by David H. Lippman
February 15th, 1942...Martin Clemens, appointed as His Majesty's Commissioner for Guadalcanal (and Coastwatcher for the Royal Australian Navy's Islands Coastwatching Service), takes up his duties at Aola station. Armed with a simple and easily-broken Playfair code, and a 100-lb. teleradio, Clemens' job is to report all hostile ship movements in the sound north of Guadalcanal. His teleradio, which requires 12 to 16 men to carry when it has to be moved, can transmit 400 miles by voice, 600 by key. It is a masterpiece of pre-transistor technology. While he awaits the Japanese advance, Clemens handles tribal disputes, judges cases, and raises the Union Jack over his home every morning.
In the early morning, Malaya's commanding general, Gen. Archibald Percival, takes communion at Fort Canning in a freshly- starched uniform. After church, he receives a message from Field Marshal Wavell, saying "So long as you are in a position to inflict losses and damage to enemy and your troops are physically capable of doing so, you must fight on. Time gained and damage to enemy by your troops are of vital importance at this juncture. When you are fully satisfied that this is no longer possible, I give you discretion to cease resistance. Inform me of your intentions. Whatever happens I thank you and all your troops for gallant efforts of last few days."
Percival summons his top officers, and tells them he has permission to surrender. There is almost no water, food reserves are only sufficient for a few days, and the only fuel left is in the tanks of vehicles. "Silently and sadly we decided to surrender," writes Australian Maj. Gen. Gordon Bennett.
Percival sends two emissaries to the Japanese lines at Bukit Timah Road with a Union Jack and white flag to ask for a cease fire at 4 p.m., under heavy Japanese bombing and shelling. Percival doesn't know it, but the bombardment is a bluff. Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita is nearly out of supplies and ammunition. He hopes to intimidate the British into surrender.
Yamashita's note is characteristically blunt. No terms, no discussion of terms, no ceasefire, until Percival has "signed on the dotted line." Exhausted, drenched with sweat, Percival walks down Bukit Timah Road to the Ford Motor Factory to meet his conqueror.
There, Percival faces Yamashita, who demands an immediate British surrender. Percival pleads for time. "All I want from you is an answer," shouts Yamashita. "Yes or no?"
Percival has no choice. He signs at 6:10 p.m., then stands straight as a ramrod on his heel. At 8:30 p.m., the shelling stops. Percival orders his officers to stay with their men and go into captivity. Gordon Bennett orders the same to his Australians. Then Bennett flees to the docks, and escapes south to Sumatra. For this act, Bennett will draw condemnation from Australian authorities, and never again hold field command.
The fall of Singapore is regarded by historians as the greatest disgrace in the history of British arms. The "Gibraltar of the East" has fallen in less than 100 days to a smaller Asian army. The disaster leaves the Dutch East Indies and Australia's north coast open to assault, and batters British morale. Historians will later argue that it also topples the British Empire and Western domination of Asia. Winston Churchill tells radio listeners not to despair. "We must remember that we are no longer alone. We are in the midst of a great company. Three- quarters of the human race are now moving with us. The whole future of mankind may depend upon our action and upon our conduct. We have not failed. We shall not fail now. Let us move forward steadfastly together into the storm and through the storm."
British casualties are 8,708, Japanese 9,824. However, more than 130,000 British troops (32,000 Indian, 16,000 British and 14,000 Australian) including the 24th New Zealand Pioneer Company, are taken prisoner. More than half will die as PoWs.
The storm rolls on in the Dutch East Indies, as the Japanese continue to attack. The Dutch defenders hit back by sending their cruisers and destroyers to sea. The Dutch destroyer Van Ghent hits a reef and has to be scuttled by her own crew. At 9:20 a.m., Japanese aircraft spot the Dutch force, and it retreats.
Nazi airpower is so dominating in the Mediterranean, the Royal Navy closes it to Allied merchant shipping that day.
February 16th, 1942...HMNZS Achilles escorts the aircraft carrier USS Lexington, which is enroute to attack the Japanese-held island of Rabaul. The attack never comes off.
In occupied Singapore, Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita says there will be no victory parade, but a solemn funeral for the Japanese dead. He also orders British officials to stay on the job until his troops can take over. His troops are busy committing atrocities. On Malaya's coast, Japanese troops round up 65 Australian Army nurses and 25 English soldiers. The soldiers are taken to the beach, and shot. Only two survive. The nurses are marched into the sea, and machine-gunned, only one, Vivien Bullwinkel, survives.
Japanese troops seize Palembang in the Dutch East Indies, and capture the oil refineries.
Just to make life irritating to Carribbean tourists, German U-boats shell the Dutch island of Aruba, frightening the locals, but doing no serious damage. Meanwhile, five more U-Boats are sent to attack Allied merchant ships on the route from Trinidad to New York.
February 17th, 1942...In Russia, the Soviet Army struggles to push German lines back near Rhzev, on the Moscow front. The Russians add something new to the war in the east, a massive airborne assault behind German lines. 7,373 Soviet paratroopers make the jump amid fog, and more than a quarter fall directly onto German lines and are taken prisoner. Despite heavy losses and Minus 52C temperatures, the Germans hold the line. One SS regiment staggers out of battle with only 35 of its original 2,000 men.
Japanese troops invade Timor, taking the Dutch western half, and then the Portuguese eastern half. The Portuguese are extremely angered, but do not declare war.
February 18th, 1942...The Nazis find that wounded soldiers from the East are flooding their hospitals. To "make way" for the battle casualties, Germany's remaining mental asylums are cleared of their patients. The usual way is euthanasia. In one asylum, 1,200 people are poisoned.
In Corregidor, US Navy Lt. Warwick Scott of the otherwise unemployed 16th Naval District boosts morale by producing a daily paper, the "Navy Evening Gopher," replete with poetry.
In occupied Singapore, British and Australian PoWs are forced to sweep the streets, while Japanese newsreel cameras roll, showing Western weakness. Singapore is re-named "Shonan," meaning "Bright South," and Japanese troops start removing British statues, signs, and memorials.
February 19th, 1942...For the first time in history, a foreign power attacks Australia. Vice Adm. Chuichi Nagumo, victor of Pearl Harbor, takes four aircraft carriers in range of the northern Australian city of Darwin, a key military base, and hurls his airpower at the city. As at Pearl Harbor, the defenders ignore warnings until bombs fall. Only 11 P-40s (and about 30 other miscellaneous aircraft ranging from biplanes to flying boats) are on hand to defend the city against more than 80 Japanese aircraft.
Lt. R.G. Oestreicher of the US Army Air Force becomes the first man to shoot down a plane over Australia, but the Japanese blast Darwin, sinking the destroyer USS Peary and 16 other ships in the first raid. Nagumo's bombs wreck the 12,000-ton transport USS Meigs, shred a ship loaded with depth charges, and blast a railway engine into the sea. Also wrecked are the Administrator's office, police barracks and station, Government House, and a civil hospital. Firefighters have to stand behind cancer-inducing asbestos shields to quell huge blazes. That afternoon, the Japanese return and treat the Royal Australian Air Force base to a dose of high-level bombing.
The Americans lose half of their 10 P-40s, and 22 overall. 15 Japanese planes are shot down. 17 Allied ships are sunk, 240 people killed, and 150 wounded, massive damage for the small city. Australian morale takes a beating.
Japanese troops invade Bali, and meet no resistance. The Combined Force of American and Dutch warships under Vice Adm. Karel Doorman heads to sea that evening to attack the invaders. At 10:30 p.m., the Dutch cruiser Java opens fire on a Japanese destroyer, and get a warm reception...the Japanese sink the destroyer Piet Hein, inflict 11 hits on the cruiser Tromp, and damage USS Stewart. One Japanese destroyer is damaged by torpedoes. Stewart lumbers off to a Soerabaja drydock and sits out the rest of the campaign.
In Burma, the British 17th Division begins to cross the Sittang River, and dig in.
February 20th, 1942...Britain's toughest battleship, HMS Warspite, sails into Sydney, enroute to the Indian Ocean.
On Amboina Island, Lt. Nakagawa of the Imperial Japanese Army orders the execution of 120 Australian PoWs. All are made to kneeel down with eyes bandaged, and are then killed either with sword or bayonet. "Most of the corpses were buried in one hole but because the hole turned out not to be big enough to accommodate all the bodies, an adjacent dugout was also used as a grave."
In the Philippines, Filipino President Manuel Quezon, racked with tuberculosis, is evacuated in the interests of his own safety, along with his family, by a US submarine. Before leaving, Quezon presents the signet ring from his own finger to Gen. Douglas MacArthur. "When they find your body," Quezon says to MacArthur, "I want them to know you fought for my country." Quezon will die in a tuberculosis institution in Saranac Lake, N.Y., in 1943. The Philippines will not be liberated until October, 1944. Quezon never sees his homeland again.
The US grants a $1 billion loan to the USSR. The British order civilians evacuated from Rangoon in Burma.
In North Africa, NZ Squadron of the Long Range Desert Group is formed, an all-New Zealand force of desert raiders. This unit, armed with jeeps, machineguns, and colorful Arab kaffiyeh scarves, is to raid behind Axis lines, destroying airfields, fuel points, and ammo dumps, collecting intelligence as they go. The LRDG's exploits hurt German effectiveness and boost British morale.
February 21st, 1942..."A most unpleasant and disastrous day," writes the British general commanding the 17th Indian Division in Burma, on the Sittang River. The Japanese attack at 5 a.m., starting with a raid on division HQ, which fails. Then comes heavy bombing and machine-gunning by Japanese aircraft, which inflicts heavy casualties.
The War Department finally makes up its mind on what to do with Douglas MacArthur. He is ordered to move his headquarters to Mindanao and then go to Australia, to take command of Allied forces in the Southwest Pacific. MacArthur threatens to resign his commission and join the Bataan defense forces as a volunteer, but his advisers talk him out of it.
On the opposite side of the Bataan trenches, the Japanese are almost as exhausted as the Americans. General Masaharu Homma later tells interrogators that had the Americans attacked him, his forces would have been in no condition to meet the attack. However, MacArthur's troops are malarial, starving, and exhausted.
The blockade runner Elcano brings 1,000 tons of food to Corregidor. Enough to feed Bataan for four days.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Scapegoat: General Percival of Singapore
by Mr Bernard Loo
Over half a century has passed since the fall of Singapore in February 1942, and still, the Malayan Campaign continues to attract attention in scholarly circles. A recent publication on the Malayan Campaign was Ong Chit Chung's Operation MATADOR: Britain's War Plans Against the Japanese 1918-1941, which was reviewed in an earlier volume of this journal.1 But it is by no means the only examination of this episode of military history.2 Nor is this the first volume that provides a sympathetic treatment of Percival's prosecution of the war effort.3 That this book explores themes which previous authors have already examined is therefore to be expected. There can be previous little new information on the Malayan Campaign that can still be gleaned from a new publication such as this. Certainly this is true for the strategic and tactical issues pertaining to the campaign.
PERCIVAL UNDER THE MICROSCOPE
It is perhaps in the field of biography that the available literature is lacking. Perhaps it is because the taint of defeat, of being involved in what Churchill called the "worst defeat and largest capitulation in British history" that has deterred scholars from examining the biographies of the major characters in this historical melodrama. There is a body of literature that examines issues pertaining to these characters.4 Apart from Tsuji, some of the major characters involved in the Malayan Campaign have also published their perspectives of this episode.5 As one of the two central figures in the Malayan Campaign, Arthur Percival certainly merits scholarly attention.
And in this sense, this book is a welcome addition to the body of literature on the Malayan Campaign. Kinvig traces the career of Arthur Percival, from a volunteer in the Inns of Court regiment Officer Training Corps (OTC) just after the outbreak of World War One, to his bewildering array of senior staff appointments during the early years of World War Two, through to his appointment as General Officer Commanding (GOC) Malaya, his subsequent defeat at the hands of Lieutenant-General Tomoyuki Yamashita and his subsequent incarceration in a Prisoner-of-War Camp. Thereafter Kinvig continues the story of Percival from his release from a POW camp in Korea after Japan's surrender and his presence at the signing of the surrender document by General Douglas MacArthur. It is an interesting and intriguing story, of a talented, intelligent, humane, humble soldier who had the misfortune to preside over Britain's worst defeat in its long military history.
WHO'S TO BLAME?
The essential question is who is to blame for the debacle of the Malayan Campaign? This is a question that continues to generate some degree of controversy. Ong Chit Chung points the finger clearly at Whitehall, particularly the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill.6 It would seem to imply that by Ong's judgement, Percival could not be held to blame for the defeat. Earlier scholars have also hinted at Churchill's culpability; in the process they also suggest that while Percival made tactical errors in his management of the campaign, the overall result cannot be attributed to him alone.7
But the problem of Percival's exoneration remains a thorny issue. There were figures that pointed the finger at Percival for his alleged mismanagement of the defense of Malaya. One such person was Lieutenant-General Lewis Heath, who commanded the III Indian Corps during the Malayan Campaign. Heath remained unhappy over Percival's performance, particularly in the indecision over Operation MATADOR in the first few hours of the Campaign.8 Ivan Simson, who was in charge of civil defense also had some scathing remarks to make about Percival's leadership, particularly over Percival's alleged rejection of Simson's proposal to construct a series of fixed defenses in Johor.9 Percival's critics point to the meeting between Simson and Percival, held on 26 December 1941 at about 11.30 PM, in which Simson relayed to Percival Heath's request for a series of defenses in Johor; Percival's reason for his rejection was "Defenses are bad for morale - for both troops and civilians."10
Kinvig points out that Percival was not alone in his opposition to fixed defenses on the basis of morale. In mid-January 1942, the Supreme Commander, General Wavell, issued instructions to Percival to begin defense preparations in the northern coastline of Singapore, with the added instruction that these preparations be kept "entirely secret . . . make it clear to everyone that battle is to be fought out in Johor without thought of retreat."11 In other words, Kinvig suggests that Percival's objections to fixed defenses on the basis of morale were entirely valid.
In similar vein, Kinvig attempts to show how the tactical reversals could not always be attributed to Percival. Whereas Kirby criticizes Percival's disposition of forces on the eve of the campaign,12 Kinvig argues that in spreading Malayan Command's forces to defend the many airfields in northern Malaya, Percival was not entirely wrong. Percival, Kinvig argues, had every reason to believe the assurances that British air power in Malaya would be built up, that even without reinforcement, existing Royal Air Force resources were sufficient to cope with a Japanese invasion. The Jitra battle, some historians argue, should never have been fought, precisely because its rear was under threat from the Patani-Kroh axis. Percival therefore should have fought the Japanese further south, perhaps at Gurun (which had the added attraction of better anti-tank ground). Percival's handling of the Singapore battle also comes under intense criticism from historians, who point out that Wavell had accurately predicted the location of the Japanese attack, but which Percival had disagreed.
PERCIVAL EXONERATED?
How does Kinvig attempt to answer these charges? In the case of the Jitra battle, Kinvig argues that Percival was aware that Jitra was not ideal country for a defense against the Japanese, but he had to fight there due to circumstances beyond his control.13 Kinvig points also to the poor quality of the forces under Percival's command, in contrast to the "excellent fighting machine"14 which Percival faced. More importantly, Kinvig points out that Percival had to satisfy two requirements - the need to preserve British forces in Malaya, and the need to hold onto the Malayan peninsula long enough for the reinforcements promised to arrive in Singapore. For these reinforcements to arrive, the Japanese had to be denied use of the airfields in central Malaya for as long as possible.
Kinvig also points out that Percival was further hampered by the intervention of his Supreme Commander. For instance, the errors of the Johor battle can be partly attributed to Wavell's unfortunate intervention in assigning the key western sector the Gordon Bennett, the Australian commanding 8th Australian Division; his 27th Brigade at Gemas would be augmented with Heath's 9th Indian Division and the newly arrived 45th Indian Brigade. This was in contrast to Percival's original plan to give the key western sector to Heath's III Corps. Wavell's intervention was unfortunate because it allotted the key western sector to a commander who was totally unfamiliar with Japanese fighting methods, created difficult administrative problems for Bennett who had to incorporate 3 additional brigades into his force structure without the necessary manpower in his headquarters to properly manage this force. There was the additional problem of the disposition of forces - Wavell had ordered a lateral defense, whereas a defense-in-depth might have had greater success against the Japanese. But the biggest error was in allotting the key western coast sector to the 45th Indian Brigade. It was newly arrived, totally unacclimatised, and was under-equipped and under-trained.
It is, of course, difficult to determine if Percival's preferred disposition of forces, where III Corps would defend the western sector in depth, would have had greater success. This is pure speculation, and not terribly useful for our purposes. Of greater significance was Percival's behaviour. Instead of arguing his case to his Supreme Commander, Percival had meekly accepted this plan. The historical record shows that Wavell was wrong - indeed it was a miracle that the 45th Brigade lasted as long as it did against the Imperial Guards, in the process buying time for 27th Brigade and 9th Indian Division to withdraw from Gemas after the coastal flank had been turned.
CONCLUSION
In the end the reader has to ask one question - has Kinvig successfully vindicated Percival? Sadly the answer, at least in the opinion of this writer, is no. Percival cannot be held to blame for the poor quality of his forces - much, if not all, of the blame has to go to Whitehall. This is, perhaps, the strongest argument for Percival's vindication. Kinvig hints at Whitehall's culpability, but this is never made as explicitly clear as Ong Chit Chung did. Kinvig's defense of Percival's performance during the campaign itself is also weak. It is true that Percival was often fighting the campaign under extremely adverse conditions - the problems in his relationship with his subordinate commanders, the problems he faced in dealing with the Colonial Governor and his office, the problems he face with his Supreme Commander. But does that exonerate Percival?
Perhaps what Percival needed to do was to be more forceful. It is true that these relationships were a constant problem and hindrance to Percival in his attempt to fight the Malayan Campaign, and it would be tempting to speculate what the end result could have been had Percival dealt with these problems in a more forceful manner. The fact, however, is that he failed to tackle these problems, that he allowed these problems to fester throughout the campaign and distract his attention from the more pressing matter of defending the peninsula and the island.
That being said, Kinvig has added a new dimension to the existing literature on the Malayan Campaign, and deserves it place in this body of literature. This writer can sympathize with Percival, and although Kinvig does not vindicate Percival successfully, he has at least showed the conditions under which Percival had to fight. Perhaps no commander could have saved the Malayan Campaign; certainly Percival was unable to. Whether history will eventually see Percival in a more positive light, however, remains to be seen.
Over half a century has passed since the fall of Singapore in February 1942, and still, the Malayan Campaign continues to attract attention in scholarly circles. A recent publication on the Malayan Campaign was Ong Chit Chung's Operation MATADOR: Britain's War Plans Against the Japanese 1918-1941, which was reviewed in an earlier volume of this journal.1 But it is by no means the only examination of this episode of military history.2 Nor is this the first volume that provides a sympathetic treatment of Percival's prosecution of the war effort.3 That this book explores themes which previous authors have already examined is therefore to be expected. There can be previous little new information on the Malayan Campaign that can still be gleaned from a new publication such as this. Certainly this is true for the strategic and tactical issues pertaining to the campaign.
