'Well, I've spent my whole life flying planes, first Stearman’s, then the early Grumman’s... flew a Wildcat and Corsair in WWII, and later in the Korean conflict, Banshees and Cougars. I've taught more than 260 people to fly and given rides to hundreds, so I guess I am a pilot, and you, what are you?
She said, 'I'm a lesbian. I spend my whole day thinking about naked women. As soon as I get up in the morning, I think about naked women. When I shower, I think about naked women. When I watch TV, I think about naked women. It seems everything makes me think of naked women.'
The two sat there sipping in silence.
A little while later, a young man sat down on the other side of the old pilot and asked, "Are you a real pilot?"
He replied, 'I always thought I was, but I just found out I'm a lesbian.'
In Victory, you deserve champagne. In Defeat, you need it!
Even if you were not a pilot or aircrew, you can smile and appreciate this. For those of us ‘Ground Pounders’ who have been in combat and felt the exhilaration of low flying friendly aircraft providing us with spot on air-ground support, know that we love you ‘Bugsuckers’ (fixed wing) and ‘Rotorheads’ (helicopter)!
For me, it was multiple pairs of A-10 Warthogs covering us on our I MEF drive to Baghdad, March-April 2003. God bless ‘em all! - Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
As we get older and we experience the loss of old friends, we begin to realize that maybe we bullet-proof pilots won’t live forever. We aren’t so bullet-proof anymore. We ponder...if I we’re gone tomorrow, “Did I say what I wanted to my Brothers?” The answer is “No!” Hence, the following random thoughts:
When people ask me if I miss flying, I always say something like, “Yes, I miss the flying because when you are flying, you are totally focused on the task at hand. It’s like nothing else you will ever do (almost). ” But then I always say, “However, I miss the squadron and the guys even more than I miss the flying.”
Why, you might ask? They were a bunch of aggressive, wise ass, cocky, insulting, sarcastic bastards in smelly flight suits who thought a funny thing to do was to fart and see if they could clear a room. They drank too much, they chased women, they flew when they shouldn’t, they laughed too loud and thought they owned the sky, the bar, and generally thought they could do everything better than the next guy. Nothing was funnier than trying to screw with a buddy and see how pissed off they would get. They flew planes that leaked, that smoked, that broke, that couldn’t turn, that burned fuel too fast, that never had working autopilots or radars, and with systems that were archaic next to today’s new generation aircraft.
But a little closer look might show that every guy in the room was sneaky smart and damn competent and brutally handsome in their own way! They hated to lose or fail to accomplish the mission and seldom did. They were the laziest guys on the planet until challenged and then they would do anything to win. They would fly with wing tips overlapped at night through the worst weather with only a little 'Form' light to hold on to, knowing their flight lead would get them on the ground safely. They would fight in the air knowing the greatest risk and fear was that another fighter would arrive at the same six o’ clock at the same time they did. They would fly in harm’s way and act nonchalant as if to challenge the grim reaper.
When we flew to another base we proclaimed that were the best squadron on the base as soon as we landed. Often we were not invited back. When we went into an O’ Club, we owned the bar. We were lucky to be the Best of the Best in the military. We knew it and so did others. We found jobs, lost jobs, got married, got divorced, moved, went broke, got rich, broke some things, and knew the only thing you could count -- really count on -- was if you needed help, a fellow pilot would have your back.
I miss the call signs, nicknames and the stories behind them. I miss getting lit up in an O’ Club full of my buddies and watching the incredible, unbelievable things that were happening. I miss the crew chiefs saluting as you taxied out of the flight line. I miss lighting the afterburners, if you had them, especially at night. I miss going straight up and straight down. I miss the cross countries. I miss the dice games at the bar for drinks. I miss listening to BS stories while drinking and laughing until my eyes watered. I miss three man lifts. I miss naps in the Squadron with a room full of pilots working up new tricks to torment the sleeper. I miss flying upside down in the Grand Canyon and hearing about flying so low that boats were blown over. I miss coming into the break hot and looking over and seeing three wingmen tucked in tight ready to make the troops on the ground proud. I miss belches that could be heard in neighboring states. I miss putting on ad hoc Air Shows that might be over someone’s home or farm in faraway towns.
Finally, I miss hearing DEAD BUG! called out at the bar and seeing and hearing a room full of men hit the deck with drinks spilling and chairs being knocked over as they rolled in the beer and kicked their legs in the air—followed closely by a Not Politically Correct Tap Dancing and Singing spectacle that couldn’t help but make you grin and order another round.
I am a lucky guy and have lived a great life! One thing I know is that I was part of a special, really talented bunch of guys doing something dangerous and doing it better than most. Flying the most beautiful, ugly, noisy, solid aircraft ever built. Supported by ground troops committed to making sure we came home! Being prepared to fly and fight and die for America. Having a clear mission. Having fun.
We box out bad memories from various operations most of the time but never the hallowed memories of our fallen comrades. We are often amazed at how good war stories never let truth interfere and how they get better with age. We are lucky bastards to be able to walk into a Squadron or a bar and have men we respect and love shout our names, our call signs, and know that this is truly where we belong. We are Pilots. We are Few and we are Proud.
I am Privileged and Proud to call you Brothers
Push it Up & Check SIX!
PS: From a US Marine
I love it.
I remember a pilot (USMC) doing his ground tour with our Engineer Battalion (as our S-3A) right after Desert Storm. He loved Shakespeare and told great stories.
One was of a former asshole squadron commander who wanted to change his call-sign (evidently aviators can’t pick their own name).
Lundy called this story “Evolution of a call-sign”. Based on the CO’s position of authority, he pushed for his new name being: ‘Thunder Dome’. The pilots under his command wrote up their review and presented it to him. Unsigned.
Thunder is an unpredictable natural event of nature. Dome is a hollow head appendage of the body. So they pronounced his new call sign: ‘Limp Dick’.
The CO backed down and went with his old, un-spectacular call-sign.
So much for inspiring leadership.
Don’t you just love our US military and our DNA aversion to narcissist authority?
Tribute to John Scolinos by Chris Sperry
America: Teaching accountability to our kids, and the consequences for failing to meet standards.
Note: John Scolinos was the real deal.
We don’t widen the plate and we teach others to be good umpires led by the great umpire in Chief - the almighty!
Coach Scalinos emphasized fair from foul, a strike from a ball, safe from out. He taught good judgment.
We must never lose sight of truth and coach Scolinos taught how to use sports to teach character, and how baseball is the only sport that is like everyday life.
Twenty years ago, in Nashville , Tennessee , during the first week of January, 1996, more than 4,000 baseball coaches descended upon the Opryland Hotel for the 52nd annual ABCA's convention.
While I waited in line to register with the hotel staff, I heard other more veteran coaches rumbling about the lineup of speakers scheduled to present during the weekend. One name, in particular, kept resurfacing, always with the same sentiment — “John Scolinos is here? Oh, man, worth every penny of my airfare.”
Who is John Scolinos, I wondered. No matter; I was just happy to be there.
In 1996, Coach Scolinos was 78 years old and five years retired from a college coaching career that began in 1948. He shuffled to the stage to an impressive standing ovation, wearing dark polyester pants, a light blue shirt, and a string around his neck from which home plate hung — a full-sized, stark-white home plate.
Seriously, I wondered, who is this guy?
After speaking for twenty-five minutes, not once mentioning the prop hanging around his neck, Coach Scolinos appeared to notice the snickering among some of the coaches. Even those who knew Coach Scolinos had to wonder exactly where he was going with this, or if he had simply forgotten about home plate since he’d gotten on stage. Then, finally …
“You’re probably all wondering why I’m wearing home plate around my neck,” he said, his voice growing irascible. I laughed along with the others, acknowledging the possibility. “I may be old, but I’m not crazy. The reason I stand before you today is to share with you baseball people what I’ve learned in my life, what I’ve learned about home plate in my 78 years.”
Several hands went up when Scolinos asked how many Little League coaches were in the room. “Do you know how wide home plate is in Little League?”
After a pause, someone offered, “Seventeen inches?”, more of a question than answer.
“That’s right,” he said. “How about in Babe Ruth’s day? Any Babe Ruth coaches in the house?” Another long pause.
“Seventeen inches?” a guess from another reluctant coach.
“That’s right,” said Scolinos. “Now, how many high school coaches do we have in the room?” Hundreds of hands shot up, as the pattern began to appear. “How wide is home plate in high school baseball?”
“Seventeen inches,” they said, sounding more confident.
“You’re right!” Scolinos barked. “And you college coaches, how wide is home plate in college?”
“Seventeen inches!” we said, in unison.
“Any Minor League coaches here? How wide is home plate in pro ball?”............“Seventeen inches!”
“RIGHT! And in the Major Leagues, how wide home plate is in the Major Leagues?
“SEV-EN-TEEN INCHES!” he confirmed, his voice bellowing off the walls. “And what do they do with a Big League pitcher who can’t throw the ball over seventeen inches?” Pause. “They send him to Pocatello !” he hollered, drawing raucous laughter. “What they don’t do is this: they don’t say, ‘Ah, that’s okay, Jimmy. If you can’t hit a seventeen-inch target? We’ll make it eighteen inches or nineteen inches. We’ll make it twenty inches so you have a better chance of hitting it. If you can’t hit that, let us know so we can make it wider still, say twenty-five inches.'”
Pause. “Coaches… what do we do when your best player shows up late to practice? or when our team rules forbid facial hair and a guy shows up unshaven? What if he gets caught drinking? Do we hold him accountable? Or do we change the rules to fit him? Do we widen home plate? "
The chuckles gradually faded as four thousand coaches grew quiet, the fog lifting as the old coach’s message began to unfold. He turned the plate toward himself and, using a Sharpie, began to draw something. When he turned it toward the crowd, point up, a house was revealed, complete with a freshly drawn door and two windows. “This is the problem in our homes today. With our marriages, with the way we parent our kids. With our discipline.
We don’t teach accountability to our kids, and there is no consequence for failing to meet standards. We just widen the plate!”
Pause. Then, to the point at the top of the house he added a small American flag.
“This is the problem in our schools today. The quality of our education is going downhill fast and teachers have been stripped of the tools they need to be successful, and to educate and discipline our young people. We are allowing others to widen home plate! Where is that getting us?”
Silence. He replaced the flag with a Cross. “And this is the problem in the Church, where powerful people in positions of authority have taken advantage of young children, only to have such an atrocity swept under the rug for years. Our church leaders are widening home plate for themselves! And we allow it.”
“And the same is true with our government. Our so called representatives make rules for us that don’t apply to themselves. They take bribes from lobbyists and foreign countries. They no longer serve us. And we allow them to widen home plate! We see our country falling into a dark abyss while we just watch.”
I was amazed. At a baseball convention where I expected to learn something about curve balls and bunting and how to run better practices, I had learned something far more valuable.
From an old man with home plate strung around his neck, I had learned something about life, about myself, about my own weaknesses and about my responsibilities as a leader. I had to hold myself and others accountable to that which I knew to be right, lest our families, our faith, and our society continue down an undesirable path.
“If I am lucky,” Coach Scolinos concluded, “you will remember one thing from this old coach today. It is this: "If we fail to hold ourselves to a higher standard, a standard of what we know to be right; if we fail to hold our spouses and our children to the same standards, if we are unwilling or unable to provide a consequence when they do not meet the standard; and if our schools & churches & our government fail to hold themselves accountable to those they serve, there is but one thing to look forward to …”
With that, he held home plate in front of his chest, turned it around, and revealed its dark black backside, “…We have dark days ahead!.”
Note: Coach Scolinos died in 2009 at the age of 91, but not before touching the lives of hundreds of players and coaches, including mine. Meeting him at my first ABCA convention kept me returning year after year, looking for similar wisdom and inspiration from other coaches. He is the best clinic speaker the ABCA has ever known because he was so much more than a baseball coach. His message was clear: “Coaches, keep your players—no matter how good they are—your own children, your churches, your government, and most of all, keep yourself at seventeen inches."
And this my friends is what our country has become and what is wrong with it today, and now go out there and fix it!
"Don't widen the plate."
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles....
Don't Be Duped Let's Start a Gun Industry: "Wall of Shame"
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
Warning about unimaginative, intellectually dishonest, back alley companies who literally steal the hard work, creative vision and dedicated planning of others.
Our arms industry is important to all of us. Yet there are times when we do a very poor job of policing ourselves … too hard, too time consuming, too expensive, and possibly legally intimidating. But right is right and wrong is wrong.
We have all been ticked when we see a cheap rip-off of a classic design we trust. We stick to the reliable standard whether toothpaste, deodorant, ammo, scope, or weapon.
But targets are another thing to many. We all grew up plinking varmints, cans, bottles, pumpkins, and every imaginative paper or cardboard target under the sun.
Since Christmas 2003, when I first returned from the Iraq War and established Salute Targets, I have kept a close eye on our steel target industry. I was a Gunsite Academy graduate and knew Col Jeff Cooper as a trusted mentor and friend. After our classes, we would sip tequila with fellow Gunsite class Marines in his indomitable Sconce home there in Paulden, Arizona. As a respected WWII combat vet and the “Gun Guru” of my Baby Boomer generation of shooters, his word was truth. He focused on what we were learning, but he also drifted to some other topics I remember. And that was the practical steel targets we enjoyed at Gunsite. Some were unique. And he gave full credit to good folks like Steve and Rhonda Smith who had given him one of the original, early 1980s “Seligman Dueling Trees”. This design was ripped off (and patented) by some in our industry. Ron Benson was one of the best historians about what had been used, abused, adopted, discarded, and put to good use, and together with others, we kept track of these injustices. Jeff Cooper and Ron went way back, to the 1970s on steel targets. Much of what I learned from them and others I shared in my earlier Salute Target blog articles.
Many of us were focused at the time on legitimate overseas military needs. My hope was to establish a credible history of steel target shooting. Back then, there were very few target companies. Today there are many. I believe my articles and website are definitive. No other target companies have even come close to being honest and transparent about what they have “borrowed” from others. I wish I had a dime for each company that copied my original “Spartan Target” style flipping plate design! Some have grown by earning it with honest products. But some have represented the worst in what we Marines call “bottom feeders”. Some at least had pride enough to make some alterations, yet other stole the entire design and shape without any hesitation! And they continue to literally steal target designs from hard working folks who introduce a fresh new design at SHOT Show, or in some honest advertisement. I have even had my target designs copied from background photos of my training prototypes! And these of targets I never offered to the public due to development stages. Yet these folks stole the design, warts and all.
For years I have held my breath, cringed, and said a prayer for patience and wisdom when I have seen this done. But today I have reached the conclusion that this is wrong. We cannot just “trust the market” or “the legal process” … there are times when we need to call a spade a spade and identify these low lives who lie, cheat and steal from our honest industry. My attorney says that is why we have a First Amendment.
So here is my proposal to all my honest Gun Industry friends out there:
In Iraq, most every American military unit had a “Wall of Shame” dedicated to sleazy women who had sent “Dear John” letters to our combat Warriors while they were deployed.
Here is my new proposed Gun Industry “Wall of Shame” for shady steel target companies. I hope you will pass the word on avoiding these rip-off artists. I know this from personal experience as they have stolen designs from me or my friends in the industry (I have your names, locations, dates, photos and prices):
Do-All Outdoors of Nashville, Tennessee
Mr. Target of Phoenix, Arizona
Targetman / Spartan Armor Systems of Tucson, Arizona
They were contacted, called or written to but hid like the cowards that they are. I have kept careful notes and photos over the years. Dates and designs, plus what they shamelessly copied from me and others. I know that some of their like-minded gang are no longer in business because some of the larger target companies actually took them to court over patents or copyright infringement. But the rest of us can also have a positive impact by ID’ing them and passing the word. Avoid giving them business, unless they fess up and make things right. It is good to see that many are no longer in business as word gets around.
But these “scum-bags” above are still out there!
Please pass the word … and urge others to avoid them, their lack of integrity, and their second-class products!
Just as the “FBI” reminder at the start of every DVD reminds us … these untrustworthy business practices hurt all of us!
Remember the “Wall of Shame” and don’t buy from these Phonies!
Many Thanks for spreading the word!
Written by Leah Comins
#Bush was born in 1924 in Milton, Massachusetts. After the Dec. 7, 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbor, he enlisted in the Naval Reserves to become a naval aviator and join the war effort. Bush received his wings just before turning 19 – making him the youngest commissioned pilot. He soon became a combat pilot serving with the Torpedo Squadron Fifty-One aboard the USS San Jacinto in the North Pacific. The squadron is credited with sinking 17 enemy ships during World War II.
In 1944, his TBM Avenger aircraft was hit by Japanese fire. Despite the severity of the damage, Bush was able to drop the aircraft’s bombs on the target before flying out over water and ejecting with his fellow crew members. After safely parachuting into the water, Bush was later found by an American submarine, the USS Finback. Serving as a lookout with other rescued pilots, he spent 30 days at sea with the Finback’s crew. Bush flew 58 combat missions and is credited with 126 carrier landings and more 1,200 flight hours.
In December 1944, he was assigned to Norfolk Naval Base in Norfolk, Virginia, where he trained new combat pilots. Bush was honorably discharged from the Navy in September 1945.
After the war, Bush received an undergraduate degree in economics from Yale University. He became an executive in the oil industry before beginning his political career. He was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives for Texas’s seventh district in 1966 and was reelected for a second term in 1968. Bush also served as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, chairman of the Republican Party, director of the CIA and vice president to President Reagan.
He was elected as the 41st President of the United States in 1989. While president, Bush worked to improve U.S. relations with the Soviet Union; led the nation through the liberation of Kuwait from Iraqi forces and signed the North American Free Trade Agreement.
For his military service, Former President Bush received the Distinguished Flying Cross and three Air Medals. A Presidential Unit Citation was also awarded to the USS San Jacinto. The USS George H.W. Bush was named for the former president in 2009. In 2011, he received the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama.
Former President Bush passed away on Nov. 30, 2018 at the age of 94. He will be buried alongside his wife of 73 years, Barbara Bush, and his daughter Robin at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas.
We honor his service.
By Kris Osborn
Earlier this year, soldiers with the Army’s 101st Airborne Division were the first to receive the services’ new high-tech 9mm pistol engineered to give dismounted infantry a vastly increased ability to fight and close with an enemy in caves, tunnels, crawl spaces, houses and other close quarter combat scenarios.
Service weapons developers and soldiers say the new M17 and M18 pistol, designed as a next-generation handgun to follow the Army’s current M9 Beretta, is expected to substantially change combat tactics, techniques and strategies for dismounted soldiers on-the-move.
“You can close with the enemy in close quarter combat and engage the enemy with one hand. It is tough to do this with the M9,” Lt. Col. Martin O’Donnell, spokesman for the 101st Airborne, told reporters earlier this year.
The new pistol is built with a more ergonomic configuration to better accommodate the widest possible range of hand grip techniques for soldiers and enable rapid hand switching as needed in combat. The M17 is said by developers to bring much tighter dispersion, improved versatility and next-generation accuracy.
“With this weapon, you can change quickly from right hand to left hand. If you are shooting something that is not comfortable on your hand and can't get a comfortable grip, it is not as accurate,” Sgt. 1st Class Andrew Flynn, 101st Division Master Gunner, said earlier this year.
The new handguns are built with an external safety, self-illuminating sights for low-light conditions, an integrated rail for attaching enablers and an Army standard suppressor conversion kit to attach an acoustic/flash suppressor, service developers said.
“It increases target recognition and increases capability with night sights,” Lt. Col. Steven Power, Individual Weapons Product Manager, Soldier Weapons, told reporters earlier this year.
The Army is now acquiring thousands of full-size XM17 and compact XM18 versions of the new 9mm pistol. The XM17 fires 147 grain jacketed hollow point ammunition.
When it comes to fast-evolving tactics now used in close-quarter combat, something with which Army soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan now have more than a decade of experience, an ability to maneuver with increased lethality in caves, tunnels, crawl spaces, attics or buildings allows soldiers to access life-impacting firepower more effectively - especially in “tight quarters” situations where a longer, larger rifle may not be available for use.
Fast emerging targets and quick-changing circumstances, fundamental to close-quarter combat, naturally require rapid decision making and on-the spot flexibility amid military confrontation. Requirements and technical improvements with the M17 were specifically designed with this in mind, Army developers emphasized.
“This adds a whole new dynamic to close-quarter combat. A standard pistol cannot change grips or allow a soldier to switch from a right-handed shooter to a left-handed shooter. This is a great capability for us to put in play,” Flynn said.
