Six Minutes, and the Rising Sun Becomes A Setting Sun

      The Pacific Ocean covers 64 million square miles, almost a third of the earth’ s total surface area, and is larger than all the land masses combined.  The modern tools of satellites, global positioning, and jet flight have made it seem conquerable, but it was not so long ago, when it was the gigantic blanket of mystery from which brief stunning events based only on courage, instinctual reckoning, and luck were brought forth from its fathomless impenetrability.  The first was the Sunday morning surprise attack on Pearl Harbor by the Imperial Japanese Navy on December 7th, 1941, achieving a devastating blow to the American Pacific Fleet through a coordinated complex plan delivered over thousands of miles of ocean to ruthless perfection.  The second occurred 69 years ago today on June 4th, when on the tiny atoll of Midway in the northern Pacific, a more spectacular, random, incredible triumph that spun the destiny of World War II on its heels occurred in only six fateful minutes.  The tremendous tidal surges of history that comprised the twentieth century were focused in a black hole like compression of time and place and from the other end of that brief interval was fashioned an alternate universe.

     The incredible story of Midway is tightly woven into prose by America’s military historian, Samuel Eliot Morison, in his book “The Two Ocean War“. Readers of the RAMPARTS will recognize Morison as the author of my favorite Christopher Columbus narrator as Morison sailed the seas about which he wrote. Similarly Morison as a Lieutenant Commander in the US Navy in War World II, functioning as a Naval historian, had intimate access to the the American naval commanders of the conflict known as Midway.
     The battle of Midway was positioned to determine the winner of the Pacific War. The Japanese, having rendered the American battleships useless at Pearl Harbor, intended to do the same to the American carrier fleet, the remaining Pacific long arm left to the United States. The plan was part of the denial of any part of the Pacific to American military access at a time when re-fueling was a mainstay of diesel powered carriers. The taking of Midway and the Aleutian Islands of Alaska in the wake of America being at its weakest would lay an impenetrable “ribbon defense” across the Pacific that would make Hawaii indefensible and the west coast of America the front lines. The brilliant Japanese strategic admiral Yamamoto saw this as the means of taking America out of the Pacific war and Japan in the position of absolute lord of the Pacific and East Asia. Recognizing the period of numbers superiority he was living in in the post-Pearl Harbor world, he intended to bring overwhelming force to bear to assure success. He brought forward Japan’s four finest aircraft carriers and 158 other ships of war, and placed the forward spear in the hands of his most trusted Admiral Nagumo, the veteran of the Pearl Harbor victory. His American counterpart, Admiral Chester Nimitz, could scrounge up only 76 ships, of which a third were tired up in the secondary threat to Alaska and unavailable. Even more devastating to Nimitz was that he had available for defense at most 2 carriers, the Hornet and the Enterprise, as the Yorktown had been severely damaged in the sea batttle of the Coral Sea only a few weeks earlier and was heading for Pearl for repairs. Pitching a perfect battle would be insufficient as the strike capacity of four carriers would easily overwhelm those of two and the American fleet would be a ghost. Only one possible outcome offered even the slightest whisper of success, if by some miracle, Nimitz could achieve the surprise at Midway, that Yamamoto achieved at Pearl.
     The miracle was the eccentric team of code breakers located at Pearl Harbor lead by Naval Commander Joseph Rochefort intercepting Japanese radio traffic and splicing together sufficient information gleaned from intercepts to suggest that the time was early June and the main strike target Midway. The identifiable information of the intercepts was barely 10% of the total volume – imagine gleaning the meaning of a paragraph where only one word out of ten of a sentence is deciphered. Nimitz had little choice but to take a chance on the intelligence information and try to achieve surprise, or simply sit back and assure annihilation. That he was not about to do. He put together carrier strike force headed by Rear Admiral Raymond Spruance, an unlikely substitute for his usuall lead, the ill Admiral Halsey, who suggested the non-aviator Spruance for the job, a sacrilege, as carriers were felt to be able to be managed effectively only by those with flight-deck experience. His warrior wingman would be Rear Admiral Fletcher of the Yorktown, the carrier achieving 90 days of repairs in 48 hours at Pearl, and immediately setting sail for Midway.

     Nimitz took the spotty information regarding Japanese intentions and ran with it. In a moment of brilliance he positioned his two carriers northeast of Midway, out of reach of Nagumo’s search planes and therefore blind to him at a time before satellites, while Nimitz could try to search for Nagumo’s fleet approaching from the southeast from planes taking off from Midway. The surprise would have to be pulled off, yet Nimitz had no illusions about the Japanese superiority in numbers and quality of equipment and hoped only to at least bloody their nose.

     On the early morning of June 4th, 1942, the awesome Japanese attack force unraveled a blistering attack on Midway Island. Over a hundred planes were involved in the first wave designed to eliminate the Midway airfields preventing an air defense from the threatening the invasion force as they closed in for the kill. As destiny began to unravel, Midway aviators put up enough of a fight to prevent demolition of the runway and the returning air squadron recommended another wave. Nagumo assuming the threat was land based only, began to arm his reserve air squadron positioned to defend against any sea based attack into a force with bombs instead of torpedoes appropriate for the second wave. He was in the midst of rearming when he was stunned with the report from one of his search planes that a ten ship strike force with carrier had been spotted, which was the lagging Yorktown coming from Pearl Harbor. Nagumo took fifteen fateful minutes to discern what this new information might mean, and decided to reverse the order for the second wave, and rather launch the squadron rearmed with torpedoes in search of the carrier. Fate struck a fateful chime; as the rearming process was re-initiated an American air squadron discovered the Japanese in the open ocean, and attempted a suicidal charge into the teeth of the Japanese defenses. 44 dive bombers and fighters flew in; 36 to their immediate deaths, and no hits on the Japanese ships.