PERCIVAL UNDER THE MICROSCOPE
It is perhaps in the field of biography that the available literature is lacking. Perhaps it is because the taint of defeat, of being involved in what Churchill called the "worst defeat and largest capitulation in British history" that has deterred scholars from examining the biographies of the major characters in this historical melodrama. There is a body of literature that examines issues pertaining to these characters.4 Apart from Tsuji, some of the major characters involved in the Malayan Campaign have also published their perspectives of this episode.5 As one of the two central figures in the Malayan Campaign, Arthur Percival certainly merits scholarly attention.
And in this sense, this book is a welcome addition to the body of literature on the Malayan Campaign. Kinvig traces the career of Arthur Percival, from a volunteer in the Inns of Court regiment Officer Training Corps (OTC) just after the outbreak of World War One, to his bewildering array of senior staff appointments during the early years of World War Two, through to his appointment as General Officer Commanding (GOC) Malaya, his subsequent defeat at the hands of Lieutenant-General Tomoyuki Yamashita and his subsequent incarceration in a Prisoner-of-War Camp. Thereafter Kinvig continues the story of Percival from his release from a POW camp in Korea after Japan's surrender and his presence at the signing of the surrender document by General Douglas MacArthur. It is an interesting and intriguing story, of a talented, intelligent, humane, humble soldier who had the misfortune to preside over Britain's worst defeat in its long military history.
WHO'S TO BLAME?
The essential question is who is to blame for the debacle of the Malayan Campaign? This is a question that continues to generate some degree of controversy. Ong Chit Chung points the finger clearly at Whitehall, particularly the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill.6 It would seem to imply that by Ong's judgement, Percival could not be held to blame for the defeat. Earlier scholars have also hinted at Churchill's culpability; in the process they also suggest that while Percival made tactical errors in his management of the campaign, the overall result cannot be attributed to him alone.7
But the problem of Percival's exoneration remains a thorny issue. There were figures that pointed the finger at Percival for his alleged mismanagement of the defense of Malaya. One such person was Lieutenant-General Lewis Heath, who commanded the III Indian Corps during the Malayan Campaign. Heath remained unhappy over Percival's performance, particularly in the indecision over Operation MATADOR in the first few hours of the Campaign.8 Ivan Simson, who was in charge of civil defense also had some scathing remarks to make about Percival's leadership, particularly over Percival's alleged rejection of Simson's proposal to construct a series of fixed defenses in Johor.9 Percival's critics point to the meeting between Simson and Percival, held on 26 December 1941 at about 11.30 PM, in which Simson relayed to Percival Heath's request for a series of defenses in Johor; Percival's reason for his rejection was "Defenses are bad for morale - for both troops and civilians."10
Kinvig points out that Percival was not alone in his opposition to fixed defenses on the basis of morale. In mid-January 1942, the Supreme Commander, General Wavell, issued instructions to Percival to begin defense preparations in the northern coastline of Singapore, with the added instruction that these preparations be kept "entirely secret . . . make it clear to everyone that battle is to be fought out in Johor without thought of retreat."11 In other words, Kinvig suggests that Percival's objections to fixed defenses on the basis of morale were entirely valid.
In similar vein, Kinvig attempts to show how the tactical reversals could not always be attributed to Percival. Whereas Kirby criticizes Percival's disposition of forces on the eve of the campaign,12 Kinvig argues that in spreading Malayan Command's forces to defend the many airfields in northern Malaya, Percival was not entirely wrong. Percival, Kinvig argues, had every reason to believe the assurances that British air power in Malaya would be built up, that even without reinforcement, existing Royal Air Force resources were sufficient to cope with a Japanese invasion. The Jitra battle, some historians argue, should never have been fought, precisely because its rear was under threat from the Patani-Kroh axis. Percival therefore should have fought the Japanese further south, perhaps at Gurun (which had the added attraction of better anti-tank ground). Percival's handling of the Singapore battle also comes under intense criticism from historians, who point out that Wavell had accurately predicted the location of the Japanese attack, but which Percival had disagreed.
PERCIVAL EXONERATED?
How does Kinvig attempt to answer these charges? In the case of the Jitra battle, Kinvig argues that Percival was aware that Jitra was not ideal country for a defense against the Japanese, but he had to fight there due to circumstances beyond his control.13 Kinvig points also to the poor quality of the forces under Percival's command, in contrast to the "excellent fighting machine"14 which Percival faced. More importantly, Kinvig points out that Percival had to satisfy two requirements - the need to preserve British forces in Malaya, and the need to hold onto the Malayan peninsula long enough for the reinforcements promised to arrive in Singapore. For these reinforcements to arrive, the Japanese had to be denied use of the airfields in central Malaya for as long as possible.
Kinvig also points out that Percival was further hampered by the intervention of his Supreme Commander. For instance, the errors of the Johor battle can be partly attributed to Wavell's unfortunate intervention in assigning the key western sector the Gordon Bennett, the Australian commanding 8th Australian Division; his 27th Brigade at Gemas would be augmented with Heath's 9th Indian Division and the newly arrived 45th Indian Brigade. This was in contrast to Percival's original plan to give the key western sector to Heath's III Corps. Wavell's intervention was unfortunate because it allotted the key western sector to a commander who was totally unfamiliar with Japanese fighting methods, created difficult administrative problems for Bennett who had to incorporate 3 additional brigades into his force structure without the necessary manpower in his headquarters to properly manage this force. There was the additional problem of the disposition of forces - Wavell had ordered a lateral defense, whereas a defense-in-depth might have had greater success against the Japanese. But the biggest error was in allotting the key western coast sector to the 45th Indian Brigade. It was newly arrived, totally unacclimatised, and was under-equipped and under-trained.
It is, of course, difficult to determine if Percival's preferred disposition of forces, where III Corps would defend the western sector in depth, would have had greater success. This is pure speculation, and not terribly useful for our purposes. Of greater significance was Percival's behaviour. Instead of arguing his case to his Supreme Commander, Percival had meekly accepted this plan. The historical record shows that Wavell was wrong - indeed it was a miracle that the 45th Brigade lasted as long as it did against the Imperial Guards, in the process buying time for 27th Brigade and 9th Indian Division to withdraw from Gemas after the coastal flank had been turned.
CONCLUSION
In the end the reader has to ask one question - has Kinvig successfully vindicated Percival? Sadly the answer, at least in the opinion of this writer, is no. Percival cannot be held to blame for the poor quality of his forces - much, if not all, of the blame has to go to Whitehall. This is, perhaps, the strongest argument for Percival's vindication. Kinvig hints at Whitehall's culpability, but this is never made as explicitly clear as Ong Chit Chung did. Kinvig's defense of Percival's performance during the campaign itself is also weak. It is true that Percival was often fighting the campaign under extremely adverse conditions - the problems in his relationship with his subordinate commanders, the problems he faced in dealing with the Colonial Governor and his office, the problems he face with his Supreme Commander. But does that exonerate Percival?
Perhaps what Percival needed to do was to be more forceful. It is true that these relationships were a constant problem and hindrance to Percival in his attempt to fight the Malayan Campaign, and it would be tempting to speculate what the end result could have been had Percival dealt with these problems in a more forceful manner. The fact, however, is that he failed to tackle these problems, that he allowed these problems to fester throughout the campaign and distract his attention from the more pressing matter of defending the peninsula and the island.
That being said, Kinvig has added a new dimension to the existing literature on the Malayan Campaign, and deserves it place in this body of literature. This writer can sympathize with Percival, and although Kinvig does not vindicate Percival successfully, he has at least showed the conditions under which Percival had to fight. Perhaps no commander could have saved the Malayan Campaign; certainly Percival was unable to. Whether history will eventually see Percival in a more positive light, however, remains to be seen.
Sylvester Stallone meets real-life Iraq war hero Johnson Beharry at The Expendables premiere
By Georgina Littlejohn
Last updated at 4:53 PM on 10th August 2010
He's played some of cinema's greatest heroes from boxer Rocky to war veteran Rambo to comic book law enforcer Judge Dredd.
But last night, Sylvester Stallone came face-to-face with a real-life hero - Lance Corporal Johnson Beharry.
The actor was delighted to meet L/Cpl Beharry who received the Victoria Cross for his bravery in Iraq in 2005.
The pair were snapped together at the British premiere of Stallone's new film, The Expendables in London last night, which was supporting the military charity The ForceSelect Foundation.
L/Cpl Beharry, 31, couldn't keep the grin off his face as she stood and posed for pictures in his military regalia next to Stallone, 64.
In 2005, L/Cpl Beharry of the 1st Battalion, Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment, was awarded the coveted Victoria Cross, the highest military decoration for valour in the British and Commonwealth armed forces.
He was given the medal for twice saving members of his unit from ambushes on May 1 and again on June 11 2004 at Al-Amarah, Iraq and sustained serious head injuries in the latter engagement.
He is the youngest and one of only seven living recipients of the Victoria Cross.
L/Cpl Beharry was one of many members of the armed forces attending the premiere last night.
He also took time out to pose with British General Sir Mike Jackson on the red carpet outside.
Stallone was joined by his co-stars Dolph Lundgren, 52, and Jason Statham, 37, at the premiere of the movie which is released across the UK on August 19.
They also met members of the 2nd Battalion Princess Of Wales Royal Regiment at Wellington Barracks before the premiere
And the three of them posed with British military officers in uniform on the red carpet as Stallone marched around a group of guards in bearskin hats and tried to jump up to match their height.
The plot of the film centres on a group of ex-SAS soldiers who battle an evil drugs baron.
Stallone said: 'Every generation has to have a hero and this generation has the superhero, it's evolved. But after Avatar it's like, 'Stop, let's go back to basics'.
'Young men need good examples, role models. I know I do, and I hope I might be one of the influences on young guys.'
Last updated at 4:53 PM on 10th August 2010
He's played some of cinema's greatest heroes from boxer Rocky to war veteran Rambo to comic book law enforcer Judge Dredd.
But last night, Sylvester Stallone came face-to-face with a real-life hero - Lance Corporal Johnson Beharry.
The actor was delighted to meet L/Cpl Beharry who received the Victoria Cross for his bravery in Iraq in 2005.
The pair were snapped together at the British premiere of Stallone's new film, The Expendables in London last night, which was supporting the military charity The ForceSelect Foundation.
L/Cpl Beharry, 31, couldn't keep the grin off his face as she stood and posed for pictures in his military regalia next to Stallone, 64.
In 2005, L/Cpl Beharry of the 1st Battalion, Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment, was awarded the coveted Victoria Cross, the highest military decoration for valour in the British and Commonwealth armed forces.
He was given the medal for twice saving members of his unit from ambushes on May 1 and again on June 11 2004 at Al-Amarah, Iraq and sustained serious head injuries in the latter engagement.
He is the youngest and one of only seven living recipients of the Victoria Cross.
L/Cpl Beharry was one of many members of the armed forces attending the premiere last night.
He also took time out to pose with British General Sir Mike Jackson on the red carpet outside.
Stallone was joined by his co-stars Dolph Lundgren, 52, and Jason Statham, 37, at the premiere of the movie which is released across the UK on August 19.
They also met members of the 2nd Battalion Princess Of Wales Royal Regiment at Wellington Barracks before the premiere
And the three of them posed with British military officers in uniform on the red carpet as Stallone marched around a group of guards in bearskin hats and tried to jump up to match their height.
The plot of the film centres on a group of ex-SAS soldiers who battle an evil drugs baron.
Stallone said: 'Every generation has to have a hero and this generation has the superhero, it's evolved. But after Avatar it's like, 'Stop, let's go back to basics'.
'Young men need good examples, role models. I know I do, and I hope I might be one of the influences on young guys.'
How Brilliant Computer Scientists Solved the Bermuda Triangle Mystery
Terrence Aym Salem-News.com
Oceanographic surveyors of the sea floor in the area of the Bermuda Triangle and the North Sea region between continental Europe and Great Britain have discovered significant quantities of methane hydrates and older eruption sites.
(CHICAGO) - According to two research scientists the mystery of vanished ships and airplanes in the region dubbed "The Bermuda Triangle" has been solved.
Step aside outer space aliens, time anomalies, submerged giant Atlantean pyramids and bizarre meteorological phenomena ... the "Triangle" simply suffers from an acute case of gas.
Natural gas—the kind that heats ovens and boils water—specifically methane, is the culprit behind the mysterious disappearances and loss of water and air craft.
The evidence for this astounding new insight into a mystery that's bedeviled the world is laid out in a research paper published in the American Journal of Physics.
Professor Joseph Monaghan researched the hypothesis with honor student David May at the Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.
The two hypothesized that large methane bubbles rising from the ocean floor might account for many, if not all, of the mysterious disappearances of ships and aircraft at specific locales around the world.
Researcher Ivan T. Sanderson identified these mystery areas during the 1960s. Sanderson described the actual shape of these regions as more like a lozenge rather than a triangle. Some of the more famous spots include an area in the Sea of Japan, the North Sea, and of course the infamous "Bermuda (or Devil's) Triangle."
Oceanographic surveyors of the sea floor in the area of the Bermuda Triangle and the North Sea region between continental Europe and Great Britain have discovered significant quantities of methane hydrates and older eruption sites.
Because of the correlations and existing data, the two envisioned what would happen when gigantic methane bubbles explode from natural fissures on the seafloor.
The methane—normally frozen at great pressure as gas hydrates embedded within subterranean rock—can become dislodged and transform into gaseous bubbles expanding geometrically as they explode upwards. When these bubbles reach the surface of the water they soar into the air, still expanding upwards and outwards.
Any ships caught within the methane mega-bubble immediately lose all buoyancy and sink to the bottom of the ocean. If the bubbles are big enough and possess a high enough density they can also knock aircraft out of the sky with little or no warning. Aircraft falling victim to these methane bubbles will lose their engines-perhaps igniting the methane surrounding them-and immediately lose their lift as well, ending their flights by diving into the ocean and swiftly plummeting
Oceanographic surveyors of the sea floor in the area of the Bermuda Triangle and the North Sea region between continental Europe and Great Britain have discovered significant quantities of methane hydrates and older eruption sites.
(CHICAGO) - According to two research scientists the mystery of vanished ships and airplanes in the region dubbed "The Bermuda Triangle" has been solved.
Step aside outer space aliens, time anomalies, submerged giant Atlantean pyramids and bizarre meteorological phenomena ... the "Triangle" simply suffers from an acute case of gas.
Natural gas—the kind that heats ovens and boils water—specifically methane, is the culprit behind the mysterious disappearances and loss of water and air craft.
The evidence for this astounding new insight into a mystery that's bedeviled the world is laid out in a research paper published in the American Journal of Physics.
Professor Joseph Monaghan researched the hypothesis with honor student David May at the Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.
The two hypothesized that large methane bubbles rising from the ocean floor might account for many, if not all, of the mysterious disappearances of ships and aircraft at specific locales around the world.
Researcher Ivan T. Sanderson identified these mystery areas during the 1960s. Sanderson described the actual shape of these regions as more like a lozenge rather than a triangle. Some of the more famous spots include an area in the Sea of Japan, the North Sea, and of course the infamous "Bermuda (or Devil's) Triangle."
Oceanographic surveyors of the sea floor in the area of the Bermuda Triangle and the North Sea region between continental Europe and Great Britain have discovered significant quantities of methane hydrates and older eruption sites.
Because of the correlations and existing data, the two envisioned what would happen when gigantic methane bubbles explode from natural fissures on the seafloor.
The methane—normally frozen at great pressure as gas hydrates embedded within subterranean rock—can become dislodged and transform into gaseous bubbles expanding geometrically as they explode upwards. When these bubbles reach the surface of the water they soar into the air, still expanding upwards and outwards.
Any ships caught within the methane mega-bubble immediately lose all buoyancy and sink to the bottom of the ocean. If the bubbles are big enough and possess a high enough density they can also knock aircraft out of the sky with little or no warning. Aircraft falling victim to these methane bubbles will lose their engines-perhaps igniting the methane surrounding them-and immediately lose their lift as well, ending their flights by diving into the ocean and swiftly plummeting
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE NUMBERS IN SINGAPORE !
Recently, I watched a historical documentary on the Pacific War. The show was produced by a reputable filmaker and was shown on a prominent channel.
Not far into the film they highlighted the Battle for Singapore and I was shocked at what I heard. Once again, as so many times before, the statement was made that the British “lost” Singapore to a Japanese force that numbered one third that of the British forces defending the island fortress. I was outraged that after all this time and with so much accurate information available, such a blatant mistake would be aired.
However, this is not surprising, for in the words of one of my American researcher friends, “many ‘so-called historians’ today never bother to really dig into the stories or check the facts for themselves. They just use information already published and repeat it again, thus perpetuating the errors of those who have gone before.”
This is what I have found to be the case with many of the the Allied intelligence reports on the Taiwan POW camps, and a great deal of other information supposedly ‘documenting’ the war in the Pacific. In the interests of truth and to hopefully help stop the continued perpetration of this myth, I have researched the numbers involved in that famous battle and submit them here for our readers to draw their own conclusions.
First of all, it should be emphasized that the British army did not “lose” Singapore. If General Percival had not surrendered, then thousands more would have died - including innocent civilians. The Japanese army had overrun most of the island, captured the water reservoirs and surrounded the main city itself. The British were very low on ammunition, food and other necessary supplies, so it would have been suicidal to have fought on as the Japanese would have killed all the soldiers and most likely many of the civilians too. The fault for the “loss” of Singapore lies squarely with Winston Churchill and the British government!
The poorly equipped RAF had been ordered out of Malaya and Singapore, and without adequate air support, the navy’s only two ships that could have made any difference were easily sunk by the Japanese Navy Air Arm. The Japanese had complete mastery of the air and could bomb and straffe at will. The land forces could not hope to win any kind of battle as they had little equipment to fight with. They had no tanks, and much of the equipment that accompanied the ill-fated 18th Division was never unloaded but was returned to England or other theatres. Churchill and his advisors knew that Singapore could not be defended but ordered that the army ‘fight to the last man’. Of course, that way there would be no one left to tell of their betrayal. It was fortunate indeed that General Percival had the good sense to surrender!
As to the numbers - by the first of December 1941, the Japanese had amassed more than 250,000 trained soldiers in Indo-China. On December 7 the landing force at Kota-Bahru, Malaya numbered 12,000 men, and as well, 50,000 troops had been secretly moved across Thailand to launch a simultaneous invasion on the west coast near Alor Star and Jitra.
A detailed breakdown of Japanese forces in Malaya on December 7, 1941 reveals that - the 25th Army under General Yamashita and Count Terrauchi had 83,000 men, the 15th Army commanded by General Lida had 55,000 men, the 26th Infantry Division led by General Mataguchi had 28,000 men, the Imperial Guards under General Nishimura had 38,000 men and they were re-inforced by 50,000 Korean soldiers. In addition, the Japanese forces had one armoured division with 500 tanks, two regiments of artillery, 500 aircraft with 80 in reserve, ten destroyers, two aircraft carriers, five submarines plus other support vessels. In total the Japanese had more that 265,000 men plus the 50,000 Korean conscripts - totalling more than 300,000 trained soldiers.