Close quarter combat, while considered indispensable to successful counterinsurgency warfare, is also something of significant relevance to large-scale force-on-force, mechanized combat against a potential near-peer adversary. Urban warfare - from urban combat in WWII to house-to-house fighting in Hue City in Vietnam - is naturally a long-standing component of major war as well.
Power explained that the Army’s M17 acquisition effort unfolded on a massively accelerated timeframe, moving to contract within 10 months.
“We are dual arming the infantry at the position of team leader and above,” Power said.
The fast-tracked acquisition effort, which merged work from the Army Research Lab and the Army’s Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, drew heavily from modeling and simulation to expedite development of the new weapon.
Prospects for the handgun have been well received across DoD; the Navy, Air Force and Marines are also receiving this pistol, according to a report from Military.com.
The Army has been closely coordinating with the Special Operations community regarding training and development of the new handgun, given the consistency with which close-quarter combat is utilized by SOF.
The M17 and M18 pistols are manufactured by Sig Sauer, who earned the $580 million contract to produce the weapons in January of this year.
Other competitors included Glock, FN America and Beretta USA.
by Nathaniel F
It is easy to forget, what with all the hubbub about SIG’s selection for M17, Glock’s protest, and SIG’s subsequent recall, that the M17 program was intended to procure a “total system package”, not just a handgun. This meant, besides the handgun, ammunition, magazines, spares, accessories, holsters, and eventually optics and suppressors as well. While much ink has been spilt, and many glam photos taken of the XM17 and M17 MHS handguns themselves, we have not yet seen or heard very much about the ammunition it is intended to fire. From second-place finisher Glock, we have already seen the Federal-engineered Enhanced Barrier Ammunition. Partnered with SIG for the competition was ammunition heavyweight Winchester/Olin, and so it was reasonable to expect their entry to be something based on Winchester’s existing product line. At the 2017 Association of the United States Army annual meeting, that expectation was confirmed:
XM1153 Special Purpose ammunition, above an XM17 handgun. That looks a lot like a T-Series to me.
Winchester representatives at the booth confirmed that the ammunition was indeed XM1153 Special Purpose, and that it was based on the T-Series, but re-engineered for the US Army’s specifications. This makes me wonder if the new Special Purpose ammnition is more similar to the older Black Talon round, which uses the same basic design as the T-Series but which is engineered to expand slightly less while giving greater penetration. Or, possibly, the Army had other requirements and this is not the case; I am just speculating.
Also present at Winchester’s booth was the XM1152 improved ball round, which externally appears to be a simple flat-nosed FMJ. This suggests it may be a variant of Winchester’s 147gr Super Unleaded encapsulated FMJ round, which lacks any exposed lead base, instead being clad all around with a gilding metal jacket. It seems likely to me that the XM1152 has a different weight bullet, however, likely 115-130 grains rather than 147.
Joachim Rønneberg, Norwegian saboteur who led factory raid to hold up Nazi Germany's atom bomb effort – obituary
Joachim Rønneberg, who has died aged 99, was only 23 when he was chosen to lead a raid intended to stop Nazi Germany’s attempt to create a nuclear bomb.
On the night of February 16 1943, Rønneberg led a six-man team of Norwegian commandos who parachuted from 1,000 ft on to the Telemark plateau in southern Norway, to join a four-man reconnaissance team and attack a Nazi-controlled hydroelectric plant producing deuterium oxide or “heavy water”. This, the Allies feared, could be used in the German production of nuclear weapons.
The enemy had been alerted by an earlier, failed raid by British commandos and the plant had been reinforced by extra guards, lights, barbed wire, guns and mines.
Despite having been dropped in the wrong place, and fierce snowstorms which kept the team weather-bound for several days, one hour before midnight on February 27 Rønneberg and his saboteurs climbed down a gorge, crossed an ice-choked river, scrambled up the rock face on the other side, and entered the plant along a railway track, cutting through a gate and a fence.
He and Fredrik Kayser climbed a stairway to a cable duct in the wall, and followed the cable tunnel into the electrolysis facility.
There they surprised a guard and locked him up.
Joined by two other Norwegians, who had broken in by another route, “two of us set the explosive charges. The fuses were about two minutes long. I cut them down to 30 seconds and lit them”, recalled Rønneberg. They then escaped, locking the door behind them.
The sound of the charges blowing was heard as a thud over the deep hum of the generating machinery, but the German guards seem to have believed that the weight of snow had set off one of their own landmines.
Rønneberg watched as one guard sauntered out of a hut, tried the door to the electrolysis facility, found it locked, shone a torch along the ground, gave up and went back into the guardhouse without realising that half a dozen Tommy guns were pointed at him.
Once the Germans realised what had happened, thousands of soldiers were brought in, but an extensive organized search failed to find the saboteurs, who under the cover of darkness and deep snow, were already far away.
Rønneberg and the explosives team, fully armed and in uniform, skied over the high plateau and across the valleys of eastern Norway to Sweden, 250 miles away: the operation was completed without firing a shot.
By March 29 Rønneberg and his team were back in London.
The raid on the heavy water plant at Vemork was one of the most important sabotage actions of the Second World War, and such a stunning success that it is still in the curriculum for today’s Special Forces.
Though Rønneberg was regarded as one of the great heroes of the war, he said: “We just did a job. We got lucky. Certainly luck, but also very good intelligence about the target. Maybe the pulse was a bit higher than normal, but it was just a question of setting the charges and getting away as quickly as possible”.
There were many rewards for the team, Rønneberg receiving the DSO from the British and Norway’s highest decoration for military gallantry, the War Cross with sword.
One of three brothers, Joachim Holmboe Rønneberg was born on August 30 1919 into a prominent merchant family in the city of Ålesund, where his great-great-grandfather had established a business in 1812.
Young Joachim had completed his schooling and taken the exams for entry to Oslo university, but he was not studious and preferred mountain climbing to reading. He was working in a fishing company and waiting for the summer conscription to join the navy, when the Germans invaded in April 1940.
In March 1941, telling no one and leaving a farewell letter to his parents, Rønneberg took the “Shetland Bus” on a 24-hour crossing in a 45-foot fishing boat to Shetland.
A few days later in London he met the Norwegian actor Martin Linge, who was also leader of No 1 Norwegian Independent Company, also known as Lingekompaniet, sponsored by the Special Operations Executive.
In the next few months Rønneberg rose from student to instructor in explosive demolitions and displayed natural leadership, until in December 1942, just as he was beginning to become impatient, he was given command of Operation Gunnerside, as the Telemark raid was officially known, (named after the village where the head of SOE, Sir Charles Hambro, used to shoot grouse).
After the raid, the Prime Minister Winston Churchill asked: “What rewards are to be given to these heroic men?” But Rønneberg was a modest man and all he wanted to do was return to his beloved Norway. Less than a year later he and two others were dropped into Romsdal to continue their campaign of sabotage against the Germans.
For nearly a year they lived in a makeshift hut under a cliff. Their survival was threatened by a shortage of supplies, but in January 1945 they blew up a bridge, which stopped German railway traffic through the Romsdal for three weeks. Only a stomach illness obliged Rønneberg to be evacuated to England before the war ended.
Postwar, he returned to his hometown of Ålesund where he became a radio journalist, and eventually editorial director at a local radio and television station, before retiring in 1987.
Rønneberg was reticent when asked about his wartime experiences, and it was not until his 70s that he began to share his stories, especially on visits to schools, his message being that people needed to know their history so that they could make the right choices in the future.
“Those growing up today”, he said, “have to understand that we must always be willing to fight for peace and freedom.” He was critical of Norway’s and the West’s present-day defensive preparations. Asked to comment in 2010 on the film The Heroes of Telemark (1965), he dismissed it as “hopeless”.
On his 95th birthday a statue of Rønneberg was unveiled in his hometown, where until recently he could be found every Saturday morning sitting by the window of his favourite café.
In 1949 he married Liv Foldal, who died in 2015. Their three children survive him.
Joachim Rønneberg, born August 30 1919, died October 21 2018.
More Salute Target articles coming soon....
by Leo Shane III
How do troops feel about President Trump?
We asked our active-duty readers about everything from Space Force to their support of the president and whether we should keep sending forces to Iraq – and here's what they said.
WASHINGTON — More than three-fourths of troops believe the military has become more politically polarized in recent years, according to the results of a new Military Times poll of active-duty service members.
And that ideological divide is sure to be a major player at the voting booth next month.
About 64 percent of active-duty troops who took the anonymous survey said they are planning to cast a ballot in the congressional midterm elections in November, even though turnout among the general public in midterm elections usually falls below 50 percent. Only 7 percent of troops surveyed said they have no plans to vote this year.
The midterm elections could significantly shift the balance of power in the nation’s capitol, where Republicans currently hold control of the House, Senate and White House. They are also the latest benchmark in an increasingly fractured national political conversation which has seen escalating rhetoric from both sides.
“What this shows is that the military as an institution is not immune to that,” said Peter Feaver, a former adviser to former President George W. Bush and a political science professor at Duke University who has authored several books on military culture.
“It’s not an oasis or an island."
“And because of the value of the military as one of the few remaining apolitical institutions in America, there are concerns that the military may be drawn into these partisan fights," Feaver said.
Only 4 percent of troops surveyed believe the military has become less politicized in recent years.
Who to vote for?
National polling suggests that Democrats have a strong possibility of gaining control of the House and possibly even the Senate, moves that would have sweeping ramifications for President Donald Trump’s policy and political priorities.
Troops see that possibility as well. Nearly 74 percent of service members in the poll say they think the election will have a noticeable impact on the military, with 28 percent of those calling it a significant effect.
Among officers, that number is even higher: 89 percent of them see this election as influential for the armed forces.
But who troops will vote for is less clear. Almost half of those who responded to the poll said they do not affiliate with either major political party, continuing a trend in Military Times polls from recent years away from close ties to either Republicans or Democrats.
Despite that, roughly 45 percent of troops polled said they intend to back Republican candidates, even though less than a third say they are registered with the party.
Similarly, about 28 percent said they plan to vote for Democrats in the upcoming contests, even though only about one-fifth consider themselves members of that party.
Exit polling in the 2016 presidential election saw military members and veterans vote nearly two-to-one in favor of Republican candidates. The Military Times poll doesn’t show as big a disparity with troops this election cycle, but that could shift given that more than 26 percent say they don’t plan to support either party.
Troops surveyed had a 44 percent favorable view of Trump against a 43 percent unfavorable view. Women, minorities and officers had significantly lower opinions of his tenure, and men and enlisted service members offered more support.
The survey showed broader approval of Trump’s handling of military issues — 60 percent say that the military is in better shape now than when President Barack Obama was in office — but most think the military as a whole has weakened during their careers.
Almost 52 percent of troops surveyed said military readiness has weakened since their enlistment, and 12 percent of the total characterized it as declining significantly. Less than one-third believe readiness is better today than when they joined their service.
The midterm elections will be held on Nov. 6.
** Our methodology
Between Sept. 20 and Oct. 2, Military Times in collaboration with the Institute for Veterans and Military Families (IVMF) at Syracuse University conducted a voluntary, confidential online survey of U.S. service members. The survey included 19 questions on service members’ opinion(s) related to the current political climate, policy and national security in the United States.
The survey received 829 responses from active-duty troops. The IVMF used standard methodology to estimate the weights for each individual observation of the survey sample. The margin of error for most questions was roughly 2 percent.
The survey audience was 89 percent male and 11 percent female, and had an average age of about 31 years old. The respondents identified themselves as 76 percent white, 13 percent Hispanic, 9 percent African American, 5 percent Asian and 6 percent other ethnicities. Respondents were able to select more than one race.
[Leo Shane III covers Congress, Veterans Affairs and the White House for Military Times. He has covered Washington, D.C. since 2004, focusing on military personnel and veterans policies.]
More Salute Target articles coming soon....
THE 2018 NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY
As noted above, Secretary of Defense Mattis has suggested the next war will be substantively different from the recent ones. “America’s military,” Mattis reminds us, “has no preordained right to victory on the battlefield.” The fact that “great power wars are more likely than they have been in decades” leads us to an inevitable tension between strategy and ethics. To avoid losing those wars, the U.S. military will have to engage in operations unlike those that have become the mainstay of counterinsurgency and counterterrorism campaigns of the 21st century.
Self-interest, realpolitik, and brinkmanship might still generate constraints on violence, but we should expect those constraints to be marginal. For example, in 1945 the U.S. chose—against the advice of the Target Committee—not to drop an atomic bomb on Kyoto because it was Japan’s cultural center and historic capital. This was not an ethically-motivated kindness to the people of Japan. Rather, both Secretary Stimson and President Truman believed “the bitterness which would be caused by such a wanton act might make it impossible during the long post-war period to reconcile the Japanese to us in that area rather than to the Russians.” This was a pragmatic, and not—or at least not entirely—an ethical, decision. U.S. self-interest in the post-war peace eliminated Kyoto from the target set, but it did nothing to reduce the noncombatant deaths in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
DISTRIBUTIVE AND RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE
Ethical concerns are not limited to civilian casualties, but also pertain to combatant casualties. Another common feature of many of the west’s recent enemies is their willingness—or perhaps eagerness—to engage in terrorist tactics. There is a sense in which our ideological differences are so significant that many hold those enemy combatants not only responsible but morally culpable for their actions. For many westerners, the maleficence of the Islamic State, for example, is met with strong retributive intuitions. That is, we might naturally want retribution in the name of justice for the evils that have been committed. In recent asymmetric conflicts with non-state terror organizations, those retributive intuitions conveniently align with distributive justice—the just distribution of benefits and harms. The former is the rhetoric of policy-makers; but the latter is the language of just war theory and international law. The language of bringing terrorists to justice might have great rhetorical force, but it teeters between distributive and retributive justice. Just war theory—for the last few centuries at least—and the international law that has grown out of it, reject such retributivist justifications for killing in war. The justification for killing in war is not backward-looking retribution for past wrongs, but forward-looking defense against future unjust harms. Even so, it is easy for western combatants and civilians to sidestep the tragedy of death in such conflicts because our retributive intuitions convince us (rightly or wrongly) that those we are justified in killing also deserve to be killed.
There are good reasons to think a great power conflict will be different. The citizen soldiers or conscript armies fighting for their own nation-state are not likely to be seen as culpable in the same sense the terrorist is. Dave Blair and Karen House distinguish between the malicious and the tragic enemy. If combatants in the great power conflict are tragic enemies, then the tragedy of war will extend beyond civilian casualties, and beyond casualties to friendly forces, to nearly all casualties in war—including combatants on the other side. The moral costs of such a conflict promise to be high.
The strategic demands of a great power war with a peer-adversary—the high-end conflict—will inevitably push decision-makers to the pale of that which is ethically permissible. We have seen it in the two great wars of the 20th century. In the next great power war—and one hopes it never comes—western states will put their strategic and operational capabilities to the test. But such a war will also test the moral will of their citizens—the people in whose name the killing and dying will take place. It is all too plausible that recent wars in which strategy and ethics have shared a comfortable overlap have lulled us into false sense of ethical security. Some wars surely are morally worth fighting—but one would be wise to count the cost.
[Joseph O. Chapais an officer in the U.S. Air Force and a doctoral student in philosophy at the University of Oxford. He holds an M.A. in Philosophy from Boston College and a B.A. in Philosophy from Boston University. The views expressed are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Air Force, the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.]
More articles by Salute Targets coming soon...
by Joseph O. Chapais
Earlier this year, The Strategy Bridge asked university and professional military education students to participate in our first annual writing contest by sending us their thoughts on strategy. We are pleased to present an selected for an Honorable Mention submitted by Joseph O. Chapais from the University of Oxford.
[War] is at all times a sad and cruel business. I hate war with all my heart, and nothing but imperative duty could induce me to engage in its work or witness its horrors. —Ulysses S. Grant
As the U.S. military transitions from a strategy-level focus on violent extremist organizations (VEO) to great power competition, Americans would do well to establish reasonable expectations for the future. The U.S. Department of Defense’s recent National Defense Strategy (NDS) has suggested as much. Secretary Mattis warns that “without sustained and predictable investment to restore readiness and modernize our military to make it fit for our time, we will rapidly lose our military advantage, resulting in a Joint Force that has legacy systems irrelevant to the defense of our people.” David Barno and Nora Bensahel have described this kind of language throughout the National Defense Strategy as a “clear warning shot,” and a “message to the American people” that without adhering to the principles laid out in the strategy, the U.S. “could actually lose those wars.” The message, according to Barno and Bensahel, is that the American people must accurately manage their strategic and operational expectations of their armed forces.
IF A JUSTIFIED WAR IS A POLITICAL ENDEAVOR AIMED AT SECURING THE POLITICAL COMMUNITY, THROUGHOUT THE STRUGGLE PARTICIPANTS MUST ALSO ENSURE THE POLITICAL COMMUNITY REMAINS ONE WORTH PRESERVING.
In addition to managing expectations about warfighting efficacy in the next war, Americans must also manage expectations about warfighting ethics in the next war. Military ethics in general, and the Just War Tradition in particular, are often taken to be moral constraints on the conduct of war. The tactician works to win battles, the strategist to win wars, and policy-makers strive to preserve the polity through the war and into the better peace. But morality demands that the tactician, the strategist, and the policy-maker operate within certain boundaries. If a justified war is a political endeavor aimed at securing the political community, throughout the struggle participants must also ensure the political community remains one worth preserving.
History is replete with circumstances that have forced decision-makers at every level to balance the conflicting pressures of military necessity on the one hand and military ethics on the other. In this century, however, western powers that have participated in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations have witnessed an alignment of strategic and ethical demands. In fact, the strategic demands in such operations have often been more stringent than the ethical ones. The proportionality requirements in just war theory and in international law do not prohibit foreseeable civilian casualties, but only those foreseeable civilian casualties that “would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.” In recent conflicts, however, civilian casualties have carried tremendous strategic significance in addition to their moral significance. I recall one Air Force squadron commander (for whom I have great respect) who distilled the airpower realities of counterinsurgency when he said “one good shot is not going to win the war. But one bad shot could lose it.” Strikes against high value targets, for example, that are within the bounds both of international humanitarian law and the Just War Tradition are frequently aborted to avert risk to a single noncombatant. In some counterinsurgency environments, one civilian casualty is simply one too many. The high levels of scrutiny over military engagements, and the low strategic-level tolerance for civilian casualties, have rendered many ethical concerns in recent wars redundant.
As the U.S. and its allies pivot from a focus on transnational terrorist threats to great power competition, we would do well to remember that the recent alignment of strategy and ethics may be a temporary phenomenon. While reducing civilian casualties to near-zero might be a strategic necessity in a military environment focused on supporting a fledgling democracy, the same will not likely be true of the high-end combat missions Secretary Mattis predicts. Those who are concerned both with strategy and ethics face a challenge. In the years since 2001, the ethical burden has been carried largely by strategic considerations. There is a real possibility the relevant ethical muscles have atrophied as a result—and we cannot know for sure until we again need to put those muscles to use.
In this essay, I briefly look at recent asymmetric conflicts, the 2018 National Defense Strategy, and at some differences between terrorist and state actors to suggest the pivot in strategic focus in the U.S., the U.K., and elsewhere must be accompanied by a reinvigoration of ethical discussion and debate among the relevant populations. It is entirely plausible that in the next war—a war marked by technological symmetry in which consequences of failure will be measured in existential terms—strategic inputs by themselves will be unable to constrain the horrors of war. Participants at every level—to include tacticians, strategists, policy-makers, and citizens—will have proactively to decide where to draw the ethical bounds of war.
WARS OF THE RECENT PAST
Though enthusiasm for counterinsurgency doctrine has waxed and waned since 2001, it has had important effects on the public conception of military operations against non-state actors. After removing the Taliban government in Afghanistan and toppling the Saddam regime in Iraq, the U.S. and its coalition partners engaged in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations to support those nascent governments. Though the hybrid war in Syria has been different in important ways, the common chord in all three cases is made up of the following threads.
1. The coalitions in question were not engaged in state-on-state conflict.
2. They were engaged in fights in and among the local population.
3. They were engaged in fights against non-state actors who challenged the local state’s monopoly on violence.
Moreover, the global connectivity of combatants and civilians has brought us into an age of the so-called strategic corporal, in which actions at the tactical level can go viral to generate strategic-level effects. The implication in these three theaters is two-fold. First, the support of the local population is often a necessary condition for winning the war. Second, civilian casualties can have a devastating effect on the support of the local population. When coalition forces cause harm to the local populace—whether the harm is justified on ethical or legal grounds or not—the coalition supports the enemy’s narrative, and therefore its strategic aims. In conflicts of this kind (or these kinds), the host nation population is a center of gravity. As a result, the “by, with, and through” posture that relies upon host nation capabilities and the demand to reduce civilian casualties are strategic and operational requirements. To summarize, in this kind of environment, ethical concerns are strategic concerns.