     At 1022 am on the morning of June 4th, 1942, Admiral Nagumo looked up and saw clear skies, a complete Japanese victory. He could now concentrate on landing his residual Midway attack force and re-arm the fighters in search of what he assumed was a single carrier. He had only 100 seconds to revel in his illusion. At 1024 am , with four carrier decks covered with rearming planes and live ammunition, and the security umbrella of protective fighters now at sea level from the recent attack of the Americans, 37 dive bombers of the USS carrier Enterprise found their four targets defenseless and positioned in a box for squadron takeoff, and screamed down from the skies with the merciless thrust of the killer shark on the unaware seal. Bomb after bomb found their target, and in five minutes the proud Akagi, Kaga, and Soryu were flaming hulks uncontrollably exploding from on deck ordinance. In six minutes, the forward spear of the mighty Imperial Navy had been decapitated, and with the crushing loss, the war itself. The fourth carrier Koryu avoided her fate only until 1700 hours when a residual feeding frenzy of American planes found her and sunk the her, the fourth carrier, as well.

     Yamamoto in the space of minutes, had lost his entire carrier group, over 250 planes, most of their pilots, and 220 officers and men. The scope of the defeat in perspective was dramatically more devastating than Pearl Harbor. The Americans lost the Yorktown, but the sacrifice of several hundred brave airman, completely turned the war on its head. The final defeat for Japan in an ever diminishing ocean against an ever stronger opponent was preodained from that moment. The myth that totalitarian regimes produced men of steel while democracies produced soft self interested soldiers was forever put to rest at Midway and the eventual triumph of the free thinking individual was codified. Only four events of World War Two comfortably stand as pivotable moments upon which history turns. The three others are Stalingrad, D-Day, and the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima. The fourth, Midway, stands alone as occurring against the most indescribeable odds, and should be remembered for what men with their backs against the wall can do, when they put their minds and free will up for ransom.

Memorial Day and the Iron Brigade

    

      At one of the dioramas at the Wisconsin’s Veteran’s Museum in Madison, Wisconsin,  stoic, tensed young men in black hats await orders to resist another surge of massed, charging Confederate soldiers in the hellish chaos of battle later referred to as The Cornfield at Antietam in 1862.  They are young men comprised primarily of Wisconsin farmers and city laborers from the 2nd, 6th, and 7th Infantry Regiments and a similar group of men from the 19th Indiana, and later, 24th Michigan.  They know what is about to befall them, and they are braced for what will surely test them to their core.  The officer to the right is about to give the order to fire; a fallen comrade is at their feet to the left and will no longer respond.  There is no doubt to the observer how these men will face their trial of fire, as they were already known by Antietam as a ferocious group of defenders that opponents preferred not to engage.  They were recognized by their army 1858 issue Hardee black hats, that stood in contrast to the more contained kepis worn by other union infantry soldiers.  They were known as the Iron Brigade of the West, and formed the steel backbone of union efforts from Bull Run to Appomattox through the entire breadth of the war.  They are memorialized today, because these young farmers and laborers from the then new state of Wisconsin, in a war known for horrific sacrifice, sustained the greatest number of casualties by percentage of any maintained brigade in the war between the states.  At Gettysburg alone the brigade lost 62%, or 1153 out of 1885 men, the 2nd Wisconsin 77%, the 24th Michigan an astounding 80%.  What brought these unique men together to willfully sacrifice, and continually replenish their catastrophic losses with more of their sons and brothers, again and again, until victory’s relief at Appomattox, is the special calling of all who remembered on this special day of memory for the fallen, Memorial Day.

     The call up in 1861 by President Lincoln for 75,000 90 day volunteers was especially perceived in the West.  The new states of Iowa (1846), Wisconsin (1848), and Minnesota (1858) sought to show their commitment to the Union they had just joined and the importance they felt to the cause of free men.  Governor Randall in Wisconsin had no trouble getting together volunteers.  The regular Army of the United States in 1860 was a minuscule force of which over half the officers took allegiance to the their southern states over their union oath.  Therefore, an officer was essentially any man, other men were willing to follow.  A prominent man could be a Captain if he could support the needs of 80 to 100 men under him, and get them to elect him Captain. A regiment consisted of ten companies and elected a Colonel, two regiments comprised a battalion, and four regiments constituted a brigade, led by a Brigadier General. The approximate 4000 men of the Wisconsin volunteers that started the war were initially led by Rufus King from Milwaukee, a part owner of the Milwaukee Sentinel and Gazette newspaper, appointed by Governor Randall to shepard the men into a fighting force.  King had been a graduate of West Point in the 1830’s, and considered one of the state’s few men with any military experience, though it had been decades since he had resigned his commission.  The training commenced at what would later be known as Camp Randall in Madison , the Brigade’s first action was with  the Army of Virginia at the second Bull Run in August of 1862.  General Rufus King, struggling with epilepsy, would not see battle, and was replaced by a succession of Generals that would obtain acclaim as leaders of this steadily more famous group, including Generals Gibbon, Meredith, Bragg, and Kellog. After Bull Run it was transferred into General Joseph Hooker’s First Corps, where it would enter Antietam in September, 1862, as First Brigade, First Division, First Corps,  a position it would proudly hold until the end of the war.