In his report to parliament after the fall of Singapore, Churchill concocted the figures - which seem to have remained in many historians’ books until the present - that a mere force of 30,000 Japanese defeated the 120,000 British and Allied forces on the island - implying a shameful defeat of the British army.
But even the figures he attributed to the Allies were incorrect. Allied forces in Malaya and Singapore on December 1, 1941 were as follows - 19,000 British, 15,000 Australian, 37,000 Indian Army - including the 11th Division which was largely made up of British soldiers trained in India, and 17,000 Malay Volunteers.
Approximately 25,000 Allied soldiers were killed, wounded, escaped or were listed missing in the Battle of Malaya. On January 29, 1942 approximately 20,000 green troops of the 18th Division arrived in Singapore, bringing the total Allied strength up to around 85,000 men. After Singapore fell, a tally of Allied losses revealed 7,000 killed and 2,000 wounded or missing.
On the Japanese side - more than 25,000 were killed or wounded in Malaya, while on Singapore the total reached more than 20,000 men killed and 5,000 wounded or missing. This figure alone is more than the number quoted by Churchill! It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that the numbers cited by Churchill were pure lies and fabrication.
So why did he do it? At the time, with things not going well for Britain, Churchill’s image and position were on shaky ground. Had the British public known that he and his government had betrayed thousands of young British servicemen and sacrificed them to the Japanese, it would have likely caused his political downfall. Better to distort and cover up the truth to save his own skin. (Sadly, it’s still the same today!)
The sad part is that many of those old soldiers have died believing that what Churchill said was true, and also that subsequent generations have been deprived of the knowledge and the truth about the Battle of Malaya and Singapore. It’s time to let the facts speak for themselves, and to correct the fallacies of history!
Not far into the film they highlighted the Battle for Singapore and I was shocked at what I heard. Once again, as so many times before, the statement was made that the British “lost” Singapore to a Japanese force that numbered one third that of the British forces defending the island fortress. I was outraged that after all this time and with so much accurate information available, such a blatant mistake would be aired.
However, this is not surprising, for in the words of one of my American researcher friends, “many ‘so-called historians’ today never bother to really dig into the stories or check the facts for themselves. They just use information already published and repeat it again, thus perpetuating the errors of those who have gone before.”
This is what I have found to be the case with many of the the Allied intelligence reports on the Taiwan POW camps, and a great deal of other information supposedly ‘documenting’ the war in the Pacific. In the interests of truth and to hopefully help stop the continued perpetration of this myth, I have researched the numbers involved in that famous battle and submit them here for our readers to draw their own conclusions.
First of all, it should be emphasized that the British army did not “lose” Singapore. If General Percival had not surrendered, then thousands more would have died - including innocent civilians. The Japanese army had overrun most of the island, captured the water reservoirs and surrounded the main city itself. The British were very low on ammunition, food and other necessary supplies, so it would have been suicidal to have fought on as the Japanese would have killed all the soldiers and most likely many of the civilians too. The fault for the “loss” of Singapore lies squarely with Winston Churchill and the British government!
The poorly equipped RAF had been ordered out of Malaya and Singapore, and without adequate air support, the navy’s only two ships that could have made any difference were easily sunk by the Japanese Navy Air Arm. The Japanese had complete mastery of the air and could bomb and straffe at will. The land forces could not hope to win any kind of battle as they had little equipment to fight with. They had no tanks, and much of the equipment that accompanied the ill-fated 18th Division was never unloaded but was returned to England or other theatres. Churchill and his advisors knew that Singapore could not be defended but ordered that the army ‘fight to the last man’. Of course, that way there would be no one left to tell of their betrayal. It was fortunate indeed that General Percival had the good sense to surrender!
As to the numbers - by the first of December 1941, the Japanese had amassed more than 250,000 trained soldiers in Indo-China. On December 7 the landing force at Kota-Bahru, Malaya numbered 12,000 men, and as well, 50,000 troops had been secretly moved across Thailand to launch a simultaneous invasion on the west coast near Alor Star and Jitra.
A detailed breakdown of Japanese forces in Malaya on December 7, 1941 reveals that - the 25th Army under General Yamashita and Count Terrauchi had 83,000 men, the 15th Army commanded by General Lida had 55,000 men, the 26th Infantry Division led by General Mataguchi had 28,000 men, the Imperial Guards under General Nishimura had 38,000 men and they were re-inforced by 50,000 Korean soldiers. In addition, the Japanese forces had one armoured division with 500 tanks, two regiments of artillery, 500 aircraft with 80 in reserve, ten destroyers, two aircraft carriers, five submarines plus other support vessels. In total the Japanese had more that 265,000 men plus the 50,000 Korean conscripts - totalling more than 300,000 trained soldiers.
In his report to parliament after the fall of Singapore, Churchill concocted the figures - which seem to have remained in many historians’ books until the present - that a mere force of 30,000 Japanese defeated the 120,000 British and Allied forces on the island - implying a shameful defeat of the British army.
But even the figures he attributed to the Allies were incorrect. Allied forces in Malaya and Singapore on December 1, 1941 were as follows - 19,000 British, 15,000 Australian, 37,000 Indian Army - including the 11th Division which was largely made up of British soldiers trained in India, and 17,000 Malay Volunteers.
Approximately 25,000 Allied soldiers were killed, wounded, escaped or were listed missing in the Battle of Malaya. On January 29, 1942 approximately 20,000 green troops of the 18th Division arrived in Singapore, bringing the total Allied strength up to around 85,000 men. After Singapore fell, a tally of Allied losses revealed 7,000 killed and 2,000 wounded or missing.
On the Japanese side - more than 25,000 were killed or wounded in Malaya, while on Singapore the total reached more than 20,000 men killed and 5,000 wounded or missing. This figure alone is more than the number quoted by Churchill! It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that the numbers cited by Churchill were pure lies and fabrication.
So why did he do it? At the time, with things not going well for Britain, Churchill’s image and position were on shaky ground. Had the British public known that he and his government had betrayed thousands of young British servicemen and sacrificed them to the Japanese, it would have likely caused his political downfall. Better to distort and cover up the truth to save his own skin. (Sadly, it’s still the same today!)
The sad part is that many of those old soldiers have died believing that what Churchill said was true, and also that subsequent generations have been deprived of the knowledge and the truth about the Battle of Malaya and Singapore. It’s time to let the facts speak for themselves, and to correct the fallacies of history!
Co-pilot Putin helps put out Russia's wildfires
Aug 10, 3:17 PM (ET)
By LYNN BERRY
MOSCOW (AP) - Prime Minister Vladimir Putin climbed into a firefighting plane Tuesday and dumped water on two of the hundreds of wildfires sweeping through western Russia and cloaking Moscow in a suffocating smog.
Putin has been a very visible leader in the battle against the fires, which have caused billions of dollars in damage and left thousands homeless in the past two weeks. He has demanded that soldiers help overstretched firefighting brigades and has walked through smoldering villages, consoling residents and promising them new homes by fall.
But with his once sky-high approval ratings dropping - and sociologists warning that discontent could grow as the fires and a severe drought take their toll - Putin has not let up.
He took off Tuesday in a Be-200 firefighting plane and then moved into the copilot's seat. Television footage showed him pushing a button to unleash water on blazing forest fires about 120 miles (200 kilometers) southeast of Moscow.
After hitting the button, Putin glanced toward the pilot and asked, "Was that OK?"
The response: "A direct hit!"
The stunt was classic Putin. In past years, he has copiloted a fighter jet, ridden a horse bare-chested in Siberia and descended to the bottom of Lake Baikal in a mini-sub. Just last month he drove a Harley Davidson motorcycle to a biker rally.
All of his exploits have been widely publicized on the national television networks, which are under government control. Russia holds its next presidential election in 2012, and Putin would be eligible to run.
Damage from the fires was expected to hit $15 billion, or about 1 percent of Russia's gross domestic product, the business newspaper Kommersant reported Tuesday. The government has yet to release any damage estimates.
The hottest summer since record-keeping began 130 years ago has cost Russia more than a third of its wheat crop and prompted the government to ban wheat exports. Putin said last week the ban would last through the end of the year, but his deputy said Tuesday the government may consider lifting the ban in October once the harvest is complete.
The government is eager to prevent a sharp increase in the price of bread, which could lead to greater public dissatisfaction. The agriculture minister, speaking Tuesday on Ekho Moskvy radio, reassured Russians that there was no reason to expect retail bread prices to rise.
The acrid smog that has engulfed Moscow for a week eased a bit Tuesday, but the concentration of pollutants remained high. Putin summoned Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, who said the situation in the capital was difficult but that city health authorities were doing what was needed to help people cope with the heat and smog.
Ambulances calls have risen by nearly a quarter, Luzhkov said.
The situation in Moscow was severe enough for the U.S. State Department to allow non-essential personnel and the families of all diplomats at the American Embassy to leave Russia temporarily at government expense. Spokesman P.J. Crowley said about 100 embassy staff and family members were eligible for the so-called "authorized departure" program.
The handling of the wildfire crisis could weigh heavily on approval ratings for Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev, the business daily Vedomosti cited a sociologist as saying.
Vedomosti noted that three polls conducted in July showed Medvedev's rating had dropped up to 10 percentage points since the start of the year, and Putin's had declined by up to 6 percentage points. The paper cited Leonty Byzov, a leading sociologist at the Russian Academy of Sciences, as saying the wildfires could drag those figures down even further and stoke anti-government protests.
The lowest approval ratings were reported by the independent Levada polling agency, which gave Medvedev 38 percent and Putin 44 percent. The highest were 52 for Medvedev and 61 for Putin, registered by the Public Opinion Foundation. The margin of error for the polls was about plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Sergei Gordeichenko, the head of the Forestry Agency for the Moscow region, was fired on Tuesday, following criticism from the president that he had not cut short his summer vacation to tend to the crisis.
Medvedev himself was slow to interrupt his Black Sea vacation even as fires around Moscow grew worse, and, unlike Putin - who went out in jeans to meet with sobbing villagers and exhausted firefighters - mostly conferred with officials after his return.
After his firefighting flight, Putin visited another village destroyed by fire and again promised residents that they would be fully compensated.
Putin also offered reassurances to residents of Moscow that something would finally be done about the dried-up peat bogs outside the city that often burn in the summer and where fires this year have sent out thick plumes of smoke. He said 300 million rubles ($10 million) would be allocated to flood the peat bogs.
---__
Associated Press writers David Nowak and Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow and Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.
By LYNN BERRY
MOSCOW (AP) - Prime Minister Vladimir Putin climbed into a firefighting plane Tuesday and dumped water on two of the hundreds of wildfires sweeping through western Russia and cloaking Moscow in a suffocating smog.
Putin has been a very visible leader in the battle against the fires, which have caused billions of dollars in damage and left thousands homeless in the past two weeks. He has demanded that soldiers help overstretched firefighting brigades and has walked through smoldering villages, consoling residents and promising them new homes by fall.
But with his once sky-high approval ratings dropping - and sociologists warning that discontent could grow as the fires and a severe drought take their toll - Putin has not let up.
He took off Tuesday in a Be-200 firefighting plane and then moved into the copilot's seat. Television footage showed him pushing a button to unleash water on blazing forest fires about 120 miles (200 kilometers) southeast of Moscow.
After hitting the button, Putin glanced toward the pilot and asked, "Was that OK?"
The response: "A direct hit!"
The stunt was classic Putin. In past years, he has copiloted a fighter jet, ridden a horse bare-chested in Siberia and descended to the bottom of Lake Baikal in a mini-sub. Just last month he drove a Harley Davidson motorcycle to a biker rally.
All of his exploits have been widely publicized on the national television networks, which are under government control. Russia holds its next presidential election in 2012, and Putin would be eligible to run.
Damage from the fires was expected to hit $15 billion, or about 1 percent of Russia's gross domestic product, the business newspaper Kommersant reported Tuesday. The government has yet to release any damage estimates.
The hottest summer since record-keeping began 130 years ago has cost Russia more than a third of its wheat crop and prompted the government to ban wheat exports. Putin said last week the ban would last through the end of the year, but his deputy said Tuesday the government may consider lifting the ban in October once the harvest is complete.
The government is eager to prevent a sharp increase in the price of bread, which could lead to greater public dissatisfaction. The agriculture minister, speaking Tuesday on Ekho Moskvy radio, reassured Russians that there was no reason to expect retail bread prices to rise.
The acrid smog that has engulfed Moscow for a week eased a bit Tuesday, but the concentration of pollutants remained high. Putin summoned Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, who said the situation in the capital was difficult but that city health authorities were doing what was needed to help people cope with the heat and smog.
Ambulances calls have risen by nearly a quarter, Luzhkov said.
The situation in Moscow was severe enough for the U.S. State Department to allow non-essential personnel and the families of all diplomats at the American Embassy to leave Russia temporarily at government expense. Spokesman P.J. Crowley said about 100 embassy staff and family members were eligible for the so-called "authorized departure" program.
The handling of the wildfire crisis could weigh heavily on approval ratings for Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev, the business daily Vedomosti cited a sociologist as saying.
Vedomosti noted that three polls conducted in July showed Medvedev's rating had dropped up to 10 percentage points since the start of the year, and Putin's had declined by up to 6 percentage points. The paper cited Leonty Byzov, a leading sociologist at the Russian Academy of Sciences, as saying the wildfires could drag those figures down even further and stoke anti-government protests.
The lowest approval ratings were reported by the independent Levada polling agency, which gave Medvedev 38 percent and Putin 44 percent. The highest were 52 for Medvedev and 61 for Putin, registered by the Public Opinion Foundation. The margin of error for the polls was about plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Sergei Gordeichenko, the head of the Forestry Agency for the Moscow region, was fired on Tuesday, following criticism from the president that he had not cut short his summer vacation to tend to the crisis.
Medvedev himself was slow to interrupt his Black Sea vacation even as fires around Moscow grew worse, and, unlike Putin - who went out in jeans to meet with sobbing villagers and exhausted firefighters - mostly conferred with officials after his return.
After his firefighting flight, Putin visited another village destroyed by fire and again promised residents that they would be fully compensated.
Putin also offered reassurances to residents of Moscow that something would finally be done about the dried-up peat bogs outside the city that often burn in the summer and where fires this year have sent out thick plumes of smoke. He said 300 million rubles ($10 million) would be allocated to flood the peat bogs.
---__
Associated Press writers David Nowak and Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow and Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.
Monday, August 9, 2010
China's Naval Game-Changer
To: Kaslin
By the end of the year, China could deploy an anti-ship missile capable of hitting U.S. aircraft carriers at long range. The naval dominance that American foreign policy depended on may be at an end.
Not to worry, Obama has a plan for this.
We will crush the Chinese through niceness and debt.
2 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:15:18 AM by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: EGPWS
And give them a few trillion in Afgan mining rights.
3 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:17:05 AM by omega4179 (PREVIEW IS MY FRIEND)
To: Kaslin
Hype to the extent that not even a mention or consideration of the multiple layers of air defense (i.e.: AEGIS, etc.) that incorporate a US CVs defense.
5 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:20:28 AM by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Kaslin
The military equivalent of the Edsel.
6 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:20:50 AM by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Mexico is the U.S. version of Hamas)
To: Kaslin
The welfare state so depleted Britain, the nation that long boasted the mightiest Navy on earth, that its war with Argentina in 1982 was a close run thing. Without our help, Argentina may have won.
In like fashion, Hussein intends to bleed our military forces at the expense of the destructive welfare state. The difference is that when Britain retreated, the US picked up the baton of freedom.
Not so this time. When the world says adios to PAX Americana, it says hello to a new Dark Age.
8 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:35:11 AM by Jacquerie (We live in a judicial tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Kaslin
In the next real war, any US aircraft carrier will simply be a big fat target and a floating death trap. They won’t last past the first couple of days of real combat. In fact, I’m sure they will be taken out of the equation at the outset of hostilities.
9 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:37:06 AM by Paratesties
To: Kaslin
“Now our naval supremacy is being challenged with the final testing and imminent deployment of the Dong Feng 21D,”
Oh, for Pete’s sake, the Chicomms can’t even manufacture a set of socket wrenches that work. Anyone who thinks the ChiComms are some sort of genuises are idiots. The ChiComms are at best monkeys looking for banana treats.
And no, the Chicomms aren’t worth squat as fighters. The lowly Vietnamese kicked the Chicomms butts in 1978. ( Go look it up.)
And all you monkeys who want to bring up Korea..
First, the UN gave up every Allied tactic to the ChiComms.
Second, Truman nixed bombing Peking, as MacArthur correctly suggested...
So, sue me.....
10 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 8:28:19 AM by sergeantdave
To: Paratesties
You don't really understand carrier operations do you?
American carriers operate as part of a Carrier Battle Group. The carrier is only one part of the Battle Group. It is the center piece to be sure but carriers do not act alone. They are formidable even if they were alone.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
13 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 10:45:45 AM by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]
To: sergeantdave
Keep living in your little fantasy world, bud. You’re going to say that our enemies have no chance against the US military right up until the time that the USA, and the US military, get annihilated in the next real war by both China and Russia. People like you that think our enemies are incapable “monkeys”, as you stated, are almost as dangerous to our national security as Obama.
The last time I looked, the US military has been shrinking both in size and capability on all fronts, while our potential enemies are modernizing and rapidly expanding their capabilities. We have been disarming as fast as we possibly can. The Chinese and the Russians have been doing just the opposite.
I suggest that you stop living in the 1950’s.
14 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 10:47:42 AM by Paratesties
To: Enchante; Vroomfondel; SC Swamp Fox; Fred Hayek; NY Attitude; P3_Acoustic; investigateworld; ...
are these missiles invulnerable to AEGIS?
I’d think we have been working on this issue for a very long time....... the article doesn’t even mention AEGIS
do these missiles have some special evasive or ECM capabilities to enable them to penetrate AEGIS?
or does it depend upon trying to overwhelm the system with numbers?
I’d thought that AEGIS is up to handling even hundreds of incoming “targets” nowadays but I have no idea what the Chicoms are up to with this missile...... anyone really KNOW something?
Enchante, you ask some very good and interesting questions. I am not knowledgeable enough on the topic to even tell you a good sea story.
I did ping the list to your post on the hope that someone else may know more, but your questions are not directly Navair related. If there was an ALLNAV list, someone on it might be better qualified to answer them than we are.
18 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 3:00:20 AM by magslinger (DISCLAIMER: No liberals were harmed in the making of this post. I'm sorry and will try harder.)
To: magslinger; Enchante; Jeff Head
I’ve been out of the community for quite a while, but when I was active (90-96) the main vulnerability of the Aegis system was the sea-skimming missile. NATO Sea Sparrow was much more effective against those threats. Aegis was designed to handle 100 Backfire Bombers launching 2 or 3 missiles each at long range. Aegis was very effective against those mass raid threats, but the sea skimmers were a different story. Remember, you had a 12 mile horizon to detect and engage an incoming threat. I don’t know if that helps, but that’s what I remember...
Jeff Head is kind of the Aegis expert, but I don’t know if he’s been freeping much lately...
