THE EAGLE and THE WOLF...by General Charles C. Krulak

NewsMax.com
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=1999/8/2/95625

Remarks for: The Lighthouse Project '99, Central High School, North Carolina
Gen. Charles C. Krulak
January 29, 1999

I am honored to be here today before such a prestigious audience. Before the leadership of tomorrow; the leaders that will advance our Nation into the 21st Century. I cannot help but be excited when I think of what lies before you - the adventure and excitement - and oh, how I envy you!

You will be the ones to take us to new heights and new accomplishments. You will be making the breakthrough discoveries and finding solutions to the problems that previous generations, to include my own, simply could not solve. And it will be you who will have to stand up to the new challenges that will arise tomorrow . . . and there will be challenges . . . there always are.

How will you prepare yourself for this exciting yet challenging future? How will you make yourself ready, so that you may be found worthy of the mantle of leadership that will surely be placed upon your shoulders? Perhaps the best way for me to illustrate these concepts is to relate to you some examples from my experience in Vietnam.

It was 0600, the third of June, 1966. I was in command of "G" Company, Second Battalion, First Marine Regiment. I was a First Lieutenant at the time, and had been given this command because the previous commander had been killed about one week earlier.

My Company had been given a simple mission that began with a helicopter assault. We would land in a series of dried-up rice paddies about 6 football fields in length, and three football fields in width. These paddies were surrounded by jungle-covered mountains, with a dry stream bed running along one side. We were supposed to land, put on our packs, and do what all Marines do: find the largest mountain, and climb to the top. There we would put ourselves in a defensive perimeter to act as the blocking force for an offensive sweep conducted by two battalions.

The helicopters landed, unloaded my company of Marines, and had just started to leave when the world exploded. Automatic weapons, mortar fire, artillery - it was hell on earth. Fortunately, a good portion of my Company had managed to move into the dry stream bed where they were protected from most of the fire.

However, one platoon had landed too far west to move immediately to the cover of the stream bed. As they tried to move in that direction, the fire on them became so heavy they had no alternative but to hit the deck. One particular squad found itself directly in the line of fire of a North Vietnamese 12.7mm heavy machine gun. In a matter of seconds, two Marines were killed and three were seriously wounded.

As I watched what was happening from my position in the stream bed, I knew that it was just a matter of time before that machine gun would systematically "take out" that whole platoon-squad by squad. If I didn't act immediately, they would be lost in just a matter of minutes. I made a call to the commander of the first platoon, directing him to move up the stream bed so he could attack across the flank of the gun position - not having to assault it directly from the front. At the same time, I directed another platoon to provide suppressive fire that might diminish the volume of fire coming from the machine gun position.

All this was happening in the midst of smoke, multiple explosions, heavy small arms fire, and people yelling to be heard over the din of battle. Suddenly, my radio operator grabbed me by the sleeve and pointed toward the middle of the rice paddy where a black Marine, a Lance Corporal by the name of Grable, had gotten to his feet, placed his M-14 rifle on his hip, and charged the machine gun-firing as fast as he could possibly fire!

He ran about 40 meters directly toward the machine gun and then cut to the side, much like a running back might do during a football game. Sure enough, the machine gun, which had been delivering heavy fire on his squad, picked up off of the squad and began firing at Grable.

Seeing the fire shift away from them, the squad moved immediately to the cover of a small rice paddy dike-thick ground, about a foot high separating each paddy from the other. Both they, and the other two squads were able to drag their casualties and gear to the position of safety behind this dike.

Grable didn't look back. He didn't see what happened. He kept on fighting. He dodged back and forth across these paddies, firing continuously. He would run out of ammunition, reload on the run, and continue forward, dodging back and forth as he ran. BAM! Suddenly he was picked up like a dishrag and thrown backward-hit by at least one round.

The rest of the platoon charged. My radio operator grabbed me again, but saying nothing, he just pointed to the middle of the rice paddy. That young Marine, Lance Corporal Grable, had gotten to his feet. As he stood, he didn't put the rifle to his hip; he locked the weapon into his shoulder, took steady aim-good sight picture, good sight alignment, and walked straight down the line of fire into that machine gun.

About four minutes later, my command group and the rest of the unit finally arrived at the now-silent machine gun position. There were nine dead enemy soldiers around the gun . . . Lance Corporal Grable was draped over the gun itself. As only Marines can do, these battle-hardened young men tenderly picked up Grable and laid him on the ground. When they opened his "flak jacket", he had five massive wounds from that machine gun. FIVE . . .

About seven months later, I traveled back to Headquarters Marine Corps in Washington and watched the Commandant of the Marine Corps present Lance Corporal Grable's widow with the nation's second highest decoration for valor-the Navy Cross. In this woman's arms was the baby boy that Grable had only seen in a Polaroid picture.

Grable displayed great physical courage. Somewhere in his character was another kind of courage as well-moral courage-the courage to do the right thing. When he had the chance to do something else, he chose to do the right thing. His squad was in mortal danger. He had a choice to make, and he did what was right, at the cost of his life. Let me remind you, this was 1966. Grable was a black Marine from Tennessee, who couldn't even buy a hamburger at the McDonald's in his own hometown.

So, what of your character? Who are you? No, not the physical and superficial image, but who are you really? What do you stand for? What is the essence of your character? Where is your moral compass pointing? Which course do you follow?

Every day we have to make decisions. It is through this decision making process that we show those around us the quality of our character. The majority of the decisions we have to make are "no brainers." Deciding what we are going to have for breakfast is not going to test your character, judgment maybe, but not character.

The true test of character comes when the stakes are high, when the chips are down, when your gut starts to turn, when the sweat starts to form on your brow, when you know the decision you are about to make may not be popular, but it MUST be made. That is when your true character is exposed. The associations you keep, the peers you choose, the mentors you seek, the organizations you affiliate with, all help to define your character. But, in the end, you will be judged as an individual, not as part of a group.

Success in life, like in combat, has always demanded a depth of character. Those who can reach deep inside themselves-and draw upon an inner strength, fortified by strong values, always carry the day against those of lesser character. Moral cowards never win in war; moral cowards never win in life. They might believe that they are winning a few battles here and there, but their victories are never sweet, they never stand the test of time and they never serve to inspire others. In fact, each and every one of a moral coward's "supposed victories" ultimately leads them to failure.

Those who have the courage to face up to ethical challenges in their daily lives will find that same courage can be drawn upon in times of great stress, in times of great controversy, in the never ending battle between good and evil.

All around our society you see immoral behavior; lying, cheating, stealing, drug use and alcohol abuse, prejudice, and a lack of respect for human dignity and the law. In the not-too-distant future, each of you are going to be confronted with situations where you will have to deal straight-up with these issues. The question is, what will you do when that happens? What action will you take? You will know what you should do, the issue is, will you DO what you know is right? It takes moral courage to hold your ideals above yourself. It is the DEFINING aspect of your character.

So, when the test of your character, of your moral courage comes, regardless of the noise and confusion around you, there will be a moment of inner silence in which you must decide what to do. Your character will be defined by your decision . . . and it is yours and yours alone to make.

When that moment of silence comes and you are wrestling with your decision, consider this poem:

THE EAGLE AND THE WOLF

There is a great battle that rages inside me.
One side is a soaring eagle
Everything the eagle stands for is good and true and beautiful.
It soars above the clouds.
Even though it dips down into the valleys, it lays its eggs on mountain tops.
The other side of me is a howling wolf.
And that raging, howling wolf represents the worst that is in me.
He eats upon my downfalls and justifies himself by his presence in the pack.
Who wins this great battle?
The one I feed.
The one I feed.

I challenge you all to feed the eagle. Remember, your Nation depends upon it.

God bless you all and Semper Fidelis.


Gunny G's GLOBE and ANCHOR Weblog
by R. W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Gunny G's...
Marines G&A Sites & Forums!
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/dickg/gunny.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

COLONEL RIPLEY REMEMBERS...