General Petraeus identified this relationship between strategy and ethics in his 2007 open letter to forces under his command in Iraq.
Our values and the laws governing warfare teach us to respect human dignity, maintain our integrity, and do what is right. Adherence to our values distinguishes us from our enemy. This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we—not our enemies—occupy the moral high ground.
n a conflict in which the host nation population is the focus of military operations, many ethical requirements are subsumed under strategic and operational imperatives. Petraeus pleads for respect for human dignity, integrity, and ethical behavior, but he does so for instrumental reasons; in such an environment, occupying the moral high ground is what it takes to win. But in the next war, strategy and ethics might—and probably will—come apart. Strategists will no longer lean upon ethical principles for their operational value but might instead find their strategic mandate at odds with the ethical one.
This is the anniversary of the horrible 1983 Beirut Bombing terrorist attack on our US Marine Barracks in Lebanon.
Our US #Marines were there as “Peacemakers”. Unloaded weapons, trying to be an honest broker of peace between groups in conflict.
I lost several good friends here, one from my very own Basic School class in Quantico, Virginia.
Sadly at the time, we did not realize yet that militant Islamic extremism had already declared war on #America and Western Civilization.
It would take 9-11 for us to wake up and realize our need for the Global War On Terrorism. Freedom isn’t free. - Col. Mike Howard USMC Ret.
October 23rd, 1983
On this day, a suicide bomber drives a truck filled with 2,000 pounds of explosives into a U.S. Marine Corps barracks at the Beirut International Airport. The explosion killed 220 Marines, 18 sailors and three soldiers. A few minutes after that bomb went off, a second bomber drove into the basement of the nearby French paratroopers’ barracks, killing 58 more people. Four months after the bombing, American forces left Lebanon without retaliating.
The Marines in Beirut were part of a multinational peacekeeping force that was trying to broker a truce between warring Christian and Muslim Lebanese factions. In 1981, American troops had supervised the withdrawal of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from Beirut and then had withdrawn themselves. They returned the next year, after Israel’s Lebanese allies slaughtered nearly 1,000 unarmed Palestinian civilian refugees. Eighteen hundred Marine peacekeepers moved into an old Israeli Army barracks near the airport—a fortress with two-foot–thick walls that could, it seemed, withstand anything. Even after a van bomb killed 46 people at the U.S. Embassy in April, the American troops maintained their non-martial stance: their perimeter fence remained relatively unfortified, for instance and their sentries’ weapons were unloaded.
At about 6:20 in the morning on October 23, 1983, a yellow Mercedes truck charged through the barbed-wire fence around the American compound and plowed past two guard stations. It drove straight into the barracks and exploded. Eyewitnesses said that the force of the blast caused the entire building to float up above the ground for a moment before it pancaked down in a cloud of pulverized concrete and human remains. FBI investigators said that it was the largest non-nuclear explosion since World War II and certainly the most powerful car bomb ever detonated.
After the bombing, President Ronald Reagan expressed outrage at the “despicable act” and vowed that American forces would stay in Beirut until they could forge a lasting peace. In the meantime, he devised a plan to bomb the Hezbollah training camp in Baalbek, Lebanon, where intelligence agents thought the attack had been planned. However, Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger aborted the mission, reportedly because he did not want to strain relations with oil-producing Arab nations. The next February, American troops withdrew from Lebanon altogether.
The first real car bomb—or, in this case, horse-drawn-wagon bomb—exploded on September 16, 1920 outside the J.P. Morgan Company’s offices in New York City’s financial district. Italian anarchist Mario Buda had planted it there, hoping to kill Morgan himself; as it happened, the robber baron was out of town, but 40 other people died (and about 200 were wounded) in the blast. There were occasional car-bomb attacks after that—most notably in Saigon in 1952, Algiers in 1962, and Palermo in 1963—but vehicle weapons remained relatively uncommon until the 1970s and 80s, when they became the terrifying trademark of groups like the Irish Republican Army and Hezbollah. In 1995, right-wing terrorists Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols used a bomb hidden in a Ryder truck to blow up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
As a United States Marine, I go on record here stating that I love the United States Army.
For just over the past decade since I retired, I have been privileged almost every year to attend the annual meeting and exposition of the Association of the United States Army (“AUSA”). It is held in downtown Washington, D.C., each Fall, at the huge Walter E. Washington Convention Center. It is an amazing event, exposition, conference and symposium dedicated to making our Army better. And the really fun part is that it is a great place to meet and make new friends.
I have a long history of Army in my family. My great great grandfather & his brother both served in the Union Army, one with the 33rd Indiana and the other with the 11th Iowa. My great grandfather served during the Spanish American War with the 5th cavalry. My Grandfather in WWII with the ordnance corps perfecting Sherman tanks at Aberdeen Proving Grounds. As a Marine, I am also reminded of the many times in battle that Soldiers and Marines worked closely together to defeat our common enemies: In WWI at the Battle of Belleau Wood, in WWII on Guadalcanal, in Korea at the Chosin Reservoir, and many times in Vietnam. And I experienced this up front and personal in 2004 during the Battle for Fallujah. We may kid each other in peacetime garrison, but I saw in clearly in the Iraq War, Soldiers and Marines work well together when the enemy confronts us. AUSA is a reminder to me that the Army are just like us Marines: Warriors. We have different missions most of the time, but if we really understand the big picture, we want what is best for America. That means being the best Soldiers and Marines that we can be and working closely as a team.
We also have close allies like the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Germans ... just to name a few. NATO is alive and well. Different in heritage and history but now all committed to defending freedom. I saw this at AUSA working with and visiting the German Pavilion. It is a good thing that we can now discuss WWII history in its full context, taking lessons from German military before, during and after the Third Reich and embracing the new German armed forces that stand with us in Afghanistan. And there is no ally like Israel and her Israel Defence Force (IDF). I also know this as a fact when I participated in the hasty built-up for the 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom (please refer for details to my earlier article: “Bulldozers to Baghdad”). The IDF gave us 18 D-9R Armored Bulldozers on essentially a handshake! And these saved many American lives at battle strewn places like Nasiriyah, Baghdad, Najaf, and particularly Fallujah. They also gave us mobile vehicle barriers unlike any other built by an outstanding company north of Haifa called MIFRAM (a Hebrew acronym based on “Mivnay Pladah Raytuch Michlina” … for ‘structure steel welded machinery’). I have personally known the folks from this company for decades and visited their factory. No one builds better barriers and other mobile security products. All of their folks are combat vets. And their gear is literally born in battle. Israel is one of the best friends that the United States can count on. Working with them closely at AUSA and spending time with them in D.C. visiting memorials, museums, and sharing stories in restaurants and hotels makes the ties even stronger. As Joel McCrea, the old Hollywood cowboy actor of the 1940s and 1950s used to tell me: “When you make a friend with a Jew, you make a friend for life.” I believe this. Having visited Israel many times, I know that it is a special feeling when you are invited to live in their homes and visit their battlefields (like the Golan Heights, Latrun, and of course Jerusalem … to name but a few). The Bible comes to life. You understand that freedom is never free.
The AUSA gathering is a chance for defenders of the free world to gather together, become friends, share experiences and perspectives and focus on improving the way we look at preparing for war. It is serious business. But it is an exhilarating challenge. As Ben Franklin wisely said at the second Continental Convention of 1776: “Either we all hang together, or we will most assuredly hang separately!”
Great job AUSA, and God bless the United States Army!
Read More Courtesy of Salute Targets...
Surely then, James Roosevelt was justified in his outrage when he learned that the military brass planned to exclude him from the Raiders’ first combat mission for fear of a propaganda nightmare if he were to be killed or captured. Upon receiving this news, Roosevelt again petitioned the help of his father, who agreed that his son deserved to fight with Carlson and the newly formed Raider battalion, no matter the risk. According to Schultz, one very stern call by President Roosevelt to Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, the commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, was enough to ensure that Roosevelt would be included in the now legendary raid on the strategically significant Makin Atoll.
The initial assault on Makin was designed primarily to gather intelligence on Japanese forces while distracting the enemy from the planned invasion of Guadal canal. It would represent many firsts for the United States military: the first American offensive of the Pacific war; the first official use of an American Special Forces unit; the first employment of motorized rubber boats for amphibious insertion; and, without question, the first time the son of a sitting U.S. President would enter a combat zone as an infantry officer.
In an intimate exchange with his mother shortly before the mission, Roosevelt revealed his motivation for participating in the raid even though he could have honorably avoided combat. He lamented his deteriorating physical condition–including a lifelong gastrointestinal problem that required a portion of his stomach be removed which would have precluded any one else from service–but avoided characterizing his ailments as a disadvantage. To Roosevelt, his failing health was a measure of his worthiness as a Marine. He explained, “When this next job is done, at least inside I’ll feel I have stood the test of making it no matter what the odds.”
Indeed, efforts were made to ensure that the President’s son was insulated from the extremely close combat and guerrilla style warfare that took place during the nearly two day raid. While most of Carlson’s Raiders directly assaulted the enemy force of around 200 Japanese soldiers, Roosevelt was tasked with managing the combat center, including maintaining communication with the submarines from which they had disembarked a few miles off the coast of the island and providing Carlson with regular battlefield updates.
Still, as Schultz puts it, “Nowhere on Makin was safe.” In fact, so exposed was the shack from which Roosevelt directed operations that several times it was fired upon by snipers and machine gunners. Roosevelt himself recalled having a radio shot out of his hand only to grab another and continue working. Carlson was so concerned by Roosevelt’s constant eagerness to survey the battlefield that on at least one occasion, he angrily ordered his second in command to take cover in a sump hole.
Despite the obvious measures taken to protect Roosevelt, he is credited with risking his life to rescue three Marines who nearly drowned while evacuating the island amidst a relentless current. Though details of the incident are uncertain, James likely aided the Marines when their small boat cap sized or when they became detached from the vessel while trying to return to one of the awaiting submarines. Several other Marines were not as fortunate, helplessly drifting off course and succumbing to the forceful surf. It was for this heroic action, and for his proficiency in managing battlefield operations while under the constant threat of attack, that Roosevelt received the Navy Cross.
Some of the Raiders mocked how liberally the Navy Cross was awarded to officers involved in the raid. Their disapproval was probably directed in part at Roosevelt, who undoubtedly had a different experience on Makin than the Marines who fought the enemy head on. He likely faced similar backlash after receiving a Silver Star from the Army during the larger scale invasion of the atoll in November of the same year. No doubt many viewed his decorations as politically earned and motivated. Indeed, such criticism has only helped to obscure Roosevelt’s remarkable service record and ultimately diminish his significant legacy as a military leader and Marine Corps innovator.
Certainly the lore of the Corps favors much more dramatic examples of heroism— Chesty Puller, John Basil one and Dan Daly, to name a few. These men all were fearless warriors who skirmished on the front lines of some of the bloodiest conflicts in modern history. They were defined by their audacious courage in the face of certain death; and in both attitude and physical appearance, they projected the image of strength and seemingly innate cunning that has become synonymous with Marines.
Roosevelt was different. On the surface he appeared meek, at times even sickly. He seemed more the timid and unsure product of a sheltered upbringing than a man prepared to lead Marines in combat. But in the case of James Roosevelt, his contradictions actually define his importance.
Roosevelt should be appreciated be cause of, not in spite of, his obvious physical inadequacies. Any one of his maladies would have prevented the average military aged man from enlisting during World War II, and they definitely would have precluded most men from enduring the rigorous training that Roosevelt underwent as a Raider. In the same way, he should be admired for the persistence he displayed early in his Marine Corps career, not simply dis credited for the embarrassing political promotion he received in the very beginning.
That he respected the fraternal order of the Marine Corps enough to accept a lower rank and continue his service is not a blotch; rather it perfectly exemplifies his humble demeanor and resilience in the face of harsh criticism.
And perhaps most significantly, that he was the President’s son should not be held against him. Rather this fact should be held up as an example of his personal honor, courage and selflessness. Roosevelt could have very easily procured political expediency–if that’s what he desired–in a much safer role within the Marine Corps.He did not have to be anywhere near the carnage that came to define the Pacific theater during WW II, but he insisted on being in the fight, alongside those who had to be there.
Author’s bio: LCpl Evan Weiss is from Edison, N.J. He enlisted in the Marine Corps in April 2016 and serves with 3d Battalion, 3d Marines as a field radio operator. Prior to enlisting in the Marine Corps, Weiss worked in the addiction treatment field, first as a case manager and administrator in a nonprofit substance abuse rehabilitation center and later as the coordinator of an adult drug court in New Jersey.
Read More Courtesy of Salute Targets....
Here is a true tale of an American President's warrior son.
This is a unique and fascinating story concerning our American heritage and World War II.
Many folks do not realize that during WWII, President Franklin Roosevelt & his wife Eleanor, actually had a very personal interest in the conflict:
Their son James was serving as a United States Marine. And this was not some safe bureaucratic service job behind the lines at a stateside base. No, they had real "skin in the game" as James was a Marine Raider with a distinguished combat record.
This undoubtedly gave the wartime President of the United States a unique perspective on what was really going on at the American fighting man's level. Yes, James Roosevelt did a tremendous service to his nation, and his fellow warriors!
Here is the rest of the story.
Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
The Legacy of James Roosevelt, Marine Corps Innovator And Navy Cross Recipient
By LCpl Even F. Weiss, USMC
Bespectacled, lanky, balding and flat-footed, he certainly did not convey the image of a fighting man, let alone that of a United States Marine. Then again, he was no average Marine. He was the son of the President of the United States.
James #Roosevelt, the oldest of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt’s four boys, joined the #Marine Corps in 1936 under rather ignominious circumstances. Having been given a lieutenant colonel’s commission–no doubt arranged by his father–Roosevelt at first avoided the rigorous training and indoctrination that officer candidates were required to undergo, much to the quiet out rage of his fellow Marines.
Roosevelt felt overwhelmed as an untested lieutenant colonel in the world’s most elite fighting force, later reflecting, “I was totally out of my depth. I didn’t know what I was doing.” So out of his depth was he that three years later, Roosevelt resigned his “honorary” commission and joined the Marine Corps Reserve at the lower and more fitting grade of captain. Given his inauspicious beginnings, it is no surprise that his command viewed Roosevelt as a Marine “in name only.”
History must forgive these critics as nobody could have imagined that the awkward and oft-underachieving Roosevelt would go on to play a central role in the development of one of the nation’s first special forces battalion–the Marine Raiders–while being awarded a Navy Cross for valor during the famed raid on the Makin Atoll.
Like so many other Americans, the turning point in Roosevelt’s life and career came when the Japanese empire attacked Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Anticipating a large-scale war, Roosevelt immediately sought the influence of his father. Only he was not looking to avoid the impending conflict; on the contrary, Roosevelt demanded his father’s assistance in order to obtain a combat billet.
No doubt reminded of his son’s lackluster academic performance and unremarkable foray into the business world–despite amassing moderate wealth in the insurance industry, James became mired in controversy when accusations arose that he used his official White House position to acquire clients for his private firm–President Roosevelt likely questioned James’ judgment and abilities. He admired his son’s desire to fight but understandably wanted to do all that he could to protect him from harm.
The President reasoned that James would be an ideal counterpart to Major Evans F. Carlson, who was tasked with forming small, specialized units of Marines to gather intelligence on the Japanese army and execute small offensive operations aimed at disrupting the enemy and boosting American morale. In his role as Maj Carlson’s executive officer, James would lend political credibility to Carlson’s attempt to advance a style of warfare that was, at the time, unfamiliar and off-putting to many of the Marine Corps senior leaders.
Meanwhile, Carlson who had become a close and trusted friend of President Roosevelt while leading a detachment of Marines assigned to the White House– would keep a watchful eye on the President’s oldest son.
If history has downplayed the role that Evans Carlson played in essentially designing the military’s modern-day special forces model, it has all but omitted Roosevelt’s involvement in the process. Perhaps no document was more important to the creation of the first Marine Raider battalion, originally referred to as “Carlson’s Raiders,” than a January 1942 memo penned by James Roosevelt to the leadership of the Marine Corps entitled “Development within the Marine Corps of a Unit for Purposes Similar to the British Commandos and the Chinese Guerillas.”
In his influential treatise, Roosevelt advocated “an outfit based on Carlson’s observations of the Communist Eighth Route Army’s notion of ethical indoctrination, which called for a policy of close relationships between officers and men, elimination of class distinctions, and full sharing of information to all ranks,” according to Carlson biographer Duane P. Schultz. “It also proposed to do away with military titles; the only distinction being that between leaders and fighters.”
Unquestionably the ideas conveyed in the memo were Carlson’s, but Roosevelt’s enthusiasm for the mission and his understanding of Carlson’s methods and influences enabled him to persuade the reluctant Marine Corps leadership to authorize the controversial plan. To be sure, it helped their efforts that the proposal was written by the President's son but absent such a cogent synthesis of Carlson’s experiences with the Chinese Communist Army and British Special Forces, the inception of the Marine Raiders might have been stalled, or even worse, thwarted, by the conservative Marine Corps command.
As a testament to James Roosevelt’s growing competence as a military leader, Carlson trusted him with more than just the “politics” of their mission. In fact, Roosevelt was intimately involved in selecting the 1,000 Marines who would comprise Carlson’s Raiders. Moreover, in Schultz’s words, the physically unimposing Roosevelt surprisingly “kept up the pace” with the other Raiders during their grueling training activities, which included a 35 mile hike two times per week and a 70 mile nighttime trek once per week, all on a near starvation diet of raisins and rice. Among those who knew him best, Roosevelt dispelled the perception that he was a Marine “in name only,” having earned the respect, even the admiration, of many of the Corps’ most elite warriors.
The #USArmy wants guns, big ones. The service is modernizing for high-intensity combat against top adversaries, and one of the top priorities is long-range precision fires.
The goal of the Long-Range Precision Fires team is to pursue range overmatch against peer and near-peer competitors, Col. John Rafferty, the team's director of the LRPF who is part of the recently-established Army Futures Command, told reporters Wednesday at the Association of the United States Army conference in Washington, DC.
The Army faces challenges from a variety of Russian weapons systems, such as the artillery, multiple rocket launcher systems, and integrated air defense networks. While the Army is preparing for combat against a wide variety of adversaries, Russia is characterized as a "pacing threat," one which has, like China, invested heavily in standoff capabilities designed to keep the US military at arms length in a fight.
The US armed forces aim to engage enemy in multi-domain operations, which involves assailing the enemy across the five domains of battle: land, air, sea, space, and cyberspace. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said the US desires "a perfect harmony of intense violence."
Rafferty described LRPF's efforts as "fundamental to the success of multi-domain operations," as these efforts get at the "fundamental problem of multi-domain operations, which is one of access."
"Our purpose is to penetrate and disintegrate enemy anti-access and area-denial (A2/AD) systems, which will enable us to maintain freedom of maneuverability as we exploit windows of opportunity," he added.
Long-range hypersonic weapon and strategic long-range cannon
At the strategic fires level, the Army is developing a long-range hypersonic weapon and a strategic long-range cannon that could conceptually fire on targets over 1,000 miles away.
With these two systems, the Army is "taking a comprehensive approach to the A2/AD problem, one by using the hypersonic system against strategic infrastructure and hardened targets, and then using the cannon to deliver more of a mass effect with cost-effective, more-affordable projectiles ... against the other components of the A2/AD complex."
The strategic long-range cannon is something that "has never been done before." This weapon is expected to be big, so much so that Army officials describe it as "relocatable," not mobile. Having apparently learned from the US Navy's debacle with the Zumwalt-class destroyer whose projectiles are so expensive the Navy can't pay for them, the Army is sensitive to the cost-to-kill ratio.
This cannon is, according to Rafferty, going to be an evolution of existing systems. The Army is "scaling up things that we are already doing."
Precision Strike Missile
At the operational level, the Precision Strike Missile features a lot more capability than the weapon it will ultimately replace, the aging Army tactical missile system.
"The first capability that really comes to mind is range, so out to 499 km, which is what we are limited to by the INF Treat," Rafferty explained." It will also have space in the base missile to integrate additional capabilities down the road, and those capabilities would involve sensors to go cross-domain on different targets or loitering munitions or sensor-fused munitions that would give greater lethality at much longer ranges."
Extended Range Cannon Artillery
At the tactical level, the Army is pushing ahead on the Extended Range Cannon Artillery, "which takes our current efforts to modernize the Paladin and replaces the turret and the cannon tube with a new family of projectiles that will enable us to get out to 70 km," the colonel told reporters. "We see 70 km as really the first phase of this. We really want to get out to 120 and 130 km."