19 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 3:38:40 AM by neodad (USS Vincennes (CG 49) "Freedom's Fortress")
To: magslinger
One reason, I believe that we made such a demonstration shooting down the dead satellite by the Lake Erie
23 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 5:12:13 AM by neodad (USS Vincennes (CG 49) "Freedom's Fortress")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]
To: neodad; magslinger; Kaslin
China and the press have been hyping this missile for months...and China for 3-4 years now.
There has not been one operational test...not one.
It presumes a long range recon, tracking, and ID capability, and a better ECM capability than the Chinese are known to possess.
In addition, it is supposedly a mid-range ballistic missile. Will not do much manuevering in terminal phase, and will not have much time to do it. The carrier will have moved good distances by the time the mmissile arrives.
Finally, as a ballistic misile it strikes at a part of the AEGI system that has been testd very successfully. We now have the BMD defense capability with AEGIS. They are striking at a strength of the most effective defensive system in the world.
I believe this missile is hype and is a Sung Tsu attempt by the Chinese to create a threat out of nothing while they are probably working on some other asymetrical weapon in the mean time.
Make no mistake, the Chinese Navy (PLAN) is developing rapidly into a threat...but this supposed system has never been seen...only talked about.
24 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 6:14:10 AM by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]
To: magslinger
do these missiles have some special evasive or ECM capabilities to enable them to penetrate AEGIS?
A friend of ours used to train Navy officers on the Aegis system. According to what he had said to me a couple of years ago this is not really that new and our Navy has been planning on it for a while.
Apparently our intell and development is further ahead than we might think.
25 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:17:35 AM by JSteff ((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
To: magslinger; neodad; Enchante
The Dong Feng 21D is indeed a ballistic missile. This only changes the problem but doesn't necessarily make it more difficult. The US has demonstrated that a SM-3 can make a skin-to-skin hit on a deorbiting satellite.
The major drawback of the 21D is its reliance on secondary assets for targeting information, primarily radar satellites. If you take out the satellites, you significantly degrade the system.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
27 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:30:53 AM by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]
To: magslinger
indicate a high trajectory and therefore easier for Aegis to handle
You are correct. We can actually shoot down satellites with the Aegis system. Yet I have heard it manages ground level (cruise missiles and air craft) nicely too._
28 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:31:23 AM by JSteff ((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
To: Jeff Head
Thank you for sharing your knowledge on this subjsct. This is what makes FR the best source of news in the world. Real time fact checking (and fact checking of the fact checking). One FReeper knows missiles and counter measures. Another FReeper knows about the spacing of letters on typewriters. No one FReeper knows it all, but between us all we come close.
30 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:37:58 AM by magslinger (DISCLAIMER: No liberals were harmed in the making of this post. I'm sorry and will try harder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]
To: Kaslin
Yawn,,,,,, 900 mile range? big whoop. If things were bad enough between us that this was a threat, the carriers would not be in range. However, in event of a “sucker punch” kind of engagement, The US response to a strike like this could be dicey. Do we go all in by turning loose the Tridents? ? Or convene a blue ribbon panel to determine why everthing is our fault. Only TheOne knows. God help us.
31 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:43:44 AM by joelt
To: magslinger
The AEGIS system no longer works because of Obama’s stripping from the Navy maintenance money so he can give the money to career racists and welfare bums. Read the Navy Times. It is a sad story of DDG-51s abd CG-47s that cannot use their weapons because they are rusted shut and cannot use AEGIS because it has fallen into disrepair.
34 posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 12:56:09 AM by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]
To: Jeff Head; neodad; magslinger
Thanks to all for the info — I thought it sounded over-hyped but had no basis for knowing..... “interesting” how reporters could write an article on such a system and not do even the slightest pretense of research on the matter....
35 posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 1:54:53 AM by Enchante ("The great enemy of clear language is insincerity." -- George Orwell --)
To: Jeff Head; neodad
I agree. I remember 20 years ago when the Sunburn was supposed to be sounding the death knell of the US carrier fleet, yet here we are.
It presumes a long range recon, tracking, and ID capability, and a better ECM capability than the Chinese are known to possess.
I think that's the key. Some people don't realize that it is hard to find ships - even a carrier battlegroup - in the middle of the open ocean. I know China has at least one naval reconnaissance satellite, but do they have enough for effective coverage of the Western Pacific?
Also, we sent the Chinese a message concerning the vulnerability of such an asset when we shot down one of our own malfunctioning satellites a couple years ago. That's a capability we're going to need to stay on top of.
37 posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 8:54:41 AM by The Pack Knight (Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]
To: JSteff; magslinger; Enchante; Jeff Head
This seems to be the future. The nice thing about a laser is it's easier to get it on target and keep it their. The nice thing about warships is they have large generators in them to make lots of nice mega watts.
The competition, will be as always, development of shielding, and development of more powerful lasers. Nothing really changes over the centuries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRFEAIdmQ_8
38 posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 10:26:35 AM by DariusBane (People are like sheep and have two speeds: grazing and stampede)
By the end of the year, China could deploy an anti-ship missile capable of hitting U.S. aircraft carriers at long range. The naval dominance that American foreign policy depended on may be at an end.
Not to worry, Obama has a plan for this.
We will crush the Chinese through niceness and debt.
2 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:15:18 AM by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: EGPWS
And give them a few trillion in Afgan mining rights.
3 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:17:05 AM by omega4179 (PREVIEW IS MY FRIEND)
To: Kaslin
Hype to the extent that not even a mention or consideration of the multiple layers of air defense (i.e.: AEGIS, etc.) that incorporate a US CVs defense.
5 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:20:28 AM by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Kaslin
The military equivalent of the Edsel.
6 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:20:50 AM by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Mexico is the U.S. version of Hamas)
To: Kaslin
The welfare state so depleted Britain, the nation that long boasted the mightiest Navy on earth, that its war with Argentina in 1982 was a close run thing. Without our help, Argentina may have won.
In like fashion, Hussein intends to bleed our military forces at the expense of the destructive welfare state. The difference is that when Britain retreated, the US picked up the baton of freedom.
Not so this time. When the world says adios to PAX Americana, it says hello to a new Dark Age.
8 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:35:11 AM by Jacquerie (We live in a judicial tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Kaslin
In the next real war, any US aircraft carrier will simply be a big fat target and a floating death trap. They won’t last past the first couple of days of real combat. In fact, I’m sure they will be taken out of the equation at the outset of hostilities.
9 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 7:37:06 AM by Paratesties
To: Kaslin
“Now our naval supremacy is being challenged with the final testing and imminent deployment of the Dong Feng 21D,”
Oh, for Pete’s sake, the Chicomms can’t even manufacture a set of socket wrenches that work. Anyone who thinks the ChiComms are some sort of genuises are idiots. The ChiComms are at best monkeys looking for banana treats.
And no, the Chicomms aren’t worth squat as fighters. The lowly Vietnamese kicked the Chicomms butts in 1978. ( Go look it up.)
And all you monkeys who want to bring up Korea..
First, the UN gave up every Allied tactic to the ChiComms.
Second, Truman nixed bombing Peking, as MacArthur correctly suggested...
So, sue me.....
10 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 8:28:19 AM by sergeantdave
To: Paratesties
You don't really understand carrier operations do you?
American carriers operate as part of a Carrier Battle Group. The carrier is only one part of the Battle Group. It is the center piece to be sure but carriers do not act alone. They are formidable even if they were alone.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
13 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 10:45:45 AM by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]
To: sergeantdave
Keep living in your little fantasy world, bud. You’re going to say that our enemies have no chance against the US military right up until the time that the USA, and the US military, get annihilated in the next real war by both China and Russia. People like you that think our enemies are incapable “monkeys”, as you stated, are almost as dangerous to our national security as Obama.
The last time I looked, the US military has been shrinking both in size and capability on all fronts, while our potential enemies are modernizing and rapidly expanding their capabilities. We have been disarming as fast as we possibly can. The Chinese and the Russians have been doing just the opposite.
I suggest that you stop living in the 1950’s.
14 posted on Saturday, August 07, 2010 10:47:42 AM by Paratesties
To: Enchante; Vroomfondel; SC Swamp Fox; Fred Hayek; NY Attitude; P3_Acoustic; investigateworld; ...
are these missiles invulnerable to AEGIS?
I’d think we have been working on this issue for a very long time....... the article doesn’t even mention AEGIS
do these missiles have some special evasive or ECM capabilities to enable them to penetrate AEGIS?
or does it depend upon trying to overwhelm the system with numbers?
I’d thought that AEGIS is up to handling even hundreds of incoming “targets” nowadays but I have no idea what the Chicoms are up to with this missile...... anyone really KNOW something?
Enchante, you ask some very good and interesting questions. I am not knowledgeable enough on the topic to even tell you a good sea story.
I did ping the list to your post on the hope that someone else may know more, but your questions are not directly Navair related. If there was an ALLNAV list, someone on it might be better qualified to answer them than we are.
18 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 3:00:20 AM by magslinger (DISCLAIMER: No liberals were harmed in the making of this post. I'm sorry and will try harder.)
To: magslinger; Enchante; Jeff Head
I’ve been out of the community for quite a while, but when I was active (90-96) the main vulnerability of the Aegis system was the sea-skimming missile. NATO Sea Sparrow was much more effective against those threats. Aegis was designed to handle 100 Backfire Bombers launching 2 or 3 missiles each at long range. Aegis was very effective against those mass raid threats, but the sea skimmers were a different story. Remember, you had a 12 mile horizon to detect and engage an incoming threat. I don’t know if that helps, but that’s what I remember...
Jeff Head is kind of the Aegis expert, but I don’t know if he’s been freeping much lately...
19 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 3:38:40 AM by neodad (USS Vincennes (CG 49) "Freedom's Fortress")
To: magslinger
One reason, I believe that we made such a demonstration shooting down the dead satellite by the Lake Erie
23 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 5:12:13 AM by neodad (USS Vincennes (CG 49) "Freedom's Fortress")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]
To: neodad; magslinger; Kaslin
China and the press have been hyping this missile for months...and China for 3-4 years now.
There has not been one operational test...not one.
It presumes a long range recon, tracking, and ID capability, and a better ECM capability than the Chinese are known to possess.
In addition, it is supposedly a mid-range ballistic missile. Will not do much manuevering in terminal phase, and will not have much time to do it. The carrier will have moved good distances by the time the mmissile arrives.
Finally, as a ballistic misile it strikes at a part of the AEGI system that has been testd very successfully. We now have the BMD defense capability with AEGIS. They are striking at a strength of the most effective defensive system in the world.
I believe this missile is hype and is a Sung Tsu attempt by the Chinese to create a threat out of nothing while they are probably working on some other asymetrical weapon in the mean time.
Make no mistake, the Chinese Navy (PLAN) is developing rapidly into a threat...but this supposed system has never been seen...only talked about.
24 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 6:14:10 AM by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]
To: magslinger
do these missiles have some special evasive or ECM capabilities to enable them to penetrate AEGIS?
A friend of ours used to train Navy officers on the Aegis system. According to what he had said to me a couple of years ago this is not really that new and our Navy has been planning on it for a while.
Apparently our intell and development is further ahead than we might think.
25 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:17:35 AM by JSteff ((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
To: magslinger; neodad; Enchante
The Dong Feng 21D is indeed a ballistic missile. This only changes the problem but doesn't necessarily make it more difficult. The US has demonstrated that a SM-3 can make a skin-to-skin hit on a deorbiting satellite.
The major drawback of the 21D is its reliance on secondary assets for targeting information, primarily radar satellites. If you take out the satellites, you significantly degrade the system.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
27 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:30:53 AM by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]
To: magslinger
indicate a high trajectory and therefore easier for Aegis to handle
You are correct. We can actually shoot down satellites with the Aegis system. Yet I have heard it manages ground level (cruise missiles and air craft) nicely too._
28 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:31:23 AM by JSteff ((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
To: Jeff Head
Thank you for sharing your knowledge on this subjsct. This is what makes FR the best source of news in the world. Real time fact checking (and fact checking of the fact checking). One FReeper knows missiles and counter measures. Another FReeper knows about the spacing of letters on typewriters. No one FReeper knows it all, but between us all we come close.
30 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:37:58 AM by magslinger (DISCLAIMER: No liberals were harmed in the making of this post. I'm sorry and will try harder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]
To: Kaslin
Yawn,,,,,, 900 mile range? big whoop. If things were bad enough between us that this was a threat, the carriers would not be in range. However, in event of a “sucker punch” kind of engagement, The US response to a strike like this could be dicey. Do we go all in by turning loose the Tridents? ? Or convene a blue ribbon panel to determine why everthing is our fault. Only TheOne knows. God help us.
31 posted on Sunday, August 08, 2010 7:43:44 AM by joelt
To: magslinger
The AEGIS system no longer works because of Obama’s stripping from the Navy maintenance money so he can give the money to career racists and welfare bums. Read the Navy Times. It is a sad story of DDG-51s abd CG-47s that cannot use their weapons because they are rusted shut and cannot use AEGIS because it has fallen into disrepair.
34 posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 12:56:09 AM by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]
To: Jeff Head; neodad; magslinger
Thanks to all for the info — I thought it sounded over-hyped but had no basis for knowing..... “interesting” how reporters could write an article on such a system and not do even the slightest pretense of research on the matter....
35 posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 1:54:53 AM by Enchante ("The great enemy of clear language is insincerity." -- George Orwell --)
To: Jeff Head; neodad
I agree. I remember 20 years ago when the Sunburn was supposed to be sounding the death knell of the US carrier fleet, yet here we are.
It presumes a long range recon, tracking, and ID capability, and a better ECM capability than the Chinese are known to possess.
I think that's the key. Some people don't realize that it is hard to find ships - even a carrier battlegroup - in the middle of the open ocean. I know China has at least one naval reconnaissance satellite, but do they have enough for effective coverage of the Western Pacific?
Also, we sent the Chinese a message concerning the vulnerability of such an asset when we shot down one of our own malfunctioning satellites a couple years ago. That's a capability we're going to need to stay on top of.
37 posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 8:54:41 AM by The Pack Knight (Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]
To: JSteff; magslinger; Enchante; Jeff Head
This seems to be the future. The nice thing about a laser is it's easier to get it on target and keep it their. The nice thing about warships is they have large generators in them to make lots of nice mega watts.
The competition, will be as always, development of shielding, and development of more powerful lasers. Nothing really changes over the centuries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRFEAIdmQ_8
38 posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 10:26:35 AM by DariusBane (People are like sheep and have two speeds: grazing and stampede)
Pravda has it right. The New York times can’t even do that. We live in strange times, indeed.
American Capitalism Gone With A Whimper
WebToday ^ | 8-8-10 | WebToday
Posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 10:56:29 AM by geraldmcg
The following is an article taken word for word from The Praavda, a former Communist propaganda rag, now reformed and warning the US not to go down the road of Communism that enslaved Russia for 70 years. It's kind of like the old song, "House of the Rising Sun," werein the singer tells mothers to warn their children not to do what he has done. --Editor, WebToday
It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas than the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a Burger King burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Weimar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, losses, and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?
These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties, and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more than a whimper to their masters.
Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motors) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self-given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.
So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.
Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "free man" whimper.
So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance, and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Frank, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.
The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.
The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest, and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.
Stanislav Mishin© 1999-2009.. «PRAVDA.Ru». When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors.
Source:Pravda.Ru URL: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0
WebToday ^ | 8-8-10 | WebToday
Posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 10:56:29 AM by geraldmcg
The following is an article taken word for word from The Praavda, a former Communist propaganda rag, now reformed and warning the US not to go down the road of Communism that enslaved Russia for 70 years. It's kind of like the old song, "House of the Rising Sun," werein the singer tells mothers to warn their children not to do what he has done. --Editor, WebToday
It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas than the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a Burger King burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Weimar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, losses, and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?
These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties, and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more than a whimper to their masters.
Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motors) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self-given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.
So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.
Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "free man" whimper.
So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance, and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Frank, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.
The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.
The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest, and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.
Stanislav Mishin© 1999-2009.. «PRAVDA.Ru». When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors.
Source:Pravda.Ru URL: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0
New Russian Holiday Marked as Kremlin Boosts Church
Ministry Values ^ | 8/7/10 | Stephan K. Ryan
Posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 10:52:24 AM by marshmallow
MOSCOW - In a stunning example of the resurgence of Christianity in general and the Russian Orthodox Church in particular, President Medvedev marked the adoption of Christianity in 988 with a new public holiday. This is the latest demonstration of the Kremlin's support for an Orthodox Church that has grown increasingly powerful since the fall of Communism.
Some rights groups have criticized the new holiday, approved by President Dmitry Medvedev, as undermining Russia's secular constitution.
To read "Is Russia more Christian than the United States?" Click here
Marking the anniversary Patriarch Kirill, head of the Russian Orthodox Church, held a liturgy in Kiev, the capital of modern Ukraine and mediaeval Kievan Rus, whose leader Prince Vladimir made Christianity the state religion more than 1,000 years ago.
Reuters reported the Patriarch as saying "Facing aggressive atheism and resurgent paganism we remain firm in our belief in God,"
Since the fall of the Soviet Union almost 20 years ago, the Orthodox Church has undergone a revival as Russia's leaders have endorsed it as the country's main faith.
Vladimir Putin, after lighting a candle in Veliky Novgorod's Saint Sophia Cathedral, said "This was an event of colossal significance ... Russia made a historical choice"
Many believe such an official State recognition of a religious event would be impossible in the United States
Reuters reported :
"It is really cool that this is finally happening. It's good young people know about our history," said Anton, a 22-year-old artist. Retired engineer Zina looked on. "I regularly go to church and maybe this will encourage others," she told Reuters. The trend toward consolidation of the church as a national force in Russia has worried its 20-million strong Muslim population -- a seventh of Russia's people -- as well as those who believe church and state should be strictly separated.
July 28 was celebrated in Russia en masse twice before -- in 1888 and 1988 -- but significantly Wednesday's holiday was the first time it was marked on a state level.
Its millennium celebration in 1988 under Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev was widely considered a turning point for the church's revival while Russia still lived under Communism.
Posted on Monday, August 09, 2010 10:52:24 AM by marshmallow
MOSCOW - In a stunning example of the resurgence of Christianity in general and the Russian Orthodox Church in particular, President Medvedev marked the adoption of Christianity in 988 with a new public holiday. This is the latest demonstration of the Kremlin's support for an Orthodox Church that has grown increasingly powerful since the fall of Communism.
Some rights groups have criticized the new holiday, approved by President Dmitry Medvedev, as undermining Russia's secular constitution.
To read "Is Russia more Christian than the United States?" Click here
Marking the anniversary Patriarch Kirill, head of the Russian Orthodox Church, held a liturgy in Kiev, the capital of modern Ukraine and mediaeval Kievan Rus, whose leader Prince Vladimir made Christianity the state religion more than 1,000 years ago.
Reuters reported the Patriarch as saying "Facing aggressive atheism and resurgent paganism we remain firm in our belief in God,"
Since the fall of the Soviet Union almost 20 years ago, the Orthodox Church has undergone a revival as Russia's leaders have endorsed it as the country's main faith.