NOTE:
This article was found among my e-mail files, dated 11 July 2001.
-DickG
~~~~~

Col Ripley Remembers...

All of this discussion on the Navajo Code Talkers brings to mind an incident I think you would enjoy hearing about. We don't need much reminding of the close bond we Marines have with this particular WWII group, but this will cement it even more, and I dare say you will not have heard of a similar story.

Several years ago my Vietnam battalion, 3/3, a very tight group consisting of some legendary Marines we've all heard of, had its reunion here in Washington. We had met here before but decided to come back because one of our members agreed to be the honored guest and speaker for the banquet; a former Company Commander, now CMC, named Krulak.

All of the usual events were planned; a visit to the Vietnam Memorial (where, remarkably, the Park Service permitted us to have a Battalion formation with wreath-laying, etc. -- a first), the Friday night parade, a visit to the Museum here and other Marine Corps related events. I organized a separate, special event as the reunion coordinator. This was a personalized, Marine Corps oriented tour of the Arlington National Cemetery with our own private trams and exclusive access to off route locations the general public doesn't see.

Its a pity that more people don't do this, as I have done for over 30yrs for private groups. It is one of the most beautiful, moving, poignant and proud events you can imagine; impossible to describe. One of our purposes was to see and decorate the graves of the former 3/3 CO's all of us had at one time or another served under, and we are very well represented there.

Joe Muir, the first battalion commander KIA in Vietnam; Josh Dorsey, later to become the Senior Marine Advisor during my year as an advisor; Jim Marsh, a great Marine by anyone's standards; and Dutch Schultz, for whom all of the previous superlatives can be said. None of these Marines need embellishment or introduction, and they are all there in Arlington.

We were enroute to Jim Marsh's gravesite when we passed two quite senior men in Navajo dress walking slowly on this very hot summer day. They waved politely and I stopped the tram to offer assistance. They wanted to know the location of Ira Hayes grave. We would be going there at our next stop after paying respects to Jim Marsh, but they preferred to walk. We carried on to Col Jim's grave site (the columbarium) and spent some time there as most of us had either served with him or knew him. Leaving this site we proceeded to Ira Hayes grave which was central between Dutch Schultz and Josh Dorsey.

On arriving there we saw the two men we had passed earlier. Although they were tired from the long walk in the hot sun, it was easy for my party of 200 plus Marines to see that something had happened, just looking into the faces of these old warriors. They had created an air of dignity and reverence that was thicker than armor. At first we would not disembark from the trams and go up the short hill to the grave because it was obvious that we were intruding on something solemn, something of great meaning. They had decorated the grave with stones, feathers and what looked like beads, painted sticks, etc. Seeing us there they motioned us forward and we reluctantly, slowly approached; surrounding them and the grave. What happened next is hard to describe.

These men spoke English, somewhat imperfectly, but their meaning was clear. They knew we were Marines and were pleased that we would join them, for "it gives great honor to our brother Ira". Already my eyes were getting that familiar sting and I wasn't alone. Then for the next 10--20 minutes they went through a prayer ritual that was so beautiful, so moving and poignant that we stood there transfixed, speechless. They picked up rocks from the headstone where they had placed them and gestured toward the sky, and then other artifacts as well. They swept their arms slowly around and over the grave while softly, respectfully incanting their prayers and singing; all in their own language. The meaning, however, came through profoundly to all of us. By this time we --all of us-- were sobbing openly, and then the real surprise came.

They began to look directly at us and ever so often we would hear "semper fidelis" or "Marines", and one one occasion "they look after Ira". We were all to pieces, and not the least bit ashamed. Indeed, we were damned honored that they would include us.

Like most of us I have attended more than my share of funerals, in and out of uniform, and each have been meaningful, dignified and memorable. But nothing in my entire life was like this, and all of us said so. We returned to our tram and carried on with the tour, but we were emotional basket cases. It took me weeks to recover, and the memory of that quiet, dignified moment on a lovely Arlington hillside will never leave me.

We belong to a proud Corps. I have often said that pride is the high octane fuel of the Marine Corps. If you can't be proud, you can't be a Marine. I thought about that as I stood there with those humble, respectful warriors, tears running down my cheeks, my shirt and damn near to my shoes. Most Americans have no idea of the meaning of pride; the kind of pride that comes not from what you do, or who you are, but because you belong to something so much greater than the individual himself -- our Corps. And it is this Corps that produced such men as Ira Hayes, and the two lonely warriors that came all the way from Arizona at no small expense just to pay homage to their fallen brother. God bless these wonderful Marines. They gave us Vietnam vets a dose of pride that will last a lifetime.

Semper Fi, Rip

John W. Ripley Col. J.W. Ripley USMC (ret.) Director History & Museums Division United States Marine Corps (202) 433-3838

*****

Gunny G's GLOBE and ANCHOR Weblog
by R. W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Gunny G's...
Marines G&A Sites & Forums!
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/dickg/gunny.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THOMAS JEFFERSON and THE REVOLUTION...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gunny G's GLOBE and ANCHOR Weblog
by R. W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Gunny G's...
Marines G&A Sites & Forums!
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/dickg/gunny.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This information provided by The Federal Observer,
http://www.federalobserver.com

Thomas Jefferson's Revolution
By SARTRE

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” - Thomas Jefferson

No doubt you will recognize the popular wisdom of Thomas Jefferson regarding Liberty, but are you familiar with what he said in a letter to John Adams, late in his life? "To attain all this (universal republicanism), however, rivers of blood must yet flow, and years of desolation pass over; yet the object is worth rivers of blood, and years of desolation." - September 4, 1823

The history of the American Revolution is usually portrayed as a struggle for independence. The hidden story is that the brief experiment with a Republic, was crushed before it ever had a chance to succeed. Autonomy from the Crown, didn’t guarantee Liberty for citizens. When Jefferson penned the decisive essential declaration, “he drew heavily on the doctrines concerning the general principles of liberty and the rights of man which Locke set forth in his work; Of Civil Government. In particular, in the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson copied Locke's words, "Life, liberty and property" which were subsequently changed to "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" ”. While property has a very narrow meaning in modern society; back then, it intended a profound significance and limiting factor on government.

The desolation that Jefferson referenced, is a recognition of a prevailing annihilation that natural man has towards a state of rule. The STATE is government administered by coercion. Inborn rights are intrinsic within one’s nature. Independence of Englishmen from England, was a reluctant alternative for many colonists. When the revolution was won, the war for the entente began. The Federalist Papers are viewed by most Americans as constitutive arguments to justify a new constitution. The erroneous case that the Articles of Confederation failed, is a study in the road to surrender.

Few truly understand the nature of the 1776 Revolution. Concealed from memory is that Jefferson did not attend the convention nor was he a contributor to the U.S Constitution, primarily drafted and guided to ratification (who’s legality is still suspect) by James Madison. In private writings to Jefferson, Madison tips his hand and admits a shortcoming to the new constitution - Congress was not given a negative (veto) over state laws.

From James Madison Explains the Constitution to Thomas Jefferson, we get the rational of Madison.

“It was generally agreed that the objects of the Union could not be secured by any system founded on the principle of a confederation of Sovereign States. A voluntary observance of the federal law by all the members could never be hoped for. A compulsive one could evidently never be reduced to practice, and if it could, involved equal calamities to the innocent and guilty, the necessity of a military force, both obnoxious and dangerous, and, in general, a scene resembling much more a civil war than the administration of a regular Government.

Hence was embraced the alternative of a Government which, instead of operating on the States, should operate without their intervention on the individuals composing them; and hence the change in the principle and proportion of representation.

This ground-work being laid, the great objects which presented themselves were:
1. To unite a proper energy in the Executive, and a proper stability in the Legislative departments, with the essential characters of Republican Government.

2. To draw a line of demarkation which would give to the General Government every power requisite for general purposes, and leave to the States every power which might be most beneficially administered by them.

3. To provide for the different interests of different parts of the Union.

4. To adjust the clashing pretensions of the large and small States. Each of these objects was pregnant with difficulties. The whole of them together formed a task more difficult than can be well conceived by those who were not concerned in the execution of it. Adding to these considerations the natural diversity of human opinions on all new and complicated subjects, it is impossible to consider the degree of concord which ultimately prevailed as less than a miracle.”

Devastation of Sovereign States was a stated goal in the formation of this new union. The Bill of Rights, especially the ninth and ten amendments, were mere window dressing to sooth the normal and healthy suspicions of sane citizens. Tyranny is the standard rule for rulers, and constitutional provisions intended to consolidate control, is not a formula for independence.

Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Jefferson’s sympathy for the French Revolution marked a shape contrast with the Alexander Hamilton faction of the Federalists. The wisdom within a non interventionist foreign policy of a John Adams, in the tradition of George Washington, did not fit the despotic vision of Hamilton. The irony is that during a Jefferson administration a naval flotilla was sent to subdue Barbary pirates and the Louisiana Territory was acquired. Such examples fostered a strong centralized government. However, Jefferson did slash Army and Navy expenditures, cut the federal budget, eliminated the tax on whiskey so unpopular in the West, yet reduced the national debt by a third. When Hamilton bargained with Jefferson for the trade-off that allowed for the central government to assume the revolutionary war debt, the fate of the independent States was ceded on the slippery slope of federal seduction.

The liberty of each individual is diminished proportionately with every increase in the range, scope and power of government. The promise of the American Revolution was the ability to limit government, so it could be controlled. Today there is a disconnect from that reality. Rational society knew that repression was the inevitable result from the concentration of civic functions under the auspices of expanding government. The men at Concord Bridge, understood this fact of nature. Now, that insight is lost to most and represents basic evidence for the mastery of the U.S. Constitution as a delusional substitute for genuine individual liberty.

The property of the citizen has become a claim of the federal government. The Sovereign States that Madison resented, have become feudal fiefdoms of an imperial empire. The happiness which is one of those “certain unalienable Rights”, has been lost and replaced with a personal isolation in search of individual dignity and social justice. The masses have been transformed into Hamiltonian Federalists, as the principles of Jefferson are ignored, forgotten and betrayed.

Jefferson’s passion for a restrained central government was a core principle foreseen as a primary reason for separation from England. His concept of an independent and self reliant society was abandoned with the rush to regiment a flawed national identity. The pivotal question is why bondage is accepted with such ease, and so few are willing to be true to the revolution and risk - Our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor. Heed well, the tradition and sagacity of the “Man from Monticello”. "As revolutionary instruments (when nothing but revolution will cure the evils of the State) [secret societies] are necessary and indispensable, and the right to use them is inalienable by the people." -Thomas Jefferson to William Duane, 1803. FE 8:256

Where are you when circumstance demands that a new revolution is justified to save the purpose of the original nation?

About the Author:
Federal Observer contributor, Sartre is the pen name of a reformed, former political operative. This pundit's formal instruction in History, Philosophy, and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. We invite you to visit his website at: Breaking All The Rules.

http://www.federalobserver.com/print.php?aid=6472
http://www.federalobserver.com/print.php?aid=6472

SENATOR MANSFIELD: HE TOLD THEM SO

The New York Times In America
October 12, 2003
'Senator Mansfield': He Told Them So
By JOHN ALOYSIUS FARRELL
SENATOR MANSFIELD
The Extraordinary Life of a Great American Statesman and Diplomat.
By Don Oberdorfer.
Illustrated. 593 pp. Washington: Smithsonian Books. $32.95.

There are parts of this fine new biography of Senator Mike Mansfield, as he pleads with Jack Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson not to plunge America into war in Southeast Asia, that could break your heart. Mansfield served with the Marines in China in 1922, then worked his way from the copper mines of Montana to become a college instructor, a congressman and the Senate's acknowledged expert on Asia. He never varied in the advice he gave about Indochina: the United States had no compelling national interest to defend there, and it would lose any war it chose to fight. Had he been able to persuade his two old friends, there might be no need for that black granite gash and its 58,000 names on the Mall in Washington.

