realm of prodigy

What is soy milk?

2009-07-25T11:15:00.000-07:00

What is soy milk?

Soy milk is made by soaking soybeans, grinding them with water. The fluid which results after straining is called soy milk. You can make soy milk at home with basic kitchen tools or with a soy milk machine. Soy milk is most commonly found in aseptic cartons. Most of the soy milk available in the market is flavoured and fortified with extra calcium or vitamins. The most popular flavours are vanilla and chocolate. Some producers add thickeners to their soy milk to give it a mouth feel of cow's milk. Traditionally, soy milk has a beany taste which is well accepted by the Chinese, but less by the Western palate. By using correct processing techniques, this beany taste can be reduced or eliminated. Recently, with the recognition of its health benefits and with its improved flavor and texture, soy milk has now a high and rising acceptance. Sometimes, use is made of protein isolates from soy bean which are mixed with water, oils, sugars, stabilisers to give it a milky appearance. This type of product should be described as soy drink and is not as wholesome as real soy milk.

Nutritional values of soy milk

Plain soy milk is very nutritive: it's an excellent source of high quality proteins, isoflavones and B-vitamins. Soy milk is free of the milk sugar (lactose) and is a good choice for people who are lactose intolerant. Also, it is a good alternative to those who are allergic the proteins of cow's milk.

Making your own soy milk

In China and Japan fresh soy milk is made daily using a simple, centuries-old process of grinding soaked soybeans and pressing the soy milk out of the beans. There, soy milk is sold by street vendors or in cafes. Soy milk is served hot or cold and is often flavored with soy sauce and vegetables to produce a spicy soup.

Many people find the cost of commercial soymilk to be prohibitive and make soy milk at home. They soak and crush soy beans and filter the liquid, which is soy milk. Some have invested in a soy milk machine that cooks and grinds the soy beans and makes soy milk, fresh in your own home. There are different brands of soy milk machines on the market (Miracle Soy Wonder, SoyJoy Automatic Soy Milk Maker, SoyToy Soy Milk Machine, Soyapower). You don't need these machines to make good quality soy milk, but they make life easier and give a high yield.

Chocolate pudding

2009-07-25T11:14:00.000-07:00

Ingredients

1 liter soy milk
1/2 teaspoon salt
2 tablespoon sugar
100 g corn starch
150 g dark chocolate
1/2 teaspoon vanilla extract, or too taste

Servings: 6

Recipe directions

This chocolate pudding recipe gives a very thick pudding which will keep its form when turned out of the mould. If you like a more liquid pudding use 60 g corn starch instead of 100 g.

Add the corn starch to about 200 ml soy milk and mix to get a smooth slurry.

In the meantime bring the remaining 800 ml soy milk to boil. Add the sugar. When boiling slowly add the starch mixture, while stirring constantly. Continue to boil for a minute. Remove from heat, add the chocolate and salt and stir until the chocolate is dissolved.
Moisten the inside of a pudding mould with water. This step insures that the pudding will come out of the mould smoothly. Poor the chocolate pudding in the mould and let it cool down. Turn the pudding out of the mould on a serving plate.
Serve the chocolate pudding as such or with some brown sugar.

Chocolate facts

Everybody likes chocolate because of its melt-in-the-mouth consistency. Some people even crave chocolate as it contains some chemicals, such as anandamide and phenylethylamine, which creates a soothing effect on the brain. Eating chocolate releases endorphins, which act as pain reliever, in our brain. Chocolate does not cause acne. Dark chocolate is more healthier than milk chocolate.
These are some levels of nutrients in 100 g dark chocolate: 5.3 g protein, 397 mg potassium, 63 mg calcium and 3.2 mg iron. Chocolate also contains some vitamins and large amounts of antioxidant polyphenols, which can help to prevent oxidative damage to our cells and reduces the risk of heart disease and cancer.

2009-07-25T11:12:00.000-07:00

t's very easy to make soy milk at home. If you make soy milk on a daily basis you might find an automatic soymilk maker (also called soy milk machine) such as Soyajoy, Soylife, Miracle, Soyquick, Soyawonder or Vegan Star very helpful.

Step1: Ingredients

You need about 125 g whole soya beans to make 1 liter of soy milk.

Step2: Soaking and dehulling the soya beans

Clean the soya beans and soak them in water for 10 - 16 hours. Although not necessary, you can remove the hulls be kneading the soya beans and flushing the loose hulls with water. Removing the hulls makes the extraction process more efficient. An alternative is to crack the soya beans before soaking. The hulls come loose easily and can be washed away. When you use cracked soya beans you need less soaking time: 6 - 8 hours.

Step3: Heating the soya beans (optional)

Heating the soya beans will destroy enzymes which are responsible for the development of beany flavour. This heating can best be achieved by microwaving the wet soaked soya beans during 2 minutes.

Step4: Grinding the soya beans

Grind the soaked soya beans and 1 liter water in a blender. Sieve the mixture trough a cheese cloth and recover the soy milk. The insoluble material which remains on the sieve is called okara, and can be used as an ingredient for bread making or as cattle feed.

Step5: Boiling the soy milk

Heat the soy milk till boiling point and continue boiling for about 5 to 10 minutes. After cooling, the soy milk is ready and can be kept in the fridge for another 3 days.

Step6: Flavouring the soy milk (optional)

The soy milk can be drunk as such but taste can be improved by adding some salt (also cow milk contains a lot of salt).
With soy milk you can easily make your own fruit smoothie. Fruit smoothies are very healthy because they contain soy milk and a lot of fresh fruits.

Benefits of Soy Milk

2009-07-25T11:06:00.000-07:00

As the taste of commercial soy milk improves more and more people are drinking it as enjoyment. But many people drink soy milk for the added health benefits. So what are the benefits of drinking soy milk as compared to cow’s milk?

Benefit 1: Soy milk contains only vegetables proteins

Vegetable proteins have the advantage that they cause less loss of calcium through the kidneys. It is known that a diet rich in animal (and dairy protein) creates a higher risk for osteoporosis.

Benefit 2: Soy milk contains no lactose

About 75 percent of the world population cannot tolerate lactose. Some ethnic groups are more affected than others. For example 75 percent of Africans and 90 percent of Asians have lactose intolerance. As an additional benefit, soy milk contains the prebiotic sugars stachyose and raffinose. These prebiotic sugars boost immunity and help decrease toxic substances in the body.

Benefit 3: Fewer people are allergic to soy milk

Only 0.5 percent of the children are allergic to soy milk, whereas 2.5 percent is allergic to cow’s milk.

Benefit 4: Soy milk reduces cholesterol

The saturated fats in cow’s milk are unhealthy and increase your cholesterol. The protein in cow’s milk has no benefits for the cholesterol. Soy protein can decrease cholesterol levels. The FDA (Food and Drug Administration of US) confirms that soy protein, as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol may significantly reduce the risk of coronary heart. The FDA recommends to incorporate 25 grams of soy protein in your daily meals.

Benefit 5: Soy milk contains no hormones

Cow’s milk contains natural hormones (from the cow) but also synthetic hormones, which can influence the good working of our own body. The synthetic hormone rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone) increase milk production by as much as 20 percent.

Benefit 6: Soy milk does not cause insulin dependent diabetes

Although no general consensus exists among scientists, some studies have shown an association between drinking cow's milk in early life and the development of insulin dependent diabetes. This association does not exist with soy milk.

Benefit 7: Soy milk is rich in isoflavones

The presence of isoflavones is the most important and unique benefit of soy milk. Each cup of soy milk contains about 20 mg isoflavones (mainly genistein and daidzein). Cow’s milk does not contain isoflavones. Isoflavones have many health benefits including reduction of cholesterol, easing of menopause symptoms, prevention of osteoporosis and reduction of risk for certain cancers (prostate cancer and breast cancer). Incidents of these cancers are very low in countries with high intake of soy products, including soy milk. Isoflavones are also antioxidants which protect our cells and DNA against oxidation.

Nutritional values of soymilk

2009-07-25T11:03:00.000-07:00

Soymilk is an excellent source of high quality protein and B-vitamins. Soymilk is not a rich source of calcium, this is way most commercial soymilk products are fortified with calcium.

Soymilk naturally contains isoflavones, plant chemicals that help lower LDL ("bad" cholesterol) if taken as part of a "heart healthy" eating plan.

Nutrional values of soymilk (per 100g):

Water	93.3	g
Energy	33.0	kcal
Energy	138.0	kJ
Protein	2.8	g
Fat (total lipid)	2.0	g
Fatty acids, saturated	0.214	g
Fatty acids, mono-unsaturated	0.326	g
Fatty acids, poly-unsaturated	0.833	g
Carbohydrates	1.8	g
Fiber	1.3	g
Ash	0.27	g
Isoflavones	8.8	mg
Calcium, Ca	4.0	mg
Iron, Fe	0.58	mg
Magnesium, Mg	19.0	mg
Phosphorus, Mg	49.0	mg
Potassium, K	141.0	mg
Sodium, Na	12.0	mg
Zinc, Zn	0.23	mg
Copper, Cu	0.12	mg
Manganese, Mn	0.17	mg
Selenium, Se	1.3	µg
Vitamin C (ascorbic acid)	0.0	mg
Thiamin (vitamin B1)	0.161	mg
Riboflavin (vitamin B2)	0.070	mg
Niacin (vitamin B3)	0.147	mg
Panthotenic acid (vitamin B5)	0.048	mg
Vitamin B6	0.041	mg
Folic acid	1.5	µg
Vitamin B12	0.0	µg
Vitamin A	3.0	µg
Vitamin E	0.010	mg
[Source: USDA Nutrient Database for Standard Reference]

History of soy milk

2009-07-25T11:01:00.000-07:00

The oldest evidence of soy milk production is a Chinese mural incised on a stone slab. It shows a kitchen scene that proves that soy milk and tofu were being made in China during the period A.D. 25-220. The oldest written reference to soy milk appeared in also in China at about A.D. 1500., in a poem "Ode to Tofu" by Su Ping.The earliest European reference to soy milk was in 1665 by Domingo Fernandez de Navarrete and in 1790 by Juan de Loureiro, a Portuguese missionary who lived in Vietnam. All these early references to soy milk only mentioned soy milk as part of the process for making tofu. Only 1866, Frenchman Paul Champion, who had traveled in China, mentioned that the Chinese drank hot soy milk for breakfast.

Soy milk was first referred to in the United States by Henry Trimble in 1896 in the American Journal of Pharmacy. In 1910, Li Yu-ying, a Chinese living in Paris founded the world's first soymilk factory. In 1917, the first commercial soymilk in the US was produced J.A. Chard Soy Products in New York.

The first calcium fortified soy milk was produced in 1931 by Madison Foods, Tennessee. This Madison Foods company was run by the faculty of the Madison College. In 1939 Miller started to produce canned liquid soy milk, which was called Soya La, because the dairy industries prevented Miller from calling the product "soy milk".

Calcium Fortification of Soy milk

2009-07-25T11:00:00.001-07:00

Calcium Fortification of Soy milk

Dairy products provide most of the dietary calcium in Western countries, where soy milk is becoming increasingly popular. Natural soy milk contains only 200 mg calcium per liter, which is 6x less than cow milk. Therefore, most commercial soy milks are fortified with extra calcium up to a level 1200 mg/L, which is the same as that of cow milk. Manufacturers of soy milk use this specific level of 1200 mg/L to provide an alternative calcium source to cow milk. However, the question is do we really need such high calcium levels in soy milk? Obviously, manufacturers want to avoid the debate about optimal calcium levels and simple use same levels as found in cow milk, which is traditionally a recommended source of calcium. However, studies have shown that a higher intake of milk and calcium from milk is associated with a higher risk of osteoporosis. The Harvard's Nurses' Health Study, which involved about 57,000 women, showed that women who consumed the most calcium from dairy products had almost double the rate of hip fractures compared to women who received the least calcium from dairy products.

Sources of Calcium in Soy Milk

Most manufacturers use tri-calcium phosphate as calcium source. Other calcium sources are calcium carbonate and vegetable calcium from seaweed (Lithothamnium Calcareum). In addition, the calcium in the water, used in the soy milk manufacturing process, can be significant. The calcium level of municipal water or well water can range from 0 mg/L up to 600 mg/L.

Bioavailability of Calcium in Soy Milk

A study by Robert Heaney and colleagues entitled "Bioavailability of the Calcium in Fortified Soy Imitation Milk, with some Observations on Method" (2000, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition) found that calcium from soy milk, fortified with tri-calcium phosphate, has an absorption efficiency of 75% compared to cow milk. Another study by Yangdong Zhao entitled "Calcium Bioavailability of Calcium Carbonate Fortified Soy Milk is Equivalent to Cow's Milk in Young Women" (2005, The Journal of Nutrition) found that calcium carbonate in soy milk had the same bioavailability than calcium from cow milk and had a higher bioavailability than tri-calcium carbonate. The lower bioavailability of tri-calcium phosphate is probably coming from the phosphate, which precipitates the calcium in the intestine. Soy milk contains phytochemicals, such as isoflavones and phytic acid, which may influence calcium absorption. Some studies have shown that isoflavones stimulate estrogen receptors in the intestine and increase calcium absorption, whereas other studies failed to show such effect. Phytic acid is known to inhibit calcium absorption but the low levels (less than 0.01%) found in soy milk are unlikely to have any influence.

Soy Protein Powder

2009-07-25T10:55:00.000-07:00

Soy Protein Powder

Soy protein powder is a term to describe many products. Pure soy protein powder is powdered soy protein isolate or soy protein concentrate. This type of powder is mainly used in the food industry. However, soy protein powder is also used for powdered protein shakes, consisting of a complex mix of soy protein powder and other ingredients including thickeners, flavours, sweeteners, sugars, minerals and vitamins. It is an easy and efficient way to add soy protein to your foods and drinks. Compared to dairy-based protein powders, soy protein powder has some minor disadvantages. Soy protein powder does not dissolve that well (needs more shaking), may have a beany taste (can be masked with flavours) and can cause flatulence to people sensitive to soy sugars.

Health benefits

The health benefits of soy protein powders are coming from the soy protein and the associated isoflavones. A daily diet low in cholesterol and saturated fat and containing 25 grams of soy protein may reduce the risk of heart disease. The soy protein has a high biological value and contains all essential amino acids . Soy isoflavones have been recognized for many health benefits, including lowering the risk of heart disease, breast cancer, prostate cancer and osteoporosis. Soy isoflavones act as anti-cancer agents because they are antioxidant, inhibit the growth of blood vessels required to feed tumours and inhibit the protein production in cancer cells. Soy isoflavones are also beneficial for menopausal women because they may ease menopausal symptoms and help to maintain strong bones.

Isoflavones in Soy Protein Powder

The isoflavones content of the commercial soy protein powder is not always mentioned on the package. The isoflavones content can vary a lot and will depend on the method used to extract the soy protein.

Brands of Soy Protein Powder

There are many brands of soy protein powder. GeniSoy is a well-known brand of soy protein powder which can be blended with juice or other liquids to make nutritious shakes. One scoop of Genisoy protein powder contains 25 g soy protein isolate and 20 vitamins and minerals. Soy protein Supro Protein Powder contains similar amounts of soy protein (23 g) and is sweetened with stevia. Jarrow Iso-Rich Soy is made from water extracted soy protein isolate and is enriched with extra isoflavones.

Soy Protein Health Claim

2009-07-25T10:53:00.000-07:00

In October 1999 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the US gave food manufacturers permission to claim on foods high in soy protein that they may help lower heart disease risk. A similar claim was approved a few years before for oat bran. Allowing health claims encourages food manufacturers to make more healthy products. Soon after the soy protein health claim was approved concerns arose about certain components in soy products, particularly isoflavones and anti-nutrition compounds. According to Elizabeth A. Yetley, Ph.D., lead scientist for nutrition at the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, every dietary health claim that has ever been published has had controversy. All foods, including soy, consists of many chemicals that can be beneficial for most people, but can be harmful to some people when used inappropriately.

Many controlled clinical studies have shown that foods rich in soy protein can have considerable value to heart health. A review of these scientific studies prompted Food and Drug Administration to allow a health claim on food labels stating that a diet containing 25 grams of soy protein, also low in saturated fat and cholesterol, may reduce the risk of heart disease. Most research involved whole soy foods including soy milk, tofu and soy protein. The recent controversy focuses mainly on specific components of soy, such as the soy isoflavones, but not the whole soybean or intact soy protein. These isoflavones extracts are sold as dietary supplements for use by women to help ease menopausal symptoms. Isoflavones act as weak estrogens and could have drug-like effect in the body. Some suggest that intake of isoflavones might increase the risk of breast cancer. Scientists are far from conclusive. Some studies even show the opposite, that soy may help prevent breast cancer. The Food and Drug Administration claim is only limited to foods containing intact soy protein and not to isoflavones extracts. According to Margo Woods, D.Sc., associate professor of medicine at Tufts University, there are probably hundreds of protective compounds in soy foods and it is just too big a leap to assume that a pill could do the same thing.

The Food and Drug Administration determined that diets 25 g of soy protein (four daily servings of 6.25 g soy protein) can reduce levels of low-density lipoproteins (bad cholesterol) by as much as 10 percent.The quantity of 25 g soy protein seems high but soy protein is actually easy to consume 25 g of soy protein. For example following foods are rich in soy protein:

Four ounces of firm tofu contains 13 g of soy protein.
A soy burger contains 10 to 12 g of protein.
One cup of soymilk contains 10 g of protein.
One soy protein bar delivers 14 g of protein.
One half cup of tempeh provides 19.5 g of protein.

Criteria for Soy Protein Health Claim

To qualify for the soy protein health claim, foods must contain at least 6.25 grams of soy protein per serving and comply to other criteria, such as low content of fat, sodium and cholesterol. To qualify for the soy protein health claim, foods must contain per serving:

6.25 g soy protein
less than 3 g fat
less than 1 g saturated fat
less than 20 mg cholesterol
less than 480 mg sodium for individual foods, less than 720 mg sodium for main dish, and less than 960 mg sodium for complete meal.

Soy Protein Isolate

2009-07-25T10:50:00.000-07:00

Soy Protein Isolate

Soy protein isolate is the soy protein with the highest content of protein. It is made from defatted soy meal by removing most of the fats and carbohydrates, yielding a product with 90 percent protein. Therefore, soy protein isolate has a very neutral flavour compared to other soy products. Because most of the carbohydrates are removed, the intake of soy protein isolate does not cause flatulence. Pure soy protein isolate is difficult to find in stores and is mainly used by the food industry and less by consumers. Maybe you can find it in health stores or in the pharmacy section of the supermarket. It is mainly found combined with other food ingredients; for example, soy protein shake powder is a mixture of soy protein isolate with flavours, minerals and vitamins.

Industrial use of soy protein isolate

Soy protein isolate is used in the food industry for nutritional (increasing protein content), sensorial (better mouthfeel, bland flavour) and functional reasons (for applications requiring emulsification, water and fat absorption and adhesive properties).

Soy protein isolate is used in following food products:

snacks
meal replacements
breakfast cereals
energy and protein bars
weight loss ready-to-drink beverages
soups, sauces and prepared foods
baked foods
ice cream, yogurt and other dairy or dairy-free products
meat alternatives
processed meat, poultry and fish products

Use of soy protein isolate by consumers

You can use soy protein isolate in different ways. It can be added to your favourite juice, it can be added to milk shakes or smoothies, or it can be sprinkled on cereal to boost the protein content. Homemade soy yogurt, which is often too watery, can be made thicker by adding some soy protein isolate. The thickness of yogurt is the result of the coagulation of proteins in an acid environment.