Vladimir Putin, after lighting a candle in Veliky Novgorod's Saint Sophia Cathedral, said "This was an event of colossal significance ... Russia made a historical choice"
Many believe such an official State recognition of a religious event would be impossible in the United States
Reuters reported :
"It is really cool that this is finally happening. It's good young people know about our history," said Anton, a 22-year-old artist. Retired engineer Zina looked on. "I regularly go to church and maybe this will encourage others," she told Reuters. The trend toward consolidation of the church as a national force in Russia has worried its 20-million strong Muslim population -- a seventh of Russia's people -- as well as those who believe church and state should be strictly separated.
July 28 was celebrated in Russia en masse twice before -- in 1888 and 1988 -- but significantly Wednesday's holiday was the first time it was marked on a state level.
Its millennium celebration in 1988 under Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev was widely considered a turning point for the church's revival while Russia still lived under Communism.
The Obama presidency increasingly resembles a modern-day Ancien Régime: extravagant and out of touch with the American people
What the great French historian Alexis de Tocqueville would make of today’s Obama administration were he alive today is anyone’s guess. But I would wager that the author of L’Ancien Régime and Democracy in America would be less than impressed with the extravagance and arrogance on display among the White House elites that rule America as though they had been handed some divine right to govern with impunity.
It is the kind of impunity that has been highlighted on the world stage this week by Michelle Obama’s hugely costly trip to Spain, which has prompted a New York Post columnist Andrea Tantaros to dub the First Lady a contemporary Marie Antoinette. As The Telegraph reports, while the Obamas are covering their own vacation expenses such as accommodation, the trip may cost US taxpayers as much as $375,000 in terms of secret service security and flight costs on Air Force Two.
The timing of this lavish European vacation could not have come at a worse moment, when unemployment in America stands at 10 percent, and large numbers of Americans are fighting to survive financially in the wake of the global economic downturn. It sends a message of indifference, even contempt, for the millions of Americans who are struggling just to feed their families on a daily basis and pay the mortgage, while the size of the national debt balloons to Greek-style proportions.
While the liberal-dominated US mainstream media have largely ignored the story, it is all over the blogosphere and talk radio, and will undoubtedly add to the President’s free falling poll ratings. As much as the media establishment turn a blind eye to stories like this, which are major news in the international media, the American public is increasingly turning to alternative news sources, including the British press, which has a far less deferential approach towards the White House.
The First Lady’s ill-conceived trip to Marbella and the complete disregard for public opinion and concerns over excessive government spending is symbolic of a far wider problem with the Obama presidency – the overarching disdain for the principles of limited government, individual liberty and free enterprise that have built the United States over the course of nearly two and a half centuries into the most powerful and free nation on earth.
It is epitomised above all by the President’s relentless drive towards big government against the will of the American people, and the dramatic increases in government spending and borrowing, which threaten to leave the US hugely in debt for generations. It is also showcased by Barack Obama’s drive towards a socialised health care system, which, as I’ve noted before, is “a thinly disguised vanity project for a president who is committed to transforming the United States from the world’s most successful large-scale free enterprise economy, to a highly interventionist society with a massive role for centralized government.”
There is however a political revolution fast approaching Washington that is driven not by mob rule but by the power of ideas and principles, based upon the ideals of the Founding Fathers and the US Constitution. It is a distinctly conservative revolution that is sweeping America and is reflected in almost every poll ahead of this November’s mid-terms. It is based on a belief in individual liberty, limited government, and above all, political accountability from the ruling elites. The Obama administration’s mantra may well be “let them eat cake”, as it continues to gorge itself on taxpayers’ money, but it will be looking nervously over its shoulder as public unease mounts.
It is the kind of impunity that has been highlighted on the world stage this week by Michelle Obama’s hugely costly trip to Spain, which has prompted a New York Post columnist Andrea Tantaros to dub the First Lady a contemporary Marie Antoinette. As The Telegraph reports, while the Obamas are covering their own vacation expenses such as accommodation, the trip may cost US taxpayers as much as $375,000 in terms of secret service security and flight costs on Air Force Two.
The timing of this lavish European vacation could not have come at a worse moment, when unemployment in America stands at 10 percent, and large numbers of Americans are fighting to survive financially in the wake of the global economic downturn. It sends a message of indifference, even contempt, for the millions of Americans who are struggling just to feed their families on a daily basis and pay the mortgage, while the size of the national debt balloons to Greek-style proportions.
While the liberal-dominated US mainstream media have largely ignored the story, it is all over the blogosphere and talk radio, and will undoubtedly add to the President’s free falling poll ratings. As much as the media establishment turn a blind eye to stories like this, which are major news in the international media, the American public is increasingly turning to alternative news sources, including the British press, which has a far less deferential approach towards the White House.
The First Lady’s ill-conceived trip to Marbella and the complete disregard for public opinion and concerns over excessive government spending is symbolic of a far wider problem with the Obama presidency – the overarching disdain for the principles of limited government, individual liberty and free enterprise that have built the United States over the course of nearly two and a half centuries into the most powerful and free nation on earth.
It is epitomised above all by the President’s relentless drive towards big government against the will of the American people, and the dramatic increases in government spending and borrowing, which threaten to leave the US hugely in debt for generations. It is also showcased by Barack Obama’s drive towards a socialised health care system, which, as I’ve noted before, is “a thinly disguised vanity project for a president who is committed to transforming the United States from the world’s most successful large-scale free enterprise economy, to a highly interventionist society with a massive role for centralized government.”
There is however a political revolution fast approaching Washington that is driven not by mob rule but by the power of ideas and principles, based upon the ideals of the Founding Fathers and the US Constitution. It is a distinctly conservative revolution that is sweeping America and is reflected in almost every poll ahead of this November’s mid-terms. It is based on a belief in individual liberty, limited government, and above all, political accountability from the ruling elites. The Obama administration’s mantra may well be “let them eat cake”, as it continues to gorge itself on taxpayers’ money, but it will be looking nervously over its shoulder as public unease mounts.
Man torches self after ‘burning’ lottery win
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2567067/posts
A VEGETABLE farmer who lived a life of luxury after winning almost RM1mil in a lottery five years ago torched himself when his “pot of gold” became empty.
The 63-year-old from Serian, Sarawak, known only as Khoo, was reported to have dug a “grave” at the back of his house before splashing petrol on his body and lighting it, reported Berita Minggu.
The man had won more than RM750,000 five years ago and then reportedly spent up to RM1,800 on a single bet over the years, hoping to strike it big again, the weekly said.
Serian OCPD Deputy Supt Jamali Umi said the police have classified the case as sudden death.
He said the victim’s nephew had found the man dead in the hole.
A relative, who declined to be named, said Khoo, who never married, had stopped cultivating his farm upon winning the lottery and had spent the money on a new house and several vacations.
But with no new winnings, the barrel soon became empty.
A VEGETABLE farmer who lived a life of luxury after winning almost RM1mil in a lottery five years ago torched himself when his “pot of gold” became empty.
The 63-year-old from Serian, Sarawak, known only as Khoo, was reported to have dug a “grave” at the back of his house before splashing petrol on his body and lighting it, reported Berita Minggu.
The man had won more than RM750,000 five years ago and then reportedly spent up to RM1,800 on a single bet over the years, hoping to strike it big again, the weekly said.
Serian OCPD Deputy Supt Jamali Umi said the police have classified the case as sudden death.
He said the victim’s nephew had found the man dead in the hole.
A relative, who declined to be named, said Khoo, who never married, had stopped cultivating his farm upon winning the lottery and had spent the money on a new house and several vacations.
But with no new winnings, the barrel soon became empty.
BLACKSTONE
Class: 12 Vehicles; apparatus for locomotion by land, air or water; pneumatic and solid wheels and tyres for all apparatus used for locomotion by land, air or water; rubber for vehicle
CHINA TIRE HOLDINGS LIMITED
CHINA TIRE HOLDINGS LIMITED: REPORT OF THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING; SECOND QUARTER DIVIDEND PAYMENT; CHANGE OF OFFICERS
HONG KONG, June 16 /PRNewswire/ -- China Tire Holdings Limited ("China Tire" or the "Company") (NYSE NYSE
See: New York Stock Exchange : TIR TIR International Road Transport [French Transports Internationaux Routiers] ) held its second Annual General Meeting in Hong Kong on May 29, 1995 where the shareholders of the Company unanimously voted for all the proposals of the Company.
On June 30, 1995, China Tire will pay second quarter dividend of US$0.02 per share of Common Stock. For the purpose of ascertaining the shareholders eligible to receive such dividend, the record date has been set for June 16 1995.
Change of Officers
Mr. Ong Hai Siew, President and CEO (1) (Chief Executive Officer) The highest individual in command of an organization. Typically the president of the company, the CEO reports to the Chairman of the Board. of the Company, has retired from the Company effective, today. While Mr. Ong will remain as a non-executive director of the Company, the post of President and CEO will be assumed by the current Chairman of the Company, Mr. Oei Hong Leong.
The 8 members of the Board of Directors are:
Mr. Oei Hong Leong, Chairman, President & CEO
Mr. Chung Cho Yee, Mico, Director & Senior Vice President
Mr. Michael Chen, Director, Finance Director & CFO See Chief Financial Officer.
..... Click the link for more information.
Mr. Ong Hai Siew, Director
Mr. Nicholas G. Clarke, Director
Mr. William E. Lemmon, Director
Mr. Kan Sung Chee, Philip, Director (Independent)
Mr. David M. Norman, Director (Independent)
The directors of the Company are pleased to announce the appointment of Mr. Tai Sheng Hsuin as the Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Chief Operating Officer (COO)
The officer of a firm responsible for day-to-day management, usually the president or an executive vice-president. of China Tire in place of Mr. Soo Khoon York.
Mr. Tai, aged 55, joins China Tire from one of Taiwan's foremost tire companies, Federal Tires, where he has worked as a Factory General Manager and more recently, as Special Assistant to the Chairman of Federal Tires. Mr. Tai is a First-Grade Tire Specialist and has over 30 years experience in the tire industry. Mr. Tai will be responsible for the operations of China Tire's six factories. Mr. Tai is well-versed in both bias and radial tire technologies from Sumitomo Tires and Dunlop Tires.
In addition Mr. Tony Cheung, previously Senior Vice President, and Mr. Richard Lui, previously Chief Financial Officer, of the Company have resigned from their respective posts effective today. Replacing Mr. Richard Lui will be Mr. Michael Chen, the Finance Director of the Company.
China Tire is the largest automobile and truck tire producer in China, with annual production of 5.2 million units of tires in 1994 and a market share of 11%. The Company is a Bermuda incorporated holding company with majority interests in six tire manufacturing operations in the People's Republic of China. China Tire also has majority interests in a synthetic nylon tire cord plant in the PRC and two international marketing companies. China Tire's majority shareholder with 83% voting rights is China Strategic Holdings Limited, a Hong Kong listed investment holding company.
NOTE: The U.S. dollar convenience translation amounts have been translated using the unified exchange rate quoted by the Bank of China on December 31, 1994 of U.S.$1.00 = Rmb 8.44. No representation is made that the Renminbi amounts could have been, or could be, converted into U.S. dollars at that rate on December 31, 1994 or at any other certain date.
-0- 6/16/95
/CONTACT: Mico Chung or Emi Yamazaki of China Tire Holdings Limited, in Hong Kong, 852-2514-0300, or Fax: 852-2537-6591; or Cathleen Mayrose or Corey Cutler of Dewe Rogerson Inc., in New York, 212-688-6840, or Fax: 212-838-3393/
(TIR)
CO: China Tire Holdings Limited ST: IN: AUT AUT n abbr (BRIT) (= Association of University Teachers) → sindicato de profesores de universidad
AUT n abbr (Brit) (= Association of University Teachers) → SU: PER DIV
DW-PS -- NY030 -- 6454 06/16/95 11:32 EDT EDT
abbr.
Eastern Daylight Time
EDT Eastern Daylight Time
EDT n abbr (US) (= Eastern Daylight Time) → hora de verano de Nueva York
EDT
HONG KONG, June 16 /PRNewswire/ -- China Tire Holdings Limited ("China Tire" or the "Company") (NYSE NYSE
See: New York Stock Exchange : TIR TIR International Road Transport [French Transports Internationaux Routiers] ) held its second Annual General Meeting in Hong Kong on May 29, 1995 where the shareholders of the Company unanimously voted for all the proposals of the Company.
On June 30, 1995, China Tire will pay second quarter dividend of US$0.02 per share of Common Stock. For the purpose of ascertaining the shareholders eligible to receive such dividend, the record date has been set for June 16 1995.
Change of Officers
Mr. Ong Hai Siew, President and CEO (1) (Chief Executive Officer) The highest individual in command of an organization. Typically the president of the company, the CEO reports to the Chairman of the Board. of the Company, has retired from the Company effective, today. While Mr. Ong will remain as a non-executive director of the Company, the post of President and CEO will be assumed by the current Chairman of the Company, Mr. Oei Hong Leong.
The 8 members of the Board of Directors are:
Mr. Oei Hong Leong, Chairman, President & CEO
Mr. Chung Cho Yee, Mico, Director & Senior Vice President
Mr. Michael Chen, Director, Finance Director & CFO See Chief Financial Officer.
..... Click the link for more information.
Mr. Ong Hai Siew, Director
Mr. Nicholas G. Clarke, Director
Mr. William E. Lemmon, Director
Mr. Kan Sung Chee, Philip, Director (Independent)
Mr. David M. Norman, Director (Independent)
The directors of the Company are pleased to announce the appointment of Mr. Tai Sheng Hsuin as the Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Chief Operating Officer (COO)
The officer of a firm responsible for day-to-day management, usually the president or an executive vice-president. of China Tire in place of Mr. Soo Khoon York.
Mr. Tai, aged 55, joins China Tire from one of Taiwan's foremost tire companies, Federal Tires, where he has worked as a Factory General Manager and more recently, as Special Assistant to the Chairman of Federal Tires. Mr. Tai is a First-Grade Tire Specialist and has over 30 years experience in the tire industry. Mr. Tai will be responsible for the operations of China Tire's six factories. Mr. Tai is well-versed in both bias and radial tire technologies from Sumitomo Tires and Dunlop Tires.
In addition Mr. Tony Cheung, previously Senior Vice President, and Mr. Richard Lui, previously Chief Financial Officer, of the Company have resigned from their respective posts effective today. Replacing Mr. Richard Lui will be Mr. Michael Chen, the Finance Director of the Company.
China Tire is the largest automobile and truck tire producer in China, with annual production of 5.2 million units of tires in 1994 and a market share of 11%. The Company is a Bermuda incorporated holding company with majority interests in six tire manufacturing operations in the People's Republic of China. China Tire also has majority interests in a synthetic nylon tire cord plant in the PRC and two international marketing companies. China Tire's majority shareholder with 83% voting rights is China Strategic Holdings Limited, a Hong Kong listed investment holding company.
NOTE: The U.S. dollar convenience translation amounts have been translated using the unified exchange rate quoted by the Bank of China on December 31, 1994 of U.S.$1.00 = Rmb 8.44. No representation is made that the Renminbi amounts could have been, or could be, converted into U.S. dollars at that rate on December 31, 1994 or at any other certain date.
-0- 6/16/95
/CONTACT: Mico Chung or Emi Yamazaki of China Tire Holdings Limited, in Hong Kong, 852-2514-0300, or Fax: 852-2537-6591; or Cathleen Mayrose or Corey Cutler of Dewe Rogerson Inc., in New York, 212-688-6840, or Fax: 212-838-3393/
(TIR)
CO: China Tire Holdings Limited ST: IN: AUT AUT n abbr (BRIT) (= Association of University Teachers) → sindicato de profesores de universidad
AUT n abbr (Brit) (= Association of University Teachers) → SU: PER DIV
DW-PS -- NY030 -- 6454 06/16/95 11:32 EDT EDT
abbr.
Eastern Daylight Time
EDT Eastern Daylight Time
EDT n abbr (US) (= Eastern Daylight Time) → hora de verano de Nueva York
EDT
Friday, August 6, 2010
Amputate or Die by Dr. Jack Wheeler
Examiner ^ | 6/17/10 | Dr. Jack Wheeler
Posted on Friday, August 06, 2010 10:11:06 AM by pissant
It was a sobering dinner party last night (6/16). Hosted by a London billionaire in his exquisite home - a Boccaccio hung on the wall behind me - the wine flowed liberally, but the conversation between the ten of us was stone-cold serious.
There were lighter moments, as when I proposed a toast to "a great hero of Europe - Geert Wilders." Every one raised their glass in a smile, but the biggest smile was that of a spectacularly gorgeous super-model (you've seen her in many a high-fashion ad). She was from Holland.
Then a well-known Hollywood producer raised his glass to toast his hero - Ronald Reagan. "We need him again," he commented. I guarantee you've watched one of his TV shows.
But when a self-made billionaire with an 11-figure private equity fund and a clear grasp of Austrian economics starts to talk about America's prospects, you listen. So we all listened.
Being in London, he started there. "To call (new Brit PM David) Cameron a disaster is like calling Hurricane Katrina a squall. He's as much a Conservative as I am a Moslem. I have already started preparing to relocate to Switzerland. If he succeeds in his current push to raise capital gains taxes from 18% to 50% -- and it looks like he will - the British economy and the London real estate market will crash. The best play around will be to short the pound.
"In short, Cameron and Osborne (George Osborne, David Cameron's Oxford classmate and now in Cameron's cabinet as Chancellor of the Exchequer, equivalent to our Treasury Secretary) lead secret lives. Just as they hide from the public that they are homosexual behind the pretense of a marriage, they hide their liberal agenda behind the pretense of being conservative. They will destroy Britain's economy just as sure as Obama is destroying America's."
There followed a spirited exchange about financial escape hatches -- if the euro, the pound, and the dollar fall off their respective cliffs, where does anybody go? The time-worn adage of "buy gold, buy silver, buy Swiss Francs" may work for individuals, but world equity markets are in a trap from which there is no clear exit.
One opinion was, "The best run governments around today are those of Canada and Singapore - having one's savings denominated in their currencies is not a bad idea." Then we got back to America.
"You know what my biggest fear is?" our host asked. "It's not really Obama, for what he's done is to accelerate what the liberals have been slowly doing for decades - so quickly that their socialism is obvious to everyone. Which means the solution is obvious to everyone. My biggest fear is that voters will give Republicans the power to repair America on November 2nd - and the Republicans won't have the courage to do it."
All I could respond with was "Ouch," to shake my head and sigh. I mentioned an email I just got from a friend of many years in Las Vegas. He's a very successful banker and businessman who knows everyone in Republican politics in Nevada - and I had asked his opinion of how Sharron Angle might possibly beat Harry Reid. The reply I got back shocked me. He will do nothing to help her, he said, as she is too "extreme."
Why is she considered extreme? our host asked, not on intimate terms with Nevada primary elections. Because she wants a government restricted to constitutional activities, I replied, which means, for example, eliminating such things as the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Our host leaned over the table to look at me as if his eyes were lasers. "Jack, you need to explain something to your friend. You need to explain something to America and all those Congressmen you know. Amputate or die. That's the choice America has right now. That's the choice Republicans will have after November 2nd, because they're the only surgeons around who can do the surgery."