And there is the technology out there to get the Army to this range. One of the most promising technologies, Rafferty introduced, is an air-breathing Ramjet projectile, although the Army could also go with a solid rocket motor.
The Army has already doubled its range from the 30 km range of the M777 Howitzer to the 62 miles with the new ERCA system, Gen. John Murray, the first head of Army Futures Command, revealed earlier this week, pointing to the testing being done out at the Yuma proving grounds in Arizona.
"We are charged to achieve overmatch at echelon that will enable us to realize multi-domain operations by knocking down the systems that are designed to create standoff and separate us," Rafferty said. "Long-range fire is key to reducing the enemy's capability to separate our formations. It does that from a position of advantage."
By Bernard Kerik
There are no truer, or frightening words than that spoken last week by retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, as he generally discussed the recent debacle involving Judge Brett Kavanaugh, without even mentioning him by name.
"Perhaps we didn't do too good a job teaching the importance of preserving democracy,” and then he shockingly admitted that we will witness the “death and decline of democracy," in this century.
As someone that has been targeted, tortured, and publicly, professionally and financially destroyed as the result of a presidential cabinet nomination, I could not agree more. Watching Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation process not only reminded me of my own experience, but clearly demonstrated the brutality of a political process, which is just a small portion of what is ripping our democracy to shreds.
Judge Kavanaugh himself called the confirmation process a “national disgrace,” and he is right, but it is far worse than even he can imagine.
In the past two years, we have heard members at the highest levels of Democratic political leadership in our country call for young people to attack — verbally assault President Trump’s supporters, and then witnessed many such assaults.
We have witnessed members of the left wing socialist movement, Antifa, attack innocent civilians for nothing more that wearing a red MAGA baseball cap, and not one Democrat in Congress… many of whom were former U.S. Attorneys… has said a word.
Most responsible parents make every effort to teach their children manners, respect, and the rule of law, and then in the last decade or so, some of the most powerful politicians in our nation comes along, and encourages our young to yell, scream, threaten, and attack others. I’ve watched young men and women get in the face of members of Congress and act like disrespectful spoiled brats — spitting, yelling, and screaming at the top of their lungs… their rhetoric making no sense, and worse, when questioned, they’re completely ignorant of true facts concerning the topic over which they were outraged.
There is no longer civilized debates or true political differences, and the nomination and confirmation process is an example of the change in our country. It has turned into a public political character assassination, in which the opposing party’s disdain or fear of the candidates, determines the level of attack, and to what extent they will go to destroy their target.
In Kavanaugh’s case, those on the left didn’t even have the common sense or decency to wait for a nominee to be announced, before saying that they oppose the president’s choice, and that they would vote not to confirm the president’s nominee, no matter who is was, exposing the realization that this Kavanaugh circus has nothing to do with the betterment of this country, and that it’s all about politics and their party.
Kavanaugh was right… his confirmation process is a national disgrace, and these recent hearings were meant to do nothing more than degrade, demoralize, demean, and destroy him and his family, and push him to withdraw his nomination.
This is a guy that has served in public office for 26 years, and been the subject of a “full-field” FBI investigation every single time he was hired or appointed to a new government position, and not once, had anyone ever heard of, or mentioned anything about sexual misconduct, until Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced he would oppose “Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination with everything” he has, signaling the Democratic Congress to do “everything” possible to derail this nomination… and that was before any of them had actually even met with Kavanaugh yet.
What I find so ironic, is that not one of those Democrats that have screamed the loudest in opposition of Kavanaugh, would ever pass and/or withstand the equivalent FBI scrutiny that Kavanaugh has undergone on six occasions.
Kavanaugh’s nomination process is a national disgrace, but it’s Justice Kennedy’s words, for us to beware. We are witnessing the death and decline of our democracy, and those to supporting this new socialist movement by many in the Democratic Party, are too ignorant to realize what that means, long term.
The real question now: Is it too late to do anything about it?
As New York City’s 40th Police Commissioner, Bernard Kerik was in command of the NYPD on September 11, 2001, and responsible for the city’s response, rescue, recovery, and the investigative efforts of the most substantial terror attack in world history. His 35-year career has been recognized in more than 100 awards for meritorious and heroic service, including a presidential commendation for heroism by President Ronald Reagan, two Distinguished Service Awards from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, The Ellis Island Medal of Honor, and an appointment as Honorary Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. To read more of his reports — Click Here Now.
A Cold War role
Despite successes in World War I and II, Marines found themselves in the late 1940s fighting for their very existence.
The newly created Air Force, alongside the Army and Navy, was preparing for the growing Cold War with the Soviet Union and their roles in it.
That fight imagined massed armies slugging it out on the plains of Europe, with a buildup of hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers on the continent. Or it envisioned trading barrages of nuclear weapons, first from air-centric bombing runs suited to the Air Force and then from the added nuclear submarine fleet and later from Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, also controlled by the Air Force.
The Marine Corps struggled as a bit player in that conversation. The Corps was seen more as a shock troop organization that could perhaps land in amphibious environments to achieve a small-scale objective as the Army gathered their strength for the real fight.
But, in practice, Marines saw much of the actual engagements.
Marines basically operated as a small land army in Korea and Vietnam and many of the smaller engagements throughout Latin America and later Africa and the Middle East into the early post-Cold War period.
“Only the Korean War led to building back up the Marine Corps,” said Richard Shultz Jr., a professor of national security studies at the Fletcher School, Tufts University. “All of the Cold War, with the exception of Vietnam, if there was going to be a land war fought, the Marines were not going to be the main force.”
As the Cold War wound down and America saw quick victory in the Persian Gulf War with a massive buildup that included scores of partner nations, top Marine Corps leaders were looking in a different direction, Shultz said.
Shultz points to retired Gen. Charles Krulak, commandant of the Marine Corps from 1995-1999, as a driving force in setting up the service for post-9/11 success.
In speech after speech, Krulak admonished leaders at the time to recognize that future wars would be fought on a much lower level and rapidly transition from direct combat to humanitarian aid.
He created the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, which helped form the asymmetrical, concept known as the “three-block war” where the key leadership was not a general, but a “strategic corporal.”
That, Shultz says, helped the Corps reorient itself first to the tasks of the time, peacekeeping missions in Somalia, Bosnia, Liberia and East Timor.
“Now we call these irregular wars,” Shultz said. “He started to get the Marine Corps ready for that.”
The flexibility built into the lowest ranks of Marine Corps units, coupled with what Schultz characterized as a premium put on education among the Marine officers, helped position the force for successes both on the battlefield and in D.C.
The education portion he credits to retired Gen. Al Gray, commandant from 1987-1991, who established the commandant’s reading list and helped support Marines at all ranks focus on intellectual achievement.
Then came 9/11, with Marines in the fight in Afghanistan and Iraq at the very beginning. This was in part because Marine Expeditionary Units are afloat and able to bring firepower to small-unit operations and invasions.
“So, the Marine Corps began to get a lot more experience in this kind of war,” Shultz said. “And it had generals who were ready for it.”
And Marines placement in high positions began shortly afterward.
In 2005, Gen. Peter Pace was appointed the first-ever Marine chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
That year, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld signed off on the creation of the Marine Corps Special Operations Command, bringing Marines to the joint special operations forces community after a quarter-century delay.
That was followed by Mattis being appointed first as head of U.S. Joint Forces Command and then as commander of CENTCOM in 2010.
In 2011, Allen took over as commander of International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.
Three years later he served as the first Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.
Some of the 1990s reorientation helped early in the Iraq War, Shultz said. He wrote a study titled, “The Marines Take Anbar: The Four-Year Fight against Al Qaeda.”
The professor points out that while then Gen. David Petraeus was still drafting the Army field manual that would define counterinsurgency, or COIN, operations, Marines were already using such techniques as part of their campaign plan.
“Humanitarian assistance is part of COIN,” Shultz said. “So, when Marines got to COIN in Anbar they adapted and understood not only the ‘clear and hold’ but also the ‘build’ portion of it.”
Seeds planted by leaders going back to Gray, new organization such as the warfighting lab, and its concepts applied to help the service pivot to immediate military missions put it on solid footing when those exact types of missions dominated the post-9/11 landscape.
Successes by commanders and their units in those fights and positioning in joint roles likely helped leaders such as Mattis, Kelly, Allen, Dunford and others claim their seats at the table.
Stay tuned for more articles by Salute Targets....
If you know Col. Mike Howard or ever crossed paths with him, it wouldn’t be long before the values of his life became evident. A wise man once said…
“As Marines we are motivated by the 5 F’s: Faith, Family, Friends, Flag & Freedom.”
If you mixed passion for the gospel, a strong dose of love for family and friends, and combined devotion to freedom and country, you’d get Col. Howard. These values are the fabric of his life and stretch back generations. The 5 F’s are why we have strong leaders in power today.
-From your friends at Gun Rodeo
There are more Marines in power now than ever before. Here’s how it happened.
By: Todd South
For much of the Marine Corps’ history its top leaders have fought for a place at the table, having to elbow the larger services with much bigger budgets just to stay in the game.
Lionhearted Marines had died in droves fighting during both World Wars, Korea and Vietnam. But in many eras, the smallest branch’s official role has been limited to the Navy’s maritime expeditionary arm, which has had to make do with less money, manpower and priorities as its sister services, which have long steered the military aspects of national security policy.
But, now, for the first time, there are more Marines in top military and civilian positions at the highest levels of government.
Right now a retired or uniformed Marine holds the seat of secretary of defense, White House chief of staff, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, head of Africa Command and incoming head of United States Central Command.
The combined Army, Army Reserve and Army National Guard has more than 1 million uniformed members. It is twice the size of the Navy and has nearly two-thirds more people than the Air Force. The Marine Corps and its reserve component have about 220,000.
There are five soldiers for every one Marine.
So how did we get here?
A close reading of the focus of key officers, performance in the past generation of warfare and the steps Marines took preceding 9/11 could provide some answers as to why Marines now are holding an out-sized number of positions.
An ‘uneasy’ situation
Today, the Marines are on top.
Secretary of Defense James Mattis and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly hold top positions of influence in both White House policy and defense department matters.
Current Marine generals such as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford, AFRICOM commander Gen. Thomas Waldhauser and incoming CENTCOM commander Lt. Gen. Kenneth McKenzie Jr. lead top commands involved in active combat.
Mattis recently nominated Marine Maj. Gen. George W. Smith Jr. for four his fourth star and an assignment as his senior military assistant. Smith serves as special assistant to the director of the joint staff.
Even the Brookings Institution, a leading D.C. think tank on foreign policy for more than a century, is being led by retired Marine Gen. John Allen. He’s the first Marine to serve as its president.
There have been 218 active-duty Army four-star generals in its history, nearly 200 since World War II.
The Marines didn’t even have a four-star general until the end of World War II. There have been about 50 active duty four-stars since.
Ten of 14 commanders of CENTCOM have been Army generals since its inception in 1983. Before 9/11, Marines had commanded it twice. Now, with McKenzie’s nomination, they are now entering their fourth turn.
Before 9/11 no Marine had ever commanded European Command. Similarly, only once before the terrorist attack had a Marine commanded Southern Command. The second was then-Gen. John Kelly.
The Marine Corps didn’t hold a seat on the Joint Chiefs of Staff until 1978, nearly 30 years after it was created. The Corps didn’t chair the staff until 2005.
Retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey, former commander of SOUTHCOM, sees the outsized role of Marines in leadership roles as an ‘uneasy’ situation, especially as the defense strategy under President Donald Trump shifts to great power competition.
McCaffrey credited top Marine leaders with having unique talent and called Mattis, Dunford and Kelly some of the “finest public servants this country has ever produced.”
He said the Marines’ development and management of senior officers put them in joint and nonstandard career track positions has helped them better compete for by-name nominations.
By contrast, he said the Army has been wary of assigning officers to such paths.
“To be honest it makes me uneasy to see the outcome,” McCaffrey wrote in an email to Marine Corps Times.
He pointed to the Army as being the centerpiece of national security and an outsized Marine-centric thinking could hurt larger efforts.
“For a decade we have been inadequately represented,” the four-star said of the Army.
The Corps’ current position in high places may not continue, irrespective of national security priorities.
Media outlets such as The New York Times have recently reported that both Mattis and Kelly are losing favor with President Donald Trump for several reasons including past disagreements and for alleged insults revealed in a book titled, “Fear: Trump in the White House,” by Bob Woodward, veteran journalist for the Washington Post.
But Mattis recently told reporters that he isn’t going anywhere yet.
And the Marine power-hold may continue.
Primarily, two guns made the threat of something in reserve; they were useful as a display of force when a lone man stacked up against a crowd. Some men could shoot equally well with either hand, and in a gunplay might alternate their fire; others exhausted the loads from the gun on the right, or the left, as the case might be, then shifted the reserve weapon to the natural shooting hand if that was necessary and possible. Such a move—the border shift—could be made faster than the eye could follow a top-notch gun-thrower, but if the man was as good as that, the shift would seldom be required.
Whenever you see a picture of some two-gun man in action with both weapons held closely against his hips and both spitting smoke together, you can put it down that you are looking at the picture of a fool, or a fake. I remember quite a few of these so-called two-gun men who tried to operate everything at once, but like the fanners, they didn’t last long in proficient company.
In the days of which I am talking, among men whom I have in mind, when a man went after his guns, he did so with a single, serious purpose. There was no such thing as a bluff; when a gunfighter reached for his fortyfive, every faculty he owned was keyed to shooting as speedily and as accurately as possible, to making his first shot the last of the fight. He just had to think of his gun solely as something with which to kill another before he himself could be killed. The possibility of intimidating an antagonist was remote, although the ‘drop’ was thoroughly respected, and few men in the West would draw against it. I have seen men so fast and so sure of themselves that they did go after their guns while men who intended to kill them had them covered, and what is more win out in the play. They were rare. It is safe to say, for all general purposes, that anything in gunfighting that smacked of show-off or bluff was left to braggarts who were ignorant or careless of their lives.
I might add that I never knew a man who amounted to anything to notch his gun with ‘credits,’ as they were called, for men he had killed. Outlaws, gunmen of the wild crew who killed for the sake of brag, followed this custom. I have worked with most of the noted peace officers — Hickok, Billy Tilghman, Pat Sughre, Bat Masterson, Charlie Basset, and others of like caliber — have handled their weapons many times, but never knew one of them to carry a notched gun.
There are two other points about the old-time method of using six-guns most effectively that do not seem to be generally known. One is that the gun was not cocked with the ball of the thumb. As his gun was jerked into action, the old-timer closed the whole joint of his thumb over the hammer and the gun was cocked in that fashion. The soft flesh of the thumb ball might slip if a man’s hands were moist, and a slip was not to be chanced if humanly avoidable. This thumb-joint method was employed whether or not a man used the trigger for firing.
On the second point, I have often been asked why five shots without reloading were all a top-notch gunfighter fired, when his guns were chambered for six cartridges. The answer is, merely, safety. To ensure against accidental discharge of the gun while in the holster, due to hair-trigger adjustment, the hammer rested upon an empty chamber. As widely as this was known and practiced, the number of cartridges a man carried in his six-gun may be taken as an indication of a man’s rank with the gunfighters of the old school. Practiced gun-wielders had too much respect for their weapons to take unnecessary chances with them; it was only with tyros and would-bes that you heard of accidental discharges or didn’t-know-it-was-loaded injuries in the country where carrying a Colt was a man’s prerogative.”
Closing Note: each year, a small, devoted group of us US Marines, and US Marshall friends, visit the Portland, Oregon, grave of Wyatt’s older brother Virgil Earp. It is located at the historic River View Cemetery in South Portland, along the Willamette River. Beautiful setting. We leave several dozen brass .45 Colt cartridge casings. We are told that it is the most visited grave in the city. So much for theologians, politicians, businessmen, lawyers, artists, and celebrities. Wyatt Earp, Virgil Earp, Morgan Earp, and John Henry “Doc” Holliday were Warriors, not bureaucrats.
Stay Tuned for more articles by Salute Targets....
Interview taken from “Wyatt Earp: Frontier Marshall” by Stuart N. Lake
Introduction by Col Michael Coleman Howard, US Marines (Ret) & Gunsite Academy Graduate
Fremont Street, outside the OK Corral, Tombstone, Arizona, 3 pm October 26, 1881: 32 shots in 23 seconds, range 6-10 feet
Wyatt Berry Stapp Earp (March 19, 1848 to January 13, 1929) was an American Old West lawman in Pima County, and deputy marshal in Tombstone, Arizona. He worked in a wide variety of trades throughout his life, and took part in the famous Gunfight at the O.K. Corral, during which outnumbered lawmen confronted a large group and killed three outlaw Cochise County Cowboys. He is often erroneously regarded as the central figure in the shootout, although his brother Virgil was Tombstone city marshal and deputy U.S. marshal that day, and had far more experience as a sheriff, constable, marshal, and soldier in combat. Wyatt Earp died on January 13, 1929 with a bigger than life reputation. He knew and mentored early Hollywood cowboy actors and directors like John Ford, Raoul Walsh, William Hart, Tom Mix, Harry Carry and John Wayne. His reputation as a fearless lawman and indomitable gunfighter have made him a role model for both American law enforcement and military Warriors. In American history, no one has a better reputation as being the Old West's "toughest and deadliest gunman of his day". MCH
“I was a fair hand with pistol, rifle, or shotgun, but I learned more about gunfighting from Tom Speer’s cronies during the summer of ’71 than I had dreamed was in the book. Those old-timers took their gunplay seriously, which was natural under the conditions in which they lived. Shooting, to them, was considerably more than aiming at a mark and pulling a trigger. Models of weapons, methods of wearing them, means of getting them into action and operating them, all to the one end of combining high speed with absolute accuracy, contributed to the frontiersman’s shooting skill. The sought-after degree of proficiency was that which could turn to most effective account the split-second between life and death. Hours upon hours of practice, and wide experience in actualities supported their arguments over style.
The most important lesson I learned from those proficient gunfighters was the winner of a gunplay usually was the man who took his time. The second was that, if I hoped to live long on the frontier, I would shun flashy trick-shooting—grandstand play—as I would poison.
When I say that I learned to take my time in a gunfight, I do not wish to be misunderstood, for the time to be taken was only that split fraction of a second that means the difference between deadly accuracy with a sixgun and a miss. It is hard to make this clear to a man who has never been in a gunfight. Perhaps I can best describe such time taking as going into action with the greatest speed of which a man’s muscles are capable, but mentally unflustered by an urge to hurry or the need for complicated nervous and muscular actions which trick-shooting involves. Mentally deliberate, but muscularly faster than thought, is what I mean.
In all my life as a frontier police officer, I did not know a really proficient gunfighter who had anything but contempt for the gun-fanner, or the man who literally shot from the hip. In later years I read a great deal about this type of gunplay, supposedly employed by men noted for skill with a forty-five.
From personal experience and numerous six-gun battles which I witnessed, I can only support the opinion advanced by the men who gave me my most valuable instruction in fast and accurate shooting, which was that the gun-fanner and hip-shooter stood small chance to live against a man who, as old Jack Gallagher always put it, took his time and pulled the trigger once.
Cocking and firing mechanisms on new revolvers were almost invariably altered by their purchasers in the interests of smoother, effortless handling, usually by filing the dog which controlled the hammer, some going so far as to remove triggers entirely or lash them against the guard, in which cases the guns were fired by thumbing the hammer. This is not to be confused with fanning, in which the triggerless gun is held in one hand while the other was brushed rapidly across the hammer to cock the gun, and firing it by the weight of the hammer itself. A skillful gun-fanner could fire five shots from a forty-five so rapidly that the individual reports were indistinguishable, but what could happen to him in a gunfight was pretty close to murder.
I saw Jack Gallagher’s theory borne out so many times in deadly operation that I was never tempted to forsake the principles of gunfighting as I had them from him and his associates.
There was no man in the Kansas City group who was Wild Bill’s equal with a six-gun. Bill’s correct name, by the way, was James B. Hickok. Legend and the imaginations of certain people have exaggerated the number of men he killed in gunfights and have misrepresented the manner in which he did his killing. At that, they could not very well overdo his skill with pistols.
Hickok knew all the fancy tricks and was as good as the best at that sort of gunplay, but when he had serious business at hand, a man to get, the acid test of marksmanship, I doubt if he employed them. At least, he told me that he did not. I have seen him in action and I never saw him fan a gun, shoot from the hip, or try to fire two pistols simultaneously. Neither have I ever heard a reliable old-timer tell of any trick-shooting employed by Hickok when fast straight-shooting meant life or death.