Nutritional and health benefits of soy protein isolate

Soy protein isolate is a complete vegetable protein. It contains all essential amino acids for growth and it is equal in quality to the protein in meat, milk and eggs. On the other hand, it has a very low fat content. Soy protein isolate may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease. There are also indications that soy protein can help in the prevention of osteoporosis, some cancers and menopausal symptoms. However, soy protein isolate may have less health benefits than whole soybeans or soy protein concentrates. During the production of soy protein isolate the protein is washed with alcohol, removing most of the isoflavones. The isoflavones have many health benefits such as improving arterial vasodilatation, lowering cholesterol and inhibiting atherosclerosis.

Textured Soy Protein

2009-07-25T10:49:00.000-07:00

Textured soy protein, often called TSP, is used by the food industry in many foods products, mainly foods that resemble meat products such as beef, pork or chicken. Textured soy protein is also available in health stores. It is granular in texture and once rehydrated it has the texture of minced beef. Textured soy protein is also available in larger pieces that take on the consistency of stew meat after rehydration or as ready to eat soy jerky.

Production of Textured Soy Protein

Textured soy protein is made from defatted soy flour that is compressed and processed into granules or chunks. During this process, the structure of the soy proteins changes in fibres. Most textured soy protein is produced from defatted soy flour, soy flakes or soy concentrates with an extrusion process. This extrusion technology can form a fibrous matrix which is almost similar than that of meat.

Use of Textured Soy Protein

Textured soy protein has a shelflife of more than a year when stored dry at room temperature. After rehydration, it should be used at once or stored for a max 3 days in the refrigerator. To use textured soy protein read the instruction on the packages. Normally it says to rehydrate the protein in cold or hot water and to let it rehydrate for a few minutes. When you add a bit of vinegar or lemon juice the textured soy protein rehydrates quicklier. Textured soy protein can replace, completely or partly, ground beef in most recipes.

Nutritional values

Textured soy protein is rich in protein and extremely low in fat and sodium. Textured soy protein shall contain at least 35% protein on a moisture free bases. It is also a good source of fiber and isoflavones.

Soy Protein Concentrate

2009-07-25T10:46:00.001-07:00

Soy protein concentrate is made by removing a portion of the carbohydrates (sugars) from dehulled and defatted soybeans. There are different soy protein production methods. The most frequent method used is alcohol extraction although this method results in most loss of the soy isoflavones. However, when the water extraction method is used to remove the sugars, there is a good retention of the isoflavones in the final product. Soy protein concentrate retains most of the fiber of the original soybean. Soy protein concentrate is widely used as functional or nutritional ingredient in a wide variety of food products, mainly in baked foods, breakfast cereals and in some meat products. Soy protein concentrate is used in meat and poultry products to increase water and fat retention, and to improve nutritional values (more protein, less fat).

Soy protein concentrate should contain at least 65% protein on a moisture free basis. The protein can have different solubility characteristics, depending on the extraction method. Some applications, such as drinks, require a highly soluble protein. The soy protein concentrate made with the alcohol wash will have low solubility.

Soy protein concentrates are available in different forms: granules, flour and spray dried.

Soy protein concentrate is very digestible and therefore suited for children, pregnant and lactating women and elderly. It is in pet foods and milk replacers for calves and pigs. Soy protein concentrate is even used for some non-food applications.

Benefits of Soy Protein

2009-07-25T10:43:00.000-07:00

Soy protein is very healthy: it is very low in fat, contains no cholesterol and contains phytochemicals. The main phytochemicals in soy protein are isoflavones, saponins and phytc acid. These phytochemicals are strong antioxidants but have many other properties. Soy protein and its associated phytochemicals seem to reduce heart disease, osteoporosis and risk of cancer.

Soy Protein and Heart Disease

Soy protein reduces the cholesterol and help to reduce the risk of heart disease. The most important scientific study about the relationship of soy protein intake and heart disease is the meta-study by Anderson et al (Meta-analysis of the effects of soy protein intake on serum lipids. N Engl J Med 1995;333:276-282). They concluded that the consumption of soy protein rather than animal protein significantly decreased serum concentrations of total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides without significantly affecting serum HDL cholesterol concentrations.
Anthony MS et al found that isoflavones in soy protein improve cardiovascular disease risk factors without apparent deleterious effects on the reproductive system of peripubertal rhesus monkeys (Soybean isoflavones improve cardiovascular risk factors without affecting the reproductive system of peripubertal rhesus monkeys. Journal of Nutrition 1996;126:43-50).
Erdman, J.W et all recommend in their study (Soy protein and cardiovascular disease: A statement for healthcare professionals from the nutrition committee of the AHA. Circulation 2000;102(20):2555-9) that including soy protein in a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol promotes heart health. They found that the daily consumption of more than 25 g soy protein, with its associated isoflavones, could improve lipid profiles in hypercholesterolemic humans. They also found that soy protein without the isoflavones appears to be less effective in preventing heart disease. Taking isoflavones supplements without soy protein does not lower cholesterol but may provide other cardiovascular benefits.

Soy Protein and Osteoporosis

Research suggests that consuming soy protein and the replacement of animal protein with plant protein may protect against osteoporosis. Although Japanese women consume less calcium than most Western women do they have a lower prevalence of fractures. This could be explained by the soy protein consumption of Japanese women. Alekel, D.L. et al found that soy isoflavones attenuated bone loss from the lumbar spine in perimenopausal women.
Source: Isoflavone-rich soy protein isolate attenuates bone loss in the lumbar spine of perimenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr 2000;72(3):844-52.

Soy Protein and Abdominal Body Fat

Soy protein contains calories, about 4 kcal per g, but does its consumption increase our body fat? Of course, if you add extra soy protein to your diet you may expect weight increase, but how does soy protein compare with for example dairy protein. One study investigated the effect of a daily supplementation of soy protein or dairy protein on body fat of postmenopausal women [1]. The researchers found that the group who consumed soy protein lost abdominal fat (-12 ml), whereas the group who had the soy protein replaced with dairy protein (casein) showed an increase in abdominal fat (+39 ml). Other parameters, such as total body fat, insulin secretion and lean mass did not differ between the groups. This study concluded that a daily supplementation of soy protein prevents the increase in subcutaneous and abdominal fat, observed with an isocaloric casein placebo in postmenopausal women.
Source: Effect of a daily supplement of soy protein on body composition and insulin secretion in postmenopausal women. Fertil Steril. 2007 Dec;88(6):1609-17.

Soy Protein and Cancer Risk

Epidemiological studies suggest that soy protein may reduce the risk of certain cancers, including breast cancer and prostate cancer. Japanese women, who eat a lot of soy protein (mainly from soy tofu and miso), have a much lower risk of breast cancer or prostate cancer than Western people have. The anti-cancer effect of soy protein could be explained by the phytochemicals, which are associated with the soy protein. These phytochemicals include the isoflavones genistein, daidzein and glycitein, phytic acid, saponins and protease inhibitors. Isoflavones and phytic acid have strong antioxidant properties and can prevent oxidative damage by free radical to our DNA and cells. Shu X.O. et all suggest that high soy intake during adolescence may reduce the risk of breast cancer in later life (Soyfood Intake during Adolescence and Subsequent Risk of Breast Cancer among Chinese Women. Cancer Epid Biomarkers Prev. 10: 483-488). The inverse association between soy protein intake and reduces risk of breast cancer was observed for each group of soyfoods examined.

What is soy protein?

2009-07-25T10:40:00.000-07:00

Soy protein has been used since 1959 as ingredients for its functional properties in a variety of foods such as salad dressings, soups, vegetarian foods and meat imitations. Its functional properties are emulsification and texturizing. Recently the popularity of soy protein is increasing, mainly because of its health benefits. It has been proven that soy protein can help to prevent heart problems and many countries allow health claims for food, which are rich in soy protein.

In the US a soy protein health claim is allowed under the following conditions:

One serving must contain at least 6.25 grams of soy protein.
One serving may contain max 3 grams of fat, unless the product consists of or is derived from whole soy and contains no fat in addition to the fat inherently present in the whole soy. Of these 3 grams of fat max 1 gram may be saturated fat, representing max 15% of the total calories.
The serving must contain less than 20 milligrams of cholesterol.
The food must be low in sodium: less than 480 milligrams for an individual food, less than 720 milligrams for a main dish and less than 960 milligrams for a meal product.

Categories of soy proteins

Soy proteins can be divided into different categories according to their production method:

Soy protein isolate is the most refined form of soy protein and is mainly used in meat products to improve texture and eating quality. Soy protein isolate contains about 90 percent protein.
Soy protein concentrate is basically soybean without the water soluble carbohydrates. It contains about 70 percent of protein.
Textured soy protein, often called TSP, is made from soy protein concentrate by giving it some texture. TSP is available as dry flakes or chunks. It will keep its structure when hydrated. Hydrated textured soy protein chunks have a texture similar to ground beef. It can be used as a meat replacement or can be added to meat. Textured soy protein contains about 70 percent protein.

Omega 3, 6, 9

2009-07-25T10:39:00.000-07:00

The Omega 3, 6 and 9 groups of fatty acids all contain essential fatty acids necessary for good health. The difference between them lies in the position of the first double bond from the methyl end or the Omega end of the carbon chain. As its name implies, the Omega 3 fatty acids have their first double bond at the 3rd position from the end of the chain, and likewise with the other two. Omega 6 has its first double bond at the 6th position from the end and Omega 9 has it at the 9th position from the end of the chain.

The following table represents the main fatty acids found in Omega 3, 6 and 9

Main components of Omega 3, 6, 9
Omega 3	Omega 6	Omega 9
alpha-linolenic acid ALA	Linolenic acid LA	Oleic acid OA
eicosapentaenoic acid EPA	Gamma-linolenic acid GLA
docosahexaenoic acid DHA	Dihomogamma linolenic acid DLA
	Arachidonic acid AA

Omega 3

The most important 2 fatty acids in the Omega 3 family are EPA and DHA as these are in limited supply and only found in any real quantities in oily fish and fish oil supplements. Although DHA is important for pregnant and nursing mothers and for young children for healthy development of the brain and vision, EPA can be considered the most important for everyone else as it is necessary for the efficient functioning of the brain and the body at a cellular level.

The Omega 3's have anti-inflammatory and anti-coagulant properties as well as many other important health benefits. They reduce inflammation and can provide protection against cardiovascular disease, arthritis, skin conditions, depression and other mood-related disorders.

Omega 6

Although Omega 6 is generally classed as pro-inflammatory, paradoxically, GLA, when sourced dietetically, has anti-inflammatory properties. It can help the bloating and pain associated with PMS. It also maintains healthy skin, hair and nails and generally helps to bring about hormonal and emotional balance.

Omega 3 and Omega 6 interact with each other so the balance between them is crucial for good health. Together they affect the production of hormonal type messengers called eicosanoids, which has an impact on inflammation in the body and all functions at a cellular level.

Omega 9

Omega 9 also has many preventative qualities as its main component, Oleic acid, helps to reduce the risk of arteriosclerosis, cardiovascular disease and stroke. Borage oil contains both Omega 6 and Omega 9 in the form of Gamma-linolenic acid and Oleic acid and is in fact, one of the best sources of GLA.

Pure EPA therefore contains a blend of all 3 of the important fatty acids EPA, GLA and OA making it an excellent choice of omega 3 6 9 supplement.

Benefits of Omega 3 6 9

Omega fatty acids are polyunsaturated fats. They are healthier than saturated fats and have many metabolic functions. There are many benefits of omega 3 6 9 supplementation.

Omega 3 and omega 6 fatty acids are essential fatty acids (EFA’s). Our bodies cannot manufacture them, and we must consume them in our diets. Omega 9 fatty acids are not essential. Our bodies need omega 9 fats, but we can manufacture them from other sources.

Omega 3 fatty acids prevent heart disease and the complications of heart attack. People who take omega 3 fatty acids have a lower mortality rate after heart attack than those who do not.

Omega 3 EFA’s improve cardiac risk factors, and help prevent CHD. They normalize lipid levels, lower blood pressure and improve glucose metabolism.

Omega 3’s may be helpful in a number of other conditions, to. Rheumatoid arthritis, depression, autism, and many other conditions may be improved by taking omega 3 EFA’s. They are necessary for growth and development, especially in the development of nervous tissue, and may improve cognitive function and emotional health.

Omega 6 fatty acids compete for enzymes with omega 3 EFA’s, so the amounts of the two need to be properly balanced. Less research has been done on omega 6 EFA’s than on omega 3’s. Most omega 6 fatty acids produce an inflammatory response that may be necessary for healthy immune system function. Research is beginning to indicate that one omega 6 EFA is, however, a powerful anti-inflammatory agent, and may be even more important for healthy hearts than omega 3 oils.

Omega 9, as mentioned, is not an essential fatty acid. Omega 9 oils are monounsaturated, and are found in olive oil. Olive oil is known to have beneficial health effects, and omega 9 oils may be necessary for healthy immune system functioning.

The benefits of omega 3 6 9 include all of the benefits of all three types of fatty acid. The amounts and ratios of each fatty acid are balanced to optimal levels of each. Taking an omega 3 6 9 supplement is a good way to ensure that you are getting essential nutrients for your good health. Pure EPA is a fantastic balance of omega 3 6 9 !

Law

2009-06-20T07:34:00.000-07:00

Human Rights advocacy

Do the refugees have any remedy under our laws?

Shafiqur Rahman Khan

INTERNATIONAL human rights law, as mentioned in the Preamble to the UDHR, aims to ensure the equality of all people that should live with all dignity and worth inherent in all human beings without any discrimination whatsoever. The primary subjects of international law being the States, they carry the responsibility to ensure that all persons within their sovereign territory and under their jurisdiction do fully enjoy the rights guaranteed under international law and which the respective State has undertaken to respect, protect and fulfil. With regard to the obligation to protect, the State, in addition to putting in place appropriate policies and legislative measures, is specifically obligated to ensure that every person in its territory enjoys the right to an effective remedy when his or her rights have been violated. This writing sought to look into how or whether this right to an effective remedy is realised by refugees both in domestic law and in international law generally.

The right to an effective remedy in international law
The meaning of the right to an effective remedy as interpreted by various international and regional bodies, namely: the HRC, the CESCR, the European Court of Human Rights and the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights. Going by the way these bodies have interpreted this right, one can deduce that the right to an effective remedy implies one; procedural remedies or the means by which a victim of a human rights violation may obtain substantive redress and these should be competent, independent and impartial tribunals, not necessarily judicial which abide by the procedural guarantees as set out under human rights law. Such institutions for obtaining remedies should be both available and accessible. Secondly, it implies that the remedy obtained by the victim should sufficiently redress the violation that has occurred and as such the nature of the remedy may take various forms ranging from reparation, compensation, investigations and prosecution of individual offenders to amending offending laws. The actual realisation of the right, moreover, occurs when the particular remedy is enforced.

The right to an effective remedy under refugee law
A refugee, fleeing persecution from his or her country as defined under international law, or civil war or armed conflict, as recognised under the African refugee protection regime, becomes “an object of international concern under refugee law, where the circumstances are such that he or she has lost or been deprived of protection under law in his or her country of origin, and is in need of another source of protection”. Owing to the principle of State sovereignty, it does not automatically follow that a refugee will obtain protection of another State. In fact international law generally does not explicitly recognise the right to obtain asylum, but it recognises the principle of non-refoulement, which shall be expounded upon shortly. There is thus a gap from when a refugee flees his or her country to when he or she is formally accepted or granted asylum in another State. In order to fill in this gap, the international community created the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) with a specific mandate to “provide international protection to refugees and to seek permanent solutions to the problem of refugees by assisting, primarily, Governments to facilitate the voluntary repatriation of refugees, or their assimilation in new national communities”.

Nevertheless, the CSR (Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees) does provide for the rights of refugees in the asylum country, among which is free access to courts. However, it goes no further than this, leaving the details into the hands of each individual and sovereign State.

The refugee and the right to an effective remedy in practice: Bangladesh situation
Following the persecution generated by the Myanmar military authority, hundreds and thousands of Rohingya refugees took refuge in Bangladesh since 19901-92. About 258,000 Rohingyas were registered by the Government of Bangladesh and still thousands of them are arriving.

The right to an effective remedy, generally speaking, is well catered for under the Constitution and laws of Bangladesh (Article 31, 32& 35 of Bangladesh Constitution). Going by the constitutional provisions, any person, refugees included, wishing to vindicate their rights has access to competent, independent and impartial institutions that will hear his or her case and where, a violation is established, then provide an appropriate remedy. Thus far, the Government of Bangladesh is very much in compliance with its obligation to ensure the right to an effective remedy to all persons within in its territory and under its jurisdiction, without discrimination, as provided under international human rights law.

When it comes to the practical implementation of these human rights and constitutional guarantees, then the right appears to be rather illusory particularly for refugees in settlements. The law provides for their free access to courts, but at the same time it greatly restricts their movement. This is worsened by the practice and other factors, as seen above, which in effect negates refugees' access to courts and any other institutions which would vindicate their rights. Moreover, these institutions do not go 'knocking at peoples' doors' looking for violations; it is the people who have to go to them.

It is therefore humbly submitted that while the right of refugees to an effective remedy is adequately provided for under both international law and in domestic law (that is, in Bangladesh), it is not that easily realised by a refugee, especially the kind of refugee that we have looked at. While international law and its protection or monitoring mechanisms aim to ensure that this right is available to all, they can only, in most cases, go as far as making declarations that a State has violated its obligations and that it should provide a remedy. The plight of a refugee would therefore be better redressed in a domestic setting, if the system is in fact functioning as envisaged under international human rights law, but even where it is not, the practice in international law is that the ultimate solution and enforcement of any right will depend on the good faith of the State in carrying out its human rights obligations.

Broadening the concept of refugee protection
Moreover, the States do avoid the responsibility of ensuring that refugees are accorded an effective remedy by their State of origin or nationality by neglecting to make such a provision under refugee law instruments. Taking this approach would better ensure that refugees do obtain an effective remedy for the violations they may have suffered that occasioned their flight. What then would be the effective remedy in such instances with regard to the remedies proffered under human rights law? There are a few suggestions that could be considered:

a) Compensation or Restitution: under the Principles Concerning Treatment of Refugees, it is provided that a refugee “shall have the right to receive compensation from the State or country which he left or to which he was unable to return”. This compensation would in fact seek to redress all the losses and violations an individual may have suffered.

b) Truth and Reconciliation: one of the ways of redressing gross human rights violations is through truth and reconciliation commissions. However, this approach taken on its own could leave many victims without full remedies and perpetrators without complete sanction, which might defeat the purpose of justice.

c) Accountability/Prosecution: as we saw earlier, human rights bodies emphasise the importance of investigating and prosecuting human rights violators as one of the effective remedies. Systematic creators of refugee problems should be made responsible to the international community by establishing proper forum.

There are other remedies provided under the Basic Principles, which include satisfaction, guarantees of non-repetition, rehabilitation and which could also be accorded to refugees. The basic proposition here is that the international community should adopt a two-pronged approach to the refugee problem: one which seeks to provide an alternative and temporary solution, and the other which aims at providing redress or remedies for human rights violations suffered by the refugees.

To wrap up, States should take their international obligations seriously instead of saying one thing on paper and doing the other in practice. Bangladesh has been hosting refugees for a long time but it is not a State party to the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 or it's Protocol. No domestic legal framework is available to deal with the issues of asylum and refugees. It is against this backdrop, Bangladesh should take necessary steps for accession to the UN Convention. This could perhaps help remove that feeling of 'nothingness' that a refugee experiences and restore his or her dignity and worth as a human being, which is one of the objectives and principles of human rights law.