     At Antietam, the southern commanders would experience the first real northern intransigence of the war as exemplified by the rock hard fighting displayed by the Wisconsin Brigade in the hell of the Cornfield in the single most casualty inflicted day in American military history.  Stonewall Jackson wanted to know who it was in “those damned black hats” that proved impenetrable;  the Union commander McClellan, surmised “they must be made of iron” and the Iron Brigade’s reputation was born.  From Antietam, to Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, Gettysburg and Overland, Richmond-Petersburg,and finally Appomattox, the black hats absorbed punishing blow after blow, yet unlike so many other regiments that disintegrated from the pressure of replenishing after onslaughts, continued to exist as a cornerstone of the Union infantry attack.

     The battle at Gettysburg with its astounding losses of 70% casualty of the brigade secured its reputation for all time.  General John Reynolds, desperate to attain the high ground on the first day of Gettysburg, until the bulk of the Union Army could arrive, sent the the Iron Brigade into the teeth of overwhelming numbers of Confederates entering the town from the north.  The brigade repulsed the southerner’s attempts at achieving tactical advantage, and managed to decimate the Brigade of General Archer, capturing him and hundreds of other southern soldiers.  The respite proved just enough to allow General Meade to secure the round tops at the gates of Gettysburg and force General Lee to impale himself upon the superior ground and ultimately lose the pivotal battle of the war.  A single black hat, lanced with a bullet through its crown, (photo removed at request of museum) represents the courage, and sacrifice of that epic performance.

     The cemeteries of Wisconsin are full of aging monuments to the over 12,000 fallen heroes of the brigade of young Wisconsin boys of that apocalyptic conflict, the names, and memories, progressively worn away by wind and time.  These were young men, the sons of immigrants and immigrants themselves, that wanted to prove their worth to the nation as a whole, and were willing to sacrifice all for the ideal of the American dream.  On this Memorial Day, the trumpets call out their mournful reveille for young men , from across the state, that wanted everyone to know they were an equal and essential part of the American Experience.  There is no measure for personal sacrifice, no capacity to fully understand, what could drive such people to continue to defy the overwhelming odds, and serve, until the job was done, and the cause was secured.  To all on this Memorial Day, thanks and prayers.  On Wisconsin.

A Presidential Campaign, Russian Style

     The United States is about to go into that season of political discourse and verbal combat known as the presidential election process. It seems the previous election is barely over and the next crop of presidential wannabes start lining up and creating distinction between themselves and the person in power. The process has produced coronations, like the second term elections of President Nixon and Reagan, surprise political savants appearing out of nowhere like Presidents Carter, Clinton, and Obama, politicians thrust into the role like Truman and Johnson, and can’t miss politicians that missed, like Senators Muskie, Glenn, and Teddy Kennedy. The journey to the election, no matter how unsatisfying the result, is a grinding battle that takes place in the harsh spotlight of an intense press, the need for voluminous sums of investors, and the capacity to weather rhetorical storms.
       In an important article in the National Review, Paul Gregory gives definitive insight to a much different presidential process, the byzantine, behind the scene struggles of the men who would lead Russia. The election of 2012 is rapidly approaching, and unlike the American version, the battle to determine the winner will take long before the official vote. The epic battle brewing between the former president and current prime minister Vladimir Putin, and the man he chose to replace him, Dmitry Medvedev, is every bit as compelling as the American version, though much of the contest will be shielded from the public eye.
Democracy in the Russian Federation is an evolving concept with no deep historical roots. 400 years of totalitarian Tsarist rule of the Russian empire was disturbed only by the brief blip of the Russian Provisional Government that wobbled out of the upheaval known as the 1917 Russian Revolution, comulnating in the  overthrow of czar Nicholas II. The country barely looked up to see the czar gone, only to be thrust back into civil conflict and the rise of the communists, with 70 years of totalitarian oppression by  communist overloads and demigods like Lenin and Stalin, and a whole host of other unsavory politicos.  The final nail in the totalitarian coffin was driven by the shaky leadership of Mikael Gorbachev, whose glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) concepts to evolve a more humane communism only hastened its collapse by exposure of its fundamental failings, hypocrisies, and conceits.  The whole Potemkin village edifice of a functioning superpower economy came crashing down in 1989 with loss of the vassal states of eastern Europe, and the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union itself. 

      The first direct election for a President in history in 1991, brought a reform minded ex-communist to power, Boriis Yeltsin, who presided the next 8 years over a wild west atmosphere in Russia complete with “shock therapy” capitalism, oligarchy formation of major Russian industries, rampant economic strain, and nasty, bitter regional conflicts such as Chechnya, in provinces that did not achieve separation when the Soviet Union dissolved.  Fragile political parties developed in this period stood no chance surviving the upheaval and the population craved the steadier times provided by autocratic rule.  Yeltsin was replaced by Vladimir Putin, and the conversion of the early seedlings of healthy democracy, a vigorous press, multiple parties, and an independent judiciary, were rapidly silenced.  Stabilization of the Russian economy through weak currency and strong oil exports have rebuilt the Russian veneer of a strong stable central government, but the price has been steep with Putin permitting increasing corruption among supporters, devastating attacks on opponents, and heavy handed governmental tactics that remind many of the closed economy and political apparatchiks of earlier times.   With Putin’s two terms completed in 2008 and his desire to maintain the appearance of respecting the Russian constitution while maintaining power, he appointed himself prime minister and positioned Dmitry Medvedev, a technocrat, to succeed him as President.  I suspect the plan was Medvedev to play caretaker until Putin was free to resume the presidency after the necessary interval of four years. 