That two-gun business is another matter that can stand some truth before the last of the old-time gunfighters has gone on. They wore two guns, most of six-gun toters did, and when the time came for action went after them with both hands. But they didn’t shoot them that way.
by David L. O’Neal
After a week of soaking and scrubbing, the receiver was completely free of fire scale, but the barrel still had some areas with blackened, baked-on build-up that would not come off. I elected to have the barrel and bolt professionally glass-bead-blasted by a local company that are experts in using dry-media blasting materials.
It is imperative to preserve the cartouches and markings on the artifacts. These markings and Imperial Cyphers are the historical links that tie the artifacts to their specific time period. The receiver was masked off to protect it, and the barrel and bolt received the blasting treatment with outstanding results. The serial number and marks on the barrel were revealed with crisp clear edges.
Upon inspection, someone had cut the sight base so that they could spread open the dove tail to salvage the front sight. Luckily, they did not deface the Imperial Cypher on the front of the sight base. To make this repair, the barreled receiver was routed to a local machine shop and repaired by an expert TIG Welder.
Luck would have it that Hayes Otoupalik in Missoula, Mont., checked with the original owner of the T-Gewehr and managed to find the original bipod that was on the gun at the time the fire occurred. And to no surprise, the condition of the bipod was the same as the rest of the T-rifle ... burned.
The rear sight was heavily damaged and encrusted in scale and ash. The range slider was locked solidly in place, and the button would not depress anymore. The Germans figured out that it was useless to mark the sights beyond 500 meters because that was the limit for armor penetration. However, the first 300 T-Gewehr rifles had fully graduated sights up to 2,000 meters.
This is what I will call the loose parts package. It contains all of the inner parts like the trigger, sear spring, ejector and the stock-mounting hardware. The internal parts were the easiest to restore, because although they were subject to extreme heat, they were not exposed to direct flame. Nonetheless, all the springs were destroyed by the heat and were replaced.
The Front Blade Sight
Although the original front blade sight was salvaged for another T-Rifle, I was able to have one manufactured using an original as a pattern.
The Wood Stock and Pistol Grip
Where do you find a replacement Tankgewehr stock and pistol grip? The answer is ... you don't. And you won't. The correct question is: How do I replicate a Tankgewehr stock and pistol grip? I started working on the wood component issue realizing three factors:
- I needed to find a hardwood blank big enough for the project.
- I needed someone to supply an original stock and pistol grip on loan.
- I needed to find someone who had the talent and ability to replicate the parts.
Once I performed the research, I discovered that the original stocks were made of ash hardwood. The ash wood blank I found for my project measured 58" long x 7" wide x 4" thick. I now had the wood for the new T-Gewehr stock and the pistol grip.
Next, Hayes Otoupalik graciously allowed the use of his personal T-Gewehr wood components to be replicated. I now had access to the original components to replicate.
Lastly, Murray’s Gunstocks in Oregon can duplicate gun stocks, and Mr. Murray is a talented craftsman that covers every detail. However, it was a challenge to make this stock just because of the immense size, but he stepped up to the challenge and made a wonderful re-creation of the T-Gewehr stock. As far as I know, this is the first new-production T-Gewehr stock that has been made since 1918.
Final Finish Barreled Receiver
I looked at lots of original German black-and-white photographs to determine what the in-service finish of the T-Gewehr was back in 1918. It appears to me that the receiver and bolt were very light in color also known as “in the white.” The barrel appears to be blued along with the rest of the components. My intention was to re-create this factory finish, only put some age to it and make it look like it has seen front line service.
Final Stock Finish
I reproduced the stock imperial stamps (cartouches) and performed a special staining technique to age the wood as it should look on a period rifle.
I am humbled to have taken on this project. I feel as though I have done something important by bringing this magnificent rifle back from the brink. It is now once more the amazing legendary “Tank Killer” … the 1918 Tankgewehr.
Overall, the goal of this project was to restore this T-Gewehr back to its 1918 World War I combat condition. Since this remarkable arm was recovered from a fire, it is fair to say that this T-Gewehr is unsafe to shoot and was being restored to be used as a museum display artifact from World War I. The temperatures that engulfed this T-Gewehr are unknown, but there are clues that suggest that the temps were very high. First of all, none of the wood survived and was burned away. The amount of scaling and surface distortion on the metal components is also a clue. Finally, I found several droplets of copper on the barrel. This means that the fire was hot enough to melt copper at 1,085 degrees C or 1,981 degrees F. At these temps, the temper of the gun metal has surely changed and is not as it once was when it left the Mauser factory back in 1918.
by David L. O'Neal
Gerhart tried to flatten his silhouette as he hunched over the giant Mauser rifle. With two solid movements up, then backward, the heavy bolt of the Tankgewehr slid back revealing the cavernous chamber. Once the massive anti-tank round was in position, he closed the bolt and chambered the round … ready for his prey.
A British MK IV Tank slowly rumbled past his position. The muddy earth trembled as the steel tracks from the behemoth carved their way forward through the quagmire. Engine smoke belched from the exhaust as the driver gunned the throttle forcing the tank to climb over obstructions blocking the advance.
As Gerhart looked down the long barrel, he could make out the flaking green paint and rivet patterns on the vehicle’s armor. When he finally sighted the driver’s viewing port, he locked on his target. With a squeeze of the trigger, the Tankgewehr roared with fire and smoke. The force of the recoil dug the bipod legs into the ground and smashed Gerhart’s helmet into the buttstock leaving a gouge in the wood.
The tank shuddered and stopped for several seconds and the machine guns on the behemoth lit up, firing wildly in all directions.
Gerhart frantically re-loaded his 1918 Mauser Tankgewehr and took aim at a specific location on the hull of the tank. The engines suddenly went to full power and smoke poured from the exhaust. The new driver shifted into reverse and began to pivot with one track as he backed.
Gerhart fired again, and the tank guns went silent…then he heard the screaming… Suddenly the hatch flew open revealing flames and choking black smoke. One crewman managed to crawl out, still burning on the ground.
Gerhart had managed to rupture the internal fuel tank as he was trained in gunnery school.
Or that is how it could’ve gone for my hypothetical Gerhart. I’ve used this story to tell how the Tankgewehr was employed, now let’s get into the gun itself.
The Tankgewehr (tank-rifle) is the world’s first anti-tank rifle developed by the Germans in 1918. This arm was specifically designed to combat the onslaught of Allied armor on the Western Front.
In November 1917, the British launched the first full-scale tank offensive at Cambrai. The attack caught the Germans by surprise and the British managed to push approximately 20 kilometers through the German lines. The church bells rang in Britain for the first time in two years. The British were stunned by their own success and failed to properly support the attack. The Germans counterattacked and won back all the lost ground within two weeks. This first organized tank assault by the British made the Germans immediately realize the need for an anti-tank weapon.
Thus, the Germans began development of the TuF (Tank und Flieger-Tank and Aircraft) machine gun—a dual-purpose machine gun that used a huge 13.2 mm TuF round. They realized that they could not design and deploy the TuF machine gun as fast as they needed it, so they created the 1918 Tankgewehr as a stop-gap measure to take on the tanks. Essentially, the Mauser engineers roughly based the T-Gewehr on the Mauser 98 rifle and incorporated some features of older designs. They built this new rifle specifically for the 13.2 mm TuF round.
Two to three T-Gewehrs were issued per regiment. They were operated by two-man gun crews. The primary gunner would carry the rifle and 20 TuF cartridges in a cloth shoulder bag with a tool kit. The secondary gunner carried two cloth shoulder bags, 20 rounds each, and an ammunition box that contained 72 cartridges.
These specially selected soldiers hunted enemy armor and positioned themselves to be within 500 meters of the enemy tanks to be effective. Gunnery school trained these anti-tank teams to target viewing ports and known areas of the tank occupied by drivers and gunners. They had information on fuel and ammunition storage and targeted those areas as well. These soldiers were extremely battle hardened to stare directly down the barrel of enemy tanks, knowing that they were also closely supported by enemy infantry.
Although the rifle proved that it was a beast on the battlefield, it could not keep up with the large number of Allied tanks. The Germans were out-resourced by the Allies and could not stop the waves of tanks approaching Germany at wars end in 1918.
While searching for the next restoration project for the WWI Preservation Collection, I came across T-Gewehr S/N 5043, which was badly burned in a fire. All that was left were the blackened and charred metal components of a monster anti-tank rifle. My task was to restore this beast of a rifle back to museum-quality display status, because saving this historically-significant weapon is important to preserving the combat history of World War I.
I obtained the 1918 Tankgewehr rifle from fellow World War I Collector Hayes Otoupalik, who is a special military historical advisor to the National World War One Centennial Commission. Hayes has been essential in finding the initial parts for this project. The condition of the 1918 Mauser was completely destroyed; the parts were black and covered with soot and scale. The smell of smoke was noticeable when I unboxed the artifacts. I evaluated the T-Gewehr parts and made notes of the extensive damage that required restoration, including a destroyed wood stock and pistol grip and a missing front blade sight and bi-pod.
Where the heck do you get parts that don't exist anymore? If you have a gun as rare as the T-Gewehr, chances are there are no extra parts floating about. The Germans only made about 15,000 of the guns in 1918, and only a handful exist today, 100 years later.
Original drawings? Finding original Mauser drawings from World War I would be hard to get—if they even exist.
The Mauser factories were prime targets during World War II, and the Allies pummeled the factories with high explosives time and time again. Fat chance finding any build drawings from 1918. So the only avenue left for a restorer is to replicate existing parts. This is where it pays off to have access to private collectors and museums that trust you and are willing to help you by loaning parts or getting measurements from the originals in their collections. These resources for the restorer can help other collectors and museums all over the world.
Most gun guys know the history of the .223 #Remington and that it—like so many of our popular cartridges—started life in the military. Because the military switched to metric designations sometime in the 1950s, this little .22-cal. #cartridge was later called the 5.56x45 mm NATO (commonly referred to as “5.56x45 mm”).
The 5.56x45 mm surfaced in 1957 as an experimental cartridge in the AR-15 rifle. The concept was to develop a smaller, lighter military cartridge that would still be traveling faster than the speed of sound at 500 yards, and this was accomplished by using a 55-gr. boattail bullet. The AR-15 evolved into the select-fire M16 rifle that was adopted by the military in 1964.
Even though it would ultimately kill off its own .222 Rem. and .222 Rem. Mag. cartridges, Remington was quick to act, and very shortly after the military adopted the 5.56x 45 mm cartridge the firm brought out the civilian version, called the .223 Remington. Confusion followed.
The common misconception is that the two are the same; that 5.56x45 mm and .223 Rem. are the same dance partner, but with a different dress. This can lead to a dangerous situation. The outside case dimensions are the same, but there are enough other differences that the two are not completely interchangeable.
One big difference is pressure. It becomes a bit confusing, as the pressure for the two is not measured in the same way. The .223 Rem. is measured with either Copper Units of Pressure (c.u.p.) or—more recently—with a mid-case transducer in pounds-per-square-inch (p.s.i.). The military 5.56x45 mm cartridge is measured with a case mouth transducer. The different measuring methods prevent a direct comparison, as a case mouth transducer gives lower numbers on identical ammunition when compared to those from a midcase transducer. That’s because the pressure is measured later in the event, after the pressure has already peaked. According to Jeff Hoffman, the owner of Black Hills Ammunition, military ammunition can be expected to hit 60,000 p.s.i., if measured on a Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute (SAAMI) mid-case system. Black Hills loads both 5.56x45 mm and .223 Rem., and Hoffman was a tremendous help in researching this article. He also provided these pressure specifications for the cartridges. The .223 Rem. mid-case transducer maximum average pressure is 55,000 p.s.i., while a 5.56x45 mm measured with a case mouth transducer has a maximum average pressure of 58,700 p.s.i.
While the 5.56x45 mm chamber is slightly larger than the .223 Rem. chamber in just about every dimension, the primary difference is throat length, which can have a dramatic effect on pressure. The 5.56x45 mm has a longer throat in the chamber than the .223 Rem. The throat is also commonly called the leade, which is defined as a portion of the barrel directly in front of the chamber where the rifling has been conically removed to allow room for the seated bullet. Leade in a .223 Rem. chamber is usually 0.085 inches, while in a 5.56x45 mm chamber the leade is typically 0.162 inches, or almost twice as much as in the .223 Rem. chamber. Also, the throat angle is different between the two chambers, and that can affect pressure rise and peak pressure.
SAAMI regulates cartridge overall length, but not bullet ogive design. The shape of the ogive can significantly affect how far the bullet jumps before contacting the rifling. Some 5.56 mm bullets have an ogive suitable for 5.56 chambers with the longer throat, but if they were chambered in a .223 Rem., it could result in very little, if any, “jump” to the rifling. This can increase pressures. Remember, the 5.56x45 mm already starts out at a higher pressure. If the higher-pressure 5.56x45 mm cartridge is then loaded into a .223 Rem. firearm with a short throat, the combination of the two factors can raise chamber pressures.
If you are a handloader, you must also consider that the 5.56x45 mm cartridge case may have a thicker sidewall and a thicker head, which were designed to withstand the stresses generated by the higher chamber pressures. This reduces the powder capacity of the case. If the 5.56x45 mm case is reloaded with powder charges that have proven safe in .223 Rem. cases, this reduced internal capacity can result in much higher chamber pressures.
Bottom line? It is safe to fire .223 Rem. cartridges in any safe gun chambered for 5.56x45 mm. But, it is not recommended and it is not safe to fire 5.56x45 mm cartridges in a firearm chambered for .223 Rem.
In fact, the 5.56x45 mm military cartridge fired in a .223 Rem. chamber is considered by SAAMI to be an unsafe ammunition combination and is listed in the “Unsafe Arms and Ammunition Combinations” section of the SAAMI Technical Correspondent’s Handbook. It states: “In firearms chambered for .223 Rem.—do not use 5.56x45 mm Military cartridges.”
There is no guarantee, however, that .223 Rem. ammunition will work in 5.56x45 mm rifles. Semi-automatic rifles chambered for 5.56x45 mm may not function with .223 Rem. ammunition because they are designed to cycle reliably with the higher pressure and heavier bullets of the 5.56x45 mm—particularly with short barrels. While problems are rare, they do not indicate that the ammunition or rifle are defective. Like some marriages, they are simply incompatible.
When shooting .223 Rem. cartridges in a firearm chambered for 5.56x45 mm, it’s likely that there will be a degradation in accuracy and muzzle velocity due to the more generous chamber dimensions. That’s not to say that a firearm chambered in 5.56x45 mm won’t be accurate with .223 Rem. loads, only that, on average, the .223 Rem. chambered firearms will be more accurate with .223 Rem. ammunition than rifles chambered for 5.56x45 mm firing .223 Rem.
Another issue is the twist rate of the rifling. The SAAMI specification for .223 Rem. is a 1:12" twist, and most non-AR-15-type rifles will use that rate. But, this is a cartridge that crosses a wide spectrum of uses, and as a result there is often a wide deviation from the 1:12-inch twist rate, particularly in the very popular AR-15-style guns. There are bullets available for the .223 Rem. that range in weight at least from 35 grains to 90 grains. With that wide of a spectrum, one twist rate is not going to be enough.
Firearms chambered for 5.56x45 mm often have a rifling twist rate of 1:7 inches to stabilize the long, sleek, heavy bullets used in long-range shooting. Any rifle with a 1:7" twist rate will work best with bullets heavier than 60 grains.
On the other hand, a 1:12" twist rate (most bolt-action .223 rifles) will stabilize most bullets up to 60 grains, however some longer 60-gr. bullets will not shoot well with that twist rate. Many firearms use a 1:9-inch twist, which is a very good compromise that works well with most bullets up to 70 or 75 grains. The great thing is that if you have a good barrel and quality bullets, the 1:9-inch works well with even the lightest bullets.
What does all this mean? If you have an AR-15 type firearm with a 5.56x45 mm chamber you can shoot either .223 Rem. or 5.56x45 mm safely. If your twist rate is 1:7" you should use bullets weighing 60 grains or heavier. If you have any rifle with a 1:12" twist you should shoot bullets of 60 grains or less for best accuracy. If you have a .223 Rem. rifle of any type, it is not recommended that you use 5.56x45 mm ammunition.
The Sato story of a patriotic American Family in WWII
On 7 December 1941, the surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, brought America into World War II, with some fearing that Japanese military forces would also bomb the West Coast of the United States. In March of 1942, 120,000 law-abiding U.S. citizens of Japanese ancestry and their immigrant parents were forcibly imprisoned in ten different concentration camp secreted inland from the Western Defense Command. In 1983, the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians—established by Congress— issued its findings in Personal Justice Denied, concluding that the incarceration of Japanese Americans had not been justified by military necessity. Rather, the Report determined that the decision to incarcerate was based on "racial prejudice, wartime hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.” The incarceration of Americans of German and Italian ancestry was not done on the East Coast, despite the fact that Germany and Italy were also at war with the US. There is an important lesson to be learned: the color of one’s skin does not indicate the content of one’s heart. We cannot decide who we are at birth, but we can determine what we are and what we become as far as character. The U.S. government tragically failed these US citizens and their immigrant parents.
One such local Oregon family was Yoshinosuke and Asano Sato (pronounced ‘Sah-toh’). Both were born in the town of Tochigi in the Nagasaki prefecture of Japan (Mr. Sato on 26 March 1880 and Mrs. Sato on 14 March 1890). Yoshinosuke immigrated to the U.S. in 1909 where he first worked in a Seattle hotel, then saved up the money to purchase land in Oregon. In 1911, he bought 14.84 acres of timberland in the Bethany area west of Portland, which he cleared for farming. His family in Japan set up an arranged marriage with Asano Suzuki’s family. Asano immigrated to the U.S. and married Yoshinosuke on 23 November 1915. Known to their neighbors affectionately as “Mr. & Mrs. Sato”, they were hard-working farmers, good neighbors, and faithful Church goers. The Satos were blessed with four children: Lois Sato, born: 22 August 1916, Marie Sato: 3 May 1918, Shin Sato: 10 April 1919, and Roy Sato: 7 April 1922. Their children attended Beaverton High School, and the family were respected members of Bethany Presbyterian Church. Shin Sato later added another 15 acres to the Sato farm.
Tragically, the U.S. government’s WWII incarceration of Japanese Americans devastated the Sato’s “American dream.” An executive order promulgated by President Roosevelt allowed the military to forcibly evict and rounded up tens of thousands of Japanese Americans. Their homes and businesses were either seized (many never to be returned), stolen by others, or foreclosed upon. These Americans were first “re-located” to stock yards and horse racing tracks euphemistically called “Relocation Centers,” then incarcerated thousands of miles away in concentration camps. This time was one of the darkest pages of US history when citizens’ rights under the Constitution and Bill of Rights were flagrantly violated.
The Sato’s friends at Bethany Presbyterian Church banded together, and though unable to prevent the incarceration of the Satos, they did manage to safeguard the Sato home and farm through the duration of WWII. But there is another inspiring story here, which must be remembered.
During WWII, many qualified military age U.S. citizens of Japanese American ancestry rallied to prove their patriotism. With the support of the U.S. War Department, first the 100thBattalion and soon after the 442nd Regimental Combat Team (“RCT”) were formed. Thousands of U.S. Japanese Americans volunteered to fight to defend their country and prove their loyalty, patriotism and faithfulness, even while their parents or other family members were incarcerated in U.S. concentration camps. The 100th Battalion later became part of the 442 RCT of the US Army. These soldiers suffered high casualties fighting in North Africa, Italy, France and Germany.
And they were the most highly decorated unit of its size in military history: 9,486 soldiers of the 442nd were awarded the Purple Hart, 18,143 individual awards, and seven Presidential Unit Citations. The number of casualties was proof of their dedication and loyalty to the U.S. They fought for freedom despite the freedom denied to their own families. This was true of the Sato family. Shin Sato was killed in action fighting in France, while his brother Roy was wounded in action at the same time. Their sister Marie served as a volunteer military nurse for the duration of WWII.
The Sato’s returned to their Bethany home, farm and church after WWII. Thanks to the church, their property taxes had been paid so that the land was not foreclosed or auctioned off by the government. The Sato family had paid a horribly high price in their family’s suffering for U.S. freedom.
Their family cemetery plot lies across Kaiser Road in the Bethany Presbyterian Cemetery. To honor them, their story of love, devotion and sacrifice must be remembered and passed on to future generations. The main lesson is that loyalty is NOT based on ethnic background and that the denial of freedom to one is the denial of freedom to all.”
“Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for a friend.” John 15:13
God bless the memory of the Sato Family. Shikataganai (仕方が無い)
God Bless the Children of Sato School for learning History
Special Thanks to
The Sato & Nagae Families
Bethany Presbyterian Church
Annie Pleau & Marlene Staugler - Sato Elementary School
Historian: Col Mike Howard USMC
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles...
Introduction by Col Michael C. Howard US Marines (Ret)
In WWII, a horrible injustice was committed when immediately following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, American citizens of Japanese ancestry (2nd Generation “Nisei”) were interned and forcibly relocated away from their homes and property on the West Coast. Due to the inability to work and pay taxes while isolated in their internment camps, most lost their homes and businesses. One such family was from the Bethany area of west Portland, Oregon. They were the Sato (pronounced “Sah-toh”) family: Yoshinosuki, Asano, and their four children: Lois, Marie, Shin, & Roy. All Christians who attended Bethany Presbyterian Church, their Japanese ancestry originated from the Nagasaki area. They were hard working, dedicated folks who became Oregon farmers. Following Pearl Harbor, while the internment was going on, thousands of these very same Americans volunteered to join the US war effort in a unique all Japanese-American (Nisei) US Army fighting unit known at the 442 Regimental Combat Team. They would become one of the most highly decorated WWII fighting units. And one with among the highest casualties. Shin Sato was killed in action in France, and his brother Roy wounded, in late 1944 as US fighting forces battled their way into Germany. Their sacrifices were not in vain and their Oregon church neighbors remembered what they were enduring. Bethany Presbyterian Church made sure the state and federal taxes on the Sato home and farm were covered so that the family had a home to return to.
This is an amazing story. One which every American should know and remember. MCH
New School Named for Japanese Family Who was Interned, List a son to War
By Samantha Swindler
The students of Beaverton School District's new K-5 school in North Bethany got to choose their own school colors (red, lime green, orange and silver) and school mascot (the raccoon.)
But the community helped choose the name: Sato Elementary School.
The Sato family came to Bethany as farmers before the Great Depression. They sent two sons to fight during World War II while being forced into a Japanese internment camp.
Only one son returned.
Karen Sato lives in her late parents' home Southeast Portland, where boxes of news clippings, personal documents and family photos have been stored.
"By default, I happen to be kind of the historian," she said.
In 1943, her father Roy and uncle Shin both enlisted in the Army.
"Because they were Americans," she said. "They wanted to prove they were loyal. They were proud of their country, except for that part."
That part about the internment, she means.
Karen's grandfather, Yoshinosuke Sato, was born in 1880 in Tochigi, Japan and came to the United States in 1906. He operated a hotel in Seattle, according to his obituary, before purchasing land along Brugger Road in Bethany in 1911.
Yoshinosuke and his wife Asano had two girls and two boys. The Sato family doesn't appear to have moved to Oregon until the 1920s, when they began growing berries and vegetables. Bethany was a small farming community at the time, settled by Swiss and German immigrants.
Under the influence of their neighbors, Karen said, her grandmother could speak more German than English.
"It was a very close knit community," Karen said. "It was passed down through the generations that friends are really important and you look after one another."
The Sato children attended Beaverton High School. Shin graduated in 1937 and spent a year at Pacific University where he played football, boxed and joined the Gamma Sigma fraternity. But he returned home to work on the farm in the lean years leading up to war.
Life changed drastically for the Satos after the Dec. 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. Laws went into effect with curfews, financial restrictions and registry requirements for Japanese Americans. Political rhetoric of the day made no distinction between the country we faced in war and the residents and citizens here at home.
"The Japanese race is an enemy race and while many second and third generation Japanese born on United States soil, possess United States citizenship, have become 'Americanized,' the racial strains are undiluted," General John L. DeWitt, head of the Western Defense Command, wrote in 1942. "Along the vital Pacific Coast over 112,000 potential enemies, of Japanese extraction, are at large today."
On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which created military areas along the West Coast from which "any or all persons may be excluded."
The order did not specifically target Japanese Americans, but among their German-speaking neighbors, the Satos were singled out as dangerous.
When the "evacuation order" began in Oregon, the Satos were ordered to report to temporary barracks constructed at the former Pacific Livestock Exposition Center in North Portland.
While many Japanese were shunned by their communities and lost their land during the war years, Bethany rallied around the Satos. Rev. Andy Lindahl, current pastor of Bethany Presbyterian, said church members visited the Satos in the barracks and promised to watch after their farm.
In the spring of 1942, the Satos were sent to the Minidoka War Relocation Center in Hunt, Idaho. Karen has a photo album from those camp years, but little other context about her family's time there.
"They didn't like to talk about it," she said.
Historic accounts describe a harsh, dusty community walled in by barbed wire and armed guards. But Sato family photos show mostly smiling faces in front of tarpaper-covered barracks.
In 1943, both sons joined the 442nd infantry regiment, comprised of soldiers of Japanese descent. They became a highly decorated unit, record-breaking in their number of honors for their size and length of service.
Yoshinosuke wrote a letter to Shin dated Oct. 21, 1944, in which he guessed his son was in France.
"I read in the paper that Allies are fighting very hard along the west German defend line," Yoshinosuke wrote in imperfect English. "Now no one is foolish talk that the war can be done at September than October ... but it must be closing to the end day by day. Now our hope are to realize that peace seem possible."
Shin likely never received the letter. He was killed in action on Nov. 1, 1944 in Belmont, France. Roy was wounded in battle two days earlier.
After the war, the Satos returned to the farm but had a difficult time. Despite the efforts of their neighbors, who had worked the land and saved the income for the family, the farm had fallen into disrepair.
Yoshinosuke died in 1951; Asano in 1969. Their daughter Lois, a long-time school teacher, the last to live on the family land. She sold part of the property to the Presbyterian Church that had treated her family so well.
Years later, the church sold the plot to a developer and used the proceeds to establish the Lois Sato Memorial Mission Fund, used for projects in Bethany and around the world.
Roy returned from war, married, and had three children. Both sons, Kenneth and Gary, went on to have careers in the military. Today, Karen is a unit specialist at Kaiser Permanente.
She learned only after the school board vote that the Bethany community had chosen to honor her family with the new school.
"I thought it was kind of neat to get honored, and to have a Japanese representative," she said.
The Sato family had received 15 community nominations - more than any other name. Rev. Lindahl was among those who suggested honoring the Sato family with the school, which will be located across the street from where several Satos are buried.
"In a lot of different ways, it's a great story to remember," Lindahl said. "Sometimes it takes a sacrifice to reach across the lines that we draw between ourselves and other people."
For the students of Sato Elementary, district officials plan to set aside space in the school to tell the history of the Sato family. Their story is part of the history of Bethany and of Oregon. But it's also a warning against the dangers of racial prejudice, of deciding who is and is not American enough.
And that's not history. That's a lesson just as applicable today.
- Samantha Swindler
Stay tuned for more articles by Salute Targets...
OUTSTANDING BOOK & REVIEW RECOMMENDATION BY COL MIKE HOWARD US MARINES (RET)
NOTE: MY GRANDFATHER, BOATSWAIN’S MATE CHIEF ALBERT JAMES MCLEAN, WAS A PROUD US NAVY VET WHO JOINED IN 1927 AND RETIRED IN 1962. HIS SHIPS WERE THE USS WEST VIRGINIA AND USS BALTIMORE (EXTENSIVE WWII SERVICE).
THIS IS A STORY AND TRIBUTE TO HIS FELLOW SHIPMATES THAT HE SHARED WITH ME WHEN I WAS A KID, AND HE WOULD WANT SHARED WITH OTHERS. THIS BOOK IS TRULY OUTSTANDING.
The American public was largely unaware of the cruiser USS Indianapolis and its fate until the 1975 blockbuster movie “Jaws,” when the shark hunter Quint, played by Robert Shaw, spun one of the most brilliant and gripping ad-libed monologues in cinema history. For viewers, Quint’s survivor story raised the question: Was the tale essentially true? The answer is, all too much so. And this book and powerful review tell us why.
‘Indianapolis’ Review: Supreme Sacriﬁce
The sinking of the American heavy cruiser in July 1945 was an unspeakable horror. “Even among the survivors, no man who went into the water was the same man who came out.”
Some stories resonate more deeply with each telling. They make pulses quicken and blood pound. Such is the case with the sinking of USS Indianapolis in the western Pacific during World War II. It is an event tinged with mystery, ineptitude and supreme sacrifice, all centered on the almost unspeakable horrors faced by hundreds of sailors who were violently cast into the sea and left for days in shark-infested waters.
It was hardly the Navy’s finest hour. The public was largely unaware of the ship and its fate until the 1975 movie “Jaws,” when the shark hunter Quint, played by Robert Shaw, spun one of the most gripping monologues in cinema history. For viewers, Quint’s survivor story raised the question: Was the tale essentially true? The answer is, all too much so.
Although fast and heavily armed, the cruiser Indianapolis was an aging queen by the evolving technology standards of World War II. But it had a storied past. Commissioned in 1932, it was outfitted with quarters for an embarked admiral or dignitary. Franklin Roosevelt sailed aboard the ship during the 1930s, and Adm. Raymond Spruance made the Indianapolis his flagship when he became commander of the Fifth Fleet, in 1943. As such, the “Indy” carried him through the landings at Tarawa, the Marshall Islands and Saipan and into the epic battle of the Philippine Sea.
In the spring of 1945, off Okinawa, Spruance was on the flag bridge when a Kamikaze attacker slammed into the main deck. He transferred his flag, and the Indianapolis limped to the West Coast. By mid-July, Capt. Charles B. McVay III and his crew were completing repairs and anticipating weeks of training.
The Navy, however, needed a sleek greyhound to deliver components of the first atomic bomb to the island of Tinian in the Marianas. Sailing alone, the Indianapolis set a speed record across the Pacific, delivered its top-secret cargo and then steamed for Leyte in the Philippines—still alone and unescorted—only to be struck by enemy torpedoes.
For almost 20 years the tragedy that unfolded next was best told by Doug Stanton in “In Harm’s Way” (2001). A gripping writer and dedicated researcher, Mr. Stanton is a tough act to follow, but in “Indianapolis” Lynn Vincent and Sara Vladic have done so admirably. Ms. Vincent is a Navy veteran and author; Ms. Vladic is a documentary filmmaker who interviewed more than 100 Indianapolis survivors and rescue-crew members over a period of two decades. Together they make a seamless team.
The survivors’ stories entrusted to Ms. Vladic form the backbone of the book. These men, in their late 70s and 80s at the time of the interviews, told Ms. Vladic the grimmer side of stories recounted earlier, including outright viciousness among survivors rendered nearly senseless by thirst, the elements and the fear of being dismembered by sharks.
Those still sane made pacts that they would kill the next among them to go mad. Others simply gave up, lifted a hand in farewell and drifted off into the void. One sailor shook a comrade he had been checking on only to find him dead with most of one leg missing. Sharks had consumed it during the night. “Even among the survivors,” the authors write, “no man who went into the water was the same man who came out.”
Along the way, the authors delve into controversies. Navy intelligence knew of Japanese submarines prowling the ship’s route, one or two of which had recently sunk the destroyer Underhill, but Capt. McVay wasn’t told of them. When he had asked to be caught up on the operational situation, Commodore James Carter had said: “Things are very quiet. . . . The Japs are on their last legs and there’s nothing to worry about.”
When it was hit, the Indianapolis wasn’t zigzagging, a decision that was later subjected to fervent debate. The ship had in fact been zigzagging during daylight, but after darkness fell the captain deemed such maneuvering unnecessary. The controversy came over whether the sky had lightened sufficiently, about midnight, to expose the ship’s silhouette. Mochitsura Hashimoto, the commander of the submarine that sent its torpedoes into the Indianapolis, later said that it didn’t make much difference, since the ship happened to be heading straight for the sub. In the event, McVay became the only World War II captain court-martialed for the loss of his ship. His long-in-coming redemption is part of Ms. Vincent and Ms. Vladic’s story.
The authors also write of the inexplicable circumstances in which a major warship could sink and go missing for almost a week without someone raising the alarm—despite the distress messages that had escaped the stricken ship. When a patrol plane spotted the dwindling numbers of survivors, it was mere serendipity. As 316 survivors recovered in hospitals on Guam, atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and ended the war, but the timing only intensified the tragedy of their shipmates’ loss—879 dead out of a crew of 1,195—in the closing days of the war.
In a fitting epilogue, maritime archaeologists in 2017 located the final resting place of the Indianapolis, though the exact location beneath the Philippine Sea remains a secret. Somewhere down there lays a 6-foot model of the Indianapolis. Lt. Cmdr. Earl Henry, the ship’s dentist, worked for months to build it as a present for his newborn son. He planned to deliver it in person but never got the chance.
—Mr. Borneman’s books include “The Admirals: Nimitz, Halsey, Leahy, and King.”
- Name: Indianapolis
- Namsake: City of Indianapolis, Indiana
- Builder: New York Shipbuilding Corporation, Camden, New Jersey
- Cost: $10,903,200 (contract price)
- Laid Down: 31st March 1930
- Launched: 7th November 1931
- Commissioned: 15th November 1932
- Identification: Hull Symbol: CL-35 and CA-35
- Nickname: Indy
- Honors and Awards: 10 x battle stars
- Fate: Torpedoed and sunk, 30th July 1945, by Japanese submarine I-58
- Class and Type: Portland-class cruiser
- Displacement: 9,950 long tons (10, 110 t) (standard)
- Length: 610 ft 3 in (186.00 m) loa 584 ft (178 m) lwl
- Beam: 66 ft 1 in (20.14 m)
- Draft: 17 ft 4 in (5.28 m) (mean) 24 ft (7.3 m) (max)
- Installed Power: 8 × White-Forster boilers and 107,000 shp (80,000 kW)
- Propulsion: 4 x Parsons reduction steamed turbines
- Speed: 32.7 kn (60.6 km.h; 37.6 mph)
- Complement: 95 officers 857 enlisted (as designed), 1,269 officers and men (wartime)
- Armament: 9 x 8 in (203 mm)/55 caliber guns (3x3), 8 x 5 in (127 mm)/25 caliber anti-aircraft guns
- Armor: Belt: 3 1/4 - 5 in (83-127 mm), Deck: 2 1/2 in (64 mm), Barbettes: 1 1/2 in (38 mm), Turrets: 1 1/ 2 - 2 1/4 in, Conning Tower: 1 1/4 in (32 mm).
- Aircraft Carrier: 4 x float-planes
- Aviation: 2 x Amidship Catapults
Stay tuned for more articles by Salute Targets...
A message from #ClintEastwood
My Twilight Years at 84.
If you realize each day is a gift, you may be near my age. As I enjoy my twilight years, I am often struck by the inevitability that the party must end.
There will come a clear, cold morning when there isn't any "more."
No more hugs, no more special moments to celebrate together, no more phone calls just to chat.
It seems to me that one of the important things to do before that morning comes, is to let everyone of your family and friends know that you care for them by finding simple ways to let them know your heartfelt beliefs and the guiding principles of your life so they can always say, "He was my friend, and I know where he stood."
So, just in case I'm gone tomorrow, please know this: I voted against that incompetent, lying, flip-flopping, insincere, double-talking, radical socialist, terrorist excusing, bleeding heart, narcissistic, scientific and economic moron that spent eight years-in the White House trying to destroy our wonderful country and turn it into Muslim loving, socialist s__t hole like he came from and I don’t mean Hawaii!
Participating in a gun buy-back program because you think criminals have too many guns is like having yourself castrated because you think your neighbors have too many kids.
BY COL MIKE HOWARD US MARINES (RET)
As a US Marine, I love the study of military hardware. Whether Spartan or Roman swords, British Brown Bess or American Revolutionary War Long-rifles, the Russian T-34, German Tiger I, or Sherman (British Firefly with 17 pounder), German 9 mm P-38 or Colt 1911 in .45 pistols, the German Bf-109 and the P-51D Mustang, the German VIIC U-Boat and the US Gato class submarine, and the IDF Merkava and M-1 Abrams tanks, it is always fascinating to compare. Design, history, capability, mission? The same goes for the ultimate jet fighters which give us ‘good guys’ air superiority over the bad guys. And as a Marine on the ground during the “March Up” from Kuwait to Baghdad in 2003, I reminded our Marines and Allies that we should never take air superiority for granted. This was a rude awakening for my Israeli friends during the early Yom Kippur War of 1973.
The F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightening offer many interesting comparisons.
The F-35 is primarily a strike aircraft. Now “strike” can mean a lot of things to different folks. Politicians, salespersons, taxpayers, laypeople, pilots. But as a Marine, I boil it down to ground support. And this is why Marines and Soldiers love the A-10. Yes, we love it more than most of the USAF. We want something above us that is always there and capable of helping us win. The Warthog is one of the most affectionate weapons NOT the US Army or Marines inventory. But I digress.
My focus is air-superiority. Some of our best friends like Japan and Israel have unique stealth fighter concerns and needs based on factors such as geography. The ‘bad guys’ … Russian and Chinese aircraft, routinely pass through and violate Japanese airspace. And Israel’s airspace is so limited that unique factors are always being considered by her IAF.
Despite all the hype about the majority of the USAF, the US Navy, the US Marines, our NATO Allies, and many of our other special friends acquiring the F-35 Lightening (so sorry the Brits did not get their requested, and far better heritage name: “Spitfire”) we do need to face reality. Quite simply, the F-22 can do things that the F-35 cannot.
The F-22 Raptor is overall, a more air-dominant focused fighter aircraft. The F-22 can amazingly cruise at 60,000 feet at 1.5 times the speed of sound without lighting its after-burners. Thus it can maintain its stealth capability while covering incredible distances in short times. Range and speed options are impressive, as are safety and combat durability with two engines. This would certainly help Japan in dealing with Chinese and Russian airspace incursions just as it would greatly assist Israel in range issues with Iran or other Middle East threats. An extra engine means more pilots make it home. The F-35 Lightening is a great aircraft, more economical with one engine, but it simply cannot touch these above numbers. Away from a camera or microphone, just ask a F-35 Lightening pilot if he or she would rather have an F-22 Raptor? I rest my case.
Bottom line, the F-22 is better at air-superiority and combat survival.
So why then doesn’t (or didn’t) our government allow the sale and export of the F-22 Raptor?
Being a History buff, I tend to focus on the facts. And yes, there are political aspects to this question I ask that we may never know. But as an American Warrior who after 32 years in the US Marines and two combat tours in Iraq, I do understand the Number 1 Rule of War: Don’t Lose!
So back to why the US doesn’t export the F-22 Raptor?
Politics. Narrow vision. Poor economics. Our Congress was convinced by the USAF that the F-22 was the ultimate embodiment of all technologies that would ensure US air dominance through the next century. That was what the USAF was convinced it had to do to secure the large piles of R&D and procurement dollars. Unfortunately, the USAF did their job so well that Congress forbade the sale of the F-22 and it’s “embodied Crown Jewels” (to quote one aviation specialist), to even our closest and most stable allies. This resulted in flyaway costs climbing, the procurement to be trimmed, and ultimately the supply chain and assembly line to be shut down. Again, narrow vision and the failure to study history and trust in true capitalism and American inattentiveness.
Add to this the following speculation. In April 2018, Lockheed Martin, the leading manufacturer of stealth aircraft in the world, proposed a new hybrid between the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning. This was specifically for Japan to purchase (and certainly an important option for Israel), based on their specific defense needs. It is thus easy to imagine that this aircraft (I would love to name this the “Spitfire II”) would easily outclass anything in the current USAF.
Again, most aviation industry experts agree that Japan has, for decades, wanted in on the USAF F-22. Its long-range, high-altitude, multi-engine, cruising, high-capacity stealth fighter capabilities perfectly suit its defense needs, except for one problem — the US would not sell it. And the Japanese character is not to be loud and rock the boat in alliance differences. I just wish the Israelis had compared notes with the Japanese and assisted them in better understanding American politics and the “belt-way bandit” mentality.
More to be considered. That while completing the F-22, the US ruled out its sale to allies as the technology involved in the plane was too advanced for export. But this decision took place some 11 years ago in 2007. As any of us with a new iPhone can tell you, much has changed in the development, capability, cost, and size of software.
So today, the US is in the process of selling Japan and Israel the F-35 Lightening multi-role strike aircraft. Israel has a unique payment process with the US, plus its already combat proven F-35I “Adirs” (Awesome) are already unique. Israel will do what it has to do. But as for Japan, the same old issues arise. Justin Bronk, an air combat and industry expert at the Royal United Services Institute, speculates, the F-35’s design makes it less than ideal for Tokyo.