''We cannot hope to substitute armed power for the kind of political and economic social changes that offer the best resistance to Communism,'' Mansfield, then majority leader, wrote his friend President Kennedy about Vietnam in 1961. ''If the necessary reforms have not been forthcoming over the past seven years to stop Communist subversion and rebellion, then I do not see how American combat troops can do it today.'' A year later, he warned that the United States was in danger of being drawn ''inexorably'' into the doomed role and bloody fate of the French colonial armies in Southeast Asia: ''To ignore that reality will . . . be immensely costly in terms of American lives.'' Kennedy's face grew red with anger. ''This is not what my advisers are telling me,'' he said.

Nor did Mansfield relent after Johnson, an ally of many years, replaced Kennedy in office. ''The Communists are, obviously, not going to be faced down. It now appears that they are not going to be stung down. That leaves only the possibility of mowing them down and that is going to take a lot of time and a great many lives,'' he warned after the Pentagon reported that an American destroyer was attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964, and Johnson responded with bombing raids.

Toward the end of his 98 years, after capping a distinguished Senate career by serving two presidents as ambassador to Japan, Mansfield's voice still broke when he spoke of Vietnam. Like Oscar Schindler weeping for Jews he could not save, he found shame and tears in his failure to stop the killing. ''It still haunts me,'' he told Don Oberdorfer, a former Washington Post reporter who teaches international relations at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. Though fond of his taciturn subject, in ''Senator Mansfield'' he doesn't duck the brutal question: Shouldn't the senator have gone public with his doubts, perhaps stepped down as Democratic leader in protest? Mansfield thought it better to preserve President Johnson's confidence, to ensure that the president got at least one expert and dissenting view. ''I could have been more vigorous, I could have adopted another kind of procedure,'' Mansfield concedes in an interview. ''But just don't know what it was.'' This is a thorough biography of a public man who served longer as majority leader than any other. It's perhaps a disservice to dwell so on Vietnam. Yet Oberdorfer recognizes Mansfield's role in the war as a core of the story. It is a timely topic.

The Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States -- Mansfield lived to see them; he died a month later -- were no Tonkin Gulf incidents. There is little doubt that our national interest is now at stake: Ho Chi Minh didn't have hopes of acquiring pirated nuclear weapons or vials of smallpox, and could have been deterred if he had. Though the North Vietnamese fought with what we saw then as irrational commitment, Al Qaeda makes them look downright reasonable.

That said, it's instructive to weigh Mansfield's cleareyed prescriptions of how, and where, and in what proportion, the United States should best apply its military and economic power as it goes up against another guerrilla foe. Mansfield warned Kennedy that the United States was overreliant on military might, while shortchanging diplomacy and efforts to bring about social and economic reform.

''The Vietnamese problem since 1955 has been a compound in which one part has been military and several nonmilitary,'' he told Kennedy in 1961. ''Yet the remedy which has been applied to this problem has been a compound in which several parts have been military and only one part nonmilitary.'' In this season when another American intervention has etched a new place name -- Iraq -- on the gravestones at Arlington, it's a warning to which, this time, we should pay better attention.

John Aloysius Farrell, the Washington bureau chief of The Denver Post, is the author of ''Tip O'Neill and the Democratic Century.''


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company
~~~~~~~~~~~
This is...
Gunny G's Marines
GLOBE and ANCHOR Sites & Forums
By R.W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
~~~~~~~~

CIVILIAN MARINES?

ALMAR 005/03
««-----------------------------------------------------»»
Date signed: 01/22/2003 ALMAR Number: 005/03



R 220845Z JAN 03

FM CMC WASHINGTON DC(n)

TO ML ALMAR(n)

ALMAR

BT

UNCLAS

ALMAR 005/03

MSGID/GENADMIN/CMC WASHINGTON DC MPO-37//

SUBJ/MARINE CORPS CIVILIAN SERVICE PINS//

RMKS/1. OUR CIVILIAN MARINES ARE AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF

THE MARINE CORPS TEAM. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE EXPRESS OUR

APPRECIATION FREQUENTLY TO CIVILIAN MARINES FOR THEIR SUPPORT

AND FAITHFUL SERVICE TO CORPS AND COUNTRY. ACCORDINGLY, I

HAVE AUTHORIZED THE CREATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF A MARINE CORPS

CIVILIAN SERVICE PIN. THIS PIN WILL IDENTIFY OUR EMPLOYEES AS

CIVILIAN MARINES AND SERVE AS A VISIBLE EXPRESSION OF

APPRECIATION FOR THEIR HARD WORK AND SACRIFICE FOR THE MARINE CORPS.

2. IT IS MY INTENTION THAT THE CIVILIAN MARINE SERVICE PIN

BE GIVEN TO EACH CIVILIAN MARINE FROM ENTRY LEVEL TO SENIOR

EXECUTIVE SERVICE. THE PINS ARE NOW AVAILABLE AND DISTRIBUTION

CAN BE ARRANGED THROUGH THE LOCAL HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE

BEGINNING IN FEBRUARY 2003. THE PIN WILL BE ISSUED TO NEW

EMPLOYEES WHEN THEY COMPLETE THEIR NEW EMPLOYEE ORIENTATION OR

TO CURRENT EMPLOYEES UPON CERTIFICATION OF THEIR YEARS OF SERVICE

TO THE MARINE CORPS.

3. THE MARINE CORPS CIVILIAN SERVICE PIN IS TO BE WORN BY ALL

CIVILIAN MARINES WITH HONOR AND IN THE KNOWLEDGE THE MARINE CORPS

IS A BETTER ORGANIZATION BECAUSE OF THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS AND

DEDICATION. CONGRATULATIONS AND MANY THANKS TO ALL CIVILIAN

MARINES FOR A JOB WELL DONE.

4. SEMPER FIDELIS, M. W. HAGEE, GENERAL, COMMANDANT OF THE

MARINE CORPS.//
~~~~~~~~
This is...
Gunny G's Marines
GLOBE and ANCHOR Sites & Forums
By R.W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
~~~~~~~

GUNNY G IN A NUTSHELL! ... --by Dick Gaines

GUNNY G IN A NUTSHELL!
My sites/forums will reflect my attitude on numerous topics Marine; but here, in a nutshell are a few of my feelings on various topics, you will get the idea of what I think, say, and do--might save ya all some time...

My direction is Old Corps--you will not find a whole lotta stuff on my sites regarding the Corps after the early '60s--or even RVN, for that matter.

OLD CORPS VS. THE NEW CORPS!
Most, even most of the oldtimers, will say that the old corps was great, but quickly explain that the new corps is just as good. But, I read an article lately where a Marine general actually said that the Marines of the new Corps are better. But, in general, most will fall back on an old remark by Chesty Puller (often quoted, you know the one I mean) old corps, new corps, there's just one Marine Corps! Paraphrased, words to that effect.

I think, that when General Puller made that remark back in the early '50s it was very true. Since then, however, many things have occurred. America itself is not the same America that many of us older Marines came from; consequently, the Marine Corps of today, of course, draws its manpower (or personpower as it is probably termed today) from today's present American society, therefore, it cannot possibly be the same or equal to that which it was back in pre-WW II days, or even thru the ...maybe, early '60s. Granted today's "Marines" are generally bigger, stronger, better educated (educated that is, meaning a piece of paper/cerification), more intelligent (depends how you define intelligence, maybe; degrees, more years in an institution, etc.) All this, aside from technical developments since the old days. And so, I, personally, think that Old Corps and new cannot be compared.

I liked the old enlisted rank structure prior to 1959--we got along fine back then w/o super-sergeants (pay grades E-8/E-9), and I considered then, and now, the new E-1/E-9 thing to be a humbug--it wasn't Marine Corps--it was a DOD thing the Corps had no choice in it.

I don't OohRah! See my OohRah Origin/History site for more on that.

I do not constantly ooze and drivel this stuff about the Marine Brotherhood--yes, to be sure there is a brotherhood among Marines, and this should be reserved for mostly serious and solemn occasions. Also noted up front on my Introductory Gunny G site.

Uniforms? The new short sleeve shirts and trench coats are fine. But, for the most part, the old service hat (campaign hat) was great for all hands, not just the present prima donnas who are entrusted to wear it today. The old heringbone (HBT) dungarees were fine w/unbloused trousers and boondockers.

And, no, I do not worship the onetime S/Sgt Lee Ermey, whom I consider, for the most part, to be a throwback to the old image of the ignorant pre--WW II sergeant of Hollywood films--I have seen a couple of his films that were pretty good, however, the ridiculous character he has developed for TV, and his carnival-like websites for suckers, are less than acceptable for the thinking Marine!

THE TITLE "GLOBE and ANCHOR"?
Regarding my chosen title for some of my webpages/sites, many have asked why I don't just indicate, eagle, globe and anchor, rather than Globe and Anchor, implying that I have erred. No error, it reads as I intended. Apparently unknown to most Marines of today, there was a time in the Corps when Marines referred to their emblem (emblem not an "ega"--but that's yet another story) as simply the Globe and Anchor, and there are still some old timers and writers around who will still use that term.

There are many writings available, most of them older writings, but some more recent, where you will find this. One of the best examples of this, perhaps, may be--and there are many more--a quote in the recent book by Colonel Jon T. Hoffman, USMCR, Chesty. It reads as follows:

"Colonel Robert D. Heinl, the premier historian of the Old Corps and a former subordinate of Puller, believed that Chesty was one of the greatest raconteurs that ever wore the Globe and Anchor."
(Random House, 2001, Preface, page xi)

This was a common expression even in this old boot's first days in the Corps of the early 1950s. I find the term similar to the term used by the Royal Marines for their emblem, known as the Globe and Laurel.

Matter of fact, I do not recall the emblem being specifically referred to as an eagle, globe and anchor until the late 50s or early 1960s, on TV recruiting promotions, ads, etc.

To be sure, the popular term has now become eagle, globe and anchor, and the majority considers anything they are not used to, to be incorrect. As for this Marine, as always, I'll fall in w/the old salts!

There's more--this should be sufficient right now for my little spiel here. There's more on my sites, if you can bear it--or save yourself the trouble and don't go at all--your choice.

Semper Fidelis
Dick Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/dickg/gunny.html



Gunny G's GLOBE and ANCHOR Weblog
by R. W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Gunny G's...
Marines G&A Sites & Forums!
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/dickg/gunny.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ALLEGED COVER-UP BY LBJ OF 1967 ISRAEL ATTACK ON USS LIBERTY...

Oct 22, 2003
Former Chief Navy Counsel Alleges Cover-Up by LBJ of 1967 Israeli Attack on U.S. Ship
By Jennifer C. Kerr
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - A former Navy attorney who helped lead the military investigation of the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty that killed 34 American servicemen says former President Lyndon Johnson and his defense secretary, Robert McNamara, ordered that the inquiry conclude the incident was an accident.

In a signed affidavit released at a Capitol Hill news conference, retired Capt. Ward Boston said Johnson and McNamara told those heading the Navy's inquiry to "conclude that the attack was a case of 'mistaken identity' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary."

Boston was senior legal counsel to the Navy's original 1967 review of the attack. He said in the sworn statement that he stayed silent for years because he's a military man, and "when orders come ... I follow them."

He said he felt compelled to "share the truth" following the publication of a recent book, "The Liberty Incident," which concluded the attack was unintentional.

The USS Liberty was an electronic intelligence-gathering ship that was cruising international waters off the Egyptian coast on June 8, 1967. Israeli planes and torpedo boats opened fire on the Liberty at what became known as the outbreak of the Israeli-Egyptian Six-Day War.

In addition to the 34 Americans killed, more than 170 were wounded.

Israel has long maintained that the attack was a case of mistaken identity, an explanation that the Johnson administration did not formally challenge. Israel claimed its forces thought the ship was an Egyptian vessel and apologized to the United States.

After the attack, a Navy court of inquiry concluded there was insufficient information to make a judgment about why Israel attacked the ship, stopping short of assigning blame or determining whether it was an accident.

It was "one of the classic all-American cover-ups," said Ret. Adm. Thomas Moorer, a former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman who spent a year investigating the attack as part of an independent panel he formed with other former military officials. The panel also included a former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, James Akins.

"Why would our government put Israel's interests ahead of our own?" Moorer asked from his wheelchair at the news conference. He was chief of naval operations at the time of the attack.

Moorer, who has long held that the attack was a deliberate act, wants Congress to investigate.

Israeli Embassy spokesman Mark Regev disputed any notion that Israel knowingly went after American sailors.

"I can say unequivocally that the Liberty tragedy was a terrible accident, that the Israeli pilots involved believed they were attacking an enemy ship," Regev said. "This was in the middle of a war. This is something that we are not proud of."

Calls to the Navy seeking comment were not immediately returned.

In Boston's statement, he does not say why Johnson would have ordered a cover-up. Attempts were made to reach Boston at his home in Coronado, Calif., but he did not return calls seeking comment.

Moorer's panel suggested several possible reasons Israel might have wanted to attack a U.S. ship. Among them: Israel intended to sink the ship and blame Egypt because it might have brought the United States into the 1967 war.

---

On the Net:

USS Liberty Memorial Web site: http://www.ussliberty.org

AP-ES-10-22-03 1943EDT

This story can be found at: http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAWBCL04MD.html

# Go Back To The Story