     The best laid plans often fail to predict all contigencies, and Putin clearly failed to see how Dmitry Medvedev would grow into the role of president.   He has proven himself competent on the international stage, more engaging then the brutish Putin with other leaders, and inherently more trustworthy.  Surprisingly, his calm, rational demeanor has proven a modern alternative to Putin’s egocentric superman persona, and the russians are beginning to view him as a compelling alternative to the godfather approach of Putin.  As Paul Gregory points out in his terrific article, the secret in Russia is to pick the winner correctly if one wants to prosper, and a surprising number of Russian politicos are hedging their bets.  What will occur over the next year is anybody’s guess, but it is not difficult to see the continuing split personality of the Russia that wants to be modern, and the Russia that wants to be dominant.  Time will tell if the country with its endless resources, will finally grasp its potential and take advantage of its diverse capacities. Putin vs Medvedev, is a heavyweight fight for the future of Russia. The best Presidential debate with the most impact on the battle of free will versus security, may yet be fought in 2012 on a foreign shore.

The President Gets A History Lesson

     Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel visited the White House as a guest of President Obama.  The President, as is his way, once again managed to frame a major address on a controversial subject in direct rebuke to the guest for whom the subject matter has most cause.  President Obama, on the eve of Netanyahu’s visit pointedly undermined 40 years of carefully crafted American diplomacy by declaring the Arab demand for Israel retreat to its pre- 1967 borders as the appropriate basis for Israel’s participation in a peace settlement. Having recently set up Representative Paul Ryan for an uncalled for slap down on a national stage regarding health care, the President attempted this subtly arrogant technique on Netanyahu, but this formidable opponent was not about to allow historical distortion to stand.  Mr. Obama, whatever else his intellectual gifts, tends to show an understanding of history that projects as if he learned it on the back of a cereal box.  Prime Minister Netanyahu determined to take the opportunity of a post meeting press engagement, to take the President to school and teach a course on Middle East History 101.  The accompanying video has rapidly spread across the internet, and perhaps shows once again, why amateurs who dabble in stratospherically difficult historical questions, can look fairly silly:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The questions of the arab israeli conflict have proved resistant to the most dogged and talented of diplomats. The apocalyptic nature of the jewish holocaust of World War II led to the world finally coming to grips with its role in preventing a deserving place for the jewish people in the human story, and the partition of the land of Palestine into Israeli and Arab states was accepted by United Nations Resolution in 1947. Israeli acceptance of the resolution followed, but the Arab powers rejected it. The result was Israel declaring nationhood on May 14, 1948, and the Arab governments of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq attacking the land of Israel the day after in an effort to eradicate it. Israel fought them off, and has been fighting on and off for its existence ever since, under a whithering blizzard of anti-israeli retoric, pre-mediated terrorism, and at times outright war for the next 60 years. The Six Day War of 1967, established Israel as the region’s significant military power in a stunning victory against a three front enemy that led to expansion into Syria, Gaza, Sinai, and the West Bank. Since that time, the faux arab argument has been to state there can be no peace and no acceptance of Israel without the retraction of Israel to its pre-1967 borders. In the interim and several more wars, Israel has withdrawn from Sinai, portions of the West Bank and Gaza. It has declared the need for defensible borders in any collective settlement, but has known in its heart, that the only acceptable border to the region’s arabs is an Israeli border that would exist only in history. The eradication of Israel as an ultimate goal of arab nationalism has always been the cause celebre, and has certainly pre-existed the establishment of the 1967 borders. A telling video from 1958 with Israel’s Ambassador to the United States, the profoundly erudite Abba Eban, shows clearly that the issues have not changed much in 50 years, and it would behoove the President to take a little more objective look at history, before he shows himself to be an historical fool in his efforts to surmount history.
http://youtu.be/9x8l9d3g_8Q

Perpetual War

  

   We are coming upon the tenth anniversary of the conflict loosely described as the War on Terror.  In October, 2001, in response to the atrocity of 9/11 and its identification as the most spectacular component of an ongoing organized war by radical Islamic organizations on to the shores of America, the United States initiated combat operations in Afghanistan.  The described aim of the war was to identify and destroy the elements of terror organizations and to decapitate their developing coordination with like-minded governments.  As put forth by President George W. Bush, there would be no separation considered between the terrorists, and the governments that knowingly harbored them.  An initial rapid success followed, with the collapse of the Taliban government and the elimination of Al Qaeda terrorist structure in Afghanistan.  The critical leadership of the Taliban and Al Qaeda escaped, though, and the war took on the more extended aims and actions that typify the initiation of conflict when ever conflict occurs. The war advanced to remove the tyrant in Iraq.  It required an unhealthy and unstable relationship with Pakistan, a nation torn in half by its desire to be a modern power, and a population that desires to respond to a more reactionary religiously inspired life dogma.  It forced hastily gathered leagues of nations to form military coalitions in Iraq and Afghanistan, only to have the actual brunt of fighting absorbed by the very few, and the commitment of most to waver.  At ten years, it has achieved identifiable triumphs with the destruction of the financial networks of Al Qaeda, overthrow of Hussein in Iraq and stabilization of a violent battleground, capture of the planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, and finally, the death of the original inspiration for the war against America, Osama Bin Laden. Yet it has additionally stirred the secondary effects of sustained conflict, the mutation of radical Islam into other fronts, the emerging position of Iran as a successor to radical instigation, the collapse of governmental structures in the arab world with unclear outcomes and progressive instability, and the ongoing perpetual effort to stabilize the unsolvable problem of Afghanistan.

