From Tue Nov 11 11:28:53 1997
>Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 10:27:16 -0800 (PST)
>From: Tracy Johnson
>To: MAHAN-L
>Subject: WWII Fire Control Tech & Order of the Palm
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>What was the proper terminology for a WWII U.S. Fire Control Technician
>First Class? Was the word “Technician” part of the rating or was it
>something else or left blank?
>
>I am genning up a bogus award parodied after the “Order of the Palm” fame
>of the movie “Mr. Roberts”, to be given to a WWII vet as a Christmas
>present. I want to get the rating right on the certificate. (We’ve also
>used this award in my Reserve unit, however “off-line” and “out of
>uniform” to avoid any “good order and discipline” issues and without
>signature or title of any real official.)
>
>(P.S. If anyone wants a copy of the award for their own personal use,
>e-mail me a request off the list. It is a MS-Word document and your
>e-mail must be able to handle the attachment.
>
>For those that wish to contruct their own copy, the graphic contains
>clip-art of two palm trees from MSWORKS (2palmtrs.wmf) followed by the
>below text, excerpted from the final letter of Mr. Roberts … using the
>True Type Billboard font at 18 point, Centered, the “Order of the Palm”
>line goes up to 36 point then back down to 18 afterward. It then goes
>down to 16 point at the sentence that starts with “This award…”.
>Parchment with border can be obtained at any Staples or Office Depot:)
>
>The Chief of Naval Inoperations takes great
> pleasure in awarding the
> Order of the Palm
> to
> add_a_rate/rank_and_name
>For “Action against the enemy, above and
> beyond the call of duty.”
>This award is presented to those exceptional
>individuals who have “sailed from Tedium to Apathy
>and back again, with an occasional side trip to
>Monotony”, who “have discovered”…”that the
>unseen enemy”…”is the boredom that eventually
>becomes a faith,” and “that the ones who refuse
>to surrender to it are the strongest of all.”
>
>—
>
>Tracy Johnson
>Minister of Propaganda, Justin Thyme Productions
>tjohnson@adnetsol.com
>”Semper Pollus”
> ADC-2239-5531

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Tue Nov 11 15:48:20 1997
>X-Errors-To:
>Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 17:47:36 -0500 (EST)
>X-Sender: rickt@pop3.cris.com
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>From: rickt@cris.com (Eric Bergerud)
>Subject: Re: Gen’l Washington and the five stars.
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>
> >
> >In the Second War, things were regularized a bit. We ended up with
> >’General of the Army’ as MacArthur didn’t want the same grade as Pershing
> >(they had never gotten along) and Marshall didn’t want to be ‘Field Marshal
> >Marshall’. We ended up with ‘Fleet Admiral’ as Ernie King detested the
> >British and so objected to the use of their grade, ‘Admiral of the Fleet’.
> >
> >If something happened to move our first President up on the retired list,
> >I’d not heard about it. I doubt if he did, either.
> >
> >Marc
> >
> >
> >msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315
> >Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!
> >
> >
>Thankee much Marc for the wonderful post. I would guess that if George could
>have observed any of this from wherever “divine providence” originates, he
>would claim complete indifference to sharing rank with other leaders, but
>secretly be ticked as hell. Might be a good thing that MacArthur didn’t get
>into the White House though…he might have tried to get that obelisk renamed.
>Eric Bergerud, 531 Kains Ave, Albany CA 94706, 510-525-0930