Related to this very situation is the past publication:
“Israel and Japan may be clamoring to buy the F-22 Raptor, but that doesn't mean the Pentagon is ready to sell the stealthy fighter. The head of the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency, which is in charge of military exports, told Reuters there's pretty much no way the Defense Department will allow foreign sales:
Designing an export version of Lockheed Martin Corp.'s (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research radar-evading F-22 Raptor could cost more than $1 billion and be "prohibitively expensive" for any would-be foreign buyer, said Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kohler, head of the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
"If (export) were to be considered, which it's not, it essentially would have to be redesigned, rebuilt, retested and then go into production," Kohler, who oversees government-to-government arms sales, told Reuters in a brief interview.
Any redesign, Kohler said, would require degrading the aircraft's capabilities and making them tamper-proof to keep the technology exclusive – a process he said would take years.
"This airplane was built to give us an edge way into the future, and that's why it's not exportable."
The issue matters to Lockheed and its F-22 partners – Boeing Co. (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research and United Technologies Corp.'s (UTX.N: Quote, Profile, Research Pratt & Whitney unit – because overseas sales could extend the production line beyond 2011, when the last of the 183 Raptors currently planned is due to be sent to the U.S. Air Force.
There's clearly some disagreement on the issue. Former Defense Secretary William Cohen, on a trip to Israel, told the Jerusalem Post that the U.S. would consider selling the F-22: "There is no stronger relationship than with Israel," Cohen told the Jerusalem Post. "There could be circumstances that that level of technology would be released to Israelis." And Japan, in the meantime, also seems to think the administration is sending them positive signals about the F-22”.
And so we have it. The untapped mysteries of the F-22 and F-35 programs. And how who got what.
I am reminded of something I once read about the “Iron Chancellor” of Prussia: Otto von Bismarck, first Chancellor of the German Empire, and the real unifier of modern Germany. He correctly stated that “One should never inquire too much into the process of making laws or the making of sausage.”
But as Americans, we must. World freedom and Western Civilization depend on us … and air superiority!
Of further interest along these lines, please check out these links:
Salute to Major General Mark William Yenter, United States Army
What a Warrior who did the Lord’s work.
It was an honor serving with him.
What a leader: dedicated, resolute, intellectual, down to earth, fun, challenging and loyal. The best America has. The finest General I ever followed into combat. A trusting friend who knew all about us but loved us anyway!
He always made us Marines feel like part of the larger Army family. And he sure became an advocate for our wonderful Israeli D-9R Combat Dozers!
Semper Fi … a “Huaah” from an “Urrah” !
Col. Mike Howard, US Marines (Ret)
Major General (Ret) Mark William Yenter
Carson City - Major General (Ret) Mark William Yenter, 60, died suddenly of natural causes at his home in Carson City on May 25th. Mark was born into military service to Dorothy (Berger) of Carson City and Captain Kenneth Yenter of Fernley at the 98th General Hospital in Birkenfeld, Germany.
Raised under the Flag, Mark lived the life of a military family member in Kentucky, Oklahoma, Hawaii, Virginia and Carson City during the period his father was in Korea. He attended the University of Nevada in Reno and was President of Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity. Through Alpha Chi Omega sorority, Mark found the love of his life, Lisa Talamo. He was a Distinguished Military Graduate of the ROTC program and in 1981 was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant of Engineers in the Regular Army. Following graduation from the Officer Basic Course and US Army Ranger School, Mark and Lisa were married and began their distinguished career of service to the Nation.
Assignments included parachute duty with 1-509 ABCT in Vicenza, Italy; multiple assignments in increasing levels of command and staff positions at Ft Bragg, NC with the 307th Engineers, 82nd Airborne Division, 27th Engineer Battalion, Delta Force and the 20th Engineer Brigade and the XVIII Airborne Corps. He was promoted to Brigadier General in the Capital Building in Carson City and went on to command the Pacific Ocean Division of Engineers and later commanded the Maneuver Support Center of Excellence and Ft Leonard Wood, Missouri. He served as the Assistant Chief of Staff, J3 for US Forces Korea and later retired from an assignment as the Deputy Chief of Engineers for the United States Army in June, 2017. Mark served multiple tours of combat duty in Bosnia-Herzogovina, Iraq, and Afghanistan and was highly decorated for his service in peace and war. He was a master parachutist and earned the Sapper and Ranger tabs, and was a Registered Professional Engineer from the State of Virginia with a Masters Degree in Water Management from the University of Colorado in Boulder.
Throughout his life, Mark remained at heart a Son of Nevada. Battle Born, he retired with Lisa to their home in Carson City, where the views of Jack's Valley and the Sierras refreshed and restored him daily. He will join generations of his ancestors dating back to the Nevada Territory when he is buried with full military honors at Lone Mountain Cemetery in Carson City. He was preceded in death by his grandparents, parents, and brother Paul. He is survived by his wife Lisa; their daughter Lindsay (Karl) Swanson of Carlsbad, CA and their two sons Kaden William and Liam Mark Robert; their son Marcus of Carson City; brother Brad (Karey) Yenter of Carson City and their daughters Jamie and Cynthia; Paul's children Brandon and Rachel; sister Jane (Dan) Fitzgerald of Plano, TX and their children Laura, Jessica and John; as well as a great number of close relatives in Northern Nevada, California and across the United States.
A funeral service will be held for MG Yenter at the First Presbyterian Church in Carson City, Nevada on Saturday, 2 June at 1100, with interment to follow. In lieu of flowers, please consider a donation to benefit any Wounded Warrior or Veterans support group in honor of Marks service to the Nation.
Published in Reno Gazette-Journal on May 31, 2018
PS: From your brothers at arms … US Marines & fellow C-7 Engineers, Iraq War
Our Time In Hell
by Lawrence Mascott
Wherever we went, we went together.
Whatever we did we did together.
Whenever we suffered, suffered as one.
Joined together, trained together, sang together.
Of Montezuma, and Tripoli, and all the rest.
Same squad, same ship, same hell, together.
And if one of us needed help, we rose together.
And if one of us were hurt, brought him back together.
And if he died, cried together.
We lived and fought and died together, and for each other.
What is esprit de corps?
Well, now hear this and pass the word:
The word is brotherhood.
Biblical wisdom is a precious gift that we have inherited from our earliest days of Western Civilization. It is powerfully reflected through our proven Judeo-Christian teachings. It is why we are who we are. The very freedom we inherit and cherish can become a moral relativism rooted in secular downfall if not kept closely with the faith of moral authority. Please take time to reflect on these passages and how they form the foundation of this article on Warriors. We must all take this to heart as our future culture depends on it. It is the basis of the very Western Civilization that is now being testing.
- Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
The necessity of military masculine ideals.
Posted Mar 28, 2018 | By Meaghan Mobbs, The Debrief
Humanity has been at peace for just 8% of recorded history. While the origins, causes, and meaning are debatable within their own fields of study, war appears to be an indelible human endeavor.
While the hope and purpose of a democratic society is to only send its military to battle when all other non-violent options have been exhausted, our nation has been at war 222 out of 239 years (this statistic includes U.S. participation in the Banana Wars for nearly 37 years, so interpret with some caution). Regardless of political affiliation, when our elected government chooses to send our military to war, our military goes with the intent of tactical, operational, and strategic victory.
In the first part of this series, it was put forth that the development of multiple masculinities within Western society is potentially problematic for service members transitioning from active duty to the civilian sector. From the condemnation of masculine ideals as toxic to the civilian-military gap, masculinity has not necessarily been afforded the opportunity to argue or establish its relevance in a post-modern society.
It is important to note that masculine traits do not always confer sex, meaning females can possess high levels of masculine traits. This is an important consideration, as 15% of active-duty military personnel are women. Many of the experiences of female veterans from the post-9/11 era differ from those of men: They are less likely to have served in combat (30% versus 57% of men), more likely to have never been deployed away from their permanent duty station (30% versus 12% of men), and less likely to have served with someone who was killed while performing their duties in the military (35% versus 50% of men)). However, they are EQUALLY as likely to say that their adjustment to civilian life after military service was very or somewhat difficult (43% of women, 45% of men).
While masculinity is not a universal construct, the dominant Western view includes characteristics such as stoicism, strength, self-reliance, independence, power, and invulnerability. As with anything, taken to the extreme, none of these qualities mete themselves out productively or effectively (stay tuned for Part 3). However, such traits are beneficial, arguably essential, to the waging and winning of war. To negate them in a society that has spent much of its existence engaged in some type of armed conflict is both narrow-minded and foolhardy.
War, the actual engagement of armed participants, is chaos personified. The fog of war, confusion caused by the mayhem of battle, is a very real thing. In such conditions, achieving a sense of internal stability or security in the face of threatening situations can help mitigate against distress. The ability to do so or belief that you are tough, capable, and resilient in the face of challenges and difficulties is the hallmark of self-reliance, an established masculine norm. From the disruptive actions of squad and team-sized elements of paratroopers during WWII to the empowerment of small units during recent military engagements, self-reliance is a seemingly indispensable component of the military person. While war is arguably a team sport, the functionality of the whole is reliant upon the composition of the individual.
To the point, a study with Air Force basic trainees found that self-reliant trainees fared better in training than did their less self-reliant counterparts. In general, they were healthier, possessed higher levels of self-esteem, and exhibited higher completion rates and lower burnout. Whether through self-selection into our all-volunteer force or the weeding out of those not in possession, it stands to reason that the military is largely comprised of men and women who view themselves as self-reliant and engage in associated behaviors.
Stoicism is another factor of the stereotypical masculine gender role, and the modern-day “warrior mindset” neatly aligns with many of its tenets. In both definition and meaning, stoicism has remained nearly unchanged for thousands of years. The classic Greek Stoic philosophy advocates calm in the face of hardship and the ability to modulate the evaluation of events as good or bad. Suppression and emotion control are fundamental components of the modern construct. Expressive suppression, an emotion regulation strategy, is the attempt to hide, inhibit, or reduce ongoing emotionally expressive behavior. This translates positively to the warfighter, as fear is ubiquitous in combat. However, the expression of fear is massively problematic. With evidence to suggest that fear can be spontaneously transmitted, fear contagion in a unit has the potential to consequently impact decision-making and inhibit necessary action.
Moreover, a values-based study of soldiers post-deployment found that hedonism and power, both commonly associated with masculinity, were negatively correlated with the probability and severity of PTSD. Meaning, those who valued one's ability to alter another person's condition or state of mind (power) and possessed the belief that all voluntary human action is rooted in the desire to experience pleasure and avoid pain were less likely to develop PTSD. While the examination of values, gender norms, and psychopathology, especially PTSD, is in its infancy, another quantitative study found that low conformity to masculine norms was associated with suicides in a military population.
With a rising trend in searches for (see below) and articles/pieces related to "toxic masculinity" (there have been 8 within the past week), we are collectively choosing to ignore the importance of masculinity and its necessary role in the function of society. The choice to downplay or denigrate traditional masculine norms is a choice to field a less lethal, less effective fighting force with a higher likelihood of failing. Unless we bring back the draft and distribute the burden of military or national service onto every American as an obligation of citizenship, warfare remains the obligation of very few with the implicit agreement that their well-being and successful reintegration into civil society is the responsibility of all.
About the Author
Meaghan Mobbs is a West Point graduate, OEF Veteran, and former Army Captain who is currently an advanced Clinical Psychology doctoral student at Columbia University, Teachers College.
This is an outstanding article because it covers a topic which every free society must face. How do we instill the very values in future generations that are needed to preserve, protect, and defend who and what we are. The very values that are needed to continue a free society based on liberty are always but one generation away from extinction. All Americans and freedom loving people must understand that Islamic Sharia #Law is COMPLETELY INCOMPATIBLE with our Judeo-Christian Biblical values, Declaration of Independence, and US Constitution. The very word “Islam” (and as a US #military officer, I had to read the Koran each time we deployed to the Middle East) means submission. It is NOT about inclusiveness! It is an evil ideology bent on breaking us and remolding America into some caliphate resembling that back in the 7th century. It is totalitarian, authoritarian, subtle and pervasive in the way it strangles the very freedom we claim to embrace. We must know, understand and be on guard against its dark side. Remember, it is all about SUBMISSION.
- Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
The relevance and impact of military masculine ideals.
Posted Mar 21, 2018 | By Meaghan Mobbs, The Debrief
Recently, The Hollywood Reporter featured a cover and article entitled “The Triumph of the Beta Male,” at the same time Men’s Health featured a cover of a man in battle dress uniform with the caption “Soldier Strong!” The juxtaposition of the two is a neat summary of the current civilian-military divide and an unanticipated commentary on the significance of masculinity in both worlds.
While alpha and beta males are not necessarily empirically derived monikers, the construct of masculinity is well-established. Traditional masculine/male traits include competitiveness, protectiveness, aggressiveness, assertiveness, sexual appetite, appreciating truth over feeling, confidence, self-reliance, and independence (to name a few) which appear to fall neatly in line with the socially recognized alpha male designation. There are few professions, if any, that ascribe more value to these qualities than the military.
In a past address to the graduating class of the United States Naval Academy, the current Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, remarked to future Naval and Marine Corps officers that “we need cocky, macho… young men and women” leading our Nation’s Armed Forces.
Our military system explicitly and implicitly places a premium on the masculinity of our warfighters. Outside of our fair share of “man up” jargon, we persistently use effeminate, pejorative adjectives as a form of irony to build camaraderie, diminish feminine traits, and highlight the inherent masculine nature of military tasks. Moreover, the use of “brotherhood” and its various diminutions is commonplace. The names of most military units are masculine in nature and all military equipment is designed with the average man in mind.
Bottom line: modern day and historical warfare and masculinity are undeniably intertwined and nearly inseparable. The ancient Greek word for courage, andreia, literally meant manliness. Virgil opens his epic poem, the Aeneid, with “I sing of arms and a man.” And the Latin word for man, vir, strongly related to courage on the battlefield, is the origin of the English word virtue.
Yet, our culture is shifting away from the embrace of such qualities and calling into question their relevance—with some labeling them as toxic. With the rise of feminism, we seem to demand a declination in masculinity. In the progressive empowerment of women, we’ve disempowered masculinity.
From a martial perspective, this became apparent when the Pentagon released a report that approximately 71% of the 34 million 17- to 24-year-olds would not qualify for military service.
In 1997, over two decades ago, The Atlantic published an article regarding this divide.
"At various times each of these new Marines seemed to experience a moment of private loathing for public America. They were repulsed by the physical unfitness of civilians, by the uncouth behavior they witnessed, and by what they saw as pervasive selfishness and consumerism. Many found themselves avoiding old friends, and some experienced difficulty even in communicating with their families."
With the Global War on Terror occurring during those intervening 20 years and approximately 1% of Americans serving, it stands to reason that the gap is now a chasm.
While there is no concrete data to indicate disparity rates between the civilian and veteran experience, a cursory internet search returns articles like: The Civilian-Veteran Survival Field Manual (VAntage Point, 2011); Veterans Employment Toolkit: Common Challenges During Re-adjustment to Civilian Life (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs); The Case For Sticking Close To Your Veteran Community (Task & Purpose, 2015) suggesting that the veteran community feels at increasing odds with the civilian community at large and vice versa.
The transition from active military duty to civilian life may be further compounded by the profound differences in how these two spheres of existence are understood—the masculinity disparity being a potentially large portion of this. For transitioning service members, the shift from a military environment that universally promotes stoicism and expects such behavior from its members into an environment that does not value such attitudes may be a considerable source of dissonance.
Until recently, there has been a failure to appreciate the collective complexity of the transition into and out of the military. Soldiers and veterans are undeniably resilient, both by selection and by training. But they are not superhuman. The process of transitioning and reintegrating back to civilian life is often stressful and can generate lasting psychological difficulties.
With half of Americans reporting the wars have made little difference in their lives, 40% of Veterans report ‘getting socialized to civilian culture’ as a key transitional challenge. How do we reconcile the two? Is it possible that it’s society that is ‘broken,’ and not our warriors?
This is not to discount the immense difficulties that veterans with PTSD might face. However, work with traumatized veterans is impeded when the distinction between PTSD-related symptoms and other broader transition difficulties and stressors is blurred. Even more importantly, although the serious and often debilitating nature of PTSD is beyond question, the available empirical evidence shows that PTSD typically occurs in only a relatively small population of returning veterans.
In other words, PTSD explains only a small fraction of veteran mental health issues. We as providers, and as a society, need to move beyond our narrow focus on trauma related symptomatology. To borrow a play from someone else’s playbook: It's not PTSD. It’s the transition, stupid.
Addis, M. E., & Mahalik, J. R. (2003). Men, masculinity, and the contexts of help seeking. American psychologist, 58(1), 5.
Mobbs, M. C., & Bonanno, G. A. (2017). Beyond war and PTSD: The crucial role of transition stress in the lives of military veterans. Clinical psychology review.
Pew Research Center, Social & Demographic Trends, The Military-Civilian Gap: War and Sacrifice in the Post-9/11 Era (2011): 13: http://www. pewsocialtrends.org/files/2011/10/veterans-report
Ricks, T. E., The Generals: American Military Command from World War II to Today. New York: Penguin, 2012.
Roach, M. (2016). Grunt: The curious science of humans at war. New York: Norton, 2016.
Zoli, C, Maury, R., and Fay, D. (2015). Missing Perspectives: Servicemembers’ Transition from Service to Civilian Life. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University, Institute for Veterans and Military Families.
By NRA Carry Guard
Nobody is thrilled during a traffic stop, not you, not the officer, not your checkbook. For an officer, it’s the unknown of what’s ahead of them that makes them a little uneasy. There are a few things you can do to keep both sides comfortable and safe.
Give the Officer a Wave
This will let the officer know you’re aware that he or she is pulling you over. It’s a terrible thing to admit, but it will get your traffic stop off to a bit better of a start.
Roll Down All of Your Windows
Most cars have tinted windows, which makes it difficult for an officer to get a good look at what’s inside your car.
Flip the Dome Light On
If it’s dark out, turning on your dome light and letting the officer see the inside of your care will help the officer feel a whole lot more comfortable.
Keep Your Hands at 10 and 2
Quick movements make officers a bit wary, so keep both of your hands at 10 and 2 on the wheel.
Let the Officer Know You’re Carrying
The last thing you want is an officer to be caught off guard by seeing you’re carrying without being notified first. As soon as the officer finishes his “spiel,” as Chuck Inderrieden says, let him or her know you’re carrying. You can say something along the lines of “Officer, I just want to let you know I’m appendix carrying. What would you like me to do next?”
Officers recognize that people who are concealed-carry permit holders are among the most law-abiding citizens around, so in addition to doing the five things listed above, you can help assure the officer that they’re safe.
Watch the full episode above and watch on NRATV.
NRA Carry Guard Daily airs live on NRATV Monday through Friday at 12:30 p.m. Central, 1:30 p.m. Eastern. Past episodes are available on NRA Carry Guard and on NRATV.
Send your questions and comments to @NRACarryGuard and by using #NRACarryGuard.
More articles by #SaluteTargets coming soon...
by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret)
Editor’s Note: This was sent to me by one of my fellow Iraq War “Battle Buddies” who lives in southeast Arizona. He is a faithful patriot and dedicated career US Marine who made repeated combat tours, alongside me, to the Middle East. We know what is at stake because we have seen failed nations who did not stand up for their freedom. Citizens must protect the laws, and honor the sacrifices that make liberty possible. Millions have served and fought for where we are today, but there is no guarantee that this freedom will be preserved for future generations. Our American history and heritage is a delicate thing. How are we serving to uphold what we have inherited?
This is making the rounds with our American Veteran community, please make sure you do your share and pass it on. I have made several edits and updates to it. My thanks to the original author, whoever this patriot was I am truly grateful.
Freedom isn’t Free.
Wake Up America !
My Grandfather watched as his friends died in WWI ...
My Father watched as his friends died in WWII and Korea …
I watched (first hand) as my older high school and college friends fought and died in Vietnam ...
I watched as our friends and children fought and died in Desert
Storm ... Afghanistan, and Iraq …
We watch today and wait while our fellow veterans, friends and family all, continue to fight the ongoing Global War on Terrorism.
None of them fought for or died for the Mexican Flag or any other foreign flag ...
Every one of them fought for and died for the American Flag!
They loved it and had a special name for it: Old Glory !
In Texas, a student raised a Mexican flag on a school flag pole; another student took it down.
Guess who was expelled ... The kid who took it down.
Kids in high school in California were sent home this year on Cinco de Mayo because they wore T-shirts with the American flag printed on them.
Gutless school bureaucrats were afraid that the U.S. Flag would “intimidate” someone!