Shafiqur Rahman Khan is Assistant Professor and Chairman, Department of Law, BGC Trust University, Chittagong, Bangladesh.

From Comilla Revisiting Mainamati

2009-06-20T07:20:00.000-07:00

THIS May, I rode the bus to Mainamati for the first time in six years. I had not seen the ancient kingdom of Samatata in so long. The archaeological museum of Mainamati displayed a number of Buddhist sculptures, artifacts, terracotta plaques, coins, utensils and manuscripts from the period between the 6th to 13th century AD.

In the museum I found the Assistant Custodian Mr. Sadequzzaman, who was my guide six years ago. I visited this area on a winter's day in 2003 and this year it was a mid-summer's day and I felt I had gotten exhausted just from the bus ride. The sun was blazing and there was a beautiful view of krishnachuras on the way. I was accompanied by Prothom Alo's Comilla Correspondent and the Assistant Custodian of the museum as I looked around.

Mainamati Museum Today
There are 42 showcases displaying royal copper plates, 350 coins, bronze sculptures, stone sculptures, terracotta plaques and other terracotta objects, stone and metal objects, pottery and more. One particular copper plate is from Salban Bihara. It measures ten by eight inches, has writing on both its sides, on top it has a Dharmachakra (Wheel of Law), with two seated deer symbolising the first Sermon of Buddha in the Deer Park of Sarnath. After the copper plates, coins are the most important findings from the Mainamati excavations. Earliest are two gold coins belonging to the imperial Guptas, identified as the Asyamedha coin of Samudragupta (335-375 AD). The most recent coins found in the Kutila Mura excavation in 1957 belongs to the last Abbaside Caliph Abu Ahmed Abdullah Mustaasim Billah (1242-1258 AD). These give us evidence of trade between Arab countries and Bangladesh during the pre-Islamic period.

There are a large number of unbaked clay stupas encasing circular burnt clay ceilings inscribed with Buddhist creed. These were recovered in abundance from the Tri-ratna stupas of Kutila Mura. Among the clay figures the eight-handed Taras and Jamvalas are noteworthy. A large number of bronze sculptures were discovered from the Salban Bihara excavations, mainly the statutes of Buddha, Bodhisattva and Tara. These are excellent specimens of metal-casting and represent a mature art. These sculptures reveal a gradual change in Mahayana Buddhism in Bangladesh in the 7th and 8th centuries AD.

The terracotta plaques are often the greatest source of excitement. Representations of men and women in war, warriors with swords and shields and archers with bows and arrows are noteworthy amongst the human representations. Besides these, flying female figures, amorous couple and acrobats are fairly common. Among birds, peacocks and swans are represented in different plaques. There is a swan holding a string of pearls and another eating the stem of a lotus. Terracotta plaques depicting animals include lions, horses, monkeys, wild boars, crocodiles and kirti-mukhas or two crouching lions. There are also fossilised woods, glass and shell objects and large-sized bricks at premises of the museum. The six largest sculptures in the museum are the black stone image of Heruka (a tantrik deity), a sandstone image of goddess Tara, the bronze head of a Buddhist image of Lokanatha, the image of Manjuvara in blackstone, the eight-armed black stone image of Marichi or the female counterpart of the meditative Buddha and the image of Ganesha, the Hindu God of wealth.

Outside the Museum: Archaeological spots under the open sky
As we come out of the museum, we follow the trail of red Krishnachura petals on red clay of the Lalmai hills to search for 23 archaeological sites of Mainamati. Finding all 23 might be a little too much for one day, but we can look at a few of the most important ones.

Salban Bihara (Site no. 12): Excavations since 1955 at the Salbanpur mound have revealed remains of a 550 square feet Buddhist monastery which was remade as Salban Bihara due to its proximity to the shal forest in the west. The big monastery, consisting of 115 cells, was built around a spacious courtyard with a shrine in the centre.

Kutila Mura (Site no. 4): Perched on a hillock, Kutila Mura is located about three miles north of Salban Bihara. On top of the hillock, within the enclosure, there are three stupas representing three jewels of Buddhism. This site measures about 280 feet from north to south and about 225 feet from east to west.

Charpatra Mura (Site no. 19): Excavation on this mound has completely exposed the remains of a fairly large temple complex. It was renamed Charpatra Mura (hillock of four leaves) and belonged to the ancient Chandra kings. The ground plan of a large temple complex, measuring 105 feet east-west and 55 feet north-south, could be found here.

Ananada Raja's Palace (Site no. 5): This mound is situated about a mile north of the BARD complex at Kotbari, Comilla. It is more than 650 square feet in size and about 15 feet higher than the flat land. Local people call it Ananda Rajar Bari.

Ranir Bungalow Mound (Site no. 20): Situated on the northernmost point of Mainamati hill, the mound is nearly 40 feet higher than the surrounding flat land. It is locally known as the palace and temple of Rani Mainamati, a well-known heroine in Bengali folk-literature. But why are cattle grazing here? Is there no one to look after this place?

Challenges of the Mainamati Museum and other archaeological spots:
Despite the beauty of the Mainamati museum and other archaeological spots, overall it lacks proper maintenance and care. “Problems are many. We have a manpower crisis” said Mr. Sadequzzaman, Assistant Custodian of the Mainamati Museum who has been working here since 1999.

“Although the museum earns around Tk. 1,50,000-2,10,000 per month from ticket sales, this is really not enough to maintain, renovate and excavate the archaeological sites and the museum. The Department of Archaeology and Ministry of Culture helps us. Still, we need more financial support to excavate further and renovate in a more modernised way,” he commented.

“We are hopeful that the number of visitors is will increase. In summer (1st April to 30th September) the museum remains open from 10:00 am to 6:00 pm with a half hour lunch break. It is closed on Sundays. In winter (1st October to 31st March), the museum remains open from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.” he added.

Audity Falguni

References:
A.K.M.Shamsul Alam, Mainamati, Department of Archaeology and Museum, 1976
Md. Shafiqul Alam, Excavation at Rupbanmura, Department of Archaeology, 2000

http://www.thedailystar.net/starinsight/2009/06/02/cover.htm

Cric-time foodfest

2009-06-20T07:14:00.000-07:00

Bangladesh is out from the T20 World Cup but there is surely a lot of suspense and drama to look forward to. The odd timing of the games surely leaves much on option for the fast food junkie. Munching on mouth-watering delights is surely a perk of the cricket action this season.

Here are some options you can try, while the slogfest goes on…
Chips have always been a popular snack. Cheetos, Doritos, Lay's and Pringles are the most widely sold ones, offering a wide range of flavours. The prices vary according to size and flavour and range between Tk 150-250.

If you want to try out the spicy Indian chat flavours then Papri Chat, Pogo Papri, Stax, Uncle chips Mirch Masala are the right picks. They come in mini packs at Tk 30-70, you can easily try them before deciding on the family packs. Apart from all these, our very own deshi Pran's roasted peas, Bombay Sweet's chanachur, and popcorn remain the traditional knick-knack snacks.

For the nut lovers, Tong Garden assorted nut cans are the must-buy items. You can choose from salted pistachios to cashew nuts to roasted almonds and lots of other flavours that are available in varying container sizes with a price tag of TK 190-270. Apart from Tong Garden, Nut Candy and Nut Walker are two other brands you can choose from.

Then there is the all time favourite: our own brand of left over sandwich. Take three pieces of sugar free bread, spread mayo, ketchup, and mustard mercilessly and generously. Shred the chicken pieces from the dinner curry; toss that in. Add deshi cheese, try to poach an egg, remember to scramble just the yoke, a few coriander leaves, tomato slices or left over salad and you got yourself a humongous sandwich. However if you have the salami loaves or hunter beef handy than there's nothing like it, throw that in too.

You can also bug mummy dearest to fill the refrigerator with marinated chicken pieces, half done kebabs, potato salad etc; she'll grumble for sure but be more than happy to oblige.

By Zannatul Lamea

http://www.thedailystar.net/lifestyle/2009/06/03/back.htm

The sound of weaving

2009-06-20T07:11:00.000-07:00

THE art of clothing is intrinsically associated with civilisation and today's fading handloom industries are a silent bystander of those bygone days when clothing was regarded more as a means to cast off barbarism than as a mere tool of fashion. While some say that the history of handloom in Bangladesh dates back to seven to eight hundred years, there are those who claim that the “Muslin” that the Egyptian mummies were wrapped in came from the ancient city of Shonagora or Shubornogram which is where the present Narsingdi district lies.

Claims aside, Bangladesh has a very old history of handloom, as old as farming, and the Baburhaat of Narsingdi where the main trade of handloom yards used to take place was once proudly known as the “Manchester of the East.”

But the emergence of powerloom has cast a dark shadow over this exceedingly traditional industry that is rapidly dwindling into obscurity. Although there still exists a local demand for handloom lungies, gamchas, saris and bedcovers, the sheer presence of powerloom clothes in the market pales it into insignificance.

As a result, the once affluent weavers who passed on their trade to future generations have sought some other line of profession and the villages behind which hid the drone of handloom can hardly boast of a single family still engaged in the profession.

In order to raise awareness about the traditional values associated with this ancient industry and to revive its popularity, Anjan's Boutique, in a rare endeavour organised a nine-day-long exhibition on the handloom of Bengal in the National Museum from 8 June, 2009 where the general public could watch old weavers at work on colourful yarns to produce the crisp handloom fabrics with the “thak-thak thak-thak” sound of their looms that really transports one to those bygone times.

It was stressed by Sultana Kamal, a guest speaker in the inaugural ceremony, that handloom is an integral part of the Bengal tradition and as such must be nurtured and valued at all costs. She urged the young generation to promote handloom fabric saying if one has five outfits in his/her wardrobe then let there be at least two of handloom.

It is important that our youth lean towards handloom in their fashion tastes as the future of this sector lies in their hands. With some help from the government sector in the form of subsidies and private by providing training facilities and the means to compete with international designs this fading industry could indeed revive. However, a word of gratitude to the Dhaka fashion houses like Aarong, Arannya, Jatra, Kumudini and Anjan's among others, for their quest to keep the handloom industry alive and celebrate its beauty.

By Shaily Fatima

http://www.thedailystar.net/lifestyle/2009/06/03/page04.htm

Sudden downpours

2009-06-20T07:07:00.000-07:00

One short glance outside my window told me I would not be able to find a more appropriate time to sit down and complete my assignment. I had the perfect weather, which worked as the necessary stimulation. So, I sat comfortably beside the window with my laptop and started typing…

Mother Nature provides its perks, now and again. Also, she loves to surprise us, I believe. She showers at us when least expected, or, perhaps at a day when you felt it would be the hottest you have ever gone through. She loves to trick you, and also, to soothe you, by the sudden drop in the temperature, thus permitting you to escape the cruel heat.

From where I sat, I could hear doors banging due to the furious wind. I again gazed out the window…

Few things are more exciting than observing the 'welcoming' of rain. The whole system of nature around you works in perfect synchrony and coordination- how the grey clouds shield the sun and thus make an otherwise bright afternoon look like dusk, how the wind goes wild and the trees respond to that with all their passion, the sudden fall of temperature, the angry thunders and the flashy lightnings and above all, you, who's either excitedly witnessing the events from your verandah or running for shelter!

Rainfall started at full enthusiasm and speed. I pulled my window a bit so that water does not enter my room. I continued with my writing…

What is it with rain and emotions? The first shot of rain on the heated streets and the soil that gives you the earthy and heavenly smell, and the sight of rainfall and the sound… rain provokes so many emotions - deep sorrows, true happiness, nostalgia and what not.

It persuades you to have an extra mug of coffee with some 'deshi' snacks to complement, makes you crave for khichuri, or, allures you to snuggle under the blanket with the person you love…

My 'musing' was interrupted by a sudden and excessively loud thunderclap. I almost jumped up. Now, my thoughts journeyed through the corridors of the past…

School hours become much more fun when it rains. Each thunder is followed by a roar of hooting and yelling together in the classrooms. Rain's always more enjoyable when you are with friends!

Indeed, it is. Exhilarated friends who dash over a field with a football during rain know it. Perhaps that's the optimum way to enjoy rain. The heavy rainfall on your head, and also the chilling water that's washing away the clay all over your body and face that you acquired during the game, the coldness- all add up to the excitement of football!

For the less sporty and more romantic folks, riding a rickshaw with its hood down, accompanied by a couple of friends, singing together (maybe with an old guitar), all the way down the road, leaves a memory that they'll cherish for the rest of their lives.

The rain has slowed down into a drizzle now. You never get enough of the good stuff, I thought. Now I fully opened my window and stare out…

Everything looks so clean after the rain. Also, the wind and the trees appear to be calm and quiet, as if they have become exhausted from the fierce performance they just gave, or as if a powerful force has been snatched away from them.

I noticed the people who were anxiously taking refuge in the building in front of my house now restart their daily chores again. I stretched out my arms; there was no more rain; the show was over, and so was my writing.

By M H Haider
Photo: Munem Wasif

Star news

http://www.thedailystar.net/lifestyle/2009/06/03/page04.htm

Saga of a Storm Ravaged People

2009-06-20T07:01:00.000-07:00

A Day of Cyclone Aila brought down prolonged sufferings for more than one lakh people of Ashasuni and Shyamnagar upazilas at Satkhira coast. The storm gave rise to a tidal surge breaking down dams and sweeping away dwellings of the residents. Many thousands were left paupers after their belongings were swept away. Following the storm, some found only poles standing, where there used to be their houses. Villages after villages were inundated by saline water, giving rise to a severe crisis of fresh drinking water. Heavy rain made the roads so muddy that it was easier for storm shelter bound people to get down into the Kholpetua and Kopotakkhya rivers and wade along the shorelines. Thousands still languish in shelters too ill equipped to accommodate the massive number of the ill fated, while many thousands more are still marooned in remote areas surrounded by saline water. The government says it will take at least a year to rebuild the destroyed dams in the area, while another storm is brewing around the corner.

Photo: Anisur Rahman

http://www.thedailystar.net/cityinframe/2009/06/01/cityinframe.htm

Computer model gives vital clues to dealing with flu pandemics

2009-06-20T06:50:00.000-07:00

RESEARCH from The University of Western Australia will give vital clues to public health authorities in dealing with potential pandemics such as the current "swine flu" (H1N1) outbreak.

The research, published in the journal BMC Public Health last month, found imposing "social distancing" measures such as school closures, home isolation, partial closure of workplaces and reduced community contact, if done rapidly, could prevent a local epidemic.

"The timing of activation of such non-pharmaceutical interventions is critical," said Professor George Milne, who along with Dr Joel Kelso and Dr Simon Huband used a computer simulation model to emulate the spread of influenza (in this case, H5N1 "avian" influenza, but the results are directly applicable to H1N1).

"For a very transmissible strain, application of all four interventions at the same time as the first case is introduced, and enforcing these draconian measures continuously, can potentially hold the illness rate at 16 per cent (compared to 73 per cent if they are not used)."

The research assumed 100% of infectious children and 90% adults are home quarantined and a 50% reduction in workplace attendance and community-wide contact.

The model used statistical data about the population of Albany, a town of 30,000 people in south-west Western Australia.

Developed by the team from UWA's School of Computer Science and Software Engineering, the model is believed to be the most detailed replication of an actual community - down to individual schools, employers and the exact make-up of households - to be used to quantify the impact of alternative intervention strategies.

Professor Milne said the model showed that non-pharmaceutical social distancing interventions could reduce the rate of development and the overall burden of epidemics.

"While such draconian measures will only be mandated under extreme circumstances, given their impact on personal freedom, they appear to play a key role in delaying the development of a 'worst case' influenza epidemic," he said. "Social distancing may be critical in holding back an epidemic until vaccines are deployed on a sufficient scale that subsequent relaxation of these measures won't result in an acceleration of the outbreak."

"The measures must be employed as soon as possible if they are to have maximum effect. We found that for an outbreak as infectious as the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, a combination of all intervention measures must be introduced within two weeks of the first case appearing in a town or city to prevent an epidemic developing. Delays of two, three and four weeks resulted in final attack rates of seven per cent, 21 per cent and 45 per cent respectively."

The UWA team has provided reports based on their two published papers to the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) and received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, DoHA and WHO.

Source: UWA Website

Singapore Diary

2009-06-20T06:39:00.000-07:00

Last week, we took a dive into the dazzling world of discounts and dining out in the garden city of Singapore during the Great Singapore Sale. Tourism being the lifeblood of this island, no trip to Singapore is complete unless you've taken some time out to do some sight-seeing. The concluding chapter on this dream destination sheds some light on just some of the very many things you can check out here.

Eye Spy
Move over, London Eye. The Singapore Flyer, inaugurated in February last year is now the tallest Ferris wheel in the world. Located on the southeast tip of the Marina Centre reclaimed land, it offers broad views of the city centre and beyond, including bits of Indonesia and Malaysia. Visitors getting into one of the 28 air-conditioned capsules are treated to a slow rotation, which takes approximately half an hour, during which one can see the glittering landscape slowly fall away before them, while an audio guide directs the gaze to points of attraction on the vista below, and provides a brief recap of the history of the island.

The ride isn't the only reason to make a stop at the Flyer. Built over a three-story terminal building which houses shops, bars and restaurants, you'll be spoiled for choices when it comes to dining or shopping. We highly recommend the Kenko Fish Spa, where you can let the Doctor Fish tickle away all your worries.

All creatures great and small
Animal lovers can let their hair down and get close to all the furry, feathery or scaly creatures they want, with some of these must-see destinations:

Singapore Zoo
Opened in 1973, and comprising a whopping 28 hectares land, which houses some 315 species, the Singapore Zoo has definitely done its part for conservation. Set in a rain-forest environment, the Zoo’s world famous ‘open concept’ allows you a most realistic experience of wildlife. There's none of the depressing cage and bars that one associates with zoos. Animals here live in spacious and landscaped environments simulating that of their natural habitat. Furthermore, the exhibits are so arranged with interactive walk-throughs and tram and boat rides with commentary to make the visit a truly educational experience. Definitely a must-see if you're bringing kids along.

If you have time on your hands, make this an all-day trip, because there's more fun as the sun goes down. A major attraction of the Zoo is the Night Safari, which covers some 40 hectares, and comprises of two road loops. It is essentially a safari park divided into eight geographical zones, which can be explored either on foot via three walking trails, or by tram. Be sure to take in the Creatures of the Night show, where some of the animals are trained to perform for an audience, and display some of their many surprising qualities. Seated in the open arena, you never know what to expect, be it a furry monkey scampering across the tight-rope just over your head, a big python suddenly materialising under your bench, or a cute pair of raccoons knocking over the recycle bins in the stage area. Since the format changes based on the temperament of the animals, the show's always fresh, and the opportunity for audience participation adds to the fun.

Jurong Bird Park
Another worthwhile animal attraction is the Jurong Bird Park. This is a 20.2 hectare open-concept park, the largest in the Asia Pacific, housing more than 8,000 birds from 600 species, mostly birds from Southeast Asia.The Park has four walk-in aviaries, among which is the world’s largest walk-in aviary with the tallest man-made waterfall for visitors to enjoy a close-up view of free-flying birds from Africa. The exhibits and aviaries are specially designed to closely resemble the natural habitats of the birds. There are also open spaces landscaped with exotic flowering plants to enhance the beauty of the place. We highly recommend the bird shows, staged at the Pools Amphitheatre. From vultures to cockatoos, flying over the heads of the viewers, playing basketball, singing birthday songs, the shows are guaranteed entertainment.

Ride away
What trip to Singapore is complete without a gander at the once-infamous Sentosa Island? Formerly a place of exile, which later became a fort and a military base, it is now an island resort, featuring a multitude of attractions. If you liked the Singapore Flyer, you'll love looking out the 37 meter replica of the Merlion, one of Singapore's enduring symbols. There's also the Tiger Sky Tower, which, standing at 131 meters above sea-level, is the tallest observation post. Grab a seat in the enclosed, air-conditioned cabin, and let it take you up, up, and away! The chair-lifts, which form part of the Skyride, give you the illusion of flying, as they take you up to the Luge rides. Speed freaks will really dig this one. Part go-cart, part-toboggan, pure excitement – the luge is a fun-filled gravity ride that's safe for all ages, with a unique steering and braking system that allows you to make the ride as leisurely or as exciting as you want. If you like speed, you'll definitely dig the Segway course. The eco-friendly two-wheeled vehicle uses your weight to take you around. At Sentosa, you get to try it over a fun obstacle course. If all those 'actual' rides are too much to take in, make sure you try out the 4D Magix shows, which synchronise a full spectrum of visual effects, surround sound, individually-controlled motion seats and special "live" environmental effects such as water spray to make your movie viewing experience come alive. Finally, the crowning glory of all the entertainment features at Sentosa, Songs of the Sea, the light and sound show is simply breathtaking. Featuring a live cast and the dramatic effects of pyrotechnics, water jets, brilliant lasers, special computer imaging, captivating music and stunning flame bursts, it is the ultimate audio-visual experience.

Daily star

Bangladeshi news.

Will British crops go thirsty?

2009-06-19T11:02:00.000-07:00

We are standing under endless Fenland skies. It's not yet Eight O Clock, but already the sun is warm and high.

We are surveying three fields on Duncan Worth's farm. Before us, glossy green potato plants with their scented white flowers; to the left of us, maize to be used in power generation; to the right of us, wheat.

"It's been ideal growing weather recently," Duncan says, "sunshine and the right amount of rain."

But for how much longer? The hotter, drier summers predicted by climate change scientists could have a dramatic effect on this agricultural powerhouse of a region, and the thousands of jobs that it supports.

Where will the water come from to slake the thirst of these crops?We're walking Duncan's fields with Dr Jerry Knox from Cranfield University, an adviser to, among others, the British Potato Council, and with Andy Brown from Anglian Water.

So will there be enough water to sustain the plants of the future in this rich, light soil?

"It's not so much a resource issue as a policy issue," says Dr Knox. "In other words, whether we want food with a low environmental footprint.

"We already import strawberries and lettuce from Southern Europe, where businesses are at risk from water shortages. We're exporting much of the problem.

"But farmers here do realise that some crops, like potatoes, may have to be grown in other parts of the UK in future."

"We're worried about water; we're not confident," says Mr Worth.

He and other farmers in the region are so concerned about the issue that they have started the Holbeach Marsh Water Transfer Project, looking at the feasibility of getting water from the River Welland to the marsh - making it accessible to agriculture.

But if projects like this proliferate in the future as water becomes more scarce, are we not robbing Peter to pay Paul?

"There's a fascinating triangle in the east of England between domestic use, agriculture and the environment," says Mr Brown.

"There are 750 sites of special scientific interest in our region, a large number of which are wetlands-based. We think we can get the balance right."

But as we finish our walk and head off for a cup of tea, all agree that it will take planning and perhaps some sacrifice to meet the many demands on the increasingly precious resource of water.

BBC News

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8107350.stm

Fun facts About Bikes

2009-06-18T23:02:00.000-07:00

Whether you rely on your bike for transportation or exercise, you’ll enjoy these ten facts on this two wheeled vehicle.

In 1817, karl von Drais, a German baron, invented a horseless carries that would help him to get around faster. The two wheeled, pedal-less device was propelled by pushing your feet against the ground, and the machine became known as the “draisine” and led to creation of the modern-day bicycle.

The term “bicycle” was not introduced until the 1860_s, when it was coined in France to describe a new kind of two-wheeler with a mechanical drive.

Orville and Wilbur Wright, the brothers who built the first flying airplane, operated a small bike repair shop in Dayton, Ohio. They used their workshop to build the 1903 Wright Flyer. Fred A. Birchmore, 25, circled the globe by bicycle in 1935. The entire trip, through Europe, Asia, and the United States, covered forty thousand miles. He pedaled about 25,000 miles. The rest was traveled by boat. He wore out seven sets of tires. There are over a half billion bicycle in china in the late 1800s.

About 100 million bicycles are manufactured worldwide each year.

Over the past 30 years, bicycle delivery services have developed into an important industry, especially in cities, where the couriers have earned a reputation for their high speed and traffic-weaving skills. American uses their bicycles for less than one percent of all urban trips. Europeans bike in cities a lot more often –in Italy 5 percent of all trips are on bicycle, 30 percent in the Netherlands, and seven out of eight Dutch people over age 15 have a bike. The tour de France is one of the most famous bicycle races in the world. Established in 1903, it is considered to be the biggest test of endurance out of all sports. Lance Armstrong, an American cyclist, is the only rider to have won seven titles (1999-2005) after surviving cancer.

Bicycle Moto Cross (BMX), an extreme style of bicycle track racing, became a sport in the 2008 summer Olympic Games in Beijing, china. Msris Strombergs, of Latvia, received the gold medal for Men’s BMX, and Anne-Caroline Chausson, from France, took home the gold in the first Women’s BMX Olympic event.

Facts taken from:

Bicycle: he history by David Herlihy

Save daylight

2009-06-18T22:42:00.000-07:00

Daylight saving time (DST) becomes a buzz word this day. We have already got know that the government has decided to forward Bangladesh standard Time by one hour from mid June to manage the severe power crisis. Although the term DST is new in Bangladesh, more than 100 countries in the world are Applying DST nowadays. “Early to bed, early to rise. One may argue that forwarding clock time is not perfect for a country like Bangladesh where the difference between day and night is too wide but it is true that DST will do us some favor. The main purpose of DST is to save energy that is scarce in Bangladesh. Think about it: shops and markets are now scheduled to close at 8pm. By applying DST those will be closed one hour earlier that will save one hour energy. Nevertheless, some other benefits like reducing traffic, crimes and many.

Politics

2009-06-18T09:11:00.000-07:00

Daylight saving has caused controversy since it began. Winston Churchill argued that it enlarges "the opportunities for the pursuit of health and happiness among the millions of people who live in this country". Robertson Davies, however, detected "the bony, blue-fingered hand of Puritanism, eager to push people into bed earlier, and get them up earlier, to make them healthy, wealthy and wise in spite of themselves", and wags have dubbed it "Daylight Slaving Time". Historically, retailing, sports and tourism interests have favored daylight saving, while agricultural and evening entertainment interests have opposed it, and its initial adoption has been prompted by energy crisis and war.

The fate of Willett's 1907 proposal illustrates several political issues involved. The proposal attracted many supporters, including Balfour, Churchill, Lloyd George, MacDonald, Edward VII(who used half-hour DST at Sandringham), the managing director of Harrods, and the manager of the National Bank. However, the opposition was stronger: it included Prime MinisterAsquith, Christie (the Astronomer Royal), George Darwin, Napier Shaw (director of the Meteorological Office), many agricultural organizations, and theater owners. After many hearings the proposal was narrowly defeated in a Parliament committee vote in 1909. Willett's allies introduced similar bills every year from 1911 through 1914, to no avail. The U.S. was even more skeptical: Andrew Peters introduced a DST bill to the U.S. House in May 1909, but it soon died in committee.

Retailers generally favor DST. United Cigar Storeshailed a 1918 DST bill.

World War I changed the political equation, as DST was promoted as a way to alleviate hardships from wartime coal shortages and air raid blackouts. After Germany led the way, the United Kingdom first used DST on May 21, 1916. U.S. retailing and manufacturing interests led by Pittsburgh industrialist Robert Garland soon began lobbying for DST, but were opposed by railroads. The U.S.'s 1917 entry to the war overcame objections, and DST was established in 1918.

The war's end swung the pendulum back. Farmers continued to dislike DST, and many countries repealed it after the war. Britain was an exception: it retained DST nationwide but over the years adjusted transition dates for several reasons, including special rules during the 1920s and 1930s to avoid clock shifts on Easter mornings. The U.S. was more typical: Congress repealed DST after 1919. President Woodrow Wilson, like Willett an avid golfer, vetoed the repeal twice but his second veto was overridden, and only a few U.S. cities retained DST locally thereafter.^[93] Wilson's successor Warren G. Harding opposed DST as a "deception". Reasoning that people should instead get up and go to work earlier in the summer, he ordered District of Columbia federal employees to start work at 08:00 rather than 09:00 during summer 1922. Many businesses followed suit though many others did not; the experiment was not repeated.

Since Willett's day the world has seen many enactments, adjustments, and repeals of DST, with similar politics involved. The history of time in the United States includes DST during both world wars, but no standardization of peacetime DST until 1966.^[96] In the mid-1980s, Clorox (parent of Kingsford Charcoal) and 7-Eleven provided the primary funding for the Daylight Saving Time Coalition behind the 1987 extension to U.S. DST, and both Idaho senators voted for it based on the premise that during DST fast-food restaurants sell more French fries, which are made from Idaho potatoes; in 2005, the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association and the National Association of Convenience Stores successfully lobbied for the 2007 extension to U.S. DST. After a three-year trial, 55% of Western Australians voted against DST in 2009, with urban areas split evenly and rural areas strongly opposed; it was the fourth consecutive referendum since 1975 to reject DST. In the UK the sport and leisure industry supports a proposal to observe SDST's additional hour year-round.

Terminology

2009-06-18T08:43:00.000-07:00

In the normative form, daylight saving time uses the present participle saving as an adjective, as in labor saving device; the first two words are sometimes hyphenated, as in daylight-saving time. Daylight savings time, daylight savings, and daylight time are common variants, the savings by analogy to savings account. Willett's 1907 proposal used the term daylight saving, but by 1911 the term summer time replaced daylight saving time in draft legislation in Britain, and continental Europe uses similar phrases, such as Sommerzeit in Germany andl'heure d'été in France.

The name of local time typically changes when DST is observed. American English replaces standard with daylight: for example, Pacific Standard Time (PST) becomes Pacific Daylight Time (PDT). British English typically inserts summer: for example, Central European Time (CET) becomes Central European Summer Time (CEST). Abbreviations do not always change: for example, many (though not all) Australians say that Eastern Standard Time (EST) becomes Eastern Summer Time (also EST).

The American English mnemonic "spring forward, fall back" (also "spring ahead ...", "spring up ...", and "... fall behind") helps people remember which direction to shift clocks. Much of North America now advances clocks before the vernal equinox, so the mnemonic disagrees with the astronomical definition of spring, but a proposed substitute "March forward ..."^[102]works only in the northern hemisphere, and is less robust against future rule changes.

Owning Half a River

2009-06-15T11:45:00.000-07:00

Morshed Ali Khan

“I have British and Pakistani parchas for this land," said Rafiq Mia firmly, showing a large stretch of the river Buriganga. "My name is even in the latest Bangladeshi survey, I am the genuine owner of this land," he said in his Dhakaiya accent without the blink of an eye.

"But this is the river Buriganga," said a young man pointing at the stretch of murky water of the river.

"Oh no," reacted Rafiq with a shriek raising his hand, " The river is in fact about 200 metres away in the middle of this waterway!"

In fact Rafiq Mia from Moddherchar was not entirely lying. He inherited some land from his forefathers at a time when the flow of the river Buriganga was not where it is today. The river changed its course over the last 70 years but official records have never been updated. During the recent Bangladesh Survey, the surveyors have legitimised his claim for the river on the basis of the British and Pakistani parchas. Equipped with the parchas that his forefathers had left behind Rafiq claims the ownership of the river Buriganga, or at least a big chunk of it. Like a good citizen he has paid all taxes (Khazna) for his 1.5 acres of 'land' and there seems no one who could stop him from filling up the river.

Only a week ago Rafiq signed a deal with a sand extraction company that agreed to fill up the area with their volgates (dredging and pumping machines) for a rate of Tk 2 for every square foot of sand filling.

Two kilometres in the upstream from Moddherchar, the Turag turns into the Buriganga just at the bend of Uttarmora at Basila. As the Buriganga rolls down it encircles more than half the city length and flows into the Dhaleshwari at Munshiganj before joining the Meghna at Gazaria. By the time the Buriganga reaches the Dhaleshwari, it has covered nearly 17 kilometres of waterway amid some of the most crammed and hostile urban territories in the world.

While Rafiq Mia stands on the Buriganga with some papers to back him up, there are hundreds like him along the 17-kilometre stretch of the Buriganga, who do not have anything but the river to encroach upon. The saddest part of the river Buriganga lies in Kamrangir Char, where the second channel of the river Buriganga, once a lively waterway encircling the Kamrangir Char peninsula, is on the verge of extinction.

The story goes like this. Lalbagh is politically one of the most important constituencies in the city, where a fierce race for power and supremacy among political godfathers has always been intense. Over the years individuals have become notorious for their involvement in crimes that include murder, extortion and land grabbing. Over a decade when land prices soared to record heights, the second Buriganga channel immediately became a target. Godfathers directly supervised the creation of one plot after the other on the channel. When the BIWTA launched a massive campaign to free the river of encroachment five years ago, godfathers and their sycophants were ready to handle it. To the surprise of the demolition team and the on-duty magistrate river grabbers either produced parchas and other documents claiming ownership or court orders against the government action. Now the BIWTA is gasping for respite from hundreds of court cases related to the Buriganga encroachments, awaiting trials for years.

Belayet Mia from Barisal owns a piece of land in Kamrangir Char where he has lived for nearly 25 years. He says the second Buriganga second channel was a blessing for the people of the area.

"But as soon as the mouth of the channel on the Rayer Bazar side was filled up by Sikdar Medical College an unofficial decree was passed to grab the river, " Belayet says.

"The government should immediately announce that even if someone owns a part of the river, the person cannot fill it up or construct anything there because it is forbidden and punishable under the wetland protection act to fill up any water body," Belayet says.

The entirety of the river Buriganga is under threat. In Waaspur, across Basila, a real estate developer has embarked on a housing project on the river that he proudly calls "Titanic Housing".

While encroachment of the river is a major problem, pollution in the river Buriganga, especially in the lean period when flow is totally cut off in the confluence of the river Jamuna, takes the worst possible turn. Millions of gallons of highly toxic wastes released by over 7,000 industrial units, 75 percent of the city's raw sewage and hundreds of tons of solid wastes, are dumped into the Buriganga every day. From the first day flow in the river water is cut off, which usually happens sometime in September or early October, the huge volume of wastes start to accumulate in water of the river. Within a month the river resembles a huge gutter with pitch-black toxic water in it. Stench in it becomes increasingly unbearable as the lean period continues.

Millions of people living along the river are the worst sufferers of this mindless pollution. Unable to even touch the water, women in areas, especially outside the purview of Dhaka WASA water supply, pass days without washing. In Waaspur, Shoalmachi, Looterchar, Jhaochar, Moddherchar, Kholamora, Jinjira and parts of Kamrangir Char, throughout the dry season most household tube wells become dry as the underground water level falls drastically. Millions living by the Buriganga become so helpless as they are denied access to the river as well as to their own water supply.

Din Islam from Waaspur also a breeder of cages birds, says the whole economy of the area is dangerously affected by the pollution. "We are really passing hard times. Water is our first and utmost problem the river becomes a gutter and the wells are dry for most part of the year," he says.

"I can tell you if we can clean up the river Buriganga we can produce enough fish here to earn twice the amount of money in foreign currency than the tanneries earn," Islam says.

As Islam spoke sitting at the small landing station in Waaspur, a group of people arrived there with a long measurement tape. They were potential land buyers. Soon one end of the tape was stretched into the river by about 25 feet. A man stood in waist-deep water holding the end of the tape, while several others checked parchas and other documents again and again.

The seller and the owner of the land showed all documents including British, Pakistani and Bangladesh parchas and said, "In fact my documents clearly shows that I own half of the river."

No Letter was ever Going to Come

2009-06-15T11:24:00.000-07:00

Abdus Selim

This year's (2009) Man Booker International Prize winner happens to be a Canadian woman short-story writer Alice Munro not for a particular book but 'for her lifetime body of work'. In recognition of her literary endeavours the panel that decided to give her the prize said, “To read Alice Munro is to learn something every time that you never thought of before." Honestly, I strongly feel inclined to agree to the statement after re-reading two of her short stories, Thanks for the Ride (1968) and How I Met My Husband (1974), when I came to know about her winning the Prize. In this fertile land of ours it is not easy to get hold of the book that you feel like reading at the right moment more so when it is an English language book. Naturally I had to be satisfied with the one that I had within my reach from my old collection.

Most of the names of Munro's short-stories and books fascinate me as a reader for example both above mentioned titles of the short-stories give me an immediate impression that she does not go for conventional things and is very informal in her storytelling. To justify my point I can give examples like Lives of Girls and Women, Something I've Been Meaning to Tell You, Who Do You Think You Are?, and Hateship, Friendship, Courtship, Loveship, Marriage. This, to me, has resulted from her strong regional focus as she was born in a family of fox and poultry farmers, and narrating her stories in small-town settings making her look at things unconventionally and informally.

Munro published her first short-story, The Dimensions of a Shadow in 1950. I have no clear picture from her biography if she wrote any other stories between 1950 and 1968, for during that period of time she got married, gave birth to three daughters and moved once to Vancouver, British Columbia, and then to Victoria. Her first collection of stories, Dance of the Happy Shades came out in 1968, and her latest book, published in 2009, is titled Too Much Happiness. Many critics compare Munro's works with Chekhov's because they think in her stories too, plot is less important and the talk drifts on, thoughts well up from within the breast, toss on the air and vanish like bubbles and little happens. But after my second reading of the stories mentioned above I genuinely feel that Munro has the quality to bring into play various other subtle dimensions of realisation in the minds of the readers.

Take How I Met My Husband. This story unfolds in the first person narrative of a fifteen-year old girl. She is not a very bright teenager, but possesses all the feelings, emotions and imaginations befitting the age. Failing to display her talent in education she is sent to work for a veterinary couple in the country by her parents where she meets one of those pilots who earn money by giving short rides to the people who love fun flying up in the sky. She grows a romantic attachment to this man double her age, and during one of her short visits to his camp he takes her to bed only to kiss her for a few minutes. This she considers to be an intimate relationship. The day this happens he tells her that for professional reasons he is going to move to another place the same afternoon, but he likes her very much and will write her letters from wherever he goes, and one day they will meet again. She believes him from the very core of her heart and from the very next week she sits near the mailbox at a fixed time routinely to check if she has got a letter. Though she meets the mailman everyday, the letter never arrives. Then one day the reality reveals to her, “It never crossed to my mind for a long time a letter might not come. I believed in it coming just like I believed the sun would rise in the morning. …One day walking back …looking across the fairgrounds with the full-blown milkweed and dark teasels, so much like fall, it just struck me: No letter was ever going to come.” Munro twists her story to another dimension with the help of two last paragraphs when she describes how the postman asks the girl to go out with him one day, and after two years of dating they get married and have children. The final lines read like this, “He [her postman husband] always tells the children the story of how I went after him by sitting by the mailbox every day, and naturally I laugh and let him, because I like for people to think what pleases them and makes them happy.”