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Tue Nov 11 15:33:28 1997
>X-Sender: msmall@roanoke.infi.net
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.3 (32)
>Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 17:28:22 -0500
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>From: Marc James Small
>Subject: Re: Gen’l Washington and the five stars.
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>Washington’s highest rank during his lifetime was Lieutenant General. He
>was appointed to the position of General of the Armies, but this was an
>office, not a rank.
>
>Pershing was promoted to ‘General of the Armies’ but no rank was ever
>specified and he only wore four stars. He was paid as an active-duty full
>general, though, until he died: a field marshal never retires, and his
>grade was equated with theirs.
>
>In the Second War, things were regularized a bit. We ended up with
>’General of the Army’ as MacArthur didn’t want the same grade as Pershing
>(they had never gotten along) and Marshall didn’t want to be ‘Field Marshal
>Marshall’. We ended up with ‘Fleet Admiral’ as Ernie King detested the
>British and so objected to the use of their grade, ‘Admiral of the Fleet’.
>
>If something happened to move our first President up on the retired list,
>I’d not heard about it. I doubt if he did, either.
>
>Marc
>
>
>msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315
>Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Tue Nov 11 21:31:14 1997
>X-Errors-To:
>Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 23:30:30 -0500 (EST)
>X-Sender: rickt@pop3.cris.com
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>From: rickt@cris.com (Eric Bergerud)
>Subject: Re: request for indulgence
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
> >I think this is the kind of thing Mahan is for.
> >
> >By the way, I taped a few weeks ago a C-SPAN show of a lecture by
> >Keegan. he mentioned that his Naval warfare book was not well
> >received, asserting that the Naval Historian writers formed rather
> >a closed club and that if you made a few small errors you were raked
> >over the coals by them.
> >
> >I would assert that if you get details wrong, to what extent can we
> >trust you in the big picture too? At any rate, I would be interested
> >in seeing your comments.
> >
> >Brooks A Rowlett
> >brooksar@indy.net
>
>Frankly I think Keegan has a point. Both naval and aviation history has
>become overly specialized in my humble opinion. Keegan’s _Face of Battle_
>contained a host of assumptions that a military historian could question but
>it was a brilliant book nevertheless. There is a priesthood of military
>minutia in every field and it can have a stifling effect, especially if it
>keeps non-specialists out of things. It also leads people to stress either a
>certain type of technical study (damn, I’d KILL for more good books on basic
>military sub-systems in World War II: bombs, gunsights, self-sealing fuel
>tanks, fire control or damage control on ships etc etc) or first person
>accounts from the “bottom of the fish bowl.” What is getting lost is the
>fabric of operations: the intersection of technology, military doctrine and
>the human psyche. And we should be glad that someone is reaching a large
>audiance in print. I knew the subject a little too well to like the World
>War II sections in _Admiralty_ but sure considered some segments contained
>in the chapters on Trafalgar and Jutland worth the price of admission. I’ve
>done three books and believe me I am convinced that no one is perfect but
>Allah. Mistakes of one kind or another are built into the game. (A good
>editor is worth their weight in gold. In my first Vietnam book I almost had
>Troung Chinh, chief ideological guide of Hanoi’s politburo, commanding the
>ARVN 25th Division. Odd things happen at 3:00 AM). Obviously this is a
>matter of degree. Nobody can support sloppy research. Yet it’s worth it to
>paint with a broad brush sometimes but when you do it’s a lot easier to
>dribble paint on the carpet.
>Eric Bergerud, 531 Kains Ave, Albany CA 94706, 510-525-0930

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Wed Nov 12 00:54:24 1997
>To: mahan@microworks.net, rickt@cris.com (Eric Bergerud)
>Subject: Re: request for indulgence
>Date: Wed, 12 Nov 97 07:55:29 GMT
>From: salvin@ocslink.com
>X-Mailer: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>
> > >I think this is the kind of thing Mahan is for.
> > >
>Me too!
> > >By the way, I taped a few weeks ago a C-SPAN show of a lecture by
> > >Keegan. he mentioned that his Naval warfare book was not well
> > >received, asserting that the Naval Historian writers formed rather
> > >a closed club and that if you made a few small errors you were raked
> > >over the coals by them.
> > >
> > >I would assert that if you get details wrong, to what extent can we
> > >trust you in the big picture too? At any rate, I would be interested
> > >in seeing your comments.
> > >
> > >Brooks A Rowlett
> > >brooksar@indy.net
> >
> > Frankly I think Keegan has a point. Both naval and aviation history has
> > become overly specialized in my humble opinion. Keegan’s _Face of Battle_
> > contained a host of assumptions that a military historian could > question but
> > it was a brilliant book nevertheless.
>
>
>Normally I try to avoid `hear, hear’ posts, but I agree with everything Eric
>said. Keegan sometimes misidentifies the trees, but his veiw of the >forest is,
>imho, very insightful. If I was to assign just one book on military history,
>it would be _Face_. Keegan is probably the most important military historian
>of his generation. Even if you disagree with his conclusions, his work has
>stimulated a mountain of new research in military history.
>
> > Eric Bergerud, 531 Kains Ave, Albany CA 94706, 510-525-0930
> >
> >
>
>—-
>
>Steve Alvin
>Department of Social Sciences
>Illinois Valley Community College
>
>salvin@ocslink.com

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Thu Nov 13 06:09:00 1997
>Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 14:06:49 +0100
>To: wwii-l@listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu, mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Truk as Gibraltar of the Pacific
>X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 2.0
>X-Sender: 0611603955-0001@t-online.de
>From: BWV_WIESBADEN@t-online.de (Tim Lanzendoerfer)
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>I’m searching for proofs that Truk was actually called the Gibraltar of the
>Pacific. Some people have told that some island off California got that name,
>and I dimly remember a discussion on one list. Can anyone cite from a book or
>webpage or article the use of Truk as Gibraltar of the Pacific?
>
>Thanks,
>Tim
>
>Tim Lanzendoerfer | “I have just taken on a great
>Amateur Naval Historian | responsibility. I will do my
>Email: BWV_Wiesbaden@t-online.de | utmost to meet it” – Nimitz
>—————————————————————–
> The United States Navy in the Pacific War 1941 – 1945
> http://www.microworks.net/pacific
> The ships, the men, the battles
>—————————————————————–

