Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 2,343
» Latest member: JFoss
» Forum threads: 5,428
» Forum posts: 31,145

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 344 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 341 Guest(s)
Baidu, Bing, Google

Latest Threads
Searching for Maps
Forum: Introduce Yourself!
Last Post: MMSantry
11-05-2025, 05:54 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 160
No Bridge Too Far - the b...
Forum: MARION'S NEWS n UPDATES n BABBLINGS...
Last Post: PDP2020
06-30-2025, 07:00 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 5,942
Exercise Tiger
Forum: ANYTHING WWII
Last Post: buk2112
04-29-2025, 01:42 PM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 11,951
Information on the 8th Na...
Forum: LOOKING FOR...
Last Post: Pierre.hacquard
03-11-2025, 02:07 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 6,075
Digital Version of No Bri...
Forum: MARION'S NEWS n UPDATES n BABBLINGS...
Last Post: CaptO
01-20-2025, 09:43 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 6,128
Harvey Kutz Jr - 540th En...
Forum: WWII ENGINEERS
Last Post: PDP2020
09-24-2024, 07:04 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 6,239
Pfc FRATARCANGELI CESARE ...
Forum: WWII ENGINEERS
Last Post: PDP2020
09-24-2024, 06:42 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 5,663
Documentary - No Bridge T...
Forum: Published articles and more
Last Post: PDP2020
07-23-2024, 11:04 AM
» Replies: 400
» Views: 638,463
Revamped site coming soon...
Forum: MARION'S NEWS n UPDATES n BABBLINGS...
Last Post: PDP2020
07-22-2024, 10:43 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 5,696
Warren G Robinson 250 eng...
Forum: LOOKING FOR...
Last Post: R Eric
07-11-2024, 12:24 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 5,899

 
  War poetry
Posted by: CaptO - 02-18-2008, 04:22 PM - Forum: General discussion - Replies (10)


War has always elicited a great outpouring from the arts. Songs, plays, movies, and books are just some of the ways the general populace has been given a glimpse of what normally happens away from the public’s eyes. One of the first great stories of western literature, the Odyssey, is the retelling of an epic retelling of a 10 year conflict. How warfare is presented depends greatly on the experiences and ideology of the poet. Some are merely descriptive, others sing of the glories of conflict and others, the horror. Here is one by English author John Donne (pronounced ‘done’) 1572-1631.

 

A BURNT SHIP

Out of a fired ship, which by no way

But drowning could be rescued from the flame,

Some men leap'd forth, and ever as they came

Near the foes' ships, did by their shot decay ;

So all were lost, which in the ship were found,

They in the sea being burnt, they in the burnt ship drowned.

 

I think the First World War was the catalyst for some of the most emotional and frank descriptions of warfare. Many of these that are so well remembered today were written by men who fought in the front trenches, their horrifying experiences reflected in the pain their words impart. Here are a few:

 

 

 

Siegfried Sassoon (1886–1967). Counter-Attack and Other Poems. 1918. Sassoon.jpg

 

The Rear-Guard

 

(HINDENBURG LINE, APRIL 1917)

 

GROPING along the tunnel, step by step,

He winked his prying torch with patching glare

From side to side, and sniffed the unwholesome air.

 

Tins, boxes, bottles, shapes too vague to know;

A mirror smashed, the mattress from a bed; 5

And he, exploring fifty feet below

The rosy gloom of battle overhead.

 

Tripping, he grabbed the wall; saw some one lie

Humped at his feet, half-hidden by a rug,

And stooped to give the sleeper’s arm a tug. 10

‘I’m looking for headquarters.’ No reply.

‘God blast your neck!’ (For days he’d had no sleep,)

‘Get up and guide me through this stinking place.’

 

Savage, he kicked a soft, unanswering heap,

And flashed his beam across the livid face 15

Terribly glaring up, whose eyes yet wore

Agony dying hard ten days before;

And fists of fingers clutched a blackening wound.