     America is uncomfortable with  extended conflict.   Its painful wars have tended to have definable ends –  The 8 years of revolutionary war ending in the formation of the country, the brutal four years of the civil war ending slavery and preserving the union, the 5 years of global catastrophe known as World War II ending in complete destruction of totalitarian powers and the unrivalled position of America as the economic and military colossus.   Even the Vietnam War, identified as America’s only “loss”, completed its circle in ten years, with America’s capacity for rapid success returning in 1991 in Kuwait.  The persistently moving endgame, and the enormous cost in material, resources, and blood, cost one president his legacy and led to the election of another committed to the reversal of war directed activities.  The candidate Obama railed against the primary components of the war against terror.  He promised the weary population of America the reversal of the war’s primary weapons in assuring the closure of military confinement of terror combatants at Guantanamo, the stopping of governmental privacy intrusion initiated by the Patriot Act, the removal of forces from Iraq, and the rapid stabilization through intense focus and commitment on the original  incursion of the War on terror, Afghanistan.  The realities of  his position as leader of a warring country has resulted in him failing to achieve any of these stated promises.  In fact, elements of perpetual war are setting in, with the realities of Afghanistan, the threat of Iran, and the expansion of war now on a wholly new and different set of principles to Libya.  As a result, fatigue is developing in the country’s will that has finally begun to cross philosophical boundaries, and may have profound affects on the government’s capacity to sustain conflict. Politico reports a cross section of both Democrats and Republican representatives are beginning to question the very principles for continuing conflict from a common perspective.  Their meeting of minds on the necessity for ending the conflict in Afghanistan bodes poorly for the President continuing to utilize the scenario of “cleaning up the mess” propagated by his political opponents as an acceptable foil for continuing war.

     The conditions of perpetual war are comprehensively understood, and feared by those who study history.  General Colin Powell, fully cognizant of the relatively recent national experience in Vietnam and fearful of historical precedents, defined a national defense posture for American involement in foreign conflicts.  The Powell doctrine stated the components of a conflict involving America should meet the following criteria:

1. A threat to national security is present.

2. A clear objective is definable, and overwhelming  force will be brought to bear to achieve swift conclusion. 

3. The risks and costs have been fully vetted.

4. All other non-violent policy means have been exhausted. 

5. A plausible exit strategy is in place.

6. The consequences of the action have been fully considered.

7. A broad international coalition is in place.

8. The action has the full support of the American people.

     Powell feared perpetual war as a significant danger to a democracy.  The elements of perpetual war include extension across political generations and regimes, the loss of original conflict intent, the conclusion of conflict not through victory but national exhaustion,  and unpredictable outcomes that are contrary to the initial combatant’s goals.  Two conflicts familiar to historians immediately come to mind.  The Hundred Years War between England and France was fought across generations from 1337 to 1453.   The origin of the conflict was a fight over who had the legitimate right to the crown of France. French Normans who had successfully conquered England in 1066 maintained ancestral ties to the French court, and through their rule of the provinces of Normandy, Anjou, and Aquitaine had control over more of France then the French king himself.  When the French throne in 1337 opened without a viable heir, Edward III, king of England and linked to royal France through the Norman and Anjou provincial House of  Plantagenet sought to enforce his right to the French crown. The house of Valois, the traditional line of French kings had a much different interpretation of history, and the battle was forced.  Over generations and kings the war continued, to the staggering loss of half the French population and much of her wealth.  The presence of superior English battle tactics and crushing wins by Edward III at Crecy in 1346, the Black Prince at Poitiers in 1356, and Henry V at Agincort in 1415 in the long run did little to effect outcome, determined ultimately by the extended logistics required by the English and the vastly larger French population committed to the traditional House of Valois.  Joan of Arc’s brief victory in 1429 at Orleans presaged the steady deterioration of the English position until, ultimately exhausted and over extended, the English were forced to give up their ancestral connections to the continent completely in 1453 and become an island nation only.  The war, extended and so devastating, forced what was once a battle of knights and expensive armour, into a war of standing armies, tactics, economic damage, and nationalist rather than royalist  objectives.  The second example is the Thirty Years War, even more complex in its origins, extensive in its expansion, and devastating in its outcome to the continent. This war from 1618 to 1648,  with origins in the protestant catholic schism of the 16th century, grew from local religious intolerances into a trans-continental struggle involving Spain, France, the germanic Holy Roman Empire, the Ottoman empire, the Dutch and the Danish, and the emerging protestant power of the north, Sweden.  The religious origins became blurred and distorted, with Catholics forming coalitions with Protestants against Catholics, Protestants joining up with Muslims against Catholics, and Protestants fighting amongst themselves.  The outcome over generations grew into the concept of nation states, ratified by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, that determined in its essence that catholics and protestants of a country would have to hold fealty to that country over their own religion.  The expense of the conflict was a uniform devastation to the continental economy created by plundering armies and loss of working force, and death to 30 percent of the population of northern Europe.

      The process of perpetual war is well defined and reflects a steady drain on national resources, deterioration in national morale, and progressive loss of capacity for projection of power.  At ten years, with no end in sight, the War on Terror deserves a studied discussion of the means of devolving a nation successfully from conflict, with goals achieved and national integrity intact.  Victory is achievable when it is definable.  Perpetual war is like a pathologic illness, where the perpetuation without victory, turns war into disease management, for an illness with no cure.

Charles The Hammer

     The recent permanent removal by the United States of one of the leading voices in the world for radical Islam, and his desire to “restore” the Islamic Caliphate under shari’a law, has brought up similar instances in history when similar aggressive impulses have been smartly put down by western fortitude.  Of particular note are the efforts of one Charles Martel, leader of the Franks, who in 732, defeated the aggressive invasion out of Iberia of islamic forces projected by the Umayyad Caliphate of Damascus.  Monsieur Martel, literally in French meaning “Hammer”, took his place in history for a definitive victory against islamic warriors that for the nearly one hundred years since the death of Mohammad had known only victory and expansion, and is credited with preserving Europe’s western and Christian genus.  Charles Martel is one of the mythic figures of western civilization, presiding at a time of almost no record keeping.  It is, therefore fun to put forward conjectures about this very real individual, and return him briefly, so many years later, to a return the spotlight of history.