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Thu Nov 13 10:47:46 1997
>X-Authentication-Warning: ecom3.ecnet.net: mslrc owned process doing -bs
>Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 11:45:40 -0600 (CST)
>From: “Louis R. Coatney”
>X-Sender: mslrc@ecom3
>To: Mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Re: URL for Royal Institution of Naval Architects (UK) (fwd, FYI)
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
> >From MarHst-L:
>
>http://www.rina.org.uk/
>which is about as direct as they could get!
>
>David

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Thu Nov 13 22:41:23 1997
>X-Authentication-Warning: ecom3.ecnet.net: mslrc owned process doing -bs
>Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 23:40:24 -0600 (CST)
>From: “Louis R. Coatney”
>X-Sender: mslrc@ecom3
>To: Mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: US Army official calls US Marines “extremists” (fwd)
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>———- Forwarded message ———-
>Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 17:24:13 -0800
>From: Mike Potter
>To: Multiple recipients of list MILHST-L
>
>Army official apologizes for calling Marines “extremists”
>_________________________________________________________
>Copyright =A9 1997 Nando.net
>Copyright =A9 1997 The Associated Press
>
>… so I can’t reproduce it.
>
> I watched the movie “The Rock,” … with Nicholas Cage, Sean
>Connery. The villain was … of course … an embittered Marine
>VN vet officer.
>
> In the recent Robert Redford/Michelle Pfeiffer film “Up Close
>and Personal” Redford dies at the end a hero’s death … the victim
>of an ambush … after concern that the “South Command” is trying to
>prevent/disrupt the handover of the Panama Canal.
>
> In a recent READER’S DIGEST, there is a cartoon … a guy comes
>home in his uniform carrying 1 bag of groceries.
>
> His wife says, “I *told* you not to go to the supermarket
>wearing your uniform!”
>
> … and people seem to resent me using my veteran’s preference,
>when I go in for job interviews.
>
> Nice people.
>
>Lou
> Coatney, mslrc@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
> www.wiu.edu/users/mslrc/

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Fri Nov 14 00:22:30 1997
>X-Authentication-Warning: ecom7.ecn.bgu.edu: mslrc owned process doing -bs
>Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 01:21:27 -0600 (CST)
>From: “Louis R. Coatney”
>X-Sender: mslrc@ecom7.ecn.bgu.edu
>To: Mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Re: US Army official calls US Marines “extremists” (fwd)
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>
>Some additional thoughts:
>
>1. I believe her remark was no spontaneous “accident,” but a deliberate
> act of provocation and/or intimidation … toward the Marines. If you
> remember, it was the Marines who stood up the strongest and clearest
> against the Administration’s accomodation of homosexuals into the
> service … and …
>
>2. with the campaign corruption … foreign/enemy payoffs … investiga-
> tion beaten, President Clinton now feels free to do what he has
> always wanted to … <50>> investigation gave new credibility to allegations about Ron Brown taking
> commercial bribe money from the North Vietnamese. Brown, of course, is
> buried in Arlington with our other national, historical heroes. He left
> the country in a different way.)
>
>3. I believe BC thinks he can play off the Army against the Marines. We
> will see if Honor is still an Army value. Has the Army succumbed to
> such/lesser temptations in the past?
>
>4. AND this is only going to get worse and worse. Clinton is just the
> (comically) corrupt and clumsy tip of the Vietnam generation iceberg.
> Those students who didn’t serve went on to higher degrees and now hold
> key positions in academia, media, politics, government, ….
>
>5. No matter how anti-military (and anti-Marine) public policy,
> propaganda, and opinion has been in the past, *I* don’t think (the)
> national security (community) has ever been as threatened as it is
> now … and from within … and the academic, media, legal, political,
> etc.) professions have never been so arrogant … and unaccountable.
> Unlike previous generations, the VN generation is a “revolutionary”
> generation that tasted the thrill of the power of the mob … defying/
> mocking/defiling “authority” institutions … and symbols. They think
> they have won … and aren’t at all conscience-stricken about the
> betrayal of the Indochinese (to holocaust) … and our own war dead …
> which that caused.
>
>This iceberg has historical roots … and it is out of control. Only
> reality checks like Saddam Hussein and Kim Il Sung Jr. could give pause,
> but even they will be rationalized … and more will be betrayed …
> given the status quo.
>
>Lou Coatney, mslrc@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

From Fri Nov 14 00:27:20 1997
>X-Authentication-Warning: ecom7.ecn.bgu.edu: mslrc owned process doing -bs
>Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 01:26:51 -0600 (CST)
>From: “Louis R. Coatney”
>X-Sender: mslrc@ecom7.ecn.bgu.edu
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>cc: Mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Re: US Army official calls US Marines “extremists” (fwd)
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>On Thu, 13 Nov 1997, Louis R. Coatney wrote:
> > In a recent READER’S DIGEST, there is a cartoon … a guy comes
> > home in his uniform carrying 1 bag of groceries.
> >
> > His wife says,
>–> “$100.00!! I *told* you not to go to the
> > supermarket wearing your uniform!”
>
>OK, I omitted the $100.00. 🙂
>
>Lou

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous