Ranger Up has a new episode of “The Damn Few” up. Since we normally post those here at TAH, well, here ya go.
Yeah, it’s Ranger Up and The Damn Few, so standard warnings apply: language is NSFW, and it’s probably not safe to watch without headphones if children or overly-sensitive people are around or within earshot.
DPMO has announced the identification of two US MIAs from Korea and one US MIA from Southeast Asia.
Welcome home, my elder brothers-in-arms. Rest now in peace.
. . .
Over 73,600 US personnel remain unaccounted for from World War II; over 7,900 US personnel remain unaccounted for from the Korean War; and over 1,640 remain unaccounted for in Southeast Asia. If you are a relative of one of the individuals listed here (World War II – critical need), listed here (Korea), or listed here (Southeast Asia) – please consider reading this link to see if you qualify to submit a mtDNA sample.
If you qualify to submit a mtDNA sample, please submit one. By submitting a mtDNA sample, you may be able to help identify US remains that have been recovered and repatriated but not yet positively identified.
Everybody deserves a proper burial. That’s especially true for those who gave their all in the service of this nation.
Apparently SGT Bergdahl is indeed still alive. His family received a letter recently through Red Cross channels indicating that he’s still alive and is “doing as well as can be expected” in captivity. Details in the letter apparently convinced SGT Berghdal’s family that the letter is genuine.
It is unclear where or by precisely whom SGT Bergdahl is being held captive. He was at one point alleged to be being held captive by the Haqqani Network, a Pakistan-based group declared by the US government to be a terrorist organization. However, that group’s leadership has stated publicly that they do not hold SGT Berghdal, and that he is being held by others.
SGT Bergdahl has been a POW for nearly 4 years. Regardless of the circumstances of his capture, I can only hope we can secure his freedom soon.
If anyone reading this article wants to disparage SGT Berghdal or debate whether or not he deserves to be rescued – how about you do us all a favor and just grab a big steaming mug of STFU instead. The time and place to debate the actions leading to his being taken prisoner is after SGT Bergdahl is repatriated, not while he’s still in captivity.
There’s been a good deal in the press lately about the government collecting phone data on US citizens. Some have even used the term “police state”.
Well, if you’re planning a visit to New York any time soon, you might want to watch your lip. Especially if you’re naturally a bit of a smartass.
The NY Senate has approved a bill making (among other things) “annoying” an on-duty cop a felony. The bill is now being sent to the State Assembly.
Jonn posted a brief story the other day on the guilty plea entered by Robert Bales – the guy who claims he “snapped” after a night of unauthorized drinking, then went out and murdered 17 Afghan civilians in their homes. Even now there appear to be those who would excuse Bales’ actions, either partially or completely.
I’d like to offer a short counterexample.
What Bales did was nothing but thuggery. What the following three Soldiers did, on the other hand, was IMO the epitome of correct, professional conduct.
During the first Gulf War a small US Special Forces team of 3 persons was conducting strategic reconnaissance. They were well behind enemy lines. Indeed, they were north of the Euphrates river and were less than 100 miles from Baghdad. Their mission was to observe one of the major roadways between Baghdad and Iraq for signs of enemy activity in order to screen the western flank of the planned allied “left hook” through southern Iraq.
They had secreted themselves in a dug-in, “spider-hole” hide site. (We’d studied the Viet Cong’s use of such during the Vietnam war, and had learned much.) The site was well camouflaged; observation was by a small periscope-like device raised through a small opening in the camouflaged door to the hide site, described as a “slit”.
Unfortunately, no camouflage is absolutely perfect; children are both inquisitive and observant. Early one morning a small Iraqi girl – a child no more than 7, per later estimates – was out and about and saw something she though unusual. She went over to investigate.
She found the slit in the hide site’s trap door – then lifted it open. In short order, she was staring down the muzzle of three silencer-equipped pistols.
The three US soldiers had a choice. They could kill the little girl, hide the body, and continue their mission. Or they could let the child go, attempt an extraction with their cover blown – and maybe not get home.
They chose the latter option. The child ran and got her father. Her father informed nearby Iraqi forces of what his daughter had found.
The site was soon surrounded by around 100 Iraqi troops. Amazingly, the team was successfully extracted – although it turned out to be a truly harrowing and narrow escape under fire.
The most junior member of the team was later asked why they didn’t kill the child to preserve their mission, and perhaps their own lives. The title of this article gives his response.
Like Bales, he was a US Army Staff Sergeant.
The story above is not apocryphal. Details may be found at pages 4 and 5 of this article. It’s a short but incredible read.
Those three soldiers knew the difference between cold-blooded murder and collateral damage. They chose to be military professionals instead of murderers, even though they knew it might cost them their freedom – or their lives.
In contrast, Bales chose cold-blooded murder. For that, there’s no justification.
Dunkin’ Donuts has announced it’s adding a fried egg and bacon on glazed donut breakfast sandwich to its breakfast menu. According to the Dunkin’ Donuts website, the new sandwich will be available starting Friday, 7 June – National Donut Day. It is to become a permanent part of the Dunkin’ Donuts breakfast menu.
There was no immediate comment noted from Mayor Bloomberg of NYC.
I wonder if they’ll call it a “Bloomie” in Manhattan? (smile)
. . . the city of Rome was liberated by Allied forces.
More properly, it was occupied by forces of the US 5th Army commanded by LTG Mark Clark – or as he was sometimes referred to by those who found him self-centered and arrogant, “Marcus Aurelius Clarkus”. US forces entered Rome after most Nazi occupation forces had been withdrawn vice used to conduct a Stalingrad-style battle for the city. Only a smallish rearguard force was left to delay Allied entry into Rome.
The Allied occupation of Rome was not without substantial controversy. During the breakout from the Anzio beachhead, Clark’s forces had the opportunity to attack northeast into the Valmontone Gap instead. This would have severed Route 6 (the Appian Way), potentially cutting off and trapping the bulk of German forces then south of Rome between the 5th Army at Anzio and 8th Army forces to the south under British General Bernard Montgomery.
Indeed, in late May 1944 Clark’s initial orders to then-MG Lucian Truscott were to attack into the Valmontone Gap with his forces (VI Corps) during the breakout from the Anzio beachhead. However, Clark shortly afterwards countermanded that order. His new orders directed Truscott to split his forces, with a large portion of VI Corps instead attacking northwest towards Rome while the remainder attacked towards Valmontone.
The early liberation of Rome was uplifting and afforded the US 5th Army great PR, but was of little military utility. It is thought by many that Clark’s desire to gain publicity prior to the Normandy landings (scheduled for a few days hence) played a large role in his ordering the dash for Rome. Clark indeed both knew the approximate date of the Normandy landings and actively sought publicity, so that theory is plausible.
In any case: one of the more famous photographs related to the liberation of Rome is that of two GIs carrying what was essentially a “Rome City Limits” highway sign. The sign is pierced with a bullet hole – the small white dot below and slightly to the right of the letter “O” in the word “ROMA”.
That sign has its own interesting story. It very nearly changed history.
During the dash to Rome, on 3 June 1944 US forces – specifically, the First Special Service Force under BG Robert Frederick – were briefly held up by Nazi rearguard forces on Rome’s outskirts. Wanting to know what was causing the delay, LTG Clark and his II Corps Commander, MG Geoffery Keyes, went forward to meet with BG Frederick.
They caught up with Frederick near the ROMA sign pictured above, while that sign was still in place on the road to Rome. While chatting with Frederick, Clark noticed the “ROMA” sign. Clark then remarked that he’d like to have the sign for his office.
About that time, a unknown German sniper nearly changed the course of history. That German sniper took the three US generals under fire – and missed. His first round was high, striking the sign and leaving the bullet hole seen above. That miss gave Clark, Keyes, and Frederick the chance to take cover. They scrambled to safety, but were pinned down by sniper fire for some time.
During the time they were pinned down by enemy fire, Frederick told Clark: “That is what’s holding up the First Special Service Force!”
US forces liberated Rome the following day. And as the photo above shows, Clark got his sign.
I’d guess many if not most TAH readers have read Steven Crane’s Civil War novel The Red Badge of Courage. And I’d also guess that virtually all TAH readers know a bit about the Purple Heart and its history.
But like the main character in Crane’s novel, with one minor change in history we easily could have ended up with a literal “red badge of courage” for wounded soldiers vice today’s Purple Heart. In fact, the Army actually did have and award such a thing – for a period of roughly three months.
Many TAH readers know that the Purple Heart was not the first decoration used by the Army to recognize combat wounds. The World War I Wound Chevron preceded the Purple heart. It was a gold chevron worn on the lower right sleeve of the uniform where today’s Overseas Bars are worn, and was instituted in War Department General Orders 6 of January 12, 1918.
But the Wound Chevron was not the first decoration or badge used to recognize combat wounds.
The Wound Chevron itself was preceded by a different but short-lived means of recognizing combat-wounded soldiers. The Army Wound Ribbon was the original Army recognition for combat wounds.
The Army Wound Ribbon was a ribbon-only award. It was also a very short-lived decoration – it was awarded for a period of roughly three months. It was created by order of the Secretary of War on September 6, 1917 and implemented by the War Department on October 12, 1917. It was formally rescinded on January 12, 1918, with the directive creating the Wound Chevron.
The ribbon was scarlet with a rather wide white center stripe.
Army Wound Ribbon, 1917
I wasn’t kidding with the title above. As you can see, for a short while the US Army really did have a literal “Red Badge of Courage” for combat wounds. And had the Army not taken that little “side trip” down Wound Chevron Way, my guess is that we’d use that same scarlet and white ribbon today – almost certainly with an accompanying medal – instead of the Purple Heart to recognize individuals wounded in combat.
Hat tip to Sparks’ comment here regarding the Red Badge of Courage for prompting the research that led to me finding this little bit of history.