     The Islamic tide of expansionism after the death of Mohammad was rapid and spectacular.  Occurring simultaneously under internal strife, the projection across central Asia, Northern Africa, the residual eastern Roman Empire, and western Europe on the Iberian peninsula reached its zenith by the end of the seventh century.  The bonding message of universal devotion to the islamic message, and the creative governance of rulers with both political dexterity and organized military talent was the driving force in creating the rapid consumption of over five million square miles of disparate tribes and cultures.  Europe, in juxtaposition, was a dysfunctional mess of residual elements of the completely worn out Roman influences, warring tribes, illiterate and disorganized populations, and formidable logistics.  Lacking in any shared value system other than the very early influences of the western church, Europe seemed prime ground for further Islamic expansion. 

     Charles Martel is thought to have been born in 688 AD in the Frankish lands of what is now Herstal, Belgium, in the duchy of Austrasia.  He was the illegitimate son of the Duke Pepin of Heristal and his concubine, and therefore had no direct lineage to his eventual role as leader.  Pepin’s death in 714 led to a struggle for ascendancy, and the young Charles found himself in the position initially of prisoner, then ironically, defender of Austrasia, against cousins from the neighboring Duchy of Neustria, seeking to achieve a forced unification of the duchies.  Not the first choice because of his illegitimacy, he proved to be the best choice, as this individual showed almost immediately unique battle skills of field interpretation and generalship that far exceeded his fellow combatants.  Thrust prematurely into an pitched battle for Cologne, the duchy capitol, Charles, with inferior forces, material, and choice of battleground, sustained what proved to be his one and only defeat on a battlefield.  Charles the Warrior, however, was of special stuff.  He showed a willingness to learn from his mistakes, identify opponent weaknesses, and develop completely unexpected tactics that soon overwhelmed his enemies. His loss at Cologne proved to be tactical.  He retreated to the local mountains; replenished and drilled his forces, and then unexpectedly turned on the returning victorious Neustrian forces at Malmedy, routing them, and proceeding to conquer them. He then whirled and defeated his enemies residually in Austrasia, and soon was the unopposed ruler of both duchies.  This illegitimate son of a concubine did what no conqueror typically does – he eschewed his opportunity to be named “king” and instead put forth administrative ‘kings” from his former enemies, while he continued to do what he did best, organize, develop and utilize a progressively invincible army.  His understanding of power, and his lack of personal “need” for a title, places Charles in every modern terms in comparison to the traditions of his time.  King or not, Charles by 732 was in charge of a vast territory from the germanic Elbe river to the border with the Islamic colony in northern Spain, and with a tactical understanding rarely known in his time, recognized the true threats to his lands were not the squabbles of local tribes, but the powerful new force to the south.  He prepared for it with his usual brilliance.

     The Islamic generals were used to facing seasonal soldiers lacking discipline and coordination, and assumed no other capacities of the barbarians to the north.  A brief foray in 721 with a strike force had not been successful at Toulouse, and they determined on their next efforts to conquer Aquitaine, the southern province of the Franks, to bring all their talents and resources to bear.  In 732, at Poitiers near Tours, they meet the forces of Charles the Hammer, and discovered a different kind of opponent.  Charles Martel was a brilliant preparer of troops and a spectacular real time field logician, positioning his highly disciplined troops in strategic positions that accentuated his return of the battlefield of the ancient Grecian phalanx, that with modern armour proved impenetrable to the arab light cavalry, and a talent for feigned retreat and flanking maneuver that was unheard of in his time.  The Hammer put a crushing defeat on the Islamic forces and pushed them back into Iberia, where they showed no further stomach for Charles’ kind of battle.  The battle proved so pivotal, that almost 1300 years after the event, Charles actions are by historians almost universally seen as preventing an Islamic domination over a weakened Europe, setting the stage for feudalism, trade associations, the Renaissance, and the tenets of western civilization this blog reveres today.  King or not, Charles Martel proved to be a colossus of the western ideal.

     Charles Martel was not done with the battle of Tours.  With further consolidation of territories, Charles at the time of his death in 741 stood astride a new Frankish kingdom the expanded the Roman Gaul, and set into place the structure that would become the Holy Roman Empire ruled by his grandson Charlemagne. He instituted the battlefield of the Medieval Age, with permanent armies, fielded with specialists, knights, armour, heavy cavalry, and tactics of siege, discipline, and brutal power.  He is remembered today for what did not develop further in Europe, the all consuming fire that was early Islam, permitting the early seeds of a new culture of individual capacity and creativity to eventually take root and supplant Islam as the citadel of intellectual development.  Charles Martel cared not a wit for titles, but he understood his place in the world and the power necessary to form and develop his vision.  He was one of the first, and very likely, one of the greatest Defenders of the Ramparts of Civilization.

Full Circle

     A manner of justice was served to a particularly odious terrorist in a upscale city in Pakistan early Monday morning local time. He will have no name in this blog, because his identity is known and he does not deserve a memorial of a Google search even to this remote, back- water blog. He found his termination as a deliverer of death at the hands of the country to whom his inflated position as a dark angel of indiscriminate terror had been etched by the inane savagery of thousands of innocent deaths on the morning of September 11th, 2001. The end was swift and sure; but it could not remotely equal the sustained horror of those trapped behind smoking floors of a soon to collapse skyscraper, the crushing agony of those who had to sit helpless as maniacal puppets of this terrorist drove planes into catastrophic impacts, and not even a wisp of the piercing pain that any mother of any slain soldier assassinated by a remote directed explosive must have felt when told the news of her beloved child’s end defending the very people this societal lynch artist claimed to represent.