What I like about the story is this waiting for something that will never happen, in this case the letter that will never come. Quite a good number of writers have worked on this particular theme, and I can readily name Tagore, Maugham, Beckett and Marquez. Tagore in his play Dak Ghor (The Post Office) describes how tirelessly a child waits for his emancipation from this worldly confinement and finally gets it by falling asleep or to be exact, through his physical death. Waiting as a theme also gyrates all through Raktakarabi (Red Oleanders) when we see Nandini repeatedly declaring Ranjan's forthcoming visit although he never appears in flesh and blood in the entire play. It is true Tagore's waiting is a kind of waiting at a higher plane, extremely philosophical, but it is rationalistic too. Maugham in his famous autobiographical novel Of Human Bondage writes how a ten-year old boy is subjected to humiliation for his club foot by his classmates and how he goes through an episode of deep religious belief, and believes that through true faith he can get God to heal his club foot, but as this does not happen his belief falters almost like the girl in Munro's story who suddenly realises that no letter will ever arrive. But man knows how to compromise with life and live on. Becket develops his play Waiting for Godot on an unbearably uninteresting plot of waiting in which two characters wait for someone named Godot who never turns upbut then again life itself is a long waiting for something to happen that almost never happens. Márquez's No One Writes to the Colonel is a novel that deals with the story of an impoverished, retired colonel who still waits to receive the pension that was promised some fifteen years earlier. Thus time and again writers have been dealing with the subject of human expectation that someday they will see redemption from their pain and suffering they undergo and wait for something better to happen the way Bangladeshi people are waiting for a change but unfortunately that hope never comes to fruition.

I like Munro's relaxed way of telling her story and finally delivering the ingenious message by means of a casual rhetoric: No letter was ever going to come.

Abdus Selim is the Assistant Professor of North South University.

Climate Change

2009-06-14T06:42:00.000-07:00

Climate Change

2009-06-14T06:32:00.000-07:00

Climate change is now widely recognized as the major environmental problem facing the globe. Addressing climate change is central to the work of the United Nations. The threat that climate change poses to peace, security and sustainable development led UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to make climate change - what he calls “the defining challenge of our age” - one of the priorities for the UN system. For more than two decades UNEP has played a key role in United Nations efforts to address climate change and increase awareness among governments, the scientific and business communities, and the general public.

Evidence is building that impacts are being felt in the form of melting icecaps in the polar areas and increased variability of temperature, rainfall and storms in virtually all regions. The scientific consensus underpinning the rising political and public recognition of the climate problem has been captured in the recent reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - established by UNEP and the World Meteorological Organization in 1988. The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) clearly states that it is no longer relevant to discuss whether the climate is changing but rather how much change we are committed to and how fast this will occur.

Assessments by the IPCC underpinned negotiations for the Kyoto Protocol, and continue to provide the foundation for global decision making on climate change within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). UNEP supports the UNFCCC process in a variety of ways, and will continue to support the Parties to the UNFCCC as they work to put in place a future climate agreement that helps to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions while at the same time providing finance, technology and support for developing country adaptation and mitigation needs.

UNDP

Swine Flu

2009-05-02T00:10:00.000-07:00

Swine influenza

2009-05-02T00:06:00.001-07:00

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about influenza in swine. For the 2009 outbreak in humans, see 2009 swine flu outbreak

Swine influenza (also called swine flu, hog flu, and pig flu) refers to influenza caused by those strains of influenza virus that usually infect pigs and are called swine influenza virus (SIV).^[1] Swine influenza is common in pigs in the midwestern United States (and occasionally in other states), Mexico, Canada, South America, Europe (including the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Italy), Kenya, Mainland China, Taiwan, Japan and other parts of eastern Asia.^[1]

Transmission of SIV from pigs to humans is not common. When it results in human influenza, it is called zoonotic swine flu. People who work with pigs, especially people with intense exposures, are at risk of catching swine flu. However, only about fifty such transmissions have been recorded since the mid-20th Century, when identification of influenza subtypes became possible. (Importantly, eating pork does not pose a risk of infection.) Rarely, swine flu can pass from human to human. In humans, the symptoms of swine flu are similar to those of influenza and of influenza-like illness in general, namely chills, fever, sore throat, muscle pains, severe headache, coughing, weakness and general discomfort.

The 2009 flu outbreak in humans that is widely known as "swine flu" is due to a new strain of influenza A virus subtype H1N1 that was produced by reassortment from one strain of human influenza virus, one strain of avian influenza virus, and two separate strains of SIV. The origin of this new strain is unknown, and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) reports that this strain has not been isolated in pigs.^[2] It passes with apparent ease from human to human, an ability attributed to an as-yet unidentified mutation.^[3] This 2009 H1N1 strain causes the normal symptoms of influenza, such as fever, coughing and headache.^[4]

Classification

Of the three genera of influenza viruses that cause human flu, two also cause influenza in pigs, with Influenzavirus A being common in pigs and Influenzavirus C being rare.^[5] Influenzavirus B has not been reported in pigs. Within Influenzavirus A and Influenzavirus C, the strains found in pigs and humans are largely distinct, although due to reassortment there have been transfers of genes among strains crossing swine, avian, and human species boundaries.

Influenza C

Influenza C viruses infect both humans and pigs, but do not infect birds.^[6] Transmission between pigs and humans have occurred in the past.^[7] For example, influenza C caused a small outbreaks of a mild form of influenza amongst children in Japan,^[8] and California.^[9] Due to its limited host range and the lack of genetic diversity in influenza C, this form of influenza does not cause pandemics in humans.^[10]

Influenza A

Swine influenza is known to be caused by influenza A subtypes H1N1,^[11] H1N2,^[11] H3N1,^[12] H3N2,^[11] and H2N3.^[13] In pigs, three influenza A virus subtypes (H1N1, H3N2, and H1N2) are the most common strains worldwide.^[14] In the United States, the H1N1 subtype was exclusively prevalent among swine populations before 1998; however, since late August 1998, H3N2 subtypes have been isolated from pigs. As of 2004, H3N2 virus isolates in US swine and turkey stocks were triple reassortants, containing genes from human (HA, NA, and PB1), swine (NS, NP, and M), and avian (PB2 and PA) lineages.^[15]

A/California/2009 (H1N1)

Main article: 2009 swine flu outbreak

A/California/2009 (H1N1), the new strain of swine influenza A (H1N1) involved in the 2009 flu outbreak in humans, is a reassortment of several strains of influenza A virus subtype H1N1 that are usually found separately, in humans, birds, and pigs. Preliminary data suggest that the hemagglutinin (HA) gene was similar to that of swine flu viruses present in United States pigs since 1999, but the neuraminidase (NA) and matrix protein (M) genes resembled viruses present in European pigs. Viruses with this genetic makeup had not previously been found to be circulating in humans or pigs, although there is no formal national surveillance system to determine what viruses are circulating in pigs in the United States.^[16]

History

The various types of influenza viruses in humans. Solid squares show the appearance of a new strain, causing recurring influenza pandemics. Broken lines indicate uncertain strain identifications.^[17]

The H1N1 form of swine flu is one of the descendants of the Spanish flu that caused a pandemic in humans in 1918–1919.^[18]^[19] As well as persisting in pigs, the descendants of the 1918 virus have also circulated in humans through the 20th century, contributing to the normal seasonal epidemics of influenza.^[18] However, direct transmission from pigs to humans is rare, with only 12 cases in the U.S. since 2005.^[20]

The influenza virus constantly changes form, thereby eluding the protective antibodies that people may have developed in response to previous exposures to influenza or to influenza vaccines. Every two or three years the virus undergoes minor changes. But at intervals of roughly a decade, after the bulk of the world's population has developed some level of resistance to these minor changes, it undergoes a major change that enables it to easily infect populations around the world, often infecting hundreds of millions of people whose antibody defenses are unable to resist it.^[21] The influenza virus has also been known to change form over a much shorter period of time. For instance, during the Spanish flu pandemic, the initial wave of the disease was relatively mild, while the second wave of the disease a year later was highly lethal.^[19]

For almost 60 years, from the first isolation in 1930 through 1998, SIV strains were almost exclusively H1N1. Then, between 1997 and 2002, novel viruses of three different subtypes and five different genotypes emerged as agents of influenza among pigs in North America. In 1997-1998, H3N2 strains emerged. These strains, which include genes derived by reassortment from human, swine and avian viruses, have become a major cause of swine influenza in North America. Reassortment between H1N1 and H3N2 produced H1N2. In 1999 in Canada, a strain of H4N6 crossed the species barrier from birds to pigs, but was contained on a single farm.^[22]

Medical researchers worldwide, recognizing that swine influenza viruses might mutate into something as deadly as the Spanish flu, are carefully watching the 2009 H1N1 outbreak in humans and making contingency plans for a possible global pandemic. Several countries took precautionary measures to reduce the chances for a global pandemic of the disease.^[23]

Transmission

Electron microscope image of the reassorted H1N1 virus. The viruses are 80–120 nanometres in diameter.^[24]

Transmission between pigs

The main route of transmission is through direct contact between infected and uninfected animals.^[14] These close contacts are particularly common during animal transport. The direct transfer of the virus probably occurs either by pigs touching noses, or through dried mucus. Airborne transmission through the aerosols produced by pigs coughing or sneezing are also an important means of infection.^[14] The virus usually spreads quickly through a herd, infecting all the pigs within just a few days.^[1]

Transmission to humans

People who work with poultry and swine, especially people with intense exposures, are at increased risk of zoonotic infection with influenza virus endemic in these animals, and constitute a population of human hosts in which zoonosis and reassortment can co-occur.^[25] Transmission of influenza from swine to humans who work with swine was documented in a small surveillance study performed in 2004 at the University of Iowa.^[26] This study among others forms the basis of a recommendation that people whose jobs involve handling poultry and swine be the focus of increased public health surveillance.^[25] The 2009 swine flu outbreak is an apparent reassortment of several strains of influenza A virus subtype H1N1, including a strain endemic in humans and two strains endemic in pigs, as well as an avian influenza.^[27]

Interaction with avian H5N1 in pigs

Pigs are unusual as they can be infected with influenza strains that usually infect three different species: pigs, birds and humans.^[28] This makes pigs a host where influenza viruses might exchange genes, producing new and dangerous strains.^[28] Avian influenza virus H3N2 is endemic in pigs in China and has been detected in pigs in Vietnam, increasing fears of the emergence of new variant strains.^[29] H3N2 evolved from H2N2 by antigenic shift.^[30] In August 2004, researchers in China found H5N1 in pigs.^[31] These H5N1 infections may be quite common, in a survey of 10 apparently healthy pigs housed near poultry farms in West Java, where avian flu had broken out, five of the pig samples contained the H5N1 virus. The Indonesian government has since found similar results in the same region. Additional tests of 150 pigs outside the area were negative.^[32]^[33]

Signs and symptoms

In swine

Main symptoms of swine flu in swines.^[1]

In pigs influenza infection produces fever, lethargy, sneezing, coughing, difficulty breathing and decreased appetite.^[14] In some cases the infection can cause abortion. Although mortality is usually low (around 1-4%),^[1] the virus can produce weight loss and poor growth, causing economic loss to farmers.^[14] Infected pigs can loose up to 12 pounds of body weight over a 3 to 4 week period.^[14]

In humans

Main symptoms of swine flu in humans^[34]
See also: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Symptoms of Swine Flu in YouTube

Direct transmission of a swine flu virus from pigs to humans is occasionally possible (this is called zoonotic swine flu). In all, 50 cases are known to have occurred since the first report in the medical literature in 1958, which have resulted in a total of six deaths.^[35] Of these six people, one was pregnant, one had leukemia, one had Hodgkin disease and two were known to be previously healthy.^[35] Despite these apparently low numbers of infections, the true rate of infection may be higher, since most cases only cause a very mild disease, and will probably never be reported or diagnosed.^[35]

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in humans the symptoms of the 2009 "swine flu" H1N1 virus are similar to those of influenza and of influenza-like illness in general. Symptoms include fever, cough, sore throat, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue. The 2009 outbreak has shown an increased percentage of patients reporting diarrhea and vomiting.^[36] The 2009 H1N1 virus is not zoonotic swine flu, as it is not transmitted from pigs to humans, but from person to person.

Because these symptoms are not specific to swine flu, a differential diagnosis of probable swine flu requires not only symptoms but also a high likelihood of swine flu due to the person's recent history. For example, during the 2009 swine flu outbreak in the United States, CDC advised physicians to "consider swine influenza infection in the differential diagnosis of patients with acute febrile respiratory illness who have either been in contact with persons with confirmed swine flu, or who were in one of the five U.S. states that have reported swine flu cases or in Mexico during the 7 days preceding their illness onset."^[37] A diagnosis of confirmed swine flu requires laboratory testing of a respiratory sample (a simple nose and throat swab).^[37]

Prevention

Prevention of swine influenza has three components: prevention in swine, prevention of transmission to humans, and prevention of its spread among humans.

Prevention in swine

Methods of preventing the spread of influenza among swine include facility management, herd management, and vaccination. Because much of the illness and death associated with swine flu involves secondary infection by other pathogens, control strategies that rely on vaccination may be insufficient.

Control of swine influenza by vaccination has become more difficult in recent decades, as the evolution of the virus has resulted in inconsistent responses to traditional vaccines. Standard commercial swine flu vaccines are effective in controlling the infection when the virus strains match enough to have significant cross-protection, and custom (autogenous) vaccines made from the specific viruses isolated are created and used in the more difficult cases.^[38]^[39] Present vaccination strategies for SIV control and prevention in swine farms, typically include the use of one of several bivalent SIV vaccines commercially available in the United States. Of the 97 recent H3N2 isolates examined, only 41 isolates had strong serologic cross-reactions with antiserum to three commercial SIV vaccines. Since the protective ability of influenza vaccines depends primarily on the closeness of the match between the vaccine virus and the epidemic virus, the presence of nonreactive H3N2 SIV variants suggests that current commercial vaccines might not effectively protect pigs from infection with a majority of H3N2 viruses.^[40]^[41] The United States Department of Agriculture researchers say that while pig vaccination keeps pigs from getting sick, it does not block infection or shedding of the virus.^[42]

Facility management includes using disinfectants and ambient temperature to control virus in the environment. The virus is unlikely to survive outside living cells for >2 wk except in cold (but above freezing) conditions, and it is readily inactivated by disinfectants.^[1] Herd management includes not adding pigs carrying influenza to herds that have not been exposed to the virus. The virus survives in healthy carrier pigs for up to 3 months and can be recovered from them between outbreaks. Carrier pigs are usually responsible for the introduction of SIV into previously uninfected herds and countries. After an outbreak, as immunity in exposed pigs wanes, new outbreaks of the same strain can occur.^[1]

Prevention in humans

Prevention of swines to humans transmission

Swine can be infected by both avian and human influenza strains of influenza, and therefore are hosts where the antigenic shifts can occur that create new influenza strains.

The transmission from swine to human is believed to occur mainly in swine farms where farmers are in close contact with live pigs. Although strains of swine influenza are usually not able to infect humans this may occasionally happen, so farmers and veterinarians are encouraged to use a face mask when dealing with infected animals. The use of vaccines on swine to prevent their infection is a major method of limiting swine to human transmission. Risk factors that may contribute to swine-to-human transmission include smoking and not wearing gloves when working with sick animals.^[43]

Prevention of human to humans transmission

Influenza spreads between humans through coughing or sneezing and people touching something with the virus on it and then touching their own nose or mouth.^[44] Swine flu cannot be spread by pork products, since the virus is not transmitted through food.^[44] The swine flu in humans is most contagious during the first five days of the illness although some people, most commonly children, can remain contagious for up to ten days. Diagnosis can be made by sending a specimen, collected during the first five days for analysis.^[45]

Recommendations to prevent spread of the virus among humans include using standard infection control against influenza. This includes frequent washing of hands with soap and water or with alcohol-based hand sanitizers, especially after being out in public.^[46] Although the current trivalent influenza vaccine is unlikely to provide protection against the new 2009 H1N1 strain,^[47] vaccines against the new strain are being developed and could be ready as early as June 2009.^[48]

Experts agree that hand-washing can help prevent viral infections, including ordinary influenza and the swine flu virus. Influenza can spread in coughs or sneezes, but an increasing body of evidence shows small droplets containing the virus can linger on tabletops, telephones and other surfaces and be transferred via the fingers to the mouth, nose or eyes. Alcohol-based gel or foam hand sanitizers work well to destroy viruses and bacteria. Anyone with flu-like symptoms such as a sudden fever, cough or muscle aches should stay away from work or public transportation and should contact a doctor to be tested.

Social distancing is another tactic. It means staying away from other people who might be infected and can include avoiding large gatherings, spreading out a little at work, or perhaps staying home and lying low if an infection is spreading in a community. Public health and other responsible authorities have action plans which social distancing actions to request or require depending on the severity of the outbreak.

Treatment

In swine

As swine influenza is not usually fatal to pigs, little treatment is required; instead veterinary efforts are focused on preventing the spread of the virus throughout the farm, or to other farms.^[14] Vaccination and animal management techniques are most important in these efforts.

In humans

If a person becomes sick with swine flu, antiviral drugs can make the illness milder and make the patient feel better faster. They may also prevent serious flu complications. For treatment, antiviral drugs work best if started soon after getting sick (within 2 days of symptoms). Beside antivirals, palliative care, at home or in the hospitals, focuses on controlling fevers and maintaining fluid balance. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends the use of Tamiflu (oseltamivir) or Relenza (zanamivir) for the treatment and/or prevention of infection with swine influenza viruses, however, the majority of people infected with the virus make a full recovery without requiring medical attention or antiviral drugs.^[49] The virus isolates in the 2009 outbreak have been found resistant to amantadine and rimantadine.^[50]

In the U.S., on April 27, 2009, the FDA issued Emergency Use Authorizations to make available Relenza and Tamiflu antiviral drugs to treat the swine influenza virus in cases for which they are currently unapproved. The agency issued these EUAs to allow treatment of patients younger than the current approval allows and to allow the widespread distribution of the drugs, including by non-licensed volunteers.^[51]

Swine Flu

2009-05-02T00:01:00.000-07:00

Also called: H1N1 flu

Swine flu is a type of virus. It's named for a virus that pigs can get. People do not normally get swine flu, but human infections can and do happen. The virus is contagious and can spread from human to human. Symptoms of swine flu in people are similar to the symptoms of regular human flu and include fever, cough, sore throat, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue.

There are antiviral medicines you can take to prevent or treat swine flu. There is no vaccine available right now to protect against swine flu. You can help prevent the spread of germs that cause respiratory illnesses like influenza by

Covering your nose and mouth with a tissue when you cough or sneeze. Throw the tissue in the trash after you use it.
Washing your hands often with soap and water, especially after you cough or sneeze. You can also use alcohol-based hand cleaners.
Avoiding touching your eyes, nose or mouth. Germs spread this way.
Trying to avoid close contact with sick people.
Staying home from work or school if you are sick.