 

Alone he staggered on until he found

Dawn’s ghost that filtered down a shafted stair 20

To the dazed, muttering creatures underground

Who hear the boom of shells in muffled sound.

At last, with sweat of horror in his hair,

He climbed through darkness to the twilight air,

Unloading hell behind him step by step. 25

 

And here another:

 

The General

 

 

‘GOOD-MORNING; good-morning!’ the General said

When we met him last week on our way to the line.

Now the soldiers he smiled at are most of ’em dead,

And we’re cursing his staff for incompetent swine.

‘He’s a cheery old card,’ grunted Harry to Jack 5

As they slogged up to Arras with rifle and pack.

. . . .

But he did for them both by his plan of attack.

 

And finally, with commentary:

 

Breaking the conspiracy of silence By Rob Ruggenberg

 

The Hero, by Siegfried Lorraine Sassoon (1886-1967), is one of the disputed war poems this British officer and poet wrote in the period 1915-1918.

When The Hero appeared in print, in 1917, many people were shocked. Fellow-officers condemned him. They found the poem caddish, as it could destroy every mother's faith in the report of her son's death.

Sassoon made clear that the poem did not refer to anyone he had known. "But it is pathetically true. And of course the average Englishman will hate it", he remarked - shaping a distance between the 'averages' and 'those who know better'.

Certainly Sassoon was breaking the conspiracy of silence, but many soldiers felt that those at home should be made to realize the full horror, and the ugliness, of the war as much as possible.

Even today Sassoon is still object of discussion. Some find it offensive that he came back from the front and said 'I can't lead men to their death any more'. It implied a monopoly of virtue, as if other officers liked doing it because they acquiesced in their duty.

On the other hand every society needs men who dare to stand up against common convictions. Sassoon did so - with strong opinions and with splendid poems, that will live on for ever.

 

The Hero

'Jack fell as he'd have wished,' the mother said,

And folded up the letter that she'd read.

'The Colonel writes so nicely.' Something broke

In the tired voice that quivered to a choke.

She half looked up. 'We mothers are so proud

Of our dead soldiers.' Then her face was bowed.

Quietly the Brother Officer went out.

He'd told the poor old dear some gallant lies

That she would nourish all her days, no doubt

For while he coughed and mumbled, her weak eyes

Had shone with gentle triumph, brimmed with joy,

Because he'd been so brave, her glorious boy.

He thought how 'Jack', cold-footed, useless swine,

Had panicked down the trench that night the mine

Went up at Wicked Corner; how he'd tried

To get sent home, and how, at last, he died,

Blown to small bits. And no one seemed to care

Except that lonely woman with white hair.

 

 

I’ll add more later, including some from other wars. These are just a few I particularly enjoy – hope you have, too.

Print this item

  Beginings of WWII in the Pacific
Posted by: CaptO - 02-17-2008, 10:09 PM - Forum: ANYTHING WWII - Replies (5)


Not sure if anyone is interested in reading more homework or not, but this is my first post for my on-line class (the Pacific War.) It is a lot of reading, I admit.

 

The topic was this: Clemenceau remarked that war was too complicated an endeavor to be left to the generals alone. Can the same be said about diplomats and trade representatives? Bismarck insisted that in order to achieve a lasting peace, settlements should not fill the vanquished with a burning desire to avenge its defeat.

 

Using Costello's introductory chapters (1-6), as well as other material you have read or studied, why is it so difficult for diplomats and/or trade representatives to achieve lasting and peaceful settlements?

 

My response:

Message: The question posed for the discussion board can be answered several ways. "Why is it difficult for the representatives of nations to achieve a lasting peace?" could be answered solely with no particular nations in mind. When discussing the decades leading to the Pacific War, the realities of the situation make a cookie-cutter solution impossible. In today’s day and age, there are relatively few countries who are as forceful in their foreign relations as the main belligerents in WWII were.