     Who was this individual who became one of the most hunted figures in history? In final essence, he was a cartoon character of a man. A rich man who sold himself as some bizarre representative of the downtrodden. A faux religious character who pretended to live a life mirroring his prophet , when his personal own true religion was a sadistic worship of nihilism. A classic mass murder who hid behind a strategy of “mass casualty” as a cleaned up description of his need to kill the innocent in droves. A man proselytizing about the “foreign devil”, when he personally was responsible for more deaths among his own race and religion than any foreign influence or action could ever achieve.

     The full circle took ten years and it ended as suddenly and as swiftly as it began, from the air in ships, striking the seemingly impregnable, and laying waste in just minutes. The lessons will potentially take many more years to fully discern, but a frontier justice to deal with the truly wicked has found a 21st century role. There is no place in a modern civilized society for an evil that hides behind its projection of fear, that works toward the creation of a racialist, segregationist false choice between individual freedom and 7th century religious fervor and societal tenets. In the end the spark that this nihilist had ignited ended up with an arab world rising up not for a modern Caliph, but with this spring, a birth of potential freedom from tyranny. Through his own destruction, the faint candle that he tried over so many years to snuff out, may finally be in a position to illuminate. The ultimate irony.  The ultimate epitaph.

     Now that’s justice…

Celebrating the Bard

     In the non-descript river town in south central England known as Stratford-on-Avon, in the last week of April, 1564, the modern English language was born.  Prior to the event of birth occurring at John Shakespeare’s house at or about April 23rd, the language known as English had developed from the ground up on the backs of many influences. An initial germanic invasion of the Angles into the Northumbria region had impacted directly into the polyglot of dialects derived from the native Celtic and Saxon tribes and the 400 year influence of the Roman colonizers’ Latin creating a distinct language base known as Old English. Though not used as an administrative language, Old English found itself roots in literature most prominently displayed through the epic poem Beowulf.  The invasion of the french Normans led by William the Conqueror in 1066 brought a ruling class of Gauls speaking predominently a French dialect, and the romance language inflection converted the pre-existing language of commonality into a new dialect known as Middle English.  Its literature champion was Chaucer in the Canterbury Tales.  To this point Britain was an island under constant threat of invasion and domination from warrior classes as diverse as the Germans, the Vikings, the Romans, and the Normans and each wave bent the language curve again and again, until it lay passive in wait for the spark that would create a distinctly English culture.

    The spark required two pieces of kindle.  The first was the Tudor queen Elisabeth I, who presided over Britain from 1558 until her death in 1603, marshaling in a permanently outward reflection of British influence through her defeat of the invading Spanish Armada in 1588, creating a British power progressively on par with continental powers, and assuring a unique English culture through her establishment of a state protestantism that evolved into the Church of England, and encouraging local dialects in administrative actions of the state.  The second was the birth in Stratford-on-Avon of John Shakespeare’s son, William, who in his life of 52 years secured the language vehicle of modern English for all time as the language of art, poetry, history, and unity of a people.

     The Bard of Avon was so spectacular in his talent for bring voice to a new, modern English that historians have fought for centuries as to whether a son of a glover and a farmer’s daughter, educated in local schools, could have possibly been the creative force behind the enormity of the masterwork he articulated. Shakespeare had basic grounding in grammar and the classics, but a keen ear for the lyrical tradition of the bard, the muse who memorized the ancient epic stories of ancient people who inhabited Albion and help create a distinct culture. He worked first as an actor with a local troop then as actor and playwright for an actor’s company, the King’s Men, at the Globe in London. His initial impact was not historical, but visceral, as the first mentions of Shakespeare in London are by “educated” critics who felt he was writing plays above his “station” in life. Obviously the popularity of the plays was a driving force in getting elites to take notice. The very existence of criticism indicates a developing sense of a “right way and wrong way” to display a nation’s culture, the initial recognition of nationhood and national identity.at time when few were literate and printing presses few, the risk of Shakespeare’s brilliance to be swallowed whole by time was great, but thankfully, 8 years after his death, two compatriots of Shakespeare’s with his acting company achieved the publishing of all but two of his known works as the First Folio, and western civilization was given one of its all time creative jewels.

     A brief salute to the Bard on his birthday has no hope of forging a worthy dissertation of his genius.  It is enough to say the English language and culture and its immense effect on western civilization was due in no small part by William Shakespeare’s gift for word and drama.  His evolution from historical plays and poetic sonnets into the magisterial tragedies that created for the first time an audience’s window into the psychic and very human forces that drive thought and action have no cumulative equal in his language.  From comedy to epic history to romance to tragedy, the unbroken line is of an ever more human voice that elevates and personifies life, death, and man’s own recognition of individuality.  Over 400 years from their origin, the phrases and lyricism seem as fresh and meaningful today as upon their introduction to the English language.  The words as expressed by Shakespeare forever cemented a reason for an English language and their universality explain much as to the dominance of English as a global language today.

      On the 447th anniversary of the great Bard’s birth, let’s again celebrate the genius of his words, and one of the prime examples of western civilization’s greatest gifts to mankind, the freedom of the individual to develop his unique talents in his own unique voice, no matter his “station” in life.

All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse’s arms.
And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress’ eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon’s mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slipper’d pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side,
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything

                                                                                                         William Shakespeare – As You Like It

To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action. - Soft you now!
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins remember'd.

                                        William Shakespeare – Hamlet


     Happy Birthday, Bard of Avon. 