Constantinople - The Citadel at the Gate

2009-04-30T18:51:00.000-07:00

Constantinople - The Citadel at the Gate by Comer Plummer, III
window.google_render_ad();
The art of fortification is a clear reflection of our past. It bears witness to our roots as a race of mutually hostile societies, and impresses upon us the determination of a people to defend themselves. It has existed ever since man first came to realize the value of natural obstacles to his common defense, and evolved as he sought to invoke his own methods to fully exploit this advantage. The building of barriers rapidly evolved from the simple mud parapets and mountain top abodes of the Neolithic Age to the construction of linear and point stone obstacles of the Bronze Age, best represented by the Hittite capital of Hattusas. The Greco-Roman world was the proving ground for medieval fortifications. When, in A.D. 324, Roman Emperor Constantine I moved the capital of the empire from Rome to the sleepy port town of Byzantium, the full possibility of this science was at hand. The results of what followed shaped the course of world history. Located on a horn-shaped peninsula astride the Bosphorus and the Sea of Marmara, Constantinople dominated the narrow waterway that divides Europe from Asia. The complexities of this geography provided both advantages and challenges to the defense. A steep and rugged shoreline and the swift currents of the Sea of Marmara protected the southern coast. To the north, the Golden Horn, an inlet that bordered the peninsula, was a natural anchorage and harbor. The ancient Lycus River ran diagonally northwest to southeast across the peninsula, forming a narrow valley that sectioned the city into two distinct areas - a chain of six hills running along the Golden Horn to the north, and a single, larger hill to the south. A coherent urban defense had to address these considerations. For the most part, the many leaders and builders of the city succeeded in mastering the terrain. The ruins that still enclose Istanbul are the remnants of centuries of evolution. Awe inspiring even in decay, they are a testament to the glory of Greco-Roman military art.[1] The despair of her enemies, the walls of Constantinople were the most famous of the medieval world, singular not only in scale, but in construction and the design and integration of the defense with natural obstacles. The principal composition of the walls was mortared rubble, faced with blocks of fitted limestone, and reinforced by courses of layered red brick. To enhance the integrity of the overall network, the towers and walls were built independently of one another. The entire city was enclosed in a defensive circuit of 14 miles of walls, reinforced by 300 towers and bastions, and several strong points and fortresses. The strongest construction faced west, against an approach by land. Here, along a 4-mile stretch of rolling land, stands the legendary Theodosian Walls. Here an enemy had to attack a linear obstacle of four belts, each ascending above the other, with a depth of some 200 feet. The main line of defense was the Inner Wall, 40 feet in height, 15 feet thick, with a battlemented parapet of 5 feet high, which was accessed by stone ramps. Along its course run 96 massive towers, at intervals of 175 feet, each once capable of mounting the heaviest military engines of the day. A second, Outer Wall of approximately 30 feet in height is joined to this main wall by an elevated 60-foot terrace. The Outer Wall is equipped with 96 bastions, each offset from the towers of the Inner Wall so to avoid masking their fires. Subterranean passages run from many of these points back toward the city, avenues that presumably provided the secure movement of troops to and from a threatened area. The belts were constructed at a tiered elevation, starting at 30 feet for the Inner Wall and descending to the moat. This, and the distance between strong points, ensured that an attacker, once within the network, was in range from all immediate points in the defense. From the Outer Wall extended another 60-foot terrace, ending in a 6-foot high parapet. This bordered a great moat of some 60 feet in width and 15-30 feet in depth, supplied by an aqueduct system. To compensate for the rolling terrain, this moat was sectioned by a number of dams, which enabled it to retain an even distribution of water along its length. The five public gates that traversed this moat by way of drawbridges were set narrowly into the walls and were flanked by towers and bastions. Any assault made on the outer gates would be attacking into the strength of the defense. The Land Walls were anchored at both extremities by two great fortresses. Along the Sea of Marmara, the Castle of the Seven Towers secured the southern approach, while in the north, along the Golden Horn, the salient that was the quarter of the Blachernae Palace, residence of the later Byzantine Emperors, was gradually transformed into one massive fortress. To these two fortified points were adjoined the Sea Walls, similar in construction to the Outer Wall, of which little remains today. The Golden Horn posed a certain challenge for the defense, since the five miles of sea walls in this area were comparatively weak, and the calm waters here could provide an enemy fleet safe anchorage. Leo III provided the tactical solution in the form of the famous barrier chain. Made of giant wooden links that were joined by immense nails and heavy iron shackles, in an emergency a ship could deploy the chain across the waters of Golden Horn from the Kentenarion Tower in the south to the Castle of Galata on the north bank. Securely anchored on both ends, with its length guarded by Byzantine warships at anchor in the harbor, the great chain was a formidable obstacle and a vital element of the city’s defenses. While the Land Walls glorify the name of Theodosius I (408-450), the reigning Roman emperor at the time their construction began, it is to one of history’s dim figures, Anthemius, to whom they owe their genesis. Anthemius, as Prefect of the East, was the head of government for six years during the minority of Theodosius and it was he who conceived and carried out a massive and defining expansion of the city defenses. His vision would provide a durable framework for a citadel the new capital would need to become to weather the challenges that lay ahead. The cornerstone of these new fortifications was a massive land wall, represented by the Inner Wall, built in 413. The Theodosian system was completed in 447 with the addition of an outer wall and moat - a response to a nearly calamity, when a devastating earthquake seriously damaged the walls and toppled 57 towers at the very moment Attila and his armies were bearing down on Constantinople. Over the centuries many emperors improved the city fortifications. Their names can be seen to this day engraved on the stone, roughly thirty of them covering more that a millenium, clearly illustrating the importance of these defenses to the Empire.[2] Constantinople would weather many challenges. While Attila drew away from the city to pursue an easier prey, others were not so discouraged. The Persians, Avars, Sacracens, Bulgarians, Russians and others in turn tried to take the citadel. Far from a deterrent, Constantinople’s reputation seemed to attract her enemies. As a capital of a mighty empire, and at the crossroads of two continents, Constantinople represented to the early medieval world what Rome and Athens had meant to classical times. The “Queen of Cities”, she was a magnet for pilgrim, trader, and conqueror alike. None were wanting. Over a millenium, the citadel turned back besieging armies seventeen times. With each succeeding onslaught, Constantinople became the final stronghold of Greek civilization. Behind her bulwark in the east, Christendom also took shelter.[3] Undoubtedly, her greatest hour came in turning back a series of determined Arab attacks during the initial period of Islamic expansion. In 632, the Muslim armies burst forth from the desert confines of the Hejaz and poured forth into the Levant. Benefiting from a power vacuum in the region, the Arab armies made stunning advances. The Byzantine and Sassanid Persian empires, nearly prostrate from 25 years of mutual warfare (fighting which cost the Greeks alone some 200,000 men, an enormous drain of manpower in this age) were unable to hold back the tide. In a little more than a decade the Byzantines were driven from Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, and Egypt. The Persians fared worse. Arab armies invaded the Persian highlands and destroyed Sassanid Empire. By 661, the standard of the Prophet reached from Tripoli to India. On two occasions, from 674 to 677, and again in 717-8, Arab armies besieged Constantinople by land and sea. Superior military organization, the leadership of Leo III (the Isaurian) and the timely intervention of one of history’s most decisive weapons – a medieval napalm dubbed “Greek fire” - enabled the Byzantines to weather the storm. The cost to both sides was high. Byzantium lost most of her territory south of the Taurus Mountains and much of the remainder of the Empire lay devastated. The Arabs lost untold thousands through futile attacks against the defenses of Constantinople, and a series of disastrous defeats on land and sea. Still many more perished of disease and cold before in dire encampments before the Land Walls. Of the 200,000 Muslims who laid siege to Constantinople in 717-718, only 30,000 crossed back into Syria the following year.[4] The impact of Byzantium’s successful defense against the Muslims cannot be overstated. The defense of Constantinople saved not only the Byzantine Empire from the same fate as Sassanid Persia, but spared a fractured and chaotic Europe a Moslem invasion for another nine centuries. One can only wonder of the consequences for Europe and Christendom had Muslims armies marched unchecked into Thrace in the late Seventh or early Eighth Centuries. Our history may have been quite different. What is certain is that the Muslim tide, broken at it shortest approach, was channeled to Europe via another and much longer axis – North Africa. Crossing the Straits of Gibraltar, a Muslim army of 50,000 traversed Spain, crossed the Pyrenees and penetrated into the heart of France before, overextended, they were finally overcome by Charles Martel at Tours in 732. With its expansion stemmed, the Muslim world turned its energies to internal disputes that splintered the CaIiphate, providing medieval Europe a much-needed period of growth and consolidation.[5] In the end, the same spirit of ingenuity that created the fortifications of Constantinople would prove their undoing. The weaknesses of the defenses must have been obvious, since a series of attackers beginning with the Avars, had tried to exploit them. Interestingly, the salient problems lay along the strongest point – the Land Walls. At a point just south of the Blachernae quarter, a section called the Mesoteichion, the walls dip sharply into the Lycus Valley, exposing that area to enfilade fires from higher ground on the enemy side.[6] Apparently, the trace of the walls owed itself more to the need accommodate a growing population than a regard for the natural lines of terrain. Another problem was the region of the Blachernae Palace, a neglected salient in the original Land Walls. The fortifications here, while often improved, were never equal to those elsewhere in this area. Finally, the construction of the Sea Walls as a single-wall circuit reflected a reliance on natural obstacles and a navy. As long as the Byzantine Navy commanded the narrows of the Hellespont and the Bosphorus, an attack from this quarter was not feared.[7] This situation changed dramatically after 1071, the year Rum Seljuks inflicted a decisive defeat upon the Greeks at Manzikert. As the Empire passed into decline, the Byzantine emperors could no longer maintain a robust navy, and they gradually fell into a reliance on the protection of friendly maritime powers. As the Byzantine Navy withered, Constantinople lay exposed to an assault from the sea. The challenge was not long in coming. The first Crusades were a marriage of convenience for a Christendom deeply divided between the rival Catholic and Orthodox churches. During the Fourth Crusade this enmity erupted into open warfare when the Latins sought to exploit one of Byzantium’s many dynastic squabbles. While en route to Palestine, the leaders of the crusade, cash-strapped and never opposed to a little profiteering, took up an offer by Alexius, the son of deposed and imprisoned Byzantine Emperor Isaac II, to restore their throne. In exchange for overthrowing the usurper, Alexius promised 200,000 marks, generous trade concessions and troops for the coming campaign. The deal was struck and on July 17, 1203, the Crusaders attacked Constantinople by land and sea. That night, the usurper, Alexius III, fled and the next day Isaac and his son were crowned co-emperors. Their restoration would be short lived. In January 1204, resentful Byzantine nobles toppled the puppet rulers, and brought a defiant Alexius Ducas Mourtzouphlus to the throne. With no hope of securing Byzantine cooperation in the campaign and little chance of success without it, the Crusaders determined once more to take Constantinople.[8] The Latins, with a decisive naval advantage, decided to make a major effort at the Sea Walls. To provide an assault platform, they erected siege towers on their ships from which long spars were rigged as a kind of suspended bridge. When the ship approached to within range of the wall or tower to be attacked, the bridge was lowered and the knights would shimmy across. The task of leading such an assault must have been daunting. A knight, grasping for balance moving down a narrow platform high above a ship rolling at anchor, then lifting himself over the parapet, all while evading the arrows and cuts of the defenders, was at the mercy of his circumstances. When the first effort failed, for the second the Latins decided to attack with two ships tied together. This provided a more stable platform and the possibility of assaulting a tower at two points. A witness, Robert de Clari, described how the attackers gained a foothold: “The Venetian who entered first in the tower was on one of these suspended bridges with two knights, and from there, with the aid of his hands and feet, he was able to penetrate the level where the bridge provided access. There he was cut down; it was there that André d’Urboise penetrated in the same way when the ship, tossed by the current, touched the tower a second time.” The Latins had made the critical penetration. Another witness, Henri de Villehardouin, described how they exploited this success: “When the knights see this, who are in the transports, they land, raise their ladders against the wall, and scale to the top of the wall by main force, and so take four of the towers. And all begin to leap out of the ships and transports and galleys, helter-skelter, each as best he can; and they break in some three of the gates and enter in; and they draw the horses out of the transports; and the knights mount and ride straight to the quarters of the Emperor Mourtzouphlus.”[9] Many historians point to the Latin conquest of Constantinople in 1204 as the practical end of the Byzantine Empire. The Empire disintegrated into a number of feudal fiefdoms and rival kingdoms and despots. While the Greeks, who had established a rival kingdom across the Bosphorus in Nicea, returned to reclaim their capital in 1261, they would find it plundered, and most of their territory lost forever. The Fourth Crusade had shattered the citadel of Christendom in the East. Though treachery and resourcefulness could overcome the strongest of medieval fortifications, it would be the cannon that would render them obsolete. The Hundred Years War witnessed the emergence of this weapon as the decisive instrument of war on land. The Ottoman Turks, a principality that emerged in the late Fourteenth Century as the next great challenge to Byzantium, were in the forefront of this early technology. Mehmet II ascended the Turkish throne in 1451 with a burning desire to succeed where his father had failed 29 years before - capture Constantinople and make it the capital of his empire. By this time the Ottoman Empire had absorbed most of Byzantium and engulfed its capital as it expanded outward from Asia Minor into the Balkans. In his quest, Mehmet would not be limited to traditional methods of siegecraft, for the sultan’s armies had by that time acquired a large numbers of cannon. Armed with this technology, and a superior energy and vision, Mehmet would go further than others in exploring tactical solutions to the defenses of Constantinople. Reports circulating around the courts of Europe in the winter of 1452-3 spoke of “unprecedented” Turkish preparations for an assault upon the Constantinople. In fact, the Turkish army that appeared before the city on April 6, 1453 was singular in only one respect. With 80,000 soldiers, among them 15,000 of the Sultan’s elite Janissary Corps, Serbian miners, various siege engines, and a fleet of some 300-400 ships, it was a formidable force, though hardly anything the city had not seen many times before. It was artillery, however, that made this a potent threat. Salient was a new generation of massive siege artillery, courtesy of a Hungarian cannon founder named Urban. Abandoning the meager pay and resources of the Byzantines, Urban found in Mehmet an eager sponsor who set him to work casting large caliber cannon to breach the city walls. The Hungarian went about his work with equal enthusiasm, promising the sultan, “the stone discharged from my cannon would reduce to dust not only those walls, but even the walls of Babylon.” The resultant monster cannon was a weapon of terror. It was titanic, requiring 60 oxen and 200 soldiers to haul across Thrace from the foundry at Adrianople. Twenty-seven feet long, 2 ½ feet in caliber, the great cannon could hurl a 1,200-pound ball over a mile. When it was tested, a Turkish chronicler wrote that a warning went out to the Ottoman camp so that pregnant women would not abort at the shock.[10] Its explosions “made the city walls shake, and the ground inside.” The cannon’s size, however, was also its liability. Crewed by 500, it took 2 hours to load and could only fire eight rounds per day. Fortunately for the Turks, Mehmet had many more practical and more proven pieces - 12 large cannon and 18 batteries of 130 of a smaller caliber weapons.[11] Against traditional siege engines and complimented by adequate land and sea forces, the walls of Constantinople had proven impregnable. Times, however, had changed. The city had never recovered from the sacking by the Latins in 1204. Destitute and depopulated, she seemed resigned to her fate. Despite efforts of Emperor Constantine XI to rally volunteers, few answered the call. To make matters worse, the defenders’ resolve was undermined by deep divisions caused by the Emperor’s decision to re-unify the Orthodox with the Catholic Church as an incentive for its aid against the Turk. The Empire was at the end of its resources. The defense was left primarily to Italian troops. Greeks commanded only two of the nine sectors of the defense. Powder was in short supply and the walls had fallen into disrepair; the overseers had embezzled the funds for their maintenance. The fleet, long the critical arm of the Empire, now consisted of just three Venetian galliasses and twenty galleys. The few defenders faced a daunting task. Numbering 4,973 Greek soldiers and volunteers and another 2,000 foreigners, they had to defend fourteen miles of city walls and fortifications.[12] With 500 men detailed to defend the Sea Walls, this would have left only one man every four feet at the Outer Land Walls alone.[13] With many of the defenders in this area manning the engines, towers, bastions and other points, this defense was undoubtedly much thinner. The demands on each man grew precipitously as the battle progressed and as casualties, sickness, and desertion reduced their numbers, and substantial breaches appeared in the walls. That this scant force could defend for seven weeks a city that was one of the largest of the medieval world is remarkable and a testament to both these fortifications and the men who defended them. For weeks Turkish guns battered the Land Walls, in the words of witness Nicolo Barbaro, with a “great deal of cannon fire in the usual way, and such shouting that the very air seemed to be splitting apart”.[14] The high masonry walls were forlorn in this new age of warfare. They were an easy target for long-range enemy guns, and at the same time could not long withstand the recoil of their own cannon mounted upon them. While the monster cannon exploded on its fourth round, killing its builder and many of the crew, the Turks found in technique a more effective way to employ their artillery. Following the advice of a Hungarian envoy, Turkish gunners concentrated their fires against points on the wall and in a triangular pattern - two shots, one each to the base of the a 30-foot section, then a toppling shot to the top center.[15] In this way, the Turks gradually breached sections of the Outer Walls, exposing the Inner Wall, which too began to crumble. The defenders fought off Turkish attempts to assault the inner defenses. At night they crept forward to cobble in the widening holes with rubble and palisades. If the end was ever in doubt, Mehmet’s solving the problem of the barrier chain made the outcome inevitable. Unable to force a passage through the chain and past the Christian ships, Mehmet resolved to bypass it by hauling his ships overland, behind Galata and into the Golden Horn. To his engineers, who had hauled Urban’s cannon across Thrace, this posed little problem. Using greased windlasses and buffalo teams, the first ships made the trip on the night of April 22. The next morning the defenders awakened to find a squadron of Turkish vessels in the Horn and themselves with another five miles of sea walls to defend. Before the Greeks and their allies could mount an effective attack against this new threat, Mehmet had the Horn sealed to the west, before his ships, by building a floating bridge of giant oil casks and planks. The Christian ships were now bottled up in the Horn between two arms of the Moslem fleet.[16] The final blow came on May 29, 1453. The Turks attacked three hours before dawn, concentrating their effort on the Mesoteichion and the western half of the Sea Walls along the Horn. After seven weeks of heroic resistance, the defenders had reached the limits of endurance. In any case, their numbers were no longer sufficient to defend the Land Walls, sections of which were now reduced to rubble. A large beach was opened in the walls in the Lycus Valley and the Turks pressed the attack. Barbaro describes the final moments: “One hour before daybreak the Sultan had his great cannon fired, and the shot landed in the repairs which we had made and knocked them down to the ground. Nothing could be seen for the smoke made by the cannon, and the Turks, under the cover of the smoke, and about 300 of them got inside the barbicans.”[17] While the defenders beat back this attack, the next succeeded in infiltrating the Inner Wall. As Turkish soldiers appeared in their rear, the defenders’ nerve finally broke. The collapse was swift. As word rang out that the defenses had been breached, panic ensued. Those who did not take flight were overwhelmed at their posts. Constantine went to a hero’s death, struck down in the final melee near the great breach. A few managed to escape aboard the Christian ships. Most of the survivors, including nearly all of the population, were sold into slavery. After nearly a thousand years, the Byzantine Empire ceased to exist. Constantinople was reborn as Istanbul, and, as the capital of the Ottoman Empire its fortunes were reversed. Today the many splendors of Istanbul beckon, while the broken, overgrown remnants of its ancient defenses attract little interest. It is pertinent today, as we look upon the tragic history of the Balkans, to recognize the consequences for the West and the implications for the World had it not been for the citadel at the gate of Europe, whose defenses held the East at bay through the long night of the Dark Ages.
sources
MilitaryHistoryOnline.com

Bacon's Rebellion: America's First Revolutionary?

2009-04-30T18:48:00.000-07:00

Bacon's Rebellion: America's First Revolutionary? by Walt Giersbach
window.google_render_ad();
Nathaniel Bacon was caught in a dilemma on a hot July day in 1676. The settlers’ avowed enemy, the Susquehannocks and their allies, were in front of him in the upper counties of Virginia while Governor William Berkeley’s English army and militia were getting ready to attack Bacon from the rear. Hundreds of landowners, indentured servants, slaves and other volunteers making up Bacon’s army waited for orders. Ever the strategist, the 29-year-old rebel addressed his army, “Gentlemen and fellow soldiers, the news just brought to me may not a little startle you as well as myselfe. The Governour is now in Gloster County endeavouring to raise forces against us, having declared us Rebells and Traytors…. They had rather wee should be Murder’d and our Ghosts sent to our slaughter’d Countrymen by their actings, than we should live to hinder them of their Interest with the Heathen.” [1] The aristocratic plantation owner and self-declared “General by Consent of the People” turned his army back to Jamestown—better to attack the Governor at once than have him hit them from the rear while engaged in the woods with the tribes. Mistakes on Every Side It’s difficult to look at 17th century American history without interpreting the clash of cultures as “grasping Europeans annihilating the Native American” or “angry savages attacking innocent settlers.” Bacon’s Rebellion, in 1675-76 Virginia, however, presents a complicated case of economic confusion, anti-authoritarian sentiment by colonists, grievous errors made by Virginia’s governor, and resentment by Native Americans.Hundreds of whites and Native Americans died, Jamestown was burned to the ground and the colonial government was in disarray before the Rebellion ended. It was a needless war that no one won and didn’t need to be fought. The conflict may also have sown the seeds of independence a century before the American Revolution. Years of Horrifying Hardships Virginians in the 1670s endured a multitude of problems. Tobacco prices were depressed when colonists were forbidden to sell to French customers and Dutch ships were blocked from trading with Virginia. Virginia’s House of Burgesses established perpetual slavery for blacks, but costs of growing tobacco still were higher than other crops. Maryland and the Carolinas were competing commercially against Virginia, the English market was constricting and finished goods from England were rising in price. The English Crown was paying for heavy losses in their naval war with the Dutch. On the Eastern seaboard, hailstorms, floods and hurricanes devastated the colonies. And politically, Governor Berkeley had co-opted the Council and avoided calling for new elections to the House of Burgesses. [2] While frustration ran high, Virginia’s elderly governor, Sir William Berkeley, was popular with King Charles II for evicting non-conformist Puritans and defeating the Dutch at what is now Wilmington, Delaware. He had also granted the Powhatan Indians rights to land near the York River. This bit of diplomacy brought peace, but at a price. Europeans, arriving in Virginia hoping to find cheap land, were upset to find the most prized land off limits. [3] In July 1675, a number of Doeg Indians raided Thomas Matthews’ plantation in the Northern Neck of Virginia near the Potomac River. Matthews supposedly had not paid for something he had obtained from the tribe. Several Doegs were killed in the fracas. This hadn’t been the first such Indian conflict, but tensions now reached a flashpoint. [4] In retaliation, colonists struck back. Nathaniel Bacon, a planter, rose as the natural leader of the outraged Virginians. Leading a ragtag group of angry farmers, slaves and indentured servants who had escaped from their masters, Bacon assaulted the Indians. [5] Unfortunately, the Virginians attacked Susquehannocks—perhaps the wrong tribe, but one which had ventured into Virginia and occupied the desired land. [6] The Susquehannocks struck back, killing 36 colonists to avenge their previous attack. [7] Governor Berkeley sharply condemned the attacks, seeing a dangerous escalation of tensions as well as an undoing of his diplomatic overtures in the new land. Berkeley was probably outraged as he rode into Bacon’s homestead at Henrico with 300 militia. Bacon, wisely, fled into the forest with some 200 volunteers, perhaps searching for a more equitable meeting place. Frustrated, the governor issued two petitions that declared Nathaniel Bacon a rebel but pardoned the volunteer Indian fighters if they returned home peacefully. Bacon would be given a fair trial for his disobedience, Berkeley stated, but would certainly be relieved of his Council seat. Bacon’s response was to attack an encampment of Occaneechee Indians on the Roanoke River between Virginia and North Carolina. The Occaneechee were enterprising people who were embroiled in their own squabble with the Susquehannocks. Bacon’s enemies now were not only Indians, but also soldiers of the king. Power Struggle Between Strong Personalities Born in Suffolk, England on Jan. 2, 1647, Nathaniel Bacon, Jr. had been called a troublemaker and schemer at home. His father, Thomas, sent him to the colonies in about 1672. His financial support allowed the 25-year-old man to purchase two estates on the James River. He settled at Curles, in Henrico County on the lower James. Intelligent and eloquent, Bacon was popular, but reportedly had no taste for labor. Coincidentally, Bacon was also related to the other chief player in the drama through the marriage of his cousin Lady Berkeley, Frances Culpeper. [8] Sir William Berkeley (pronounced BARK-lee) was a veteran of England’s civil wars, had fought in the Indian wars on the colonies’ frontier and was a favorite of King Charles I during his first term as governor of Virginia in the 1640s. When the English civil war ended in 1660 and the monarchy restored under Charles II, Berkeley was reappointed governor. At his home in Green Spring Plantation in James City County, he experimented with growing silk worms to supplant the colony’s reliance on tobacco. [9] But there was a darker side to the loyalist. He stated memorably, “I thank God there are no free schools, nor printing, and I hope we shall not have these hundred years; for learning has brought disobedience into the world, and printing has divulged them and libels against the best governments. God keep us from both!” [10] Berkeley respected Nathaniel Bacon as a fellow aristocrat when the young man arrived in Virginia, giving him a land grant and a seat on the Council. [11] Warfare, Personal and Political Governor Berkeley immediately investigated the Doeg and Susquehannock attacks, hoping to preserve friendship with the tribes while pacifying the settlers’ tempers. But, when he set up a parley between the aggrieved parties, several tribal chiefs were murdered. Bacon refused to heed caution, disregarded Berkeley’s direct orders, and seized friendly Appomattox Indians for supposedly stealing corn. This resulted in an official reprimand from the governor. at attempting to compromise, Berkeley relieved the tribes of their powder and ammunition. Turning to the second problem of pacifying the colonists, Berkeley called a “Long Assembly” in March 1676. The assembly declared war on the “bad” Indians and created a defensive zone around the settlements with a military chain of command. (The ensuing war also led to high taxes to support the soldiers and resentment from the colonists having to pay for it.) The Long Assembly’s bias led to a ruling over trade with the tribes. The favored traders, not coincidentally, were cronies and supporters of the governor. Independent traders, who had associated with the Indians for years, were no longer allowed to continue their commercial activities. A commission was created to oversee trade and ensure the Indians didn’t receive arms and ammunition. Nathaniel Bacon was not one of the traders favored by this “Tidewater Aristocracy.” He was also angry that the governor denied him a commission in the local militia. This didn’t stop Bacon from accepting unofficial appointment as “General” by local volunteer Indian fighters. [12] Governor Berkeley must have seethed at the insolence of a colonist demanding a commission, but knew it wouldn’t be prudent to absolutely refuse Bacon. He evaded the issue and sent representatives to persuade Bacon to disband. Bacon, for his part, had mustered a force of 500 men. He refused Berkeley’s order and marched to the falls of the James River. On May 29, Governor Berkeley declared that everyone who failed to return would be termed rebels. Many of Bacon’s men—land owners whose property could be confiscated—heeded the declaration and disbanded. Bacon, left with just 57 loyalists, continued upriver. With their provisions nearly exhausted, the band stumbled into the Occaneechee tribe led by Persicles in its fort on an island in the north branch of the James River. Persicles had accepted the Susquehannocks when the latter wandered in from the north, but they “being exercised in warr for many years with the Senecaes…endeavoured to beat the Ockanagees of their own Island.” Persicles was conferring with conquered Mannakin and Annelecton tribes people to surprise and cut off the Susquehannocks when Bacon appeared at the island fortress. [13] Bacon tried to buy provisions, but the tribe put them off for days. In fact, Persicles insisted the English execute his Susquehannock prisoners, which Bacon refused to do. As the last of the food gave out, Bacon’s men waded across a branch of the river to the fort, whereupon one of his men was shot. Suspecting the tribe had colluded with Berkeley, the rebels stormed the fortification, blew up the Indians’ supply of guns and powder and killed 150 people, many of them defenseless men, women and children. The dead included Persicles, his wife and children. Three of Bacon’s party also lost their lives in the two-day fight before the small band dragged themselves back to their homes.News of the victory was enthusiastically received in the frontier counties and the hero now became an idol. Nathaniel Bacon was soon elected one of the burgesses of Henrico County in defiance of Governor Berkeley’s proclamations. Going downriver to Jamestown to take his seat in the Assembly, Bacon wisely was accompanied by a friendly escort. Above the town, Bacon sent ahead to learn whether he would be allowed to take his seat. In reply, the Governor opened fire on the sloop from the fort’s guns. Bacon sailed back upriver to the home of Richard Lawrence, a sympathizer where he, Lawrence and a William Drummond conferred for hours. Returning to his boat, Bacon was discovered, alarms were sounded and several boats with armed men chased after Bacon’s little sloop. By about three o’clock he was driven aground by the Adam and Eve and forced to surrender. Bacon was taken to Governor Berkeley. The old man exclaimed, “Now I behold the greatest Rebell that ever was in Virginia!” He asked, “Mr. Bacon, do you continue to be a gentleman? And may I take your word? If so you are at liberty upon your parol.” Bacon was set free, not because of the Governor’s magnanimity (he had told Bacon’s wife she would see her husband hanged) but because to do otherwise could set the entire colony upon revenge. Bacon’s companions who had been arrested, however, were kept in irons. [14] Standoff Between Royalists and Rebels Members of the new Assembly—including the duly elected Nathaniel Bacon—gathered in Jamestown on June 5 and listened to Governor Berkeley pontificate about the Indian massacres. “If they had killed my grandfather and my grandmother,” he exclaimed, “my father and mother, all my friends, yet if they had come to treat of peace they ought to have gone in peace.” There was a short recess before Berkeley began again, “If there be joy in the presence of the angels over one sinner that repenteth, there is joy now, for we have a penitent sinner come before us. Call Mr. Bacon.” Bacon was then compelled to kneel in front of the burgesses and confess his offense, and to beg the pardon of God, the King and the Governor. To this, Berkeley exclaimed three times, “God forgive you, I forgive you.” Colonel Cole, a Council member, asked pointedly, “And all that were with them?” “Yea,” Governor Berkeley answered, “and all that were with him.” He then said, “Mr. Bacon, if you will live civilly but to the next quarter court, I’ll promise to restore your place there,” pointing to Bacon’s seat. In fact, Bacon’s election was immediately restored and he was promised a commission—to be delivered in three days—to go out against the Indians. [15] The commission didn’t arrive—possibly because the Assembly was confronting other matters. Governor Berkeley, believing all was quiet and that his pardon wasn’t morally binding, issued secret warrants to seize Bacon. Whether Bacon suspected hypocrisy or felt his work was done, he left Jamestown unaccompanied. His old comrades in arms welcomed him home in Henrico County, believing he was officially commissioned to defend their territory and homes. When they learned he was once more a fugitive they “sett their throats in one common key of Oathes and curses and cried aloud, that they would either have a Commission…or else they would pull downe the Towne.” [16] Rumors reached Jamestown on June 22nd that Bacon was approaching at the head of 500 very angry men. The ragtag army was made up of weatherbeaten frontiersmen, planters sunk deeply in debt, freedmen whose release from bondage brought little relief. There was no moderation and little reason in the mass of rebels. Berkeley summoned the York “train bands” to defend Jamestown against Bacon’s presumed attack. (Train bands were local militia who trained in weekly drills.) Only 100 showed up—late—and half of them were rebel sympathizers. Four guns were dragged to Sandy Bay to cover the narrow neck of land connecting the peninsula to the left bank of the river. Messengers rushed to Jamestown, advising of the ad hoc army’s approach led by Bacon. In the face of this apparently oIn the face of this apparently overwhelming threat, Governor Berkeley dismounted the guns, withdrew the soldiers and retired to the state house. Confrontation at the State House Four days later, at 2:00 in the afternoon, Bacon and his men—now numbering 600 on foot and horseback—entered the city without resistance. A file of fusiliers arrayed themselves on the green before the state house. Half an hour later, a customary drum tattoo called the Assembly to order. Two Council members demanded to know what Bacon wanted. Bacon answered that he had come for a commission as general of volunteers enrolled against the Indians, and that his men would refuse to pay levies for new forces. Angrily, Governor Berkeley signed a commission and presented it. Bacon read it to his soldiers and declared that the powers were insufficient. Bacon drew up a new paper, indicating his loyalty to the king and the legality of his past actions and appointing himself general of all the forces in Virginia used against the Indians. This threw the aged governor into a rage and he refused to sign the commission. Berkeley, dramatically baring his breast before the armed rebels, cried, “Here! Shoot me, ’fore God, fair mark. Shoot!” Bacon replied, “No, may it please your Honor, we will not hurt a hair of your head, nor of any other man’s. We are come for a commission to save our lives from the Indians, which you have so often promised, and now we will have it before we go.” Bacon strode back and forth before his men, holding his left arm akimbo, gesticulating violently with his other arm and muttering “new coyned oathes.” The Governor and Council members withdrew to his private apartment at the other end of the state house. Bacon rushed after him, his hand moving from sword hilt to his hat, followed by the fusiliers with their guns cocked. They shouted at a window, “We will have it! We will have it!” A burgess well-known to them appeared at the window, waved his handkerchief and exclaimed, “You shall have it, you shall have it!” The fusiliers uncocked their guns and lowered them as Bacon returned. It was reported that Bacon had earlier ordered his men to fire in case he drew his sword, which explained his nervous gestures. An hour later, Bacon entered the Assembly chamber and received the commission authorizing him to march against the Indians. [17] A new humiliation awaited the Governor the next day as Bacon returned to the House of Burgesses with an armed guard, demanding that certain persons obeying the Governor’s orders be removed from office and that letters to the king denouncing Bacon as a rebel be publicly contradicted. Berkeley swore he would rather be killed than submit. The Burgesses, who likely thought their throats would be cut, advised the Governor to grant Bacon whatever he wanted. Shortly, a letter was written to the king and signed by Berkeley and the Burgesses attesting to Bacon’s loyalty and justifying his actions, several Berkeley cronies were assigned to prison, blank commissions were written for officers to command under Bacon—any and everything Bacon wanted was granted “as long as they concerned not life and limb” [18] Giving in to the Rebels Berkeley’s capitulation allowed Bacon to fight the Indians wherever and whenever he desired without interference. With this, the Governor lost all claim to authority and Bacon’s Rebellion was in full force. Standing now at the head of a thousand men, Bacon marched against the Pamunkies, killing many and destroying their camps. Meanwhile, the loyal colonists in Gloucester—disarmed earlier by Governor Berkeley—petitioned for protection. Berkeley responded with animation, hurrying to the town proclaiming Bacon a rebel and a traitor. He summoned militia from throughout that county and Middlesex—some 1,200 men—proposing that they pursue Bacon and arrest him. He was greeted by shouts, “Bacon! Bacon!” They withdrew from the field, leaving the humiliated Governor to ponder the chasm separating the people and their government. Bacon, nearing the York River, heard of the situation in Gloucester. He stated that “it vexed him to the heart that while he was hunting wolves which were [presumed?] innocent lambs, the governor and those with him should pursue him in the rear with full cry, and that he was like corn between two millstones, which would grind him to powder if he didn’t look to it.” He marched back to Gloucester on July 29th. Berkeley, knowing he had been abandoned, escaped with a few friends across the Chesapeake Bay to John Custis’s house in Accomack County on the Eastern Shore—safe in knowing Bacon’s army hadn’t the boats to follow him. During this pause in the confrontation, Bacon was faced with a quandary. He could fight, knowing the terrain and new methods of unorthodox fighting would make 500 Virginians the equal of 2,000 Red Coats. He could also appeal to the Dutch or French for assistance. But the people would not openly refute their ties of blood, religion and language to their mother land of England. He had to deceive the people with a pretence of loyalty, take an oath of allegiance and demand it of his followers—even, absurdly, that it was in the crown’s interest to disobey a king’s order, arrest his governor and fight his troops. To succeed, he knew, he had to seduce the wealthy planters, and so called at least 69 influential plantation owners to his home at Middle Plantation on Aug. 3, 1676. Haranguing, wheedling and cajoling them—even locking the doors against their departure—Bacon made them sign three oaths: to assist him in fighting the Indian war, to resist all attempts of the Governor to raise troops against him, and to resist His Majesty’s troops until Bacon could bring his cause to the attention of King Charles II. This last was a contentious sticking point. [19] As “General by Consent of the People” now, Bacon issued his Declaration of the People the next day. [This classic statement of grievances is printed below.] Although this statement seems classic in foreshadowing the Declaration of Independence a century later, it must be remembered that Bacon wrote it without consulting anyone. He probably had strong support from the rank and file, since about 70 of the 600 men who rallied to the cause were black. [20] Bacon also undertook civil administration at this time. With four members of the Council, he ordered the election of a new Assembly on Sept. 4th in Jamestown. Uppermost in his mind was the fight on two fronts. His men seized the English ship lying in the James River, impressing Captain Larrimore and her crew to secure his back. This vessel, along with a sloop and a bark with four guns, were placed under the command of Captain William Carver and Gyles Bland to patrol the Western shore. Attacking on Two Fronts Bacon simultaneously turned to renew his attack against the Occaneechees and Susquehannocks. For some reason, his attention was turned to the Pamunkeys. Crossing the James to the York River, he met with Colonel Gyles Brent with reinforcements from plantations on the Potomac and Rappahannock. The small army was fired upon by the Pamunkeys, who then fled into the swamps—except for one woman and her child. They then found an elderly nurse of the Pamunkey queen, forcing her to be their guide. The wily woman, unwilling to betray her people, led them far astray. Angry at being taken miles from their quarry, he ordered the old woman knocked in the head and killed. The army then wandered randomly, following one lead and then turning to another, all the time realizing the Assembly would meet shortly in Jamestown. A tired and discouraged army begged Bacon to take them home, but he resolved that he would rather die in the woods, living on chinquapins and horse flesh, than betray the confidence placed in him. As the army split—half to remain and half to return home, Bacon’s group floundered into the main camp of the Pamunkeys. The enemy was surrounded by swamp on three sides, but fled as the English charged in. Securing his plunder and captives, Bacon and his men turned back to the plantations. [21] Disgruntled, Governor Berkeley remained at his home at Green Spring trying to ignore the problem Bacon presented. But, by September, he had regained his spirit. Captain Carver had arrived at the coast of Accomack and went ashore under a flag of truce. Bland and his men remained on board to guard the ships and Larrimore’s sailors. Larrimore somehow managed to get a message to the Governor, urgently requesting rescuers. Berkeley dithered; was it a trap? Desperate, he liberally “caressed Carver with wine” to delay him while 26 men under Colonel Philip Ludwell sneaked out to Larrimore in two small boats. Ludwell’s men entered Larrimore’s boat through an open gun port. One soldier put a pistol to Bland’s heart, saying “You are my prisoner.” The rest of the company followed, while Captain Larrimore and his crew grabbed spikes to help. The rebels surrendered immediately. Carver returned unsuspecting, was immediately tried for treason, condemned and hanged. [22] Seizing the moment as a turning point, Berkeley felt strong enough to retake Jamestown and fortify it. The Indian fighting continued and Bacon was nowhere in sight as the date of the Assembly approached. Bacon’s friends had left Jamestown and it was occupied now by the governor’s sympathizers. Berkeley arrived on Sept. 7 on Captain Larrimore’s ship, with the Adam and Eve and 16 or 17 sloops. Colonel Lawrence’s house was seized the next morning, “with all his wealth and a faire cupboard of plate standing, which fell into the Governor’s hands.” He and his army, crossing the James River at his own house at Curles, surprised a band of Appomattox Indians who lived on both sides of the river. The militia killed a large number of people, scattered the rest and burned the village. Moving southward, he then destroyed tribal towns on the banks of the Nottoway, Meherrin and Roanoke. Indians fled in advance, often without food. Having exhausted their own provisions, Bacon dismissed a large part of his forces. At this point, he learned of the governor’s return to Jamestown. Infuriated, Bacon collected a force—estimated variously as 150, 300 or 800—from New Kent and Henrico, informed them of the situation and quickly marched them and the Indian captives to Jamestown. Attack on the Capital City Jamestown had been fortified with a “palisade ten paces in width, running across the neck of the peninsula” and defended with three large guns. The ships had been laid broadside, bringing their guns to bear on the probable attack. In town, the forces numbered a thousand men—three times the force Bacon could bring. Jamestown contained a church and some 16 or 18 brick houses. The population had been reduced to about a dozen families. Within the besieged town, the Governor hoped Bacon’s troops would run out of food and force the rebels to retire from the field. For his part, Berkeley had supplied his troops from his home three miles distant. In this tense standoff, Bacon executed an unthinkable and ungentlemanly tactic. Small parties of cavalry captured the wives of several loyalists. His captives included the wife of his cousin Colonel Nathaniel Bacon, Sr., Madame Bray, Madame Page and Madame Ballard. He singled out one lady to return to town with the warning that the women would be put on the ramparts as shields if the governor attacked. An outraged Colonel Philip Ludwell fulminated that the rebels were “ravishing the women from their homes, and hurrying them about the country in their rude camps, often threatening them with death.” More probably, Bacon used the shield tactic only as a threat. He was busy having his men build earthworks around the Governor’s fortification. On Sept. 16th, a lookout standing on a rooftop announced the rebels were going attack. Six or seven hundred English troops were ordered to storm Bacon’s redoubt—but many were there by compulsion with no heart for fighting. General Bacon rode along his hastily constructed breastwork, reconnoitering the Governor’s position. Dismounting, he addressed his men to advance, had a trumpet sound the attack and ordered them to fire. With the first volleys from the rebels, the English turned and fled. They marched out “like scholars going to school,” reported one chronicler, “but returned with light heels.” The mortal losses were small—12 men were killed in the attack—but the English humiliation was incalculable. It was reported, “Soe great was the Cowardize and Baseness of the generality of Sir William Berkeley’s party that there were only some 20 Gentlemen willing to stand by him.” The captive ladies went back on top of the earthworks in view of their husbands and friends in town. [23] The Governor, realizing the enormity of his defeat, stole away in the night with his sympathizers after nailing up the guns and leaving the houses empty. Bacon stormed Jamestown on Sept. 19th. At this moment, news came that Bacon’s former ally Colonel Brent had collected troops in the counties bordering the Potomac and would march with a thousand men to assist Berkeley. If this happened, and supported by the fleet, Bacon would be cut off in Jamestown. In his anger, he determined to burn Jamestown, saying there would be no more sanctuary there. His leaders agreed. Richard Lawrence and William Drummond, who owned two of the best houses, each set fire to their own homes as examples. The soldiers fired the rest of the community, including the church and statehouse. [24] Bacon’s forces marched to the York River, crossing at Tindall’s Point (Gloucester) to confront Colonel Brent. Many of the Virginia soldiers, sympathizing with Bacon’s success, deserted the army. Bacon stopped and set up a headquarters at Colonel Augustine Warner II’s homestead where he called a convention in Gloucester. (Warner, a member of the House of Burgesses, was a loyalist and may have been agitated by the visitors.) Here he administered his oath of allegiance to the people of the county and began planning another expedition—either against the Indians or the Governor’s troops in Accomack. Beginning of the End The influential plantation owners were now withdrawing their support—even drawing to the Governor’s side. Further, the king’s troops would shortly arrive in Virginia. With no navy and no army, Bacon was doomed. In the midst of this planning, Nathaniel Bacon fell ill with dysentery and retired to the house of a Dr. Pate in Gloucester County. The loathsome disease was called the “bloodie flux” and “lousey disease” (body lice). Delirious in the following days, he often cried out, asking if the guard around the house was strong or if the king’s troops had arrived. The debacle of anarchism—or popular heroism?—came to an abrupt end on Oct. 26. Bacon was dead at age 29. His body was disposed of and never found. It’s possible that the contaminated corpse was burned by soldiers—or that they hid it so his remains wouldn’t be desecrated. His death, however, was remembered by the doggerel, “Bacon is Dead I am sorry at my hart That lice and flux should take the hangman’s part.” He was succeeded—for a very short while—by his Lieutenant General Joseph Ingram. Ingram has been called a man of low birth, a dandy and a fool even though he showed military skill against the Governor. In any case, it is doubtful any rebel army could have held out against English Red Coats and sea power. [25] Hearing of Bacon’s death, Governor Berkeley returned to reclaim his government. He had sent to England for more troops, which set sail Nov. 24, 1676. The remainder of the fleet left on Dec. 8 and 9. The Bristol, under Admiral Sir John Berry and Francis Moryson, sailed up the James River Jan. 29, 1677, with the other forces arriving between Feb 1 and 14. Governor Berkeley used these forces in exacting revenge. Among his first acts was to hang leaders of the rebellion—some 23 men. He seized rebel property without benefit of trial. Finally, an outraged Assembly insisted that the executions and reprisals stop. Berkeley’s excessive reprisals were not greeted pleasurably in England. An investigating committee there reported to King Charles II. Berkeley was relieved of his Council seat and recalled to England. He sailed for the mother country on Apr. 20. In August, Berkeley died in England without ever having seen the king. [26] This ended one of the strangest chapters of colonial American history. Latter-day interpretations call Bacon’s Rebellion the first cry of independence against British authority. Certainly, Virginia’s laws weren’t effective in dealing with economic or civil problems. At its heart, however, the rebellion may best be called a power struggle between two very strong personalities that resulted in the destruction of Jamestown and the death of hundreds of colonial rebels, Indians, military forces and colonists.
sources
MilitaryHistoryOnline.com