Enough is enough.
The message below needs to be viewed by every American;
And every American needs to stand up for America.
And every American needs to stand up for America.
We've bent over to appease the America-haters long enough...
I'm taking a stand.
I'm standing up because the hundreds of thousands who died fighting in wars for this country, and for the U.S. Flag can't stand up...
And shame on anyone who tries to make this a racist message...
I'm standing up because the hundreds of thousands who died fighting in wars for this country, and for the U.S. Flag can't stand up...
And shame on anyone who tries to make this a racist message...
Let me make this perfectly clear!
THIS IS MY COUNTRY!
And, my making this statement DOES NOT Mean
I'm against immigration!
YOU ARE WELCOME HERE IN OUR COUNTRY!
Truly Welcome as a Legal Immigrant!
But to come here and become a part of our nation, you must:
1. Get a sponsor!
2. Get a place to lay your head!
3. Get a job!
4. Live by OUR laws and rules!
5. Pay YOUR Taxes!
6. Learn the ENGLISH LANGUAGE like millions of immigrants have in the past! This is not racism, but common sense. You can be proud of your heritage (as I am mine) but you are now a US citizen. As an American, you join a UNITED states, not a reflection of growing identity of the nation from which you chose to leave. You are wrong if you want to change America to be the very place from which you fled!
7. Please don't demand that we hand over our lifetime Savings of Social Security Funds to you.
If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone,then YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM!
When will AMERICANS STOP giving away THEIR RIGHTS???
We've gone so far the other way.
We’ve bent over backwards not to offend anyone.
But it seems no one cares about the
AMERICAN CITIZEN being offended!
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
Stay tuned for more #general articles by Salute Targets....
Introduction by Col Mike Howard US Marines (Ret), Historian
This article (based on work by Jack Menzey & Dan Greenfield), was sent to me by a dear friend I’ve known since Elementary School through High School (1960s-1970s era). She spent her career as a dedicated Teacher and was raised by a WWII Army Vet father and a mother who worked closely with Ronald Reagan on his Staff when he was Governor of California. The focus of this is Professor Jack Minzey, who went to be with the Lord, on Sunday, 8 April 2018. Professionally, Jack was head of the Department of Education at Eastern Michigan University as well as a prolific author of numerous books, most of which were on the topic of Education and the Government role therein. His interest in Conservative Politics was exceeded only by his intellectual ability.
His essay is believed to have been influenced by a speech delivered by Daniel Greenfield (a conservative author whose work can be found in publications such as FrontPageMag.com) at the South Carolina Tea Party Coalition Convention in January 2018:
This is a civil war.
There aren’t any soldiers marching on Charleston… or Myrtle Beach. Nobody’s getting shot in the streets. Except in Chicago… and Baltimore, Detroit and Washington D.C.
But that’s not a civil war. It’s just what happens when Democrats run a city into the ground. And then they dig a hole in the ground so they can bury it even deeper.
If you look deep enough into that great big Democrat hole, you might even see where Jimmy Hoffa is buried.
But it’s not guns that make a civil war. It’s politics.
Guns are how a civil war ends. Politics is how it begins.
How do civil wars happen?
Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge.
That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.
How do civil wars happen?
by Professor Jack Minzey
Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can't settle the question through elections because they don't even agree that elections are how you decide who's in charge. That's the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.
The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it's not the first time they've done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn't really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There's a pattern here.
What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don't accept the results of any election that they don't win. It means they don't believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections.
That's a civil war.
There's no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice. But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.
This isn't dissent. It's not disagreement. You can hate the other party. You can think they're the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election. When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don't win, what you want is a dictatorship.
Your very own dictatorship.
The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it's inherently illegitimate. The Democrats lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats. Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can't scratch his own back without his say so, that's the civil war.
Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that's not the system that runs this country. The Democrat's system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.
If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. His power is unlimited. He's a dictator.
But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can't do anything. He isn't even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented. A Democrat in the White House has 'discretion' to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn't even have the 'discretion' to reverse him. That's how the game is played. That's how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn't yet won that particular fight.
When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren't even allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws. Under Obama, a state wasn't allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission. But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries.
The Constitution has something to say about that.
Whether it's Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country. If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land. This is what I call a moving dictatorship.
Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding: Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can't serve in it if you're not a member. If you haven't been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren't in the club. And Trump isn't in the club. He brought in a bunch of people who aren't in the club with him.
Now we're seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them. They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail. They use the tools of power to bring them down.
That's not a free country.
It's not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an 'insurance policy' against Trump winning the election. It's not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It's not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media. It's not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn't supposed to win did.
Have no doubt, we're in a civil war between a conservative volunteer government and a leftist Democrat professional government.
Closing note of Historical commentary by Col Mike Howard. Just like in 1861, it is the Republicans who have the training, majority of and background in weapons. We understand the precious value of our 2nd Amendment. Not too many of my Looney Tune Left acquaintances have ever patriotically served in the military, nor have basic weapons instruction or experience.
It could be a short Civil War. The Left, aside from Antifa Thugs hiding in hooded black clothes, don’t have an equivalent Army of Northern Virginia or a Robert E. Lee to effectively lead them in battle. And most US military and Law Enforcement folks are American patriots, not anarchists and socialists with the goal of totalitarian communism.
Trump, and those who support him, are builders, not arsonists. Just like in 1865, we will preserve the Union.
Stay tuned for more Salute Target articles...
By Steven Hayward
The Democrats’ ban on plastic straws is the gift that keeps on giving GIFs—or at least memes. I can’t decide whether it was Nietzsche or T.S. Eliot who got it wrong. If Nietzsche were with us today, he’d surely issue a correction—”No, I said the last straw man!” And Eliot would have to re-write “The Hollow Men.” Even though the title is perfect for modern liberals, the lines need revision: “We are the hollow [liberal] men [optional gender ID here]/We are the stuffed men [optional gender ID here]/Leaning together/Headpiece filled with [plastic] straw[s]/Our dried [Pelosi] voices/When we whisper [shout] together/Are [not] quiet [but certainly] meaningless/That’s for darn sure.”
Stay tuned for more Salute articles....
By Frank Hawkins
#America has undergone enormous change during the nearly eight decades of my life. Today, America is a bitterly divided, poorly educated and morally fragile society with so-called mainstream politicians pushing cynical identity politics, socialism and open borders. The #President of the United States is threatened with impeachment because the other side doesn’t like him. The once reasonably unbiased American media has evolved into a hysterical left wing mob. How could the stable and reasonably cohesive America of the 1950s have reached this point in just one lifetime? Who are the main culprits? Here’s my list of the 10 most destructive Americans of the last 80 years.
10) Mark Felt – Deputy director of the FBI, aka “Deep Throat” during the Watergate scandal. This was the first public instance of a senior FBI officially directly interfering in America’s political affairs. Forerunner of James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe.
9) Bill Ayers– Represents the deep and ongoing leftist ideological damage to our education system. An unrepentant American terrorist who evaded punishment, he devoted his career to radicalizing American education and pushing leftist causes. Ghost wrote Obama’s book, “Dreams of My Father.”
8) Teddy Kennedy – Most folks remember Teddy as the guy who left Mary Joe Kopechne to die in his car at Chappaquiddick. The real damage came after he avoided punishment for her death and became a major Democrat force in the US Senate, pushing through transformative liberal policies in health care and education. The real damage was the 1965 Hart-Cellar immigration bill he pushed hard for that changed the quota system to increase the flow of third world people without skills into the US and essentially ended large-scale immigration from Europe.
7) Walter Cronkite – Cronkite was a much beloved network anchor who began the politicization of America’s news media with his infamous broadcast from Vietnam that described the Tet Offensive as a major victory for the Communists and significantly turned the gullible American public against the Vietnam War. In fact, the Tet offensive was a military disaster for the NVA and Viet Cong, later admitted by North Vietnamese military leaders. Decades later Cronkite admitted he got the story wrong. But it was too late. The damage was done.
6) Bill and Hillary Clinton—It’s difficult to separate Team Clinton. Bill’s presidency was largely benign as he was a relative fiscal conservative who rode the remaining benefits of the Reagan era. But his sexual exploits badly stained the Oval Office and negatively affected America’s perception of the presidency. In exchange for financial support, he facilitated the transfer of sensitive military technology to the Chinese. Hillary, a Saul Alinsky acolyte, is one of the most vicious politicians of my lifetime, covering up Bill’s sexual assaults by harassing and insulting the exploited women and peddling influence around the globe in exchange for funds for the corrupt Clinton Foundation. She signed off on the sale of 20% of the US uranium reserve to the Russians after Bill received a $500,000 speaking fee in Moscow and the foundation (which supported the Clinton’s regal lifestyle) received hundreds of millions of dollars from those who benefited from the deal. Between them, they killed any honor that might have existed in the dark halls of DC.
5) Valerie Jarrett - The Rasputin of the Obama administration. A Red Diaper baby, her father, maternal grandfather and father-in-law (Vernon Jarrett who was a close friend and ally of Obama mentor Frank Marshall Davis) were hardcore Communists under investigation by the U.S. government. She has been in Obama’s ear for his entire political career pushing a strong anti-American, Islamist, anti-Israeli, socialist/communist, cling-to-power agenda.
4) Jimmy Carter - Carter ignited modern day radical Islam by abandoning the Shah and paving the way for Ayatollah Khomeini to take power in Tehran. Iran subsequently became the main state sponsor and promoter of international Islamic terrorism. When Islamists took over our embassy in Tehran, Carter was too weak to effectively respond thus strengthening the rule of the radical Islamic mullahs.
3) Lyndon Johnson – Johnson turned the Vietnam conflict into a major war for America. It could have ended early if he had listened to the generals instead of automaker Robert McNamara. The ultimate result was: 1) 58,000 American military deaths and collaterally tens of thousands of American lives damaged; and 2) a war that badly divided America and created left wing groups that evaded the draft and eventually gained control of our education system. Even worse, his so-called War on Poverty led to the destruction of American black families with a significant escalation of welfare and policies designed to keep poor families dependent on the government (and voting Democrat) for their well-being. He deliberately created a racial holocaust that is still burning today. A strong case could be made for putting him at the top of this list.
2) Barack Hussein Obama - Obama set up America for a final defeat and stealth conversion from a free market society to socialism/communism. As we get deeper into the Trump presidency, we learn more each day about how Obama politicized and compromised key government agencies, most prominently the FBI, the CIA and the IRS, thus thoroughly shaking the public’s confidence in the federal government to be fair and unbiased in its activities. He significantly set back race and other relations between Americans by stoking black grievances and pushing radical identity politics. Obama’s open support for the Iranian mullahs and his apologetic “lead from behind” foreign policy seriously weakened America abroad. His blatant attempt to interfere in Israel’s election trying to unseat Netanyahu is one of the most shameful things ever done by an American president.
1) John Kerry – Some readers will likely say Kerry does not deserve to be number one on this list. I have him here because I regard him as the most despicable American who ever lived. After his three faked Purple Hearts during his cowardly service in Vietnam, he was able to leave the US Navy early. As a reserve naval officer and in clear violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, he traveled to Paris and met privately with the NVA and the Viet Cong. He returned to the United States parroting the Soviet party line about the war and testified before Congress comparing American soldiers to the hordes of Genghis Khan. It was a clear case of treason, giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war. We got a second bite of the bitter Kerry apple when as Obama’s secretary of state, he fell into bed with the Iranian (“Death to America”) mullahs giving them the ultimate green light to develop nuclear weapons along with billions of dollars that further supported their terrorist activities. Only the heroic Swift Vets saved us from a Manchurian Candidate Kerry presidency. Ultimately we got Obama.
Dishonorable Mentions! (Just missed the list)
John Brennan–Obama’s CIA director who once voted for Communist Gus Hall for president. A key member of the Deep State who severely politicized the CIA. Called President Trump treasonous for meeting with the president of Russia.
Jane Fonda – movie actress who made the infamous trip to Vietnam during the war in support of the Communists. She represents hard left Hollywood that has done so much damage to our culture.
Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin – Both revered entertainers helped usher in the prevailing drug culture. Joplin personally suffered the consequences. Karma’s a bitch.
Robert Johnson /BET – Helped popularize ho’s, bitches and pimps while making millions on great hits such as “Jigga my Nigga”, “Big Pimpin’”, “Niggas in Paris” and “Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z.” Many scholars within the African American community maintain that BET perpetuates and justifies racism by adopting the stereotypes held about African Americans, affecting the psyche of young viewers through the bombardment of negative images of African Americans. Who can disagree?
Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr./The New York Times – Once the gold standard of American journalism, the paper always had a liberal tilt and occasionally made bad mistakes. As the years have gone along, the paper has slid further and further left and today is virtually the primary propaganda arm of the increasingly radical Democrat Party. Still retains influence in Washington and New York.
George Soros – Jewish former Nazi collaborator in his native Hungary who as a self-made billionaire has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into left wing groups and causes. The damage he has caused is difficult to measure, but it’s certainly large. He has funded much of the effort to kill the Trump presidency.
Frank Marshall Davis - Anti-white, black Bolshevik, card-carrying Soviet agent. Probable birth father and admitted primary mentor of young Barak Hussein Obama.
Frank Hawkins is a former US Army intelligence officer, Associated Press foreign correspondent, international businessman, senior newspaper company executive, founder and owner of several marketing companies and published novelist. He is currently retired in North Carolina. email@example.com
Editor's note: the original version of this piece misspelled the names of Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin, and also implied that Hendrix was a drug addict, which the coroner's autopsy after his death clearly stated was not the case. AT regrets these errors.
The Last Days
The last civilians to see the Romanovs alive were four women who had been brought in from the town to clean the Ipatiev House. Mariya Starodumova, Evdokiya Semenova, Varvara Dryagina, and an unidentified fourth gave the family a small amount of relief from the boredom of their confinement, and one final contact with the outside world.
The testimony of these women has given the most penetrating and humane portrait of the doomed family. Forbidden to speak to the Romanovs, the cleaners nevertheless had the chance to observe them at close quarters. At first, they were struck by the contrast between the tales of the family’s arrogance disseminated by anti-tsarist propaganda and the modest people they found before them. The grand duchesses were ordinary girls. As for poor, broken Alexei, he looked to Semenova like the epitome of delicate suffering. Like so many before her, she was particularly struck by his eyes, which were soft and callow, but which appeared to Semenova to be full of sadness.
The family, however, was delighted with the diversion. The sisters threw themselves into helping scrub the floors, taking the opportunity to speak with the cleaners in defiance of house rules. Semenova managed to say a few kind words to Alexandra. One of the scenes Semenova and Starodumova both remembered with great clarity was when Yurovsky sat down next to the tsarevitch and inquired after the boy’s health. A scene of rare kindness and sympathy made retrospectively sinister by the fact that Yurovsky was perfectly aware that within a short time he would be the child’s executioner.
The visit to the Ipatiev House made a deep impression on the women. The Romanovs were to be killed because they were the supreme symbols of autocracy. The irony was that, in Yekaterinburg, the Bolsheviks had turned them into the opposite of aristocrats. In the words of Evdokiya Semenova, “they were not gods. They were actually ordinary people like us. Simple mortals.”
On the night of July 16, a telegram was sent to Moscow informing Lenin of the decision to carry out the murders. Rousing the family and the four servants from bed at 1:30 a.m., Yurovsky informed them that fighting between Red and White forces was threatening the city and that they must be moved down to the basement for their own safety.
The Last Night
No evidence survives to suggest the Romanovs reacted with anything but docility. Carrying the tsarevitch in his arms, Nicholas led the family and the four servants—family doctor Eugene Botkin, maid Anna Demidova, chef Ivan Kharitonov, and footman Alexei Trupp—down to the cellar. Gathered together in a small, bare room, they still appeared oblivious to their fate. Chairs were fetched for Alexandra and Alexei while the others stood.
Yurovsky approached them, with the executioners behind him in the doorway, and read from a prepared statement to the astonished prisoners: “The presidium of the Regional Soviet, fulfilling the will of the Revolution, has decreed that the former Tsar Nicholas Romanov, guilty of countless bloody crimes against the people, should be shot.” When, he finished, they began firing on the family. Accounts are conflicting, but most say that the tsar was the main target, and that he died from several gunshots. The tsarina died from a bullet to the head.
As the room filled with gun smoke, discipline among the killers vanished. The grand duchesses seemed unharmed by the bullets, which had ricocheted off their bodies (it was later discovered that diamond jewelry sewn into their clothing had acted like armor during the initial assault). One of the murderers—a drunkard named Ermakov—lost all control and began to slash at the Romanovs with a bayonet. Finally, after a horror-filled 20 minutes, the entire family and their servants were all dead: shot, stabbed, and beaten.
The 11 bodies were hauled out of the house and loaded onto a truck. The disposal of the remains was chaotic. Scholars believe the bodies were first dumped in a shallow mine called Ganina Yama, which the Bolsheviks tried to collapse with grenades. The shaft stayed intact, so the bodies were hastily removed. On the way to the new burial site, the truck got mired in mud, and two bodies—now believed to be Alexei and Maria—were removed and disposed of in the forest. The nine other bodies were burned, doused with acid, and buried in a separate grave not too far away.
When Rasputin first met the #Romanovs in 1905, the tsarina was desperate. The 1905 revolution had almost seen the monarchy overthrown. The birth of Alexei the previous year gave them the heir she had been hoping for, but his hemophilia was not only a personal tragedy but also a threat to the dynasty. This situation of political crisis and maternal agony enabled Rasputin to insinuate himself into the family. In 1908 Alexei suffered a severe bleeding episode and Rasputin was able to ease the boy’s pain. The mystic allegedly warned Nicholas and Alexandra that the child’s health would be linked to the strength of the dynasty. Rasputin’s ability to keep the child healthy would secure him a place in the palace and the power to influence the tsar.
The relationship may have helped the tsarevitch, but it wrecked Alexandra’s reputation and further distanced her from the Russian people. Rumors swirled that Rasputin’s debauched behavior included seducing the tsarina. Although he almost certainly was not her lover, he did have affairs with untold numbers of women at the Romanov court. Nicholas ignored the calls to remove Rasputin from court, further angering the Russian people. Keeping his wife happy and his child happy kept Nicholas from removing the threat. (See how the faith of the Russian tsars now enjoys favored status.)
In September 1915, during World War I, Nicholas II traveled to the front to take personal command of Russian forces. The tsarina saw to domestic affairs, and Rasputin’s influence on her became evident in her choice of incompetent ministers. Losses on the front and Rasputin’s conduct at home turned the Russian people against their tsar and his family. The time was ripe for revolution.
Life in Captivity
For the Bolsheviks, once they took power in November 1917, the Romanovs simultaneously became a bargaining chip and a headache. Russia needed to negotiate its exit from World War I while also avoiding a foreign invasion. The country’s enemies would be watching what happened to the former rulers, but if the Romanovs remained alive they would forever be a symbol for the monarchist movement. Some wanted them sent into exile, some wanted them put on trial for their perceived crimes, and some wanted them to disappear, for good.
At first the family was sent to the palace at Tsarskoye Selo. Security concerns then sent them to Tobol’sk, east of the Ural Mountains. They were not treated badly, and Nicholas even seemed to thrive. He enjoyed the outdoor, rural life and did not miss the stress of being tsar. The family retained a generous staff: 39 servants altogether. They kept many of their personal possessions, including their beloved family leather-bound photograph albums. It was still possible in these early days of their imprisonment to dream of a happy ending. They might reach England and live in exile with their British cousin King George V. Better still, perhaps they would be allowed to retire to their estate in the Crimea, the scene of many happy summers.
They did not understand that, little by little, each escape route was closing until only one was left, the worst one: the road to Yekaterinburg.
The most radicalized city in Russia, Yekaterinburg was strongly communist and fanatically anti-tsarist. “I would go anywhere at all, only not to the Urals,” Nicholas is reported to have said as the train approached his final residence. The family stayed in a large building known as the Ipatiev House, after its former owner. A high wooden palisade was constructed to cut off the outside world. They had the use of a garden for exercise. The man in charge, Avdeev, was corrupt (his men stole freely from the Romanovs) but not cruel. The guards were ordinary men, recruited from local factories. As time went on they became familiar and even friendly with their charges.
It couldn’t last. The local Bolsheviks replaced Avdeev with Yakov Yurovsky, the man who would orchestrate their murders. He stopped the petty thieving that had gone unpunished by his predecessor, but he instituted a much harsher regime and recruited stricter, more disciplined guards. He maintained a distant but professional relationship with Nicholas and Alexandra, even as he planned their deaths. Nicholas—getting it wrong yet again—even seemed to like him.