The Japanese were especially forceful in their dealings with other Asian countries; most notably China. The Japanese feelings toward the non-Asian tradesmen were not good in the first place due in part to anti-Japanese and Asian policies and journalism during the first decade of the twentieth century (27). During the mid thirties, however, they began to resent the presence of Europeans in a market they saw as their own and they began more aggressive expansion into Manchuria and other parts of China. The English and American response to this was motivated by two factors: first, they did not want to be forced out of what was seen as a burgeoning market, and second, they felt an obligation to the Chinese to help protect them. This was especially true in the case of the Americans. Roosevelt choose to "uphold the sanctity of international treaties" and had the "deepest sympathy" for China (47). At the same time, investments in China were not near as sizable as the English ones; limiting the reason for a increasingly antagonistic relationship with Japanese (48).

The Japanese, for their part, were growing more and more nationalistic and militaristic all the time. The USS Panay was sunk by Japanese warplanes, angering the United States. The Rape of Nanking, which was to shock the Chinese Nationalists into surrender, only strengthened the resolve of the Chinese and disgusted the rest of the world. Cabinets were also frequently dissolved or subject to assassination. This meant there was a constantly shift in policy and that only cabinets that pleased the nationalists and militarists stayed in power. It also led to the military having no fear of the civil authorities as evidenced by the July 29, 1939 attack into Russia (60). An attack that had been expressly forbidden.

The English and Americans vowed to stop this expansion. The only problem was that there was no threat to back up the big talk. The Joint Board held in 1939 came to the conclusion that the US should withdraw from its base in the Philippines in order to protect Hawaii and the US West Coast (63). As a result of this perceivable weakness, the Japanese continued to push for trade rights and take over more Asian territory. To counter this, the US threatened one of the few things it could threaten Japan with: oil. When the incoming supply of oil dried up, the militarists set a deadline for war to begin before their planes, tanks, and ships would stop. Time ran out and war began.

One constant in the world is the use of force. A gun is a morally neutral device. Bad in the hands of one who would do ill with it, good in the hands of someone who would stop the evil. On a larger scale, there will always be nations led by people that are intent on using force against other nations who are not as strong. The only thing they understand is force and the arithmetic one does to gage chances of victory. The Japanese saw only weakness in the American/English threat that was posed to them. The same was true of Saddam Hussein. In the case of Iraq, even after a crushing defeat in the Gulf War, he remained defiant after UN resolution after resolution was shown to be meaningless. With no force behind them to back them up, they, too, were "scrapes of paper." Only the overwhelming force that was eventually brought to bear on both countries brought an end of the conflict.

Print this item

  Naples Medal
Posted by: CaptO - 02-14-2008, 11:16 PM - Forum: VI CORPS AND 5TH & 7TH ARMIES - Replies (4)

I have this medal from my grandfather. Does anyone have any information on it?

Print this item

  A VIEW FROM AFAR..!!
Posted by: ricklind - 02-14-2008, 07:57 PM - Forum: Current Events - Replies (25)


post-256-1203029810_thumb.jpg



Attached Files
.jpg   TOP.jpg (Size: 434.24 KB / Downloads: 0)
Print this item

  US Army Unit Sizes - WWII
Posted by: Walt's Daughter - 02-14-2008, 07:17 PM - Forum: INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESEARCH - No Replies


Army Unit Sizes - WWII

 

This is a rough approximation of regular army units. "Bastard" or independent engineer regiments vary somewhat from this. More on this later in this post...

 

================

 

Squad - 9 to 10 soldiers. Typically commanded by a sergeant or staff sergeant, a squad or section is the smallest element in the Army structure, and its size is dependent on its function.

 

Platoon - 16 to 44 soldiers. A platoon is led by a lieutenant with an NCO as second in command, and consists of two to four squads or sections.

 

Company - 62 to 190 soldiers. Three to five platoons form a company, which is commanded by a captain with a first sergeant as the commander's principle NCO assistant. An artillery unit of equivalent size is called a battery, and a comparable armored or air cavalry unit is called a troop.