~~~~~
This is...
Gunny G's Marines
GLOBE and ANCHOR Sites & Forums
By R.W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
~~~~~

MEDALGATE... -by David Hackworth

Medalgate
By David H. Hackworth



Recently in Iraq, an Army two-star general put himself in for the Silver Star, a gallantry award, for just being there, and for the Combat Infantryman Badge, an award designed for infantry grunts far below the rank of this division commander.



During the war, members of an Air Force bomber crew were all awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for lobbing a smart bomb from 30,000 feet onto a house where Saddam was rumored to be breaking bread – even though Saddam’s still out there somewhere sucking desert air. In 1944, the only way a bomber crew might have gotten the DFC would have been if it had wobbled back from Berlin on one wing and a prayer after a dozen-plus missions of wall-to-wall flak.



Here’s another “Believe It or Not”: When the Scuds were thumping down on Kuwait, a Navy two-star admiral and six of his flunkies were awarded the Bronze Star after a missile struck 10 miles away.



Not that these abuses of the awards system are anything new. The U.S. military’s awards program – designed to recognize both our combat heroes’ valor and the meritorious deeds by those hard-working supporters who bring up the rear – has never been exactly fair.



In the past, Joe and Jill have often gone unrecognized because there was no one left at the end of the battle to bear witness, or the paperwork got lost or wasn’t written persuasively enough, or some eager-beaver officer in the chain of command stole their glory.



I know of two Medals of Honor – one in Korea and the other with a Navy unit in Vietnam – that shamefully went to still-living former officers when in fact their above-and-beyond deeds “witnessed” by sycophants were actually performed by grunts.



In the latter days of the Korean War and in Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Desert Storm and Somalia, such abuses of military honors increased with each battle. In Vietnam, a dog was awarded the Bronze Star, and in Grenada, more medals were awarded than there were soldiers on that tiny island. In Desert Storm, Army infantry battalions that never saw a shot fired were awarded the coveted CIB.



Now warriors in Iraq are reporting that COs there are using a quota system for awards.



Sgt. Bill Casey, whose unit saw heavy combat in Iraq, says: “Our awards were not given out on heroism. They were based entirely upon rank and duty position. If you were a company commander, you got a Silver Star. If you were a platoon leader or platoon sergeant, you got a Bronze Star. If you did a good job at a level below that, you might get a Bronze Star. If you were a PFC (private first class), you probably didn’t get a medal for valor. Every award was entirely based upon rank and duty position – rather than whether that person stood tall and continued to return fire or whether that person continued to bring the fight to the enemy or flat-out ran away when the bullets started flying.”



These stats tell the story:



* The U.S. Air Force has approved more than 50,000 medals for operations in the Middle East.



* The U.S. Army, trying to catch up with the folks in blue who flew through all that imaginary Iraqi flak, has issued medals as though they were Cracker Jack prizes. So far they’ve pinned on tens of thousands of awards, from the coveted Distinguished Service Cross to the CIB. More than 5,000 Bronze Stars alone have been awarded. One-half the members of a 700-strong aviation squadron at Fort Stewart, Ga., were recently presented Bronze Stars and Commendation medals.



But as of Sept. 22, 2003, the U.S. Marine Corps has approved only 56 Meritorious Bronze Stars – 46 to officers, 10 to enlisted – and 15 Bronze Stars for valor – 11 to officers and four to enlisted – for their 70,000 fighters who kicked more than a little butt during the war in Iraq.



Kudos to our gallant Marine Corps for not following the quota system and to its top brass for refusing to play the Pentagon’s public-relations medal-giveaway game.



But any way you count ‘em, deserving grunts aren’t being appropriately recognized by a sick, out-of-control system that desperately needs overhauling.



The address of David Hackworth's home page is Hackworth.com. Sign in for the free weekly Defending America column at his Web site. Send mail to P.O. Box 11179, Greenwich, CT 06831. His newest book is “Steel My Soldiers’ Hearts.”
© 2003 David H. Hackworth.

Gunny G's GLOBE and ANCHOR Weblog
by R. W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Gunny G's...
Marines G&A Sites & Forums!
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/dickg/gunny.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THE STOPPING POWER MYTH, by Mr. Bruce L. Jones

5 November 2003

MILINET: The Stopping Power Myth

By: Mr. Bruce L. Jones

Inland Empire Mensa
copyright - 1994 & 1997

I am about to commit ballistic heresy. I suppose this admission
shouldn't be taken lightly, but feeling my steadily advancing years I am
too old to begin being a hypocrite at this stage of the game. I should
mention that some people I know consider me sane the majority of the
time, but the jury is still out.

I have been reading material written by very earnest people (grandaddy
was named Earnest) for at least thirty years arguing the relative merits
of one size pistol cartridge over another. The argument seems to center
around whether or not someone's favorite caliber will put an end to the
violent and sometimes maniacal attack of one of society's more
disenchanting creatures.

The theory de jure in today's glossier periodicals was developed by a
very sincere man named Evan Marshall who possibly has a pathological
need to help old ladies cross the street. I am not sure where he
acquired this pathogen but keep a firm grip on granny. Because of this
tendency, I feel certain that Mr. Marshall is one sterling fellow. I
would probably feel proud to call him a friend. Also, to his credit, he
comes very close to disavowing any belief in his own theory, stating in
his first book (which he would be happy to sell you) that the most
important component of stopping power is shot placement; but we'll get
to that later.

In his second book, Mr. Marshall - I am told - elaborates on the first
book to a large degree. I have yet to read it. I read the first through
an inter-library loan. The charge for an ILL then was only a quarter. In
their constant search to provide better service, my library has since
hiked the price for an ILL to three bucks. When my curiosity to read
book two of the same stuff contained in book one reaches a three buck
threshold, I'll get it on ILL, too. Until then I am blissfully content
to remain ignorant of the majority of it's contents.

Later on, we will get to a phenomenon of ballistics that no one else
considers; else referring to me. If you are a bright and inquisitive
kind of person, you will then want to find ways to run out and test the
information for yourself. For those somewhat less inquisitive, I'll give
you a method to use that you can do "for free". We will also include
some science of the absurd.

Sabers drawn, we enter the fray. There are two problems I have with
Marshall's basics. 1) His theory. 2) His data. Having said that, let us
elaborate.

Mr. Marshall arbitrarily chose to include data in his findings from
incidents wherein there was only a single fired round solidly striking
the torso. What? How's that? Gee, this - of course - leaves out all
other data. The problem here is that this excludes the majority of the
available information. The kind of data missed in this method is - e.g.
- the first shot fired, the second and subsequent shots fired, if any;
and the reasons for multiple shots being fired. I am not sure if there
are more tidbits being left out, but it seemed to me the first two
considerations should be: "how many shots were fired" and "why were they
fired". The total effect of all of this missing data is not fully
appreciated.

Now, it may be considered academic to exclude first shot misses (I don't
think so) but multiple pops should definitely be counted because the
first shot failed to accomplish the goal, as we will demonstrate. This
omission tends to make some products look better than they actually are.
In some circles this could be said to be deliberately misleading.
Everyone who wishes to be misled about the efficiency of their last
resort personal life saving device, raise your hand. What, none? I
didn't think so.

To take a close look at what I am talking about, lets look at some
make-believe data and some easy to crunch numbers. Lets say that data
collected for the .32 caliber had shown, under Marshall's method, 200
incidents where someone was solidly hit in the torso. Of those, 100 of
the people were hit only once. These were counted, the remainder
excluded (left 100 running amuck, I suppose). Thus, 100 single hits of
200 opportunities occurred and in 50 of those single shots the bad guy
surrendered. This equates to a 50 percent probability of a one-shot
stop. "Probability" is a word I am not crazy about were my life to be at
stake, but we'll get to that later, too.

Well, let's say that the 100 incidents were excluded from the data above
because they were multiple hits to the torso. Let's say, further, that
of those, 75 of the follow-up shots were fired because the first one
didn't phase the attacker (the other twenty-five were just double-tap
advocates). I call this a "failure to stop". This data should be
included. Why, you might ask (if you don't ask the article kinda stops
here)?

Well, if this data is included with the rest then the actual stops are
really 50 out of 175, not 50 of 100. This lowers the "probability" a
considerable degree; to less than 29 percent. By following his method,
Mr. Marshall inadvertently made poor performance appear much better. If
one did not know better, one might wonder if Mr. Marshall owned stock in
Seecamp. If he ever reads this I hope he knows I'm just kidding.

Of course, the better a cartridge performed, the less this particular
phenomena affected their respective data. But, the data are still
skewed. The best calibers still come out on top as the best performers,
but where is the "real data" in the noise? The problem with this last
statement is: it is true. The effect, however, is that it still leaves
in question just where this phantom line of separation lies between the
poor performers who have been accidentally made to look good and the
truly good performers that would actually enhance the probability of a stop.

For a minute, let's stop and consider the term "probability of a stop"
as used in Marshall's context. Few people understand "probability" in
it's actual sense. A reasonable person would look at the above data and,
if he carried a .32, would say, "Well, if the stop probability is 50%,
I'll just shoot him twice and it will be 100%." Wrong. That's "real
world math" not "math-math". With the rules for probabilities
(math-math) you can never get to 100 percent. Huh? What was that? I'll
splain.

If the .32 shows a 50 percent probability of a one-shot stop (sure it
does), then the first shot should stop half of the bad guys, half of the
time. The second shot should stop half of the rest of those that didn't
fall the first time; this makes only 75 percent! The third shot should
stop 50 percent of whoever's still standing hefting the total up to
grand 87.5 percent. And so-on and so-on. Using this method, we need
about four rounds from the .32 right off the top to approach what