Everyone was quiet so he continued. "Gangrene will kill you. If you don't amputate a finger or other limb that's gangrenous, it will spread bacterially [via Clostridium perfringens], and you will die. Look at these unconstitutional growths of government on the body public as gangrenous infections that have to be amputated for the body to continue living."
He looked around the table at all of us. "You know that I know all the main players in the world economy. Some are fools who don't know what they are doing like Strauss-Kahn (Dominque Strauss-Kahn, head of the IMF, International Monetary Fund), some are not like Trichet (Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the European Central Bank). America has no adult on the economy's lever - Geithner is more of a hopeless disaster than Bush's Paulson was, and Bernanke is worse than Greenspan.
"So I don't know any player whose smarts I really respect who has much hope for America, who doesn't see an alternative future than the destruction of America's wealth through hyper-inflation. They think elephants will fly before Republican elephants will do what is necessary if the voters give them the power to do it."
He looked at me - so everyone else did. "Are they wrong, Jack?" The question hung in the air as I felt my face redden.
"Thanks, pal," I responded with a smile to gain a little time. Everyone did laugh for just a moment, then I had to jump into the waiting silence. Here's what I said.
"The situation is dire, there is no doubt, the gravest since the Civil War. The only hope I see is with the anger of the TeaPartyers. That anger is directed just as much towards Republican cowards as towards Democrat fascists. We don't have to wait long to see the power of that anger. Just six days from now (6/22) in South Carolina, Nikki Haley the TeaPartyer is going to wipe out Gresham Barrett the RINO, even though the state GOP establishment is doing everything slimy to smear her.
"I think your player-friends have to see things not as Democrat vs. Republican but as the Court Party - the establishment in power be they Democrat or GOP - vs. the Country Party, the TeaPartyers who want an end to all the corruption, Dem or GOP. Your players are part of the Court Party. The TeaPartyers you might think are like those who led the French Revolution - but they are like those who led the American Revolution instead.
"Yes, the TeaPartyers own most of the 300 million guns in America, but they don't want blood unless there's no choice. Note the ‘unless.' November 2nd better be an honest election. What the TeaPartyers must grasp is Churchill's call after the battle of El Alamein [November 1942], that November is only ‘the end of the beginning.'
"So you are right - the only hope is radical surgery to cut out all the metastasizing cancer, to amputate unconstitutional gangrene, or another metaphor, to be like Alexander and cut the Gordian Knot with a swordstroke.
"But the question really is not whether Republicans have the courage to perform the surgery, to defund ObamaCare, to defund the entire Obama agenda, to defund entire agencies like the Department of Education, Energy, and the EPA. It is whether the TeaPartyers have the courage and capacity to force the Republicans to. I mean, how is eliminating the EPA extreme, and EPA unconstitutional fascism not extreme? We'll find out, because they are America's only hope now."
Everyone waited for our host's response. "And the hyper-inflation? The debt's already baked in the cake, no matter what future spending is cut."
"Hyper-inflation is only another word for total default. The only way to avoid it is a government default on its debts only. Then we can switch from a worthless fiat currency to an asset-backed currency." I smiled. "Gold brings freedom."
He smiled in return and raised his glass. "We can all drink to that. To gold, to freedom, and these TeaPartyers - may Jack be right about them. May they amputate fascism before the fascists amputate our freedom."
Posted on Friday, August 06, 2010 10:11:06 AM by pissant
It was a sobering dinner party last night (6/16). Hosted by a London billionaire in his exquisite home - a Boccaccio hung on the wall behind me - the wine flowed liberally, but the conversation between the ten of us was stone-cold serious.
There were lighter moments, as when I proposed a toast to "a great hero of Europe - Geert Wilders." Every one raised their glass in a smile, but the biggest smile was that of a spectacularly gorgeous super-model (you've seen her in many a high-fashion ad). She was from Holland.
Then a well-known Hollywood producer raised his glass to toast his hero - Ronald Reagan. "We need him again," he commented. I guarantee you've watched one of his TV shows.
But when a self-made billionaire with an 11-figure private equity fund and a clear grasp of Austrian economics starts to talk about America's prospects, you listen. So we all listened.
Being in London, he started there. "To call (new Brit PM David) Cameron a disaster is like calling Hurricane Katrina a squall. He's as much a Conservative as I am a Moslem. I have already started preparing to relocate to Switzerland. If he succeeds in his current push to raise capital gains taxes from 18% to 50% -- and it looks like he will - the British economy and the London real estate market will crash. The best play around will be to short the pound.
"In short, Cameron and Osborne (George Osborne, David Cameron's Oxford classmate and now in Cameron's cabinet as Chancellor of the Exchequer, equivalent to our Treasury Secretary) lead secret lives. Just as they hide from the public that they are homosexual behind the pretense of a marriage, they hide their liberal agenda behind the pretense of being conservative. They will destroy Britain's economy just as sure as Obama is destroying America's."
There followed a spirited exchange about financial escape hatches -- if the euro, the pound, and the dollar fall off their respective cliffs, where does anybody go? The time-worn adage of "buy gold, buy silver, buy Swiss Francs" may work for individuals, but world equity markets are in a trap from which there is no clear exit.
One opinion was, "The best run governments around today are those of Canada and Singapore - having one's savings denominated in their currencies is not a bad idea." Then we got back to America.
"You know what my biggest fear is?" our host asked. "It's not really Obama, for what he's done is to accelerate what the liberals have been slowly doing for decades - so quickly that their socialism is obvious to everyone. Which means the solution is obvious to everyone. My biggest fear is that voters will give Republicans the power to repair America on November 2nd - and the Republicans won't have the courage to do it."
All I could respond with was "Ouch," to shake my head and sigh. I mentioned an email I just got from a friend of many years in Las Vegas. He's a very successful banker and businessman who knows everyone in Republican politics in Nevada - and I had asked his opinion of how Sharron Angle might possibly beat Harry Reid. The reply I got back shocked me. He will do nothing to help her, he said, as she is too "extreme."
Why is she considered extreme? our host asked, not on intimate terms with Nevada primary elections. Because she wants a government restricted to constitutional activities, I replied, which means, for example, eliminating such things as the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Our host leaned over the table to look at me as if his eyes were lasers. "Jack, you need to explain something to your friend. You need to explain something to America and all those Congressmen you know. Amputate or die. That's the choice America has right now. That's the choice Republicans will have after November 2nd, because they're the only surgeons around who can do the surgery."
Everyone was quiet so he continued. "Gangrene will kill you. If you don't amputate a finger or other limb that's gangrenous, it will spread bacterially [via Clostridium perfringens], and you will die. Look at these unconstitutional growths of government on the body public as gangrenous infections that have to be amputated for the body to continue living."
He looked around the table at all of us. "You know that I know all the main players in the world economy. Some are fools who don't know what they are doing like Strauss-Kahn (Dominque Strauss-Kahn, head of the IMF, International Monetary Fund), some are not like Trichet (Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the European Central Bank). America has no adult on the economy's lever - Geithner is more of a hopeless disaster than Bush's Paulson was, and Bernanke is worse than Greenspan.
"So I don't know any player whose smarts I really respect who has much hope for America, who doesn't see an alternative future than the destruction of America's wealth through hyper-inflation. They think elephants will fly before Republican elephants will do what is necessary if the voters give them the power to do it."
He looked at me - so everyone else did. "Are they wrong, Jack?" The question hung in the air as I felt my face redden.
"Thanks, pal," I responded with a smile to gain a little time. Everyone did laugh for just a moment, then I had to jump into the waiting silence. Here's what I said.
"The situation is dire, there is no doubt, the gravest since the Civil War. The only hope I see is with the anger of the TeaPartyers. That anger is directed just as much towards Republican cowards as towards Democrat fascists. We don't have to wait long to see the power of that anger. Just six days from now (6/22) in South Carolina, Nikki Haley the TeaPartyer is going to wipe out Gresham Barrett the RINO, even though the state GOP establishment is doing everything slimy to smear her.
"I think your player-friends have to see things not as Democrat vs. Republican but as the Court Party - the establishment in power be they Democrat or GOP - vs. the Country Party, the TeaPartyers who want an end to all the corruption, Dem or GOP. Your players are part of the Court Party. The TeaPartyers you might think are like those who led the French Revolution - but they are like those who led the American Revolution instead.
"Yes, the TeaPartyers own most of the 300 million guns in America, but they don't want blood unless there's no choice. Note the ‘unless.' November 2nd better be an honest election. What the TeaPartyers must grasp is Churchill's call after the battle of El Alamein [November 1942], that November is only ‘the end of the beginning.'
"So you are right - the only hope is radical surgery to cut out all the metastasizing cancer, to amputate unconstitutional gangrene, or another metaphor, to be like Alexander and cut the Gordian Knot with a swordstroke.
"But the question really is not whether Republicans have the courage to perform the surgery, to defund ObamaCare, to defund the entire Obama agenda, to defund entire agencies like the Department of Education, Energy, and the EPA. It is whether the TeaPartyers have the courage and capacity to force the Republicans to. I mean, how is eliminating the EPA extreme, and EPA unconstitutional fascism not extreme? We'll find out, because they are America's only hope now."
Everyone waited for our host's response. "And the hyper-inflation? The debt's already baked in the cake, no matter what future spending is cut."
"Hyper-inflation is only another word for total default. The only way to avoid it is a government default on its debts only. Then we can switch from a worthless fiat currency to an asset-backed currency." I smiled. "Gold brings freedom."
He smiled in return and raised his glass. "We can all drink to that. To gold, to freedom, and these TeaPartyers - may Jack be right about them. May they amputate fascism before the fascists amputate our freedom."
Bungled heist lands man back in prison
Most people probably get pretty good at their jobs after 30 years experience. Nathan Wayne Pugh, though, not so much.
The man’s criminal record dates back to 1980, and his most recent, probably most humorous, job occurred late last month when we tried and failed, failed hard, to rob a Wells Fargo bank branch in Dallas.
Police have to break out in giggles at stuff like this. Pugh walked in, according to a report in the Dallas Morning News, and told a teller he wanted to make a withdrawal.
Summarizing, the teller asked how much, he produced a note that said he had a “bom,” she asked for his ID, he handed over his Wells Fargo debit card, she stifled a laugh, probably, and asked how much of a withdrawal, he said two grand, she asked for a second form of ID, nudged the teller next to her and rolled her eyes, maybe, he presented his state-issued ID, she handed over less than half the amount he demanded, he took it and the two forms of ID, spun to leave, and spotted a Dallas police officer or two.
Hmm, stay cool Nathan Wayne, think now. That’s when he decided it’d be a good idea to take a hostage, a woman standing nearby with a child. She was having a bad day, probably, and wasn’t in the mood, so she beat him up.
The officers somehow managed to cuff Pugh even though they had to be laughing hysterically.
But don’t give up, Nathan Wayne. You keep practicing and eventually you’ll get the hang of it. Or not.
The man’s criminal record dates back to 1980, and his most recent, probably most humorous, job occurred late last month when we tried and failed, failed hard, to rob a Wells Fargo bank branch in Dallas.
Police have to break out in giggles at stuff like this. Pugh walked in, according to a report in the Dallas Morning News, and told a teller he wanted to make a withdrawal.
Summarizing, the teller asked how much, he produced a note that said he had a “bom,” she asked for his ID, he handed over his Wells Fargo debit card, she stifled a laugh, probably, and asked how much of a withdrawal, he said two grand, she asked for a second form of ID, nudged the teller next to her and rolled her eyes, maybe, he presented his state-issued ID, she handed over less than half the amount he demanded, he took it and the two forms of ID, spun to leave, and spotted a Dallas police officer or two.
Hmm, stay cool Nathan Wayne, think now. That’s when he decided it’d be a good idea to take a hostage, a woman standing nearby with a child. She was having a bad day, probably, and wasn’t in the mood, so she beat him up.
The officers somehow managed to cuff Pugh even though they had to be laughing hysterically.
But don’t give up, Nathan Wayne. You keep practicing and eventually you’ll get the hang of it. Or not.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The biggest lie about U.S. companies Commentary: Healthy balance sheets? They owe $7.2 trillion, the most ever
By Brett Arends
BOSTON -- You may have heard recently that U.S. companies have emerged from the financial crisis in robust health, that they've paid down their debts, rebuilt their balance sheets and are sitting on growing piles of cash they are ready to invest in the economy.
You could hear this great news pretty much anywhere -- maybe from Bloomberg, which this spring hailed the "surprising strength" of corporate balance sheets. Or perhaps in the Washington Post, where Fareed Zakaria reported that top companies "have accumulated an astonishing $1.8 trillion of cash," leaving them in the best shape, by some measures, "in almost half a century."
Or you heard it from Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard Fisher, who recently said companies were "hoarding cash" but were afraid to start investing. Or on CNBC, where experts have been debating what these corporations are going to do with all their surplus loot. Will they raise dividends? Buy back shares? Launch a new wave of mergers and acquisitions?
It all sounds wonderful for investors and the U.S. economy. There's just one problem: It's a crock.
American companies are not in robust financial shape. Federal Reserve data show that their debts have been rising, not falling. By some measures, they are now more leveraged than at any time since the Great Depression.
You'd think someone might have noticed something amiss. After all, we were simultaneously being told that companies (a) had more money than they know what to do with; (b) had even more money coming in due to a surge in profits; yet (c) they have been out in the bond market borrowing as fast as they can.
Does that sound a little odd to you?
A look at the facts shows that companies only have "record amounts of cash" in the way that Subprime Suzy was flush with cash after that big refi back in 2005. So long as you don't look at the liabilities, the picture looks great. Hey, why not buy a Jacuzzi?
According to the Federal Reserve, nonfinancial firms borrowed another $289 billion in the first quarter, taking their total domestic debts to $7.2 trillion, the highest level ever. That's up by $1.1 trillion since the first quarter of 2007; it's twice the level seen in the late 1990s.
The debt repayments made during the financial crisis were brief and minimal: tiny amounts, totaling about $100 billion, in the second and fourth quarters of 2009.
Remember that these are the debts for the nonfinancials -- the part of the economy that's supposed to be in better shape. The banks? Everybody knows half of them are the walking dead.
Central bank and Commerce Department data reveal that gross domestic debts of nonfinancial corporations now amount to 50% of GDP. That's a postwar record. In 1945, it was just 20%. Even at the credit-bubble peaks in the late 1980s and 2005-06, it was only around 45%.
The Fed data "underline the poor state of the U.S. private sector's balance sheets," reports financial analyst Andrew Smithers, who's also the author of "Wall Street Revalued: Imperfect Markets and Inept Central Bankers," and chairman of Smithers & Co. in London.
"While this is generally recognized for households," he said, "it is often denied with regard to corporations. These denials are without merit and depend on looking at cash assets and ignoring liabilities. Cash assets have risen recently, in response to the fall in inventories, but nonfinancials' corporate debt, whether measured gross or after netting off bank deposits and other interest-bearing assets, is at peak levels."
By Smithers' analysis, net leverage is nearly 50% of corporate net worth, a modern record.
There is one caveat to this, he noted: It focuses on assets and liabilities of companies within the United States. Some U.S. companies are holding net cash overseas. That may brighten the picture a little, but the overall effect is not enormous, and mostly just affects the biggest companies.
That U.S. companies are in worse financial shape than we're being told is clearly bad news for those thinking of investing in U.S. stocks or bonds, as leverage makes investments riskier. Clearly it's bad news for jobs and the economy.
But why is this line being spun about healthy balance sheets? For the same reason we're told other lies, myths and half-truths: Too many people have a vested interest in spinning, and too few have an interest in the actual picture.
Journalists, for example, seek safety in numbers; there's a herd mentality. Once a line starts to get repeated, others just assume it's correct and join in.
Wall Street? It's a hustle. This healthy balance-sheet myth helps sell stocks and bonds. How many bonuses do you think get paid for telling customers the stark facts, and how many get paid for making the sale?
You can also blame our partisan age too. Right now, people on the right have a vested interest in claiming businesses are in healthy shape. That makes the saintly private sector look good, and demonizes President Barack Obama and Big Government for scaring away investment. Vote Republican! Meanwhile, people on the left have an interest in making businesses sound really healthy too: If greedy companies are hoarding cash instead of hiring people, they can cry "Shame on them! Vote Democratic!"
As ever, the truth is someone else's problem and no one's responsibility.
When it comes to the economy, let's just hope the public is too hopped up on painkillers and antidepressants to notice. If they knew what was really going on, there'd be trouble.
BOSTON -- You may have heard recently that U.S. companies have emerged from the financial crisis in robust health, that they've paid down their debts, rebuilt their balance sheets and are sitting on growing piles of cash they are ready to invest in the economy.
You could hear this great news pretty much anywhere -- maybe from Bloomberg, which this spring hailed the "surprising strength" of corporate balance sheets. Or perhaps in the Washington Post, where Fareed Zakaria reported that top companies "have accumulated an astonishing $1.8 trillion of cash," leaving them in the best shape, by some measures, "in almost half a century."
Or you heard it from Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard Fisher, who recently said companies were "hoarding cash" but were afraid to start investing. Or on CNBC, where experts have been debating what these corporations are going to do with all their surplus loot. Will they raise dividends? Buy back shares? Launch a new wave of mergers and acquisitions?
It all sounds wonderful for investors and the U.S. economy. There's just one problem: It's a crock.
American companies are not in robust financial shape. Federal Reserve data show that their debts have been rising, not falling. By some measures, they are now more leveraged than at any time since the Great Depression.
You'd think someone might have noticed something amiss. After all, we were simultaneously being told that companies (a) had more money than they know what to do with; (b) had even more money coming in due to a surge in profits; yet (c) they have been out in the bond market borrowing as fast as they can.
Does that sound a little odd to you?
A look at the facts shows that companies only have "record amounts of cash" in the way that Subprime Suzy was flush with cash after that big refi back in 2005. So long as you don't look at the liabilities, the picture looks great. Hey, why not buy a Jacuzzi?
According to the Federal Reserve, nonfinancial firms borrowed another $289 billion in the first quarter, taking their total domestic debts to $7.2 trillion, the highest level ever. That's up by $1.1 trillion since the first quarter of 2007; it's twice the level seen in the late 1990s.
The debt repayments made during the financial crisis were brief and minimal: tiny amounts, totaling about $100 billion, in the second and fourth quarters of 2009.
Remember that these are the debts for the nonfinancials -- the part of the economy that's supposed to be in better shape. The banks? Everybody knows half of them are the walking dead.
Central bank and Commerce Department data reveal that gross domestic debts of nonfinancial corporations now amount to 50% of GDP. That's a postwar record. In 1945, it was just 20%. Even at the credit-bubble peaks in the late 1980s and 2005-06, it was only around 45%.
The Fed data "underline the poor state of the U.S. private sector's balance sheets," reports financial analyst Andrew Smithers, who's also the author of "Wall Street Revalued: Imperfect Markets and Inept Central Bankers," and chairman of Smithers & Co. in London.