 

Battalion - 300 to 1,000 soldiers. Four to six companies make up a battalion, which is normally commanded by a lieutenant colonel with a command sergeant major as principle NCO assistant. A battalion is capable of independent operations of limited duration and scope. An armored or air cavalry unit of equivalent size is called a squadron.

 

Brigade/Regiment - 3,000 to 5,000 solders. A brigade headquarters commands the tactical operation of two to five organic or attached combat battalions. Normally commanded by a colonel with a command sergeant major as senior NCO, brigades are employed on independent or semi-independent operations. Armored cavalry, ranger and special forces units this size are categorized as regiments or groups.

 

Division - 10,000 to 15,000 soldiers. Usually consisting of three brigade-sized elements and commanded by a major general, divisions are numbered and assigned missions based on their structures. The division performs major tactical operations for the corps and can conduct sustained battles and engagements.

 

Corps - 20,000 to 45,000 soldiers. Two to five divisions constitute a corps, which is typically commanded by a lieutenant general. As the deployable level of command required to synchronize and sustain combat operations, the corps provides the framework for multi-national operations.

 

Army - 50,000 + soliders. Typically commanded by a lieutenant general or higher, an army combines two or more corps. A theater army is the ranking Army component in a unified command, and it has operational and support responsibilities that are assigned by the theater commander in chief. The commander in chief and theater army commander may order formation of a field army to direct operations of assigned corps and divisions. An army group plans and directs campaigns in a theater, and is composed of two or more field armies under a designated commander. Army groups have not been employed by the Army since World War II.

 

Above Information Derived from DA Pamphlet 10-1

 

There is no set size (number of troops) assigned to any specific element. The size of an element of command depends primarily upon the type of unit and mission. For example, an aviation company would have a different number of troops assigned than an infantry company because it has a different mission, different equipment, and therefore different requirements.

 

Note: The usual structure is battalion -> brigade -> division, with battalions organized into regiments as the exception. An example of this exception would be cavalry regiments. Cavalry is unique in that battalions are called "squadrons" and companies are called "troops."

 

==========================

 

Army - 2 or more corps

 

Corps - 2 or more divisions

 

Division - 3 or more regiments or brigades

 

Regiment - 3 battalions (two in some engineer units)

 

Battalion - 3 companies

 

Company - 3 to 4 platoons

 

Platoon - roughly 24 men

 

Squad - approximately 8 men

 

 

 

===

 

Engineer units (separate)

 

I hope you will find the following helpful. I've shared this army lesson a few times over the past few years. Welcome to the army!

 

This is using the VI Corps engineer units as an example. This may help you "picture" it. Each of the "bastard" or separate engineer units were all regiments. Each regiment has either two to three battalions, each battalion has three companies, plus HQ, H&S Co's, Medical detachments, etc. Here's a breakdown for the four units I am researching:

 

36th Engineer Regiment - 2826, 2827, 2828th Battalions

2826th - A, B and C Companies

2827th - D, E and F Companies

2828th - G, H and I Companies

 

39th Engineer Regiment - 1st and 2nd Battalions

1st - A, B and C Companies

2nd - D, E and F Companies

 

540th Engineer Regiment - 2832nd and 2833rd Battalions

2832nd - A, B and C Companies

2833rd - D, D, and F Companies

 

1108th Engineer Regiment - 48th and 235th Battalions

48th - A, B and C Companies

1108th - D, E, and F Companies

 

Many times companies were in the same area, but each company within a regiment could be given different assignments, so they did not necessarily work together.

 

A company was further broken down into the following:

 

1 company = 3 to 4 platoons

1 platoon = 3 squads

 

My dad was - 540th Combat Engineer Regiment (or later in the war, Group), 2833rd Battalion, H&S Company, 4th Platoon

 

=============

 

You will notice that everyone of the above engineer regiments had only two battalions, except for the 36th Engineer Regiment, which had the NORMAL three army battalions. As you can see, the ARMY loves the number three! This is not an accidental number, but allows the the "use" of two at the front (in action), while the other battalion remains in reserve (at rest).

 

Lesson over, class dismissed!

Print this item