Marshall states is the probability for a single round from a .357
magnum. Thus, reality is much more dismal that the bare numbers make it
seem. This becomes immediately worse if one starts with the more abysmal
29 percent rating developed from the multiple hit data.

Now for some fun.

All of this notwithstanding I have another major problem when
considering the data from Marshall's book. Put in the simplest terms,
the data base has no way of correlating the extent - or even if - the
skill of the individual shooter plays in the equation. Considering that
shot placement is the single most important factor in accomplishing a
ballistically inspired stop, the relative skill of the shooters must be
considered if one uses actual "street" data. If you do not, it would
tend to invalidate all of the data. I'll show how.

An example of what I am talking about can be demonstrated with some more
fictional data.

Lets suppose that we create two teams of shooters that will be exposed
to the need for expressing lethal force with a handgun.

The first team, let's call them Team 1, is comprised of 5 ft. tall, 100
lb., 80 year old great-grandpa's with no firearms training other than
basic instruction in how to fire the weapon. We assume that they can see
well enough to acquire the rear sight and have enough physical strength
to eventually pull the trigger with one or more fingers. We are not
entirely sure, they have never fired the weapon. They are armed with the
new H&K Mk. 23 Mod. 0 .45ACP SOCOM semi-automatic pistols loaded with
hardball ammo and carried in their bathrobe pockets. They carry Bugs
Bunny flashlights that their great-grand-kids left during their last
visit. To turn them on (no, the flashlights!), you have to push the
switch forward and bang the side of the lens bezel simultaneously.

The second team, let's call them Team 2, is made up of tall, well
muscled, young female clones of Gina Davis' character in "The Long Kiss
Goodnight". You know, your basic spy/ para-military types with 20-20
vision, each of whom can bench-press a Buick and are completely
impervious to pain. They are all highly practiced and trained;
experienced veteran combat shooters. They are armed with .22LR S&W Model
63 revolvers with the standard 4 -inch barrels and Aim Point Red Dots.
These are loaded with Stinger hollowpoints and carried in tactical
holsters strapped over skin-tight stretch-pants. They shun upper-body
tactical armor with hard panel inserts in favor of Versace t-shirts and
helmets with night and thermal sights built-in.

Now we send both teams onto the street in any of America's more blighted
urban centers on a typical weekend with instructions to secure their
respective areas. Naturally, they both have an unlimited supply of
ammunition and batteries.

Team 1 is involved in 40 incidents. They were able to actually discharge
their weapons in 27 of them. A remarkable 22 actually hit their targets.
Of these, 20 were torso hits; primarily love-handle perforations. They
experienced a total of 5 one-shot stops, all fired in their team's
classic stance; eyes closed with the weak side index finger in the
weak-side ear and the index and middle finger of the strong hand on the
trigger. Range averaged about 40 yards. A total of 27 rounds of
ammunition was expended.

Team 2, on the other hand, also had 40 incidents - in the first hour.
Each was a one- shot stop to the brain-case of the perpetrators. In each
instance the range was approximately 2 yards and firing was from the
isosceles stance. Having frightened off all other inhabitants in their
area they spent the remainder of the weekend target practicing on urban
self-propelled high-mobility targets (rats, dogs and cats). Team 2
expended a total of 3000 rounds of ammunition.

By the above example we can see that what everyone already knows is
proven beyond a doubt. The lowly .45 ACP is only a 25 percent one-shot
stopper and the amazingly effective .22 LR is a 100 percent one-shot
stopper!

Now, I don't know about you, but if Team 2 does that good with .22
caliber revolvers, then I'm gonna run right out and buy a Ruger auto
pistol with a politically correct 10 round capacity so that I can be
perfectly protected against at least 10 bad-guys, right? And the H&K,
forget that. Who would want such an abysmal performer?

The examples provided by the experiences of teams one and two serve to
illustrate the importance of the skill, training and physical
capabilities of the shooter in the stopping power debate. These are
perhaps the most important factors of all.

At this point I ask myself, "Is there anything left out". Well, some
other fine folks like to ponder the effects of mass versus energy. I
think the eventual outcome is probably similar to the stopping power
index Marshall developed. I do know that one factor is observed and
seldom measured. For lack of a better term, I like to think of it as a
"radial pressure wave". This radial pressure wave is a very real
phenomenon that is characterized by a "wave" or cyclic series of
pressure that is radially dispersed from the point of ballistic impact,
perpendicular to the path of projectile trajectory. I first thought of
it hunting feral hogs.

I happened upon a particularly corpulent porker one day and placed a
solid hit with a large magnum caliber projectile just behind his front
shoulder. I also noticed that, almost immediately, a cloud of dust flew
off his back, as if he had given a mighty shudder. I don't think he
shuddered though as he just looked at me through his one-side eye as if
to say, "Huh?". He was unimpressed. He turned to look at me, then fell
over dead. I wondered about the dust cloud though, and sort of mentally
filed it away. Some years later, it would resurface in an unexpected way.

Fast forward to the Viet Nam war. Near the end of the war ( having
served my time) I was working - at the time - in an Army Depot helping
to assess battle damage of equipment that returned from the zone. There
I stood one fine afternoon surveying the side of a shelter (for
non-military types this is a camper-like box used in military trucks to
house all manner of portable facilities). There was a large impact hole
through-and-through the side. I was observing the entry side. The hole
was probably the result of a dud artillery shell that passed through
without exploding. It was large enough to stick my hand through,
probably made by about a 75mm. What caught my attention was the damage
caused by the impact. There was, for sure, the hole. But what was
different was that the entire aluminum skin was rippled and many of the
rivets that held it to the frame around the edges were popped loose. I
immediately thought the damage caused by some time of ripple effect
radiating from the center of impact.

When the skin was finally peeled back from the side of the shelter, some
of the interior ribs also had partial ripples and buckles radiating
outward from the center of impact. The damage was much more than what
would have been expected from just the material being displaced from the
path of the projectile. I began to ponder other examples I had seen of
this and I remembered my hog years before. Now I see the effects of this
pressure wave in almost every ballistic impact I examine (some materials
are so resilient it isn't observed). It is also three dimensional. It
travels forward along with the projectile. It is coincident with the
sound wave, but is more. The addenda is that pressure is increased
proportionately to the velocity and mass of the projectile. The
frequency of the pressure wave also fluctuates with changes in velocity
and mass. The frequency of the pressure wave is also altered by the
specific gravity of the object being struck. Material of differing
densities resonate at differing frequencies in response to the pressure
effect.

All of the ballistic test media used by modern researchers shows the
effects of this pressure. Water, wet newsprint, phone books, sacks of
flour, melons and the standby ballistic gelatin all reveal it. The
observable after-effect is now called the "crush cavity", either
temporary or permanent. The crush-cavity is only the after effect.
Radial Pressure Wave is the cause. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to
figure it out. If one looks at the crush cavity in ballistic gelatin
what you are observing is the physical evidence left behind by the
pressure wave traveling through the material.

If you want to ponder the effect and waste a little time here's what you do:

Gather up two sacks of pebbles. One sack should contain pebbles of
approximately a quarter inch in diameter. The other sack should contain
pebbles of about three-quarters of an inch in diameter. Don't be too
picky, size doesn't matter all that much. Retire to your favorite
swimming hole with appropriate refreshments and make yourself
comfortable. Drop one small pebble into the test media (the water) and
observe the ripples that evenly radiate outward from the center of
impact of your projectile (the pebble). This is the pressure wave.

Now repeat this procedure with one large pebble. Notice that the
resultant wave has a different appearance, or "signature" than the waves
created by the first pebble. Repeat this procedure, alternating between
large and small pebbles. Observe that with the different size pebbles
the height and distance between the little waves that they cause is
different with each, yet consistent among like-size pebbles. This is the
observable frequency of the pressure wave.

Now vary the experiment. Launch more pebbles downward, still alternating
size, but increase the introductory velocity by increasing the launch
momentum (throw them harder). As you do so, you will notice that the
frequency signature of the pressure waves change in a dramatic and
noticeable manner. They become higher and closer together. The pressure
waves also move through the test media with a noticeably greater
velocity between frequency spikes.

If you have chosen your refreshments carefully, after a while you will
be able to accurately predict the effect of the introduced projectiles
on the test media and the frequency of the pressure wave that will
result by varying the size of the projectile and the launch velocity.

Now, most people would be satisfied at this point. But, if you want to
pretend to be a scientist you can conjure up ways to test this
phenomenon even further. First, begin by varying the specific gravity of
the test media. Gradually increase the density. When the media becomes
dense enough to stand without support, stand it on it's side and place
pressure sensors all around it and feed the data they obtain into a
computer. The main problem with this is that the media will eventually
become too dense for you to penetrate by just throwing the pebbles by
hand. You may want to devise some kind of pyrotechnic-like method for
launching the pebbles so that they will penetrate the test media. In
fact, you may eventually want to switch from pebbles to something else.
Perhaps small, metallic pellet-like objects.

What might be gained from this? Well, if enough experimenting is done,
you may eventually discover that an optimal destructive pressure wave
exists for any given test media that induces some kind of sympathetic
resonance with only a certain mass and velocity of projectile. Or not. I
might conduct the research myself someday if I can find a benefactor to
fund it. Imagine, I could discover the perfect mass and velocity of
projectile that would create a pressure wave that would be 100%
effective in stopping an attacker. Or, I could find a hand gun I can
shoot well and practice, practice, practice.

--------------
end