And Now For Something Completely Different…

     President Obama determined today at a press conference to finally release his long form birth certificate, in order to end what he termed the “sideshow”, and declaring, “We do not have time for this silliness. We’ve got better stuff to do.”  Better stuff to do, indeed.  Putting aside the president’s motives in withholding the certificate for over three years after his birthplace was initially questioned by the Hillary Clinton forces in the democratic primaries of 2008, the announcement clearly puts to rest for the time being the quisentential American time honored tradition of the Conspiracy Theory. The rupturing of the “birtherism” conspiracy leaves of course all the other wonderful residual conspiracy theories attached to this mystery of a man – who got Obama into Columbia and Harvard University – who really wrote Obama’s “autobiography” – what really is the religion that Obama professes as his faith – that will take us right up through the next election cycle, and will continue to deflect from what the President refers to as “better stuff”. Conspiracy theories live in the world of incomplete information, and this President, who promised to be the most open in history, has been the master of the tabula rasa.
   

       The historical expanse of American Conspiracy Theories projects back to the founding of the republic and is driven by the assumption that successful entities achieved their success not through hard work but a vehicle not available to the “average Joe”. President Obama himself daily participates in such yarns when he implies the “rich” are not “paying their fair share” as a tribute of their “bounty”, that the oil companies are “price gauging” every time the price of gasoline reaches painful levels, or that reform of medicare will preferentially harm the “aged” and the “disabled”. The conspiracy theories with the most staying power are usually the most obtuse and bizarre, and often involve the government. Take for instance the 9/11 Truther conspiracy that claims the United States government destroyed the World Trade Center either by “allowing” it to happen or even physically directing the planes to strike pre-armed sections of the towers. This theory builds upon the historical trellis of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s supposed pre-knowledge of the Japanese Pearl Harbor Attack December 7th, 1941, again, “allowing” it to happen to draw us into war. Both scenarios draw on the inadequate intelligence information available to the Presidents Bush and Roosevelt that supposes that the destiny of the event was clear to all, but ignored for nefarious means. A different kind of government conspiracy is the public health menace in which “experts” seek to control the population, such as the US creating AIDS and releasing it from a lab, or the placement of Fluoride in water not to reduce tooth decay, but to poison people. Insidious conspiracy theories based on racialist notions have induced great harm, such as the conspiracy of Jewish world domination, or the western world’s response to 9/11 as a device to corral the world’s oil supply from Arabs or a return of the Crusades, inflaming the Arab street. Another venue is the small group knowing elites controlling the world, such as the Tri-Lateral Commission, the “New World Order”, or earlier the Masons.  The list goes on, and on, and on.

     We are, in short, a nation full of suspicions and rationalizations of what effects history and events, and we are not soon to be cured of this affliction.  The best device for controlling the conversation and focusing the people on the hard work and challenges inherent in conquering large problems is a willingness to be open and upfront about the small distractions.  The president in his dribbling out of information only enhances those who would assume an irrational explanation for their concerns about his decision making.  As the president says, it is time to put away such silliness, and focus on what is the true conspiracy of this presidency, the willingness to talk about our difficult times as an adult, yet act upon potential solutions with the avoidance and disdain of a distracted child.

He is not here.

          The miracle that is Easter morning will be celebrated by over 2 billion people today in reflection and adoration of the triumph of life over mortality. The power of the messenger resonates with such clarity over the millenia that historical significance of the event still drives enormous academic study, and the religious significance unbounded in its power still to convert. The conceptualization of a miracle that frees man of his sinful character and provides a means for eternal salvation in a world that constantly torments is still the single most powerful philosophical force in humanity’s understanding of being, and continues to grow amongst all religions.
     He is not Here. With those simple words the New Testament describes the “impossible”. A Nazarene named Jesus, borne some where around 4 BC, and unknowable to history until three years prior to the above event, had developed a new strain of religious philosophy that was powerfully drawing people of all persuasions to a new perception of life and religion that was beginning to threaten established traditions and hierarchies. At a time at the height of the Roman Empire, the recent establishment of a “devine” emperor did not leave room for a philosophic religion that had no place for his divinity. Additionally this new religious strain taught concepts of individuality that flew in the face of the local Judaic tradition – this religious teacher claimed inward purity was more important than outward acts of precise following of the letter of biblical law.  He spoke in parables and claimed miracles, and had a place for those who had been scorned or punished by establishment law or creed. He saw a loving and forgiving God, and saw the individual as the sole claimant to that love, “You are the Light of the world.”  Thousands believed and thousands began to follow. The implied threat was visible to established order, and the action to end the threat ruthless. The man Jesus suffered the painful death of crucifixion at the hands of the Romans, and the threat to their order they thought they had just ended was ignited a thousand fold with the miracle of the empty tomb, as prophesied, three mornings later.

     He is not here.  The empty tomb was the consequence of a Risen Jesus.  No single reported event in world history has shown the prosthelitizing power of this one. The witnessed miracle led to his apostles risking all to spread what they had experienced to Jew and Gentile alike, and through Peter and Paul, into the very heart of known world, Rome itself.  In the course of just three hundred years, the Roman Empire that attempted to snuff out the fragile message of individuality at its origin, ended up fully converted to the powers of the event by the act of its own emperor Constantine.

     What exactly happened so many years ago is an article of faith. Like all unexplainable events, the faithful have been buffeted over the centuries with distortions and trials by those who would seek to control the masses through the control of the message and memory.  The clarity of the message over time grows sharper and more distinct with each year more removed from the miracle of Golgotha.  If one focuses on a life of personal charity, love, and forgiveness, no greater path to eventual happiness exists, and no happiness exists that is more palpable and enduring.  Happy Easter.