"While this is generally recognized for households," he said, "it is often denied with regard to corporations. These denials are without merit and depend on looking at cash assets and ignoring liabilities. Cash assets have risen recently, in response to the fall in inventories, but nonfinancials' corporate debt, whether measured gross or after netting off bank deposits and other interest-bearing assets, is at peak levels."
By Smithers' analysis, net leverage is nearly 50% of corporate net worth, a modern record.
There is one caveat to this, he noted: It focuses on assets and liabilities of companies within the United States. Some U.S. companies are holding net cash overseas. That may brighten the picture a little, but the overall effect is not enormous, and mostly just affects the biggest companies.
That U.S. companies are in worse financial shape than we're being told is clearly bad news for those thinking of investing in U.S. stocks or bonds, as leverage makes investments riskier. Clearly it's bad news for jobs and the economy.
But why is this line being spun about healthy balance sheets? For the same reason we're told other lies, myths and half-truths: Too many people have a vested interest in spinning, and too few have an interest in the actual picture.
Journalists, for example, seek safety in numbers; there's a herd mentality. Once a line starts to get repeated, others just assume it's correct and join in.
Wall Street? It's a hustle. This healthy balance-sheet myth helps sell stocks and bonds. How many bonuses do you think get paid for telling customers the stark facts, and how many get paid for making the sale?
You can also blame our partisan age too. Right now, people on the right have a vested interest in claiming businesses are in healthy shape. That makes the saintly private sector look good, and demonizes President Barack Obama and Big Government for scaring away investment. Vote Republican! Meanwhile, people on the left have an interest in making businesses sound really healthy too: If greedy companies are hoarding cash instead of hiring people, they can cry "Shame on them! Vote Democratic!"
As ever, the truth is someone else's problem and no one's responsibility.
When it comes to the economy, let's just hope the public is too hopped up on painkillers and antidepressants to notice. If they knew what was really going on, there'd be trouble.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
Heroes of the Korean War: Lieutenant Colonel Charles B. Smith
The Soldiers of Taskforce Smith
It has been 57 years since the Task Force Smith Battle against the communist North Korean forces on July 5, 1950 at the beginning days of the Korean War. The battalion of soldiers called Task Force Smith after their commander Lieutenant Colonel Charles B. Smith was quickly deployed from occupation duty in Japan to Korea to delay the North Korean advance until more American units could arrive to fight the communist aggressors. History tends to record Task Force Smith as a an example of a military blunder, but the fact of the matter is that Task Force Smith really did fight the best they could with what they had and should not be looked down upon as being an example of poor soldiering. They were great soldiers and Americans that fought well in defense of freedom for a country few had ever heard of. To truly understand Task Force Smith it is important to examine the morale and psychology of the unit at the time.
The soldiers that composed Task Force Smith were from 1st Battalion, 21st Regiment, 24th Infantry Division. The 24ID was located in Japan and were conducting peacekeeping operations. The priority of the military at the time was on occupation and reconstruction duties in Japan and not collective unit training. Plus the soldiers were living a soft life that included personal shoe shine boys and flirting with numerous prostitutes. Even the lowest private felt like a king in 1950 Japan.
Plus many of the soldiers in the Army at the time were not old enough to have fought in World War II. They were young teenagers during World War II and grew up believing the US and especially the military was invincible. However these young soldiers had no idea what real combat was like, but John Wayne had taught them on TV that combat was glorious and you can run around the battle field with out fear of bullets and when somebody does gets hit they just spin around and lie on the ground motionless. There was no movies like Saving Private Ryan that conveyed the real horrors of actual ground combat.
The soldiers of 1-21IN, 24ID were not a lone and unique example of untrained soldiers at the time, as the unit is sometimes referred too. In fact LTC Smith actually instituted a vigorous company level training program to improve the soldiers basic infantry standards beginning in January of 1950. However, the unit would not have time to conduct vigorous battalion level training due to the on set of the Korean War that was launched on June 25, 1950..
LTC Smith’s unit was in fact a microcosm of the entire post-war military in 1950. The army was filled with untrained, but highly patriotic youths brought up to believe America and it’s military were the best in the world without appreciation for the realities of the hard work and training it takes to stay the best. All the John Wayne movies in the world do not make up for tough, realistic training. Unfortunately for them, they would soon learn this reality in the far away hills of Korea. A place many of them had never heard of and would soon give their lives for.
Lieutenant Colonel Charles B. Smith was first notified of his 1-21 Infantry Battalion’s deployment to Korea on July 1, 1950 when he was called into the office of the 24th Infantry Division’s Commanding General’s office. The commander General Dean notified LTC Smith that his battalion was chosen to lead a delaying action in Korea against the advancing North Korean forces. They would be the speed bump that would slow down the North Koreans until more US forces could arrive to destroy them.
Commander of all US forces General Douglas MacArthur had referred to Task Force Smith as an “arrogant display of American strength.” This sentiment caused many of the soldiers in Task Force Smith to feel that this was just a temporary “Police Action” as the Korean War is sometimes referred to, and they would be back to their comfortable lives in Japan in no time. They believed that once the North Koreans saw the all mighty American Army in front of them, they would turn around and run back to North Korea. The North Koreans had other plans.
LTC Smith’s orders were to deploy the battalion as quickly as possible to Pusan and from there advance as far North as possible along the Taejon to Seoul road to set up a defensive line to delay the North Korean advance until General William Dean could get the rest of the 24ID deployed to Korea. The 24ID was spread throughout Japan on occupation duty and was not configured for rapid deployment. They needed time to get everyone mobilized and prepared for deployment. Task Force Smith’s mission was to give the Division that time.
1-21IN deployed on July 2nd from Camp Wood, Japan with two rifle companies, headquarters, and a two mortar platoons, and a 75mm recoilless rifle platoon. In total the small battalion totaled roughly 430 men. The unit flew by plane to a military airfield near Pusan. By July 3rd 1-21IN had arrived by train to Taejon where they began to move North to meet the advancing North Koreans. On America’s birthday, the 4th of July, 1950, 1-21IN met up in Pyongtaek with part of the 52nd Field Artillery battalion. Field Artillerymen only had six 105mm howitzers, totaled 108 men, and were commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Miller Perry. Task Force Smith now totaled roughly 540 men and were on their way to stop two advancing North Korean Divisions totaling upwards of 20,000 men who had days prior routed the ROK Army. But this was a “police action”, and those 20,000 North Koreans are supposed to run in fear when they see the US soldiers in front of them. It didn’t quite work out that way.
Task Force Smith moved North from Pyongtaek and set up a defensive line on some key high ground along Highway 1 just North of modern day Osan. The Task Force dug in and prepared to fight the advancing North Koreans. These soldiers would soon learn that warfare is not a John Wayne movie and the enemy doesn’t always follow the script.
On July 5, 1950 Task Force Smith sat entrenched in a defensive line just North of modern day Osan. A steady rain fell on the defenders as they awaited for the inevitable battle. At 0700 Lieutenant Colonel Smith saw eight North Korean T-34 tanks moving south down the highway from Suwon to Osan heading straight for the ridge line the US soldiers were dug in at.
LTC Smith called on his six supporting howitzers from the 52nd Field Artillery Battalion to pour what artillery men like to call “steel rain” on the enemy. The howitzers fired their 105mm artillery rounds on the enemy tanks but this “steel rain” met even stronger iron as the rounds were unable to penetrate the thick armor of the T-34 tanks.
The T-34 tanks were from the NK 105th Armor Brigade that were screening in front of the advancing NK 4th Infantry Division. Some of you may remember the NK 4ID from when they battled the ROK 7ID in the Battle of Uijongbu. The Americans would be equally frustrated by the superior T-34′s armor as their ROK Army counterparts were.
The eight T-34′s continue to move forward and engage the Americans on the ridge line oblivious to the artillery fire that could not penetrate their armor. Lieutenant Ollie Connor took a bazooka and ran down the hill into a ditch along side the road and fired on the T-34. The bazooka round had no effect. He then fired into the rear of the tank which is supposed to be the T-34′s “soft spot” which that also had no effect. In all Lieutenant Connor fired a total of 22 bazooka rounds which all had no effect on the T-34′s. The tanks would of been easy kills with anti-tank mines but the infantrymen had none at their disposal. Air power could of also hit the tanks hard, but the steady rain caused the US Air Force to not fly sorties in the vicinity of Task Force Smith due to concerns of friendly fire incidents.
The first T-34′s unimpressed by the ambush continued forward looking for the real fight not realizing that was in fact the real fight. The North Koreans felt there had to be a stronger American force awaiting somewhere to ambush them and this was just a road block to occupy them with. This was the legendary American Army they fighting, there had to be more. However, there was no more; it was just Smith and his men.
The tanks continued down the road towards the artillery positions. The artillery men fired one of their total of nine anti-armor rounds at one of the tanks. There was only nine of these rounds in country at the time. The lead tank was hit in the front and burst into flames. The three NK tankers jumped out and fired at an American machine gun position killing an assistant gunner. This assistant gunner would become the first US fatality of the Korean War, he soon would not be alone; many more would follow. The three North Korean tankers were eventually quickly shot down by the other Americans.
The other tanks were not detoured by the destroyed tank and moved forward. The artillery men were practically using their howitzers as direct fire weapons firing at ranges of 150-300 meters at the T-34′s. One more tank was disabled when it was hit in the treads, but the other tanks kept coming. The tanks moved to the rear of the howitzers and destroyed LTC Perry’s headquarters and vehicles but by passed the howitzers and kept moving south. The Americans still had their six howitzers but no means of communicating with LTC Smith’s infantry men because the tanks had cut the communications line in between the infantrymen and the artillery men. Artillery is of no use if there is no one to communicate with them to call in the indirect fires.
Once LTC Smith realized that his communications with LTC Perry had been cut he sent runners to try and restore communications but they twice returned saying they could not run a line due to enemy direct fire on them. The radios between the infantry men and the artillery also would not work due to the rain damaging their equipment. Comms or no comms the tanks just kept coming.
The artillery men continued to fire at the tanks as they passed by. However, some of the young artillery men panicked and ran at the sight of over 40 tanks moving through their area. Officer and sergeants took over the howitzers, continuing the heavy fire on the tanks. They were able to disable another track before all the tanks passed them and continued south. Amazingly the artillerymen took only two wounded including LTC Perry with no dead. The nearby infantry men had sustained 20 dead in the fight against the tanks. The artillery men had only one destroyed howitzer but most of their headquarters and support vehicles had been destroyed. The artillery men from the 52nd FA had fought bravely against the enemy tanks destroying three of them but without communications the artillery men would have no more impact on this fight.
After what must have seemed like an endless column of North Korean tanks, they passed by the ridge defended by LTC Smith’s infantry men with little resistance. The main column of the NK 4th Infantry Division came into sight. The NK column was composed of dismounted infantry, approximately 4,000 of them, walking in congested groups down the road accompanied by more T-34 tanks. Great more tanks, but at least there was finally something Smith and his guys could actually kill.
However, by this point in the battle, the John Wayne movie illusions of combat had been shattered after the unit’s fight with the North Korean tanks. The soldiers couldn’t have been to thrilled to see more tanks and let alone 4,000 enemy infantry on top of it.
Heavy casualties could of been inflicted on the dismounted North Korean infantry if LTC Smith had communications with his howitzers to fire artillery on them. LTC Smith was still not able to restore communications and figured the artillery men had been destroyed by the North Korean tanks that had passed by. Also if the steady rain would of stopped, American air power could of decimated the North Korean column, but Smith had neither and would pay dearly for it.
Smith ordered his mortars to start the attack. The enemy took casualties and began to search for cover. The North Korean soldiers though battle hardened and mentally prepared for combat were not tactically disciplined and did not realize their numerical superiority and initially did not mount an effective dismounted counterattack. The North Koreans did however unload on the ridge line with artillery and tank fire. The volume of fire was ferocious but without an effective infantry counterattack to dislodge Smith’s men, the US soldiers continued to hold the high ground.
However, after the North Koreans began to realize their numerical superiority they began slowly to flank the American forces. Task Force Smith was slowly becoming enveloped by the North Koreans and sustaining heavy casualties, plus many soldiers had simply ran out of ammunition to fire. LTC Smith made the tough decision to withdraw. A withdrawal is difficult to execute even with a well disciplined unit much less soldiers that were scared and poorly trained in withdrawal operations. Once the order was given many of the soldiers simply took off and ran, leaving behind their weapons and equipment.
LTC Smith headed towards LTC Perry’s position to see what had become of the artillery men. He was amazed to see the artillery men were still intact. However, it was to late for them to provide any effective fires in this battle. He gave the order for them to retreat, but not before they effectively disabled their howitzers rendering them useless to the enemy. The artillery men still had a few trucks left and loaded up their men and began retreating.
To make matters worse for Smith, the already chaotic withdrawal was rendered more difficult because the prior enemy tanks had now occupied Osan to the unit’s rear. He had to have the unit withdraw towards the east instead. Nobody wanted to mess with those tanks again. However, the east was filled with slimy rice paddies the soldiers had to navigate through instead. I’m sure the soldiers preferred that then to fight those tanks again. Some of the trucks from 52nd FA stopped and picked up about 100 infantry men along the way.
The North Koreans were happy with just capturing the ridge line and chose not to pursue the Americans. Not because they were exhausted but because there was to much good loot on the hill to plunder. I’m sure the NK soldiers have a great time taking watches, wallets, and equipment from all the dead and wounded American soldiers. This probably slowed the North Korean advance more than the battle itself.
The next morning LTC Smith could only account for half of the unit’s 540 men. Approximately 181 American soldiers were either killed or captured that summer day in July 1950 and inflicted approximately 127 casualties on the North Korean enemy. Those 181 lives had delayed the North Koreans for 7 hours.
Weeks later scattered soldiers from Task Force Smith would trickle into Pusan. Some soldiers had made it all the way to the East Coast and followed the coast line down to Pusan. One soldier reached the Yellow Sea and used a Korean sampan to travel to Pusan.
Other 24th Infantry Division units had arrived over night and set up positions in Choenan and Taejon areas. They to would be routed at a great cost of American lives, but more time had been bought. The 24ID had been piece mealed and trickled into Korea one unit at at time. No general would ever want to fight a battle with piece mealed units, but the 24ID has no choice, but to do so to delay the advancing enemy. The 24ID had actually delayed the enemy long enough for the 1st Cavalry and 25th Infantry Divisions to arrive in strength from Japan. These two units would go on to achieve heroic acts of bravery in saving the country of Korea by holding the Pusan Perimeter. However, the Pusan Perimeter would of never been formed without the precious time payed for in American lives by the units of the 24th Infantry Division and Task Force Smith.
The Lessons Learned from Taskforce Smith
Task Force Smith though poorly trained and ill equipped was still able to put up an effective defense for a limited amount of time. If they had land mines, air support, and more ammunition they probably could of sustained their defense longer and inflicted more casualties. However, with two approaching North Korean divisions they were sure to be over run at some point and the Army commanders in Tokyo knew this. So to blame the defeat of Task Force Smith solely on the unit and LTC Smith, like some people like to believe, for allowing his unit to become so poorly trained and outfitted during peace time, I find to be misguided.
The Army commanders in Tokyo are the ones that allowed the soldiers of 1-21 Infantry and the rest of the occupation forces in Japan to become so poorly trained and ill equipped in the first place, but it really isn’t their fault either. As is so often the case the blame really lies with the politicians.
The US Congress at the time set the Army’s strength at 10 combat Divisions, but they did not provide enough money to sustain these 10 Divisions. At best there was enough money to fund only 6 Divisions. The politicians however are always eager to not be seen as “soft on defense” and mandated that 10 Divisions had to be kept knowing full well they would not be properly funded. After all the US had the atomic bomb, who needs ground forces when you have nukes, right? At least that is what Congress thought.
The Army short on money chose to use their scarce resources to ensure that the front line Divisions in Germany were fully manned and trained due to the increasing Soviet threat than to allocate resources to an occupation force in Japan. Thus the four Army Divisions in Japan received little money for equipment and training and many units were only filled with 50% of their required personnel.
Combine this with the John Wayne attitude of the military’s youth at the time and this is how you end up with a Task Force Smith. It is important to understand that Task Force Smith was not unique. It was just microcosm of the military in the Pacific that was allowed to weaken by the US government due to budgetary reasons that forces the military to focus its scant resources to defend Europe then to train an occupation army.
The politicians apparently thought just like the young soldiers, that enough John Wayne movies and patriotism can make up for rigorous training and good equipment. Past greatness doesn’t sustain the readiness of an Army. If this was the case the French and Italians would still be military powers today. Training and the best equipment are what makes a military strong.
However, as often is the case, the politicians don’t pay for their bone headed errors, the soldiers do and Task Force Smith payed for these mistakes in blood.
Today a memorial to the soldiers of Task Force Smith can be found just off of Highway 1 between Osan and Suwon. It is a fitting memorial with sculptures depicting American soldiers facing off in every direction just like they were that rainy day on July 5, 1950.
It has been 57 years since the Task Force Smith Battle against the communist North Korean forces on July 5, 1950 at the beginning days of the Korean War. The battalion of soldiers called Task Force Smith after their commander Lieutenant Colonel Charles B. Smith was quickly deployed from occupation duty in Japan to Korea to delay the North Korean advance until more American units could arrive to fight the communist aggressors. History tends to record Task Force Smith as a an example of a military blunder, but the fact of the matter is that Task Force Smith really did fight the best they could with what they had and should not be looked down upon as being an example of poor soldiering. They were great soldiers and Americans that fought well in defense of freedom for a country few had ever heard of. To truly understand Task Force Smith it is important to examine the morale and psychology of the unit at the time.
The soldiers that composed Task Force Smith were from 1st Battalion, 21st Regiment, 24th Infantry Division. The 24ID was located in Japan and were conducting peacekeeping operations. The priority of the military at the time was on occupation and reconstruction duties in Japan and not collective unit training. Plus the soldiers were living a soft life that included personal shoe shine boys and flirting with numerous prostitutes. Even the lowest private felt like a king in 1950 Japan.
Plus many of the soldiers in the Army at the time were not old enough to have fought in World War II. They were young teenagers during World War II and grew up believing the US and especially the military was invincible. However these young soldiers had no idea what real combat was like, but John Wayne had taught them on TV that combat was glorious and you can run around the battle field with out fear of bullets and when somebody does gets hit they just spin around and lie on the ground motionless. There was no movies like Saving Private Ryan that conveyed the real horrors of actual ground combat.
The soldiers of 1-21IN, 24ID were not a lone and unique example of untrained soldiers at the time, as the unit is sometimes referred too. In fact LTC Smith actually instituted a vigorous company level training program to improve the soldiers basic infantry standards beginning in January of 1950. However, the unit would not have time to conduct vigorous battalion level training due to the on set of the Korean War that was launched on June 25, 1950..
LTC Smith’s unit was in fact a microcosm of the entire post-war military in 1950. The army was filled with untrained, but highly patriotic youths brought up to believe America and it’s military were the best in the world without appreciation for the realities of the hard work and training it takes to stay the best. All the John Wayne movies in the world do not make up for tough, realistic training. Unfortunately for them, they would soon learn this reality in the far away hills of Korea. A place many of them had never heard of and would soon give their lives for.