~~~~~~~~~~
This is...
Gunny G's...
GLOBE and ANCHOR
Marines
Sites & Forums
By R.W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
~~~~~~~~~~

VETERANS HISTORY PROJECT

TJC home to war veterans' project

By Shalina Ramirez - Progress News Writer

They write of yearnings to be reunited with the loves they left behind.

They speak of a sense of community developed between strangers, joined together under some of the most harsh conditions to support a common cause.

And they relive the memories of experiences taken place on foreign soil.

Tomorrow, Americans across the country will once again band together to honor them for their dedication and willingness to risk life and limb.

They are the Veterans of War.

"I was wounded almost immediately," said Jacksonville resident and World War II veteran Hugh Neeld.

It was May, 1945, and the war in the Pacific was drawing to a close.

Neeld, then 16, had dropped out of high school and joined the Navy.

"All the young fellows at that age were anxious to get in," he said. "We all wanted to be a part of something important, and of course we were."

Neeld was assigned sea duty and shipped out immediately aboard the U.S.S. Indra, a small auxiliary repair ship, which was en route across the Pacific to join a fleet off the coast of Okinawa.

"The morning of May 11, there was a kamikaze attack," he said in a written statement. "I was frantically passing clips of shells to Bobby [Bowman, a crewman from Beaumont, TX] when something hit my helmet with enough force to knock me off my feet. My ears were ringing. I couldn't focus my eyes.

"Blood on my life jacket told me I'd been hit. From what seemed a great distance, I could hear people screaming for a Medic. Then I passed out.'

The carrier Bunker Hill, the ship which the U.S.S. Indra was closest too, had been hit by two kamikazes and a piece of shrapnel from the explosion had gotten inside his helmet, Neeld said.

"I had a bad scalp laceration," he said. "Bobby got hit too, but his injury, like mine, was minor."

Both men were taken by a small boat to the hospital ship, Hope, anchored outside the battle zone, Neeld said.

"I spent most of the time on board a ship in a hospital," he said. "Then that fall, they dropped the atom bomb and the war was over."

Never Forgetting

Neeld's experience is just one of dozens of war stories recently collected and video taped by Tyler Junior College to be contributed to a national archive maintained by the American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress.

The archive, known as the Veterans History Project, was created in October 2000 as a means of chronicling the stories and memories of America's war veterans before the opportunity passes.

"There are 19 million war veterans living in the United States today, but every day we lose 1,700 of them," the project's Web site stated.

The Veterans History Project records experiences from World War I, World War II, and the Korean, Vietnam, and Persian Gulf wars. It includes all participants in those wars - men and women, civilian and military.

The project also documents the contributions of civilian volunteers, support staff, and war industry workers as well as the experiences of military personnel from all ranks and all branches of service, including the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, and Navy, U.S. Coast Guard and Merchant Marine.

Currently, more than 800 VHP partners across the country, including TJC, are helping to recorded stories and memories of war veterans.

TJC, through it's Seniors College division of its School of Continuing Studies, announced its plans to participate in the national effort last spring, but wanted to focused squarely on veterans.

"There are many veteran throughout East Texas and their storied and life experiences are a treasure we must not let slip away," Bobbye Rucker, TJC Seniors college coordinator, said in a released statement.

The college's interviews began Sept. 8 and concluded Oct. 10.

Neeld was among the more than 100 area veterans to visit the college.

"I think it's, number one, was a great idea," he said. "I was proud to participate in it."

Interviewees who participated in the TJC project will also be honored during a, "Tribute to Veterans," ceremony scheduled for 7 p.m. Tuesday in the Wise Auditorium on the college campus, located on Mahon Avenue.

"The public is invited to join us as we recognize veterans who have served in World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam war and Desert Storm," Rucker said. "We appreciate the service of the veterans, and we are grateful that so many of them have shared their memories with us and recorded them for the history project."

Neeld said he is looking forward to the ceremony and meeting other veterans who too part in the project.

"We're looking forward to a good turnout," he said. "Of course, it will be nice to be recognized."

Fred Peters, TJC's director of marketing and public information, said the video taped interviews will be submitted to the Library of Congress following the ceremony.

"The stories of these men and women are incredible," Rucker said. "This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for memories to be open to the world and for posterity."

Those wanting more about the Veterans History Project can visit HERE!!!!!. To read or listen to submitted stories or experiences, visit HERE!!!!!.

Shalina Ramirez may be reached via email to citybeat@jacksonvilleprogress.com.

Copyright © 2003 Jacksonville Daily Progress
~~~~~~~~~~
This is...
Gunny G's...
GLOBE and ANCHOR
Marines Sites & Forums
By R.W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Semper Fidelis
~~~~~~~~~~

LIBERTY's STEAMROLLER: GEORGE S. PATTON

20th Century Heroes

Liberty’s Steamroller
by William Norman Grigg

A cultured, perceptive man of principle, General George S. Patton fought for freedom as one of America’s greatest military geniuses.

O God, thou art my God; early will I seek thee; my soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee in a dry and thirsty land, where no water is; To see thy power and thy glory, so as I have seen thee in the sanctuary....

My soul followeth hard after thee. Thy right hand upholdeth me. But those that seek my soul, to destroy it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth. They shall fall by the sword.... But the king shall rejoice in God; every one that sweareth by him shall glory, but the mouth of them that speak lies shall be stopped.

— From Psalm 63
General Patton’s favorite Bible verse


20th Century Heroes - $29.95

The popular "20th Century Heroes" series from THE NEW AMERICAN has been compiled into a handsome hardcover volume! Profiling 25 individuals from different lands and different fields of endeavor, all fought for freedom and made significant contributions to the cause of liberty. Containing more than 175 stunning illustrations and oversized at 11 ¼" x 8 5/8", this beautiful book brings to life the tremendous character, noble traits, and inextinguishable spirit found in each of the profiled heroes. A perfect gift item! (2000, 208pp, hb) [Order] [View Cart/Checkout]

‘‘Piety" is not a word commonly associated with the memory of General George S. Patton, also known as "Old Blood and Guts" — a man quite properly regarded as the embodiment of America’s martial tradition. The late George C. Scott’s Oscar-winning film portrayal of Patton, which was as much caricature as tribute, has immortalized the general as a human juggernaut to whom everything, including worship, was subordinated to an all-consuming passion for war. But as his posthumously published memoir War As I Knew It documents, Patton was a cultured and perceptive man of principle for whom war was a means of protecting freedom.

Although his granite-willed determination to destroy the enemy’s capacity for warfare is well known, Patton’s capacity for melancholy reflection upon war’s ugliness is not. Upon arriving in Normandy, Patton noted in his journal that he attended a Field Mass "where all of us were armed. As we knelt in the mud in the slight drizzle, we could distinctly hear the roar of the guns, and the whole sky was filled with airplanes on their missions of destruction … quite at variance with the teachings of the religion we were practicing."

George Gosselin, a much-decorated veteran of Patton’s army, observed that while the general was a "taskmaster" who demanded exemplary order and discipline within the ranks, he was also a man of profound and sincere faith. It should not be forgotten, wrote Gosselin, that "this man, who was so hard on himself and others, was totally soft on God." "I am a strong believer in prayer," declared General Patton on one occasion. "There are three ways that men get what they want: by planning, by working, and by praying. Any great military operation takes careful planning. Then you must have well trained troops to carry it out. But between the plan and the operation there is always the unknown. That unknown spells success or failure. Some people call that getting the breaks; I call it God. God has His part or margin in everything. That’s where prayer comes in."

As a believer, Patton’s God was Christ, not Mars. As a master strategist given to fits of tactical genius he couldn’t explain, Patton understood the need for focused ruthlessness in confronting an insurgent foe; as a Christian, he understood and practiced the virtue of mercy in dealing with a conquered enemy. These complementary aspects of Patton’s personality were on display during an interview with the Vicar of Sicily after Patton’s forces routed the Italian Army. "I assured him," wrote Patton, "that I was amazed at the stupidity and gallantry of the Italian Army; stupid, because they were fighting for a lost cause, and gallant, because they were Italians." Patton asked the Vicar to call upon the Italians to surrender in order to prevent needless bloodshed. "As a matter of fact," wrote Patton, "I called off the air and naval bombardments we had arranged, because I felt enough people had been killed, and felt that with the drive of the 2nd Armored Division we could take the place without inflicting unproductive losses on the enemy."

On another occasion, Patton referred reproachfully to what he called "the seemingly barbaric bombardment of the centers of cities" during the war, a practice that did not comport with Patton’s sense of martial chivalry and the moral principles of just warfare. "Kill all the Germans you can," urged the general during the Third Army’s unprecedented drive across Europe, "but do not put them up against a wall and kill them. Do your killing while they are still fighting. After a man has surrendered, he should be treated exactly in accordance with the Rules of Land Warfare, and just as you would hope to be treated if you were foolish enough to surrender. Americans do not kick people in the teeth after they are down."

George Smith Patton was born in California in 1885, and at the age of five he informed his parents of his intention of becoming a "great general." "When he learned to read, the first book he bought was a history of decisive battles," recounted Colonel Robert S. Allen in Lucky Forward, his memoir of serving in Patton’s Third Army. "In school he was always organizing sham battles. On his honeymoon in France, he took his young bride to historic battlefields and fortresses. Later, when stationed in Hawaii, he and his wife and young children would stage assault landings while on sailing trips. Even when playing his beloved polo, and fox hunting, he played at war." Patton received his Cavalry commission in 1909. After representing the U.S. at the 1912 Olympic Games, Patton took part in General John J. Pershing’s punitive raid into Mexico in 1916. Pershing took Patton to France in 1917 as a staff captain, and Patton finished World War I as a commander of a tank brigade.

During a mere 13 months of combat command in World War II — a little more than a month in northern Africa, 38 days in Sicily, 318 days in north-west Europe — Patton gradually showed himself to be America’s greatest fighting general. Under his command, the Third Army killed or captured 1.4 million soldiers of the Third Reich, while enduring the lowest casualty rate of any Allied army in the European Theater of Operations (ETO). A strategic assessment of Allied generals compiled by the German Oberkommando Herres (high command) described Patton as "the most modern, and the only, master of the offensive" among Allied commanders: "Patton is the most dangerous general on all fronts. The tactics of other generals are known and countermeasures can be effected against them. Patton’s tactics are daring and unpredictable. He fights not only the troops opposing him, but the Reich."

This ironic tribute from Patton’s enemies is made more ironic still in light of the post-war smear campaign, mounted by Soviet sympathizers in the press and acted upon by a pro-Soviet political establishment, depicting the general as a covert Nazi sympathizer. "It is not an exaggeration to state that Patton fought two wars in the ETO: one against the enemy and one against higher authorities for the opportunity to fight the enemy," notes Colonel Allen. After Germany surrendered on May 7, 1945, Patton realized that our Soviet "allies" — who had begun the war as co-aggressors with National Socialist Germany — were in fact our enemy, and he urged his superiors to evict the Soviets from central and eastern Europe.

In a conversation with then-Undersecretary of War Robert P. Patterson that took place in Austria shortly after the Nazi surrender, Patton complained that the "point system" being used to de-mobilize Third Army troops was destroying the Third Army, and creating a vacuum that the Soviets would exploit. "Mr. Secretary, for God’s sake, when you go home, stop this point system; stop breaking up these armies," pleaded the general. "Let’s keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to these people [the Soviets]. This is the only language they understand." Asked by Patterson — who would become Secretary of War a few months later — what he would do, Patton replied: "I would have you tell the [Red Army] where their border is, and give them a limited time to get back across. Warn them that if they fail to do so, we will push them back across it."

Patton knew that the Red Army was weak, under-supplied, and vulnerable, and that if Europe were to be freed from totalitarian despotism, the West would have to act before the Soviets consolidated their position. "Oh George," came the condescending reply from Patterson, "you … have lost sight of the big picture."

That "big picture," as leftist historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. explained in the July/August 1995 issue of Foreign Affairs, "was to commit the United States to postwar international structures before [victory] … could return the nation to its old habits." In order to keep our nation entangled in the growing network of international bodies, a credible foreign menace was needed, and the Soviets were perfectly cast in the part. "It is to Joseph Stalin that Americans owe the 40-year suppression of the isolationist impulse," wrote Schlesinger with approval.

Had Patton been permitted to drive the Soviets from Europe, millions of people would have been spared decades of abject oppression, and the criminal elite that continues to dominate most of eastern and central Europe might never have come to power. Patton understood, and warned his superiors, that if the Soviets were allowed to consolidate their grip, "we have failed the liberation of Europe; we have lost the war!" Patton, an honorable and patriotic man, was apparently unable to accept the fact that while he and his soldiers fought to liberate their fellow men from tyranny, those above him in policy-making positions were seeking to control the world, not to emancipate it. Thus Patton was traduced in the servile press as a covert "Nazi sympathizer" and stripped of his command shortly before his fatal automobile accident on December 9, 1945.

Patton "was a man who trained and disciplined his mind and body nearly every day of his life for the role he had always known he was to play," recorded Patton’s nephew, Fred Ayer, Jr., in his book Before the Colors Fade: Portrait of a Soldier. "[He was] a man who believed in the aristocracy of achievement and in the sanctity of his country’s course. He was conceited, sometimes ruthless, often inconsiderate and outwardly very, very tough. He was often too much the impetuous showman and yet a deep and careful thinker. But he was also magnificently well-read, deeply religious, softhearted, emotional and easily moved to tears."

It is quite likely that Patton possessed the finest military mind our nation ever produced, and that mind was the result of a deep and expansive study of history. "Papa always told me that the thing was to be a good soldier," recalled the general. "Next was to be a good scholar." It was Patton’s scholarly exertions that made his soldierly exploits possible. "To be a successful soldier you must know history," Patton advised in War As I Knew It. "Read it objectively. Dates and even the minute details of tactics are useless. What you must know is how man reacts. Weapons change, but man who uses them changes not at all.... To win battles you do not beat weapons — you beat the soul of man, of the enemy man." Because he was a diligent student of the past, noted Ayer, Patton "would accurately be able to foretell much of the future."

Not only was Patton an omnivorous reader, he was blessed with uncanny powers of retention, and could quote extensively from nearly anything he read — the Bible, military history, Shakespeare, even the Koran (which he read as preparation for his arrival in northern Africa). While Patton was stationed in Hawaii as a colonel, he maintained a personal library containing hundreds of books — histories, biographies, memoirs, and political works — nearly all of which had been read and annotated with margin notes.

His preternatural gifts of retention and recall proved indispensable during the Third Army’s mad dash across Europe. "He collected maps the way some men do art treasures," recalls Colonel Allen. "He knew the entire road net of France and Germany by memory, and the details of every major battlefield." Before his arrival in Normandy, Patton devoured Douglas Southall Freeman’s The Norman Conquest, paying particular attention to the roads used by William the Conqueror during his campaigns in Normandy and Brittany almost nine centuries earlier. Using those ancient roads, explained Patton, provided his army with valuable avenues of attack "when the enemy resorts, as he always does, to demolition."

Patton’s diligent study of military history could have spared our nation one of its most painful defeats, had Patton’s superiors been willing to listen to him. In 1937, during his assignment in Hawaii, then-Colonel Patton composed a detailed report predicting, in unsettling detail, the sneak attack by Japan against Pearl Harbor four years later. Taking note of the fact that Japan’s 1904 sneak attack upon Russian forces at Port Arthur began the victorious campaign in that war, Patton warned that "an attack like that is perfectly feasible if we’re off guard.... They haven’t forgotten how well it worked." Patton’s astute assessment, if followed, may have saved countless American lives, but his superiors had a different agenda. "I turned [the report] in to the ranking naval officer of the command and he just put it in his safe," Patton recalled later. "Nobody else had the combination except his own houseboy, [who] was, of course, a good loyal Japanese. Nobody ever saw the report again — not on our side, anyway."

As this incident illustrates, Patton’s devoted study and his intuitive gifts allowed him to get inside the head of an enemy, in this case the Japanese. He proved to be an equally pellucid student of the German military as well. "I have studied the German all my life," reflected Patton in War As I Knew It. "I have read the memoirs of his generals and political leaders. I have even read his philosophers and listened to his music. I have studied in detail the accounts of every damn one of his battles. I know exactly how he will react under any given set of circumstances. He hasn’t the slightest idea what I am going to do. Therefore, when the time comes, I’m going to whip the hell out of him."

‘‘Throughout his life, [Patton] completely dominated every unit he commanded," recalled Colonel Allen. "Yet in dominating, he did not domineer. Patton always led men. He did not rule them. This vital distinction explains many things about him. It explains why the troops called him ‘Georgie.’ Why his men and units were always the most soldierly, the most efficient, the most aggressive, and cockiest. Why he always got so much out of them." "I served with General George S. Patton," proudly recalls military historian Porter B. Williamson in his book Patton’s Principles. "No man served under Gen. Patton; he was always serving with us."

Patton’s well-publicized contempt for soldiers who professed to suffer from "battle fatigue," or who had dodged combat through self-inflicted wounds, was the obverse of his respect for personal courage. In War As I Knew It, the general recalled that whenever he would come across a soldier with self-inflicted wounds, "I would … say, ‘Now, all of you other soldiers listen,’ and would use about three lines of choice profanity and state that, by wounding himself, he not only showed he was a coward, but also added to the labor and risk of the brave men who did not use this means of getting out of battle."

While Patton certainly understood the horrors of combat, he also understood that it was useless to "take counsel of one’s fears" when there were battles to fight. "I don’t admit the existence of battle fatigue, because in war you can’t admit the existence of things like that," he explained. "Once you concede its reality, you admit the reality of demoralization. You can’t win battles with demoralized troops." Nor did he allow himself ever to display even the slightest hint of fear or doubt in the midst of battle. "Patton was scared, discouraged, and weary on many occasions, as he would frankly admit afterward," notes Colonel Allen. "He never claimed to be devoid of fear. It was not unusual for him to return from the lines and relate that he had been frightened."

"If we take the generally accepted definition of bravery as a quality which knows no fear, I have never seen a brave man," reflected Patton. "All men are frightened. The more intelligent they are, the more frightened they are. The courageous man is the man who forces himself, in spite of his fears, to carry on. Discipline, pride, self-respect, self-confidence, and the love of glory are attributes which will make a man courageous even if he is afraid."

Among Patton’s keys to victory were preparation and discipline. "A pint of sweat saves a gallon of blood," he noted in his memoirs, and he had the advantage of inheriting an exceptionally well trained Third Army from Lt. General Courtney H. Hodges. He also demanded that his army meet the highest and least forgiving standards of discipline and comportment, because it is through discipline that men overcome their fears on the battlefield.

"All human beings have an innate resistance to obedience," wrote Patton. "Discipline removes the resistance and, by constant repetition, makes obedience habitual and subconscious. Where would an undisciplined football team get?... Battle is more exigent than football. No sane man is unafraid in battle, but discipline produces in him a form of vicarious courage which, with his manhood, makes for victory. Self-respect grows directly from discipline. The Army saying, ‘Who ever saw a dirty soldier with a medal?’ is largely true."

Patton also displayed "intense loyalty to his men," recalled Colonel Allen, and he gave personal attention to men of outstanding courage. On one occasion he came across a soldier who had been run over by a tank and nearly cut in two. The general personally administered morphine and tended to the injured man as he succumbed to his fatal injuries. According to Patton, nearly 80 percent of an army commander’s mission "is to arouse morale in his men." Patton’s carefully cultivated image — the spit-shined cavalry boots, ivory-handled revolvers, the bulldog demeanor — was not merely an exercise in vanity, but a reflection of his leadership strategy.

Patton was also "the only army commander in the ETO who was briefed by enlisted men," notes Allen. "He listened to them as attentively as he did to officers." Patton demanded that the officers "talk with the troops": "They know more about the war than anybody. Make them tell you all of their gripes. Make sure they know we are doing everything we can to help them. The soldiers have to win the war. We cannot do it." Williamson points out that while Patton understood and strictly enforced the discipline of rank, he readily mingled with his men. "He talked with all of the soldiers," writes Williamson. "He touched the soldiers with a handshake or a slap on the back." Although Patton’s insistence upon obedience to uniform regulations was legendary, he also respected those soldiers who had dirtied themselves in combat, and no soldier "was so dirty or greasy that Gen. Patton would decline to shake his hand.... If a man deserved a compliment, Gen. Patton would snap to attention and salute the man for his work." Patton was also "the only senior ETO commander who always thanked and commended his troops upon the completion of a campaign, not with a merely perfunctory ‘well done’ statement, but a heartfelt message that he wrote himself," recalls Colonel Allen.

Williamson testifies that the respect shown by Patton to his troops was heartily reciprocated: "When we were in the dust and dirt of the desert and the salute was not required, I have seen soldiers try to form a straight line and salute Gen. Patton when he would drive past their area." The devotion of Patton’s men, summarizes Colonel Allen, was the product of "three deep-seated beliefs: That he was invincible in battle; that he was loyal to his men and always looked out for their interests; that he was as courageous as he demanded others should be."

Following the Allies’ disastrous loss to Rommel’s German-Italian panzer army at Tunisia’s Kasserine Pass in February 1943, Patton was appointed to replace Lt. General Lloyd Frendenall as head of the 2nd U.S. Corps. Upon taking command of a demoralized force that had suffered great losses in men, matériel, and momentum, Patton — at the time a two-star general — issued what he described as "a simplified directive of war: Use steamroller strategy; that is, make up your mind on course and direction of action, and stick to it." But he understood that strategic inflexibility depends upon tactical flexibility: "[I]n tactics, do not use steamroller strategy. Attack weakness. Hold them by the nose and kick them in the pants."

Few if any field commanders in history have been as tactically adaptable as Patton, and while he was an assiduous student of both warfare and history, he was quite at a loss to explain his gifts. "Whether these tactical insights of mine are the result of inspiration or insomnia, I have never been able to determine, but nearly every tactical idea I have ever had has come into my head full-born, much after the manner of Minerva from the head of Jupiter," Patton reflected. But his tactical decisions always served his overall strategy, which was rooted in Napoleon’s maxim that "the purely defensive is doomed to defeat."

"Wars are not won by defensive tactics," he explained. "Pacifists would do well to study the Siegfried and Maginot Lines, remembering that these defenses were forced; that Troy fell; that the walls of Hadrian succumbed; that the Great Wall of China was futile; and that, by the same token, the mighty seas which are alleged to defend us can also be circumvented by a resolute and ingenious opponent," admonished the general. "In war, the only sure defense is offense, and the efficiency of offense depends upon the warlike souls of those conducting it."

"General Patton always hated those military and political leaders who delayed, regrouped, consolidated gains, defended land, dug foxholes, or would permit any act which would prolong the war without any thought of the soldiers on both sides that would die from the delay," observed military historian Porter B. Williamson. "It’s a waste of fine young men to stay in fixed positions and see who can send over the most shells," explained General Patton. "It costs too many men to stay in fixed positions where the enemy can strike. We will keep moving and the enemy will always hit where we have been and not where we are. When the enemy is firing at where we have been, we can tell exactly where they have their firepower. We will move fast and destroy the enemy where he can be easily killed." To his Third Army Patton attached the nickname "Hell on Wheels" — an apt summary of his strategic vision. Patton’s key tactical insight was, "Never let the enemy pick the battle site. We will fight where we want to fight and not where the enemy wants to fight. We will always keep the odds on our side."

During his 13 months in combat in WW II, recalls military historian Colonel Paul D. Hawkins, Patton "never issued a defensive order. His theory — attack, attack, attack, and, when in doubt, attack again — shortened the war by never giving the enemy a chance to organize or reorganize enough to make a concerted attack against him." Although Patton, like most men of accomplishment and ambition, had a flair for self-promotion, he readily acknowledged that his successes were not the product of his unaided genius and the disciplined, capable troops under his command. "God has been very good to us," he acknowledged on the eve of his dramatic relief mission at Bastogne. "We have never retreated; we have suffered no defeats, no famine, no epidemics. This is because a lot of people back home have been praying for us. We have to pray for ourselves, too."

By September 1944, the Patton-commanded Third Army had blitzed across France, crushed German defenses, and was poised to strike at the very heart of the Reich. Within sight of the German border, Patton’s drive literally ran out of gas and ammunition. Supreme Allied Commander General Dwight Eisenhower had diverted the crucial supplies from Patton’s Army to British Commander Bernard Montgomery, who was staging an airborne invasion of Holland. Montgomery’s operation was a debacle that cost the lives of 17,000 British and American soldiers, while Patton, immobilized by the diversion, could only watch in impotent frustration. "It was my opinion that this was the momentous error of the war," Patton wrote in his memoir.

As journalist Jeffrey St. John wrote in an earlier profile of Patton in The New American, "Stopping Patton’s army from a thrust into Germany prolonged the war and cost greater Allied casualties." Patton, who understood that to make war means to sacrifice the lives of good men, found the needless waste of lives unconscionable. Compounding this outrage, observes St. John, was the fact that Eisenhower’s decision "gave the Soviets the necessary time to advance toward Germany from the east and to occupy Eastern Europe. Eisenhower’s later decision to allow the Soviets to capture Berlin has been defended on the grounds of saving lives — but he threw away lives earlier by halting Patton in August 1944. Keeping Patton from taking Prague proved equally favorable to the Soviets."

In April 1945, the Third Army had crossed the Rhine, rolled across Germany, and were within 50 miles of Berlin, when Patton’s superiors issued a nearly inexplicable order: He was ordered to withdraw 100 miles west, over captured territory. The vacuum was quickly filled by the Red Army, which swarmed over Czechoslovakia and eastern Germany.

"This war stopped right where it started," observed Patton during a closed, off-the-record press conference on May 8, 1945. "Right in the Hun’s backyard which is now Hitler’s graveyard. But that’s not the end of this business by any means. What the tin-soldier politicians in Washington and Paris have managed to do today is another story you’ll be writing for a long while.... They have allowed us to kick hell out of one b****** and at the same time forced us to help establish a second one as evil or more evil than the first. We have won a series of battles, not a war for peace. We’re headed down another long road to losing another peace."

Over the next several months, as Patton’s understanding of the betrayal grew, he became resolved to speak out publicly. "I will resign when I have finished this job [as military governor of Bavaria], which will be not later than Dec. 26," wrote Patton in an October 1945 diary entry. "I hate to do it, but I have been caged all my life, and whether they appreciate it or not, America needs some honest men who dare say what they think, not what they think people want them to think."

Unfortunately, Patton’s voice was stilled before it could be raised to protest the perfidy of our political establishment. On December 9, 1945, Patton and General Hobart Gay were backseat passengers in a military staff sedan speeding along the autobahn en route to a pheasant hunt. An army truck traveling in the opposite direction suddenly crossed their lane, creating the conditions for a head-on collision. Both drivers swerved to avoid a direct collision, but the side-swiping impact threw the general forward, striking his head on the sedan’s interior dome light, and then whiplashing him back. Although both the driver and General Gay were uninjured, Patton suffered crushed vertebrae in his upper spinal column, leaving him paralyzed from the neck down and mortally wounded.

"This is a hell of a way for a soldier to die," protested Patton as he lay paralyzed in an Army hospital bed in Heidelberg. For 12 days the indomitable 60-year-old general fought a rearguard action against death, valiantly battling an injury that would have killed most men within, at most, 72 hours. But on December 23rd the hero finally succumbed to pneumonia while in the company of his wife, Beatrice. "It is too dark; I mean too late," whispered the general as death came to claim him.

"He was buried in the drizzle of a fog-shrouded December morning on the day before Christmas in the American Military Cemetery at Hamm in Luxembourg," writes biographer Ladislas Farago. There he joined 5,076 other fallen Third Army heroes, whose honored remains repose beneath crosses and Stars of David. In death, as on the battlefield, Patton could be found amid his men. "The dead, most of whom had been killed fighting in the Battle of the Bulge, came from all of what were then the forty-eight states, from the District of Columbia, and from Alaska and Hawaii," records Farago.

Given Patton’s bottomless courage, his voracious appetite for the written word, and his unyielding sense of honor, his legacy is perhaps best summarized in his favorite quotation from Pilgrim’s Progress: "‘My sword I give to him that will succeed me in my pilgrimage, and my courage and skill to him that can get it. My works and scars I carry with me to be a witness for me that I have fought His battles who will now be my rewarder.’ So he passed over and all the trumpets sounded for him on the other side."
.

© Copyright 2003 American Opinion Publishing Incorporated

NOTE:
For those interested in further online reading on Patton....
~~~~~~~~~~
This is...
Gunny G's...
GLOBE and ANCHOR
Marines Sites & Forums
By R.W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Semper Fidelis
~~~~~~~~~~

SOLEMN DAY GIVES WAY TO MARINE CORPS CELEBRATION

This page has been printed from the following URL:
http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/11092003/maine/59756.htm

11-9-2003

Solemn day gives way to Marine Corps celebration

By Karen Sanborn
news@seacoastonline.com

KITTERY - Darby Healey stood somberly in the frigid, blustery air at John Paul Jones Park Saturday morning.

As the Seacoast Detachment of the Marine Corps League fired three shots into the air and set a wreath in front of the Marine memorial, tears crept from her eyes as she remembered her father.

J.T. Jenkins was his name. He served as a Marine for 30 years and was a prisoner of war for four. Healey still wears his dog tags, rectangular and gold in color.

She recalled how her father told her the tags kept him safe when he was taken prisoner.

Healey said her father helped start the Seacoast Detachment. He died before he ever saw the park’s memorial.

"He was proud to be part of this group," Healey said. "And I was proud of him."

Healey was one of a small group who gathered to watch the Marine Corps League honor wounded and departed Marines. With Marines dressed to the nines in red jackets and blue pants, the ceremony also marked Corps’ 228th birthday.

Commandant Frank Wisinski read a tribute to express "gratitude and pride to those who fought for the preservation of life."

Former Gunnary Sgt. Vic DiSilvestro set a wreath in front of the memorial, then saluted it. After a brief prayer, a six-gun salute cut through the air. Taps was played as the Marines stood at attention.

After the ceremony, Corps members stopped to reflect.

"This is a very significant event," said Wisinski, who served from 1957 to 1961. "The motto of the Marine Corps is to continue the honor the dignity, the bravery, the courage and the patriotism. Most of all, this is for fallen Marines and many who are disabled, for all those who have made a sacrifice on behalf of this country."

Ray Maher, a Marine from Hampton, served from 1969-1974. He believes the Corps is one of the few military organizations that celebrates its birthday each year.

"I think it’s just the brotherhood that makes the Marine Corps," Maher said. "It’s ‘once a Marine, always a Marine.’ That about sums it up. It never goes away."

The Marine Corps League members looked forward to the evening ball, held on Saturday evening.

Healey remembered how her parents looked forward to the event each year.

"When I was a child, I used to watch my parents get dressed up for the ball," Healey said. "My dad in his blues and my mom in a fancy dress. That was the big deal."

~

This page has been printed from the following URL:
http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/11092003/maine/59756.htm

Copyright 2003 Seacoast Newspapers, a division of Ottaway Newspapers Inc., all rights reserved.



~~~~~~~~~~
This is...
Gunny G's...
GLOBE and ANCHOR
Marines Sites & Forums
By R.W. "Dick" Gaines
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-72
Semper Fidelis
~~~~~~~~~~