Lieutenant Colonel Charles B. Smith was first notified of his 1-21 Infantry Battalion’s deployment to Korea on July 1, 1950 when he was called into the office of the 24th Infantry Division’s Commanding General’s office. The commander General Dean notified LTC Smith that his battalion was chosen to lead a delaying action in Korea against the advancing North Korean forces. They would be the speed bump that would slow down the North Koreans until more US forces could arrive to destroy them.
Commander of all US forces General Douglas MacArthur had referred to Task Force Smith as an “arrogant display of American strength.” This sentiment caused many of the soldiers in Task Force Smith to feel that this was just a temporary “Police Action” as the Korean War is sometimes referred to, and they would be back to their comfortable lives in Japan in no time. They believed that once the North Koreans saw the all mighty American Army in front of them, they would turn around and run back to North Korea. The North Koreans had other plans.
LTC Smith’s orders were to deploy the battalion as quickly as possible to Pusan and from there advance as far North as possible along the Taejon to Seoul road to set up a defensive line to delay the North Korean advance until General William Dean could get the rest of the 24ID deployed to Korea. The 24ID was spread throughout Japan on occupation duty and was not configured for rapid deployment. They needed time to get everyone mobilized and prepared for deployment. Task Force Smith’s mission was to give the Division that time.
1-21IN deployed on July 2nd from Camp Wood, Japan with two rifle companies, headquarters, and a two mortar platoons, and a 75mm recoilless rifle platoon. In total the small battalion totaled roughly 430 men. The unit flew by plane to a military airfield near Pusan. By July 3rd 1-21IN had arrived by train to Taejon where they began to move North to meet the advancing North Koreans. On America’s birthday, the 4th of July, 1950, 1-21IN met up in Pyongtaek with part of the 52nd Field Artillery battalion. Field Artillerymen only had six 105mm howitzers, totaled 108 men, and were commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Miller Perry. Task Force Smith now totaled roughly 540 men and were on their way to stop two advancing North Korean Divisions totaling upwards of 20,000 men who had days prior routed the ROK Army. But this was a “police action”, and those 20,000 North Koreans are supposed to run in fear when they see the US soldiers in front of them. It didn’t quite work out that way.
Task Force Smith moved North from Pyongtaek and set up a defensive line on some key high ground along Highway 1 just North of modern day Osan. The Task Force dug in and prepared to fight the advancing North Koreans. These soldiers would soon learn that warfare is not a John Wayne movie and the enemy doesn’t always follow the script.
On July 5, 1950 Task Force Smith sat entrenched in a defensive line just North of modern day Osan. A steady rain fell on the defenders as they awaited for the inevitable battle. At 0700 Lieutenant Colonel Smith saw eight North Korean T-34 tanks moving south down the highway from Suwon to Osan heading straight for the ridge line the US soldiers were dug in at.
LTC Smith called on his six supporting howitzers from the 52nd Field Artillery Battalion to pour what artillery men like to call “steel rain” on the enemy. The howitzers fired their 105mm artillery rounds on the enemy tanks but this “steel rain” met even stronger iron as the rounds were unable to penetrate the thick armor of the T-34 tanks.
The T-34 tanks were from the NK 105th Armor Brigade that were screening in front of the advancing NK 4th Infantry Division. Some of you may remember the NK 4ID from when they battled the ROK 7ID in the Battle of Uijongbu. The Americans would be equally frustrated by the superior T-34′s armor as their ROK Army counterparts were.
The eight T-34′s continue to move forward and engage the Americans on the ridge line oblivious to the artillery fire that could not penetrate their armor. Lieutenant Ollie Connor took a bazooka and ran down the hill into a ditch along side the road and fired on the T-34. The bazooka round had no effect. He then fired into the rear of the tank which is supposed to be the T-34′s “soft spot” which that also had no effect. In all Lieutenant Connor fired a total of 22 bazooka rounds which all had no effect on the T-34′s. The tanks would of been easy kills with anti-tank mines but the infantrymen had none at their disposal. Air power could of also hit the tanks hard, but the steady rain caused the US Air Force to not fly sorties in the vicinity of Task Force Smith due to concerns of friendly fire incidents.
The first T-34′s unimpressed by the ambush continued forward looking for the real fight not realizing that was in fact the real fight. The North Koreans felt there had to be a stronger American force awaiting somewhere to ambush them and this was just a road block to occupy them with. This was the legendary American Army they fighting, there had to be more. However, there was no more; it was just Smith and his men.
The tanks continued down the road towards the artillery positions. The artillery men fired one of their total of nine anti-armor rounds at one of the tanks. There was only nine of these rounds in country at the time. The lead tank was hit in the front and burst into flames. The three NK tankers jumped out and fired at an American machine gun position killing an assistant gunner. This assistant gunner would become the first US fatality of the Korean War, he soon would not be alone; many more would follow. The three North Korean tankers were eventually quickly shot down by the other Americans.
The other tanks were not detoured by the destroyed tank and moved forward. The artillery men were practically using their howitzers as direct fire weapons firing at ranges of 150-300 meters at the T-34′s. One more tank was disabled when it was hit in the treads, but the other tanks kept coming. The tanks moved to the rear of the howitzers and destroyed LTC Perry’s headquarters and vehicles but by passed the howitzers and kept moving south. The Americans still had their six howitzers but no means of communicating with LTC Smith’s infantry men because the tanks had cut the communications line in between the infantrymen and the artillery men. Artillery is of no use if there is no one to communicate with them to call in the indirect fires.
Once LTC Smith realized that his communications with LTC Perry had been cut he sent runners to try and restore communications but they twice returned saying they could not run a line due to enemy direct fire on them. The radios between the infantry men and the artillery also would not work due to the rain damaging their equipment. Comms or no comms the tanks just kept coming.
The artillery men continued to fire at the tanks as they passed by. However, some of the young artillery men panicked and ran at the sight of over 40 tanks moving through their area. Officer and sergeants took over the howitzers, continuing the heavy fire on the tanks. They were able to disable another track before all the tanks passed them and continued south. Amazingly the artillerymen took only two wounded including LTC Perry with no dead. The nearby infantry men had sustained 20 dead in the fight against the tanks. The artillery men had only one destroyed howitzer but most of their headquarters and support vehicles had been destroyed. The artillery men from the 52nd FA had fought bravely against the enemy tanks destroying three of them but without communications the artillery men would have no more impact on this fight.
After what must have seemed like an endless column of North Korean tanks, they passed by the ridge defended by LTC Smith’s infantry men with little resistance. The main column of the NK 4th Infantry Division came into sight. The NK column was composed of dismounted infantry, approximately 4,000 of them, walking in congested groups down the road accompanied by more T-34 tanks. Great more tanks, but at least there was finally something Smith and his guys could actually kill.
However, by this point in the battle, the John Wayne movie illusions of combat had been shattered after the unit’s fight with the North Korean tanks. The soldiers couldn’t have been to thrilled to see more tanks and let alone 4,000 enemy infantry on top of it.
Heavy casualties could of been inflicted on the dismounted North Korean infantry if LTC Smith had communications with his howitzers to fire artillery on them. LTC Smith was still not able to restore communications and figured the artillery men had been destroyed by the North Korean tanks that had passed by. Also if the steady rain would of stopped, American air power could of decimated the North Korean column, but Smith had neither and would pay dearly for it.
Smith ordered his mortars to start the attack. The enemy took casualties and began to search for cover. The North Korean soldiers though battle hardened and mentally prepared for combat were not tactically disciplined and did not realize their numerical superiority and initially did not mount an effective dismounted counterattack. The North Koreans did however unload on the ridge line with artillery and tank fire. The volume of fire was ferocious but without an effective infantry counterattack to dislodge Smith’s men, the US soldiers continued to hold the high ground.
However, after the North Koreans began to realize their numerical superiority they began slowly to flank the American forces. Task Force Smith was slowly becoming enveloped by the North Koreans and sustaining heavy casualties, plus many soldiers had simply ran out of ammunition to fire. LTC Smith made the tough decision to withdraw. A withdrawal is difficult to execute even with a well disciplined unit much less soldiers that were scared and poorly trained in withdrawal operations. Once the order was given many of the soldiers simply took off and ran, leaving behind their weapons and equipment.
LTC Smith headed towards LTC Perry’s position to see what had become of the artillery men. He was amazed to see the artillery men were still intact. However, it was to late for them to provide any effective fires in this battle. He gave the order for them to retreat, but not before they effectively disabled their howitzers rendering them useless to the enemy. The artillery men still had a few trucks left and loaded up their men and began retreating.
To make matters worse for Smith, the already chaotic withdrawal was rendered more difficult because the prior enemy tanks had now occupied Osan to the unit’s rear. He had to have the unit withdraw towards the east instead. Nobody wanted to mess with those tanks again. However, the east was filled with slimy rice paddies the soldiers had to navigate through instead. I’m sure the soldiers preferred that then to fight those tanks again. Some of the trucks from 52nd FA stopped and picked up about 100 infantry men along the way.
The North Koreans were happy with just capturing the ridge line and chose not to pursue the Americans. Not because they were exhausted but because there was to much good loot on the hill to plunder. I’m sure the NK soldiers have a great time taking watches, wallets, and equipment from all the dead and wounded American soldiers. This probably slowed the North Korean advance more than the battle itself.
The next morning LTC Smith could only account for half of the unit’s 540 men. Approximately 181 American soldiers were either killed or captured that summer day in July 1950 and inflicted approximately 127 casualties on the North Korean enemy. Those 181 lives had delayed the North Koreans for 7 hours.
Weeks later scattered soldiers from Task Force Smith would trickle into Pusan. Some soldiers had made it all the way to the East Coast and followed the coast line down to Pusan. One soldier reached the Yellow Sea and used a Korean sampan to travel to Pusan.
Other 24th Infantry Division units had arrived over night and set up positions in Choenan and Taejon areas. They to would be routed at a great cost of American lives, but more time had been bought. The 24ID had been piece mealed and trickled into Korea one unit at at time. No general would ever want to fight a battle with piece mealed units, but the 24ID has no choice, but to do so to delay the advancing enemy. The 24ID had actually delayed the enemy long enough for the 1st Cavalry and 25th Infantry Divisions to arrive in strength from Japan. These two units would go on to achieve heroic acts of bravery in saving the country of Korea by holding the Pusan Perimeter. However, the Pusan Perimeter would of never been formed without the precious time payed for in American lives by the units of the 24th Infantry Division and Task Force Smith.
The Lessons Learned from Taskforce Smith
Task Force Smith though poorly trained and ill equipped was still able to put up an effective defense for a limited amount of time. If they had land mines, air support, and more ammunition they probably could of sustained their defense longer and inflicted more casualties. However, with two approaching North Korean divisions they were sure to be over run at some point and the Army commanders in Tokyo knew this. So to blame the defeat of Task Force Smith solely on the unit and LTC Smith, like some people like to believe, for allowing his unit to become so poorly trained and outfitted during peace time, I find to be misguided.
The Army commanders in Tokyo are the ones that allowed the soldiers of 1-21 Infantry and the rest of the occupation forces in Japan to become so poorly trained and ill equipped in the first place, but it really isn’t their fault either. As is so often the case the blame really lies with the politicians.
The US Congress at the time set the Army’s strength at 10 combat Divisions, but they did not provide enough money to sustain these 10 Divisions. At best there was enough money to fund only 6 Divisions. The politicians however are always eager to not be seen as “soft on defense” and mandated that 10 Divisions had to be kept knowing full well they would not be properly funded. After all the US had the atomic bomb, who needs ground forces when you have nukes, right? At least that is what Congress thought.
The Army short on money chose to use their scarce resources to ensure that the front line Divisions in Germany were fully manned and trained due to the increasing Soviet threat than to allocate resources to an occupation force in Japan. Thus the four Army Divisions in Japan received little money for equipment and training and many units were only filled with 50% of their required personnel.
Combine this with the John Wayne attitude of the military’s youth at the time and this is how you end up with a Task Force Smith. It is important to understand that Task Force Smith was not unique. It was just microcosm of the military in the Pacific that was allowed to weaken by the US government due to budgetary reasons that forces the military to focus its scant resources to defend Europe then to train an occupation army.
The politicians apparently thought just like the young soldiers, that enough John Wayne movies and patriotism can make up for rigorous training and good equipment. Past greatness doesn’t sustain the readiness of an Army. If this was the case the French and Italians would still be military powers today. Training and the best equipment are what makes a military strong.
However, as often is the case, the politicians don’t pay for their bone headed errors, the soldiers do and Task Force Smith payed for these mistakes in blood.
Today a memorial to the soldiers of Task Force Smith can be found just off of Highway 1 between Osan and Suwon. It is a fitting memorial with sculptures depicting American soldiers facing off in every direction just like they were that rainy day on July 5, 1950.
Murphy's law
Murphy's law is an adage or epigram that is typically stated as: "Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences
In the social sciences, unintended consequences are outcomes that are not (or not limited to) the results originally intended by a particular action. The unintended results, not recognized by the actor, may be positive or negative. The concept has long existed, but was named and popularised in the 20th century by the American sociologist, Robert K. Merton.[1] The law of unintended consequences is an adage or idiom warning that an intervention in a complex system invariably creates unanticipated and often undesirable outcomes.[2][3][4][5] Akin to Murphy's law, it is commonly used as a wry or humorous warning against the hubristic belief that humans can fully control the world around them. Many scientific and sociological fields of study embrace the idea, including economics, history, philosophy, political science, and sociology.
Unintended consequences can be grouped into roughly three types:
* a positive unexpected benefit, usually referred to as serendipity or a windfall.
* a negative unexpected drawback, occurring in addition to the desired effect of the policy - e.g. while irrigation schemes do provide people with water for agriculture, they often increase waterborne disease which can a have a devastating negative health effect, such as schistosomiasis.
* a perverse effect, that may be contrary to what was originally intended (i.e. when an intended solution to a problem only makes the problem worse). This situation can arise when a policy has a perverse incentive and causes actions contrary to what is desired.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 History
* 2 Causes
* 3 Examples
o 3.1 Unexpected benefits
o 3.2 Unexpected drawbacks
o 3.3 Perverse results
* 4 See also
* 5 Footnotes
* 6 References
[edit] History
The idea of unintended consequences dates back at least to Adam Smith, the Scottish Enlightenment, and consequentialism (judging by results).[6] However, it was the sociologist Robert K. Merton who popularized this concept in the twentieth century.[7][8][9][10]
In his 1936 paper, "The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action", Merton tried to apply a systematic analysis to the problem of "unanticipated consequences" of "purposive social action". He emphasized that his term "purposive action… [is exclusively] concerned with 'conduct' as distinct from 'behavior.' That is, with action that involves motives and consequently a choice between various alternatives".[10] Merton also stated that "no blanket statement categorically affirming or denying the practical feasibility of all social planning is warranted."[11]
[edit] Causes
Possible causes of unintended consequences include the world's inherent complexity (parts of a system responding to changes in the environment), perverse incentives, human stupidity, self-deception, failure to account for human nature or other cognitive or emotional biases. As a sub-component of complexity (in the scientific sense), the chaotic nature of the universe – and especially its quality of having small, apparently insignificant changes with far-reaching effects (e.g., the butterfly effect) – applies.
Robert K. Merton listed five possible causes of unanticipated consequences:[12]
1. Ignorance (It is impossible to anticipate everything, thereby leading to incomplete analysis)
2. Error (Incorrect analysis of the problem or following habits that worked in the past but may not apply to the current situation)
3. Immediate interest, which may override long-term interests
4. Basic values may require or prohibit certain actions even if the long-term result might be unfavorable (these long-term consequences may eventually cause changes in basic values)
5. Self-defeating prophecy (Fear of some consequence drives people to find solutions before the problem occurs, thus the non-occurrence of the problem is unanticipated.)
The relevance paradox where decision makers think they know their areas of ignorance about an issue, and go and obtain the necessary information to fill that ignorance, but neglect certain other areas of ignorance, because, due to not having the information, its relevance is not obvious, is also cited as a cause.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences
In the social sciences, unintended consequences are outcomes that are not (or not limited to) the results originally intended by a particular action. The unintended results, not recognized by the actor, may be positive or negative. The concept has long existed, but was named and popularised in the 20th century by the American sociologist, Robert K. Merton.[1] The law of unintended consequences is an adage or idiom warning that an intervention in a complex system invariably creates unanticipated and often undesirable outcomes.[2][3][4][5] Akin to Murphy's law, it is commonly used as a wry or humorous warning against the hubristic belief that humans can fully control the world around them. Many scientific and sociological fields of study embrace the idea, including economics, history, philosophy, political science, and sociology.
Unintended consequences can be grouped into roughly three types:
* a positive unexpected benefit, usually referred to as serendipity or a windfall.
* a negative unexpected drawback, occurring in addition to the desired effect of the policy - e.g. while irrigation schemes do provide people with water for agriculture, they often increase waterborne disease which can a have a devastating negative health effect, such as schistosomiasis.
* a perverse effect, that may be contrary to what was originally intended (i.e. when an intended solution to a problem only makes the problem worse). This situation can arise when a policy has a perverse incentive and causes actions contrary to what is desired.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 History
* 2 Causes
* 3 Examples
o 3.1 Unexpected benefits
o 3.2 Unexpected drawbacks
o 3.3 Perverse results
* 4 See also
* 5 Footnotes
* 6 References
[edit] History
The idea of unintended consequences dates back at least to Adam Smith, the Scottish Enlightenment, and consequentialism (judging by results).[6] However, it was the sociologist Robert K. Merton who popularized this concept in the twentieth century.[7][8][9][10]
In his 1936 paper, "The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action", Merton tried to apply a systematic analysis to the problem of "unanticipated consequences" of "purposive social action". He emphasized that his term "purposive action… [is exclusively] concerned with 'conduct' as distinct from 'behavior.' That is, with action that involves motives and consequently a choice between various alternatives".[10] Merton also stated that "no blanket statement categorically affirming or denying the practical feasibility of all social planning is warranted."[11]
[edit] Causes
Possible causes of unintended consequences include the world's inherent complexity (parts of a system responding to changes in the environment), perverse incentives, human stupidity, self-deception, failure to account for human nature or other cognitive or emotional biases. As a sub-component of complexity (in the scientific sense), the chaotic nature of the universe – and especially its quality of having small, apparently insignificant changes with far-reaching effects (e.g., the butterfly effect) – applies.
Robert K. Merton listed five possible causes of unanticipated consequences:[12]
1. Ignorance (It is impossible to anticipate everything, thereby leading to incomplete analysis)
2. Error (Incorrect analysis of the problem or following habits that worked in the past but may not apply to the current situation)
3. Immediate interest, which may override long-term interests
4. Basic values may require or prohibit certain actions even if the long-term result might be unfavorable (these long-term consequences may eventually cause changes in basic values)
5. Self-defeating prophecy (Fear of some consequence drives people to find solutions before the problem occurs, thus the non-occurrence of the problem is unanticipated.)
The relevance paradox where decision makers think they know their areas of ignorance about an issue, and go and obtain the necessary information to fill that ignorance, but neglect certain other areas of ignorance, because, due to not having the information, its relevance is not obvious, is also cited as a cause.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