The Success of Napoleon

2009-04-30T18:47:00.000-07:00

The Success of Napoleon by Richard Podruchny
window.google_render_ad();
On the European continent, no one would have imagined that the rise of the "Little Corsican" would have perpetuated a conquest that would involve the entire European continent. This article will take a look at how and why Napoleon Bonaparte was as successful on the battlefield as he was. We will also see how Napoleon efficiently utilized the weapons and technology on hand that would formulate his strategy and tactics, which would result in his domination of Western Europe. To begin looking at how Napoleon came to dominate Western Europe, we will start with what was inherited from his predecessors. Overall, the technology during the Napoleonic era was relatively unchanged. For the infantry, their small arms, such as the musket and bayonet changed very little.[1] The artillery arm, however, went through some major renovations prior to Napoleon's rise to power. Under the direction of Inspector General Jean-Baptiste Varvette de Gribeauval, these innovations have been described as the foundation of the military achievements of Revolutionary and Napoleonic France.[2] The innovations that Gribeauval implemented were that artillery pieces were now made with interchangeable parts, which was suitable for mass production; gun carriages were built to a standard model; the mobility of the guns was improved by harnessing the horses in pairs instead of in file; hardwood axles replaced heavy iron ones; and accuracy was improved through the introduction of the "tangent sight," which is a graduated brass measure that enabled the gunner to sight the gun on a target. The greater mobility of the artillery would be one of the most defining improvements, since it would make it possible for the guns to accompany divisions.[3] Through these relatively small number of improvements, Napoleon essentially mastered Europe with the weapons and equipment that was available. This means that Napoleon simply made more efficient use with what was on hand. As was mentioned previously, Napoleon improved upon the potential of division formations. Napoleon essentially borrowed the divisional formation from Count Jacques de Guibert, who was the author of his Essai General de Tactique and Defense du Systeme de Guerre.[4] He stressed the need for greater mobility and advocated the use of divisional formations. It was through the use of divisional formations that Napoleon revolutionized strategy. Armies would now be composed of detachable parts that could engage the enemy alone until the rest of the army came up in support, which consisted of both infantry and artillery.[5] Divisions could also be used in encircling or flanking movements, while on the defensive, the division could be used to prevent these offensive maneuvers. This type of formation can now take the advantage of parallel roads and be able to concentrate immediately before making contact with the enemy. As a result of implementing divisional formations, generalship was made more complicated and staff work became more important, as well as the need for highly detailed maps that would need to show terrain features and road networks. It was through this type of generalship that Napoleon would demonstrate his genius, since he was essentially his own chief of staff and he was able to effectively direct operations of his armies, where others would have failed.[6] Even though Napoleon had implemented the use of divisional formations, armies during this time period would drastically increase in size due to conscription. These conscription based armed forces in France would number over a half a million men.[7] In order to effectively command these large numbers of troops, Napoleon would implement permanent army corps within the French army. This organizational unit became essential for administration and command and controlling these large numbers of troops. The corps formation would be utilized similarly as the division, which it would be a combined arms organization composed of infantry, artillery and cavalry. The cavalry would be responsible for conducting reconnaissance for the entire corps and would also have its own divisional organization within the corps. Even though the corps made it easier for Napoleon to direct his forces, the division would still remain as the major tactical unit within the French army.[8] As mentioned previously, conscription became the reason for such a drastic increase in the number of troops. However, conscription came about from the French Revolution, which is where a new type of army emerged. In this new type of army, the aristocratic monopoly on officer commissions was removed, which paved the way for a new kind of officer. These new officers were the former Non-Commissioned Officers of the old royal army and they quickly transformed into a competent professional officer corps. Now that the aristocracy no longer had their monopoly, these officers, especially engineering and artillery officers, needed some knowledge of math and science, which led to giving these officers some type of formal education that led to the development of military academies. Another result of the French Revolution would be the emergence of the "nation-in-arms." The French army was not only moved by discipline but through ideological and patriotic dedication. The French government and citizens would support this new national army through the nationalized manufacturing of war material. This increased industrial production, even though this was before the full extent of the Industrial Revolution had reached the European continent, would largely be accomplished by hand rather than machine in order to support that vast numbers of troops that France and Napoleon would rely on.[9] Now that we have seen what Napoleon had inherited through some of the technological and organizational innovations, as well as through the fruits of the French Revolution, we can now take a look at how Napoleon utilized these resources on the field of battle. By taking a top-down approach, we will first examine the strategic concepts that were refined and employed by Napoleon. At this level of warfare, the strategic level is where Napoleon would excel. To make effective use of his army's superior mobility and inspiration, Napoleon developed two major strategic systems. When he was facing an enemy superior in numbers, the strategy of the central position was used in order to split the enemy into separate parts.[10] This was where each could be eliminated in detail through maneuvering in order to gain the French a local superiority of force in successive actions by bringing the reserve into action at the critical time and place. On the other hand, of the French held superiority in numbers, Napoleon would often use a maneuver of envelopment.[11] By using this tactic, Napoleon would capture his foe's attention with a detachment of his army, while the bulk of his army would sweep against the enemy's lines of communication in order to sever the enemy's links with his bases.[12] Through these two types of strategy, Napoleon would once again borrow these ideas from one of his teachers. Pierre de Bourcet, a chief of staff of the royal armies in both the War of the Austrian Succession and the Seven Years War, as well as the director of the school for staff officers at Grenoble. He taught that an enemy could be misled by moves of various units which appeared to be disconnected, but which were actually part of a unified plan. The overall aim of this strategy was to compel the enemy to divide their forces and then to attack them while separated before it could be reinforced. It was through this philosophy that would form the basis of Napoleonic strategy. Napoleon would later refine this strategy by accident at the Battle of Marengo in 1800, where the battle was won for Napoleon by the opportune appearance of a division that had failed to concentrate prior to battle. Thereafter, Napoleon would often hold reserves back until the enemy forces were worn out, which was when he would send in his reserves.[13] By employing these two types of strategies, Napoleon always looked to ways that would draw his enemy out to battle. He saw battle as a means to destroying his enemy's means of resistance. Napoleon's first and clearly defined objective at the outset of any of his campaign was the enemy's army, which he intended to destroy.[14] If his enemy did not want to risk battle, he would force them to do battle through his maneuvering, which would threaten something vital. Throughout all of his campaigns, Napoleon always sought to seize and retain the initiative, in order to impose his will upon the enemy. Even when Napoleon was badly outnumbered, he was still able to outmaneuver his enemies through marching and maneuvering, in order to employ the bulk of his forces at a weakened point of the enemy's. It was through Napoleon's focus on the enemy's armed forces and his ability to exercise quick maneuvering that he would enjoy most of his successes.[15] The quick maneuvering and marching ability of Napoleon's armies would form the foundation in the execution of Napoleon's strategic concepts. When the French Revolution broke out, the French military logistical system rapidly fell apart, which proved incapable of providing the logistical support required by the newly raised French armies. This would evolve into the French army being able to operate by living off the land and not having to depend upon the magazine supply system. By living off the land, this would lead to the mystique that the French army could outmarch every other army in Europe. The French army was not handicapped by large numbers of supply wagons, which also fed this mystique. Instead of the army being hampered with how fast or how slow their supply train can move, now they were able to march as fast as their soldier's legs could carry them.[16] To aid in Napoleon's speed of maneuver, his troops traveled light. Coupled with the increase in mobility from living off the land, the French abandoned the orthodox 70 paces per minute line of march in favor of a quick step of 120 paces per minute. This simple change would allow the French to march twenty to thirty kilometers per day. Even though this may seem to be a simplistic change, but in the days prior to railroads or automobiles, this change was a dramatic one. However, any army could duplicate France's new doctrine, but it was the revolutionary ideals of the citizen army and the threat to the survival of their "New France," as well as the sense of French nationalism that inspired the French army to perform such feats that were impossible for other armies to achieve during this time period.[17] Now that we have seen how Napoleon was able to dominate the strategic arena on the European continent through strategic refinements, adopted changes in doctrine and the revamping of the logistical supply system, we can now look at the modifications and innovations that Napoleon made at the tactical level of warfare. At the tactical level, we will first examine the foundation of Napoleon's army, the infantry arm. As a member of the French infantry, an individual could expect two to three weeks of basic training, which stressed the use of the bayonet. The Napoleonic foot soldiers were renowned for their agility, stubborn attacks, as well as the speed of their marches. As it was mentioned previously, it was this speed and maneuverability that formed the foundation of Napoleon's successful campaigns. This speed and maneuverability was due to the lack of baggage that was carried by the French foot soldier, since they bivouacked in the open and lived off the land.[18] Now that the French infantry was not weighed down with excess baggage, the re-introduction of light-infantry was put into practice. The use of skirmishing tactics and skirmishers in the era of the French Revolution meant that the foot soldier had to be re-trained to operate as an individual, as well as a part of a group. Napoleon would often utilize the light infantry or skirmishers to probe enemy positions or to find and keep the enemy stationary until the light artillery and larger infantry formations moved in support.[19] With the re-introduction of light infantry into the Napoleonic army, they would be combined with a close order column, which would constitute the new tactics of the Napoleonic infantry. The light infantry or skirmishers would occupy the enemy in order for the larger assault formations to move up without being too exposed to the fire of the enemy line. To put this into a clearer perspective, the Napoleonic regular infantry would perform either role, whether it was in a skirmishing or regular infantry role. Now the roles of the Napoleonic foot soldier has been identified, we can now examine the more renown infantry formations that Napoleon would utilize in his battlefield successes. One such formation was the column, which was developed by Lazare Carnot and later perfected by Napoleon. The French infantry column was an adaptation of the linear system, where the deployment of a number of linear units or battalions were in depth to provide physical and psychological weight to an attack, however, individual units could still operate in a linear formation. The greatest advantage by using this type of formation would rest in its flexibility and versatility. This formation would permit the commander to move large numbers of troops over the battlefield with better control and more rapidly than was possible before. The column formation could operate with ease in rough terrain, while being able to change formations just as easily. With the re-introduction of skirmishers, they could be detached without making major readjustments on the battlefield. While on the battlefield, this formation could very rapidly convert from two or three rank firing lines or squares and back to the original formation.[20] Overall, the French infantry column essentially had two main functions; first, it could be used to bring troops in close order rapidly to engage the enemy; second, it could be used as a sustaining force. If the column sent out skirmishers to start the engagement, it would be used as a replacement pool for the skirmishers, as well as their immediate tactical reserve. If the column encountered firm resistance, the column might deploy into lines to carry on the fight with volleys. Once the enemy wavered, these lines could resume the advance or they might reduce their front and move forward in column.[21] With the improvements in tactics and employment of the infantry arm, Napoleon would also make great use of his cavalry and not just in battle. The French cavalry would serve as the basis for Napoleon's intelligence collection. His light cavalry would be sent out well ahead of his army's main body in their attempt to find the enemy and be able to ascertain their dispositions.[22] On the battlefield, the cavalry would remain as the shock arm of the Napoleonic army, with lances and sabers as their principle weapons. Within Napoleon's cavalry arm, he would still keep the distinctions between light and heavy cavalry. Now with Napoleon providing his cavalry with artillery and still utilizing them in great numbers, he would use them in surprise operations against the enemy's cavalry and infantry, which would prove to be very effective. The Napoleonic cavalry would typically be used against the enemy's infantry that had already been shaken or broken by massive artillery bombardment or by infantry attacks. Napoleon would demonstrate just how effective he could use his cavalry on the retreating enemy, which would cause as much chaos and destruction upon his enemies as possible. As Napoleon would later find out, the use of his cavalry against fresh infantry formations that would have the time to form squares would often prove disastrous for the attacking cavalry.[23] After looking at how the Napoleonic infantry and cavalry underwent their renovations during the Napoleonic era, we can now focus upon Napoleon's favored arm, the artillery. By the time that France was plunged into its revolution, its army's artillery had been brought up to the latest standards, as well as its many new gunners and officers being trained in their employment. The French artillery arm would owe its change in status to Jean Baptiste Gribeauval, who would standardize all construction and design of the artillery pieces and gun carriages. This led to lighter, more manageable cannon, better quality barrels and ammunition. After 1800, the French artillery service would also benefit from the fact that their new Commander-in-Chief, Napoleon, was one of these very same artillery officers who had exerted so much influence on revolutionary fighting. Combined with the sweeping technological and organizational changes that were begun before the revolution, this would assure that the French artillery arm was the state-of-the-art for its time. These improvements would boost morale in a branch of service which already had a long tradition of professionalism. The end result was more aggressive battlefield tactics and ensuing success, which ushered artillery away from a supporting position into a decisive and highly destructive role.[24] The use of artillery by Napoleon would once again be traced back and perfected during this era. Even though Napoleon believed that while the infantry was the main arm of an army and it could not stand up to superior artillery, he would borrow his ideals in employing artillery from Chevalier du Teil, who was Napoleon's superior in command of artillery at Toulon, where he had urged that artillery be concentrated at the point of attack and dispersed along the entire line. Napoleon would follow this practice and he would use his large caliber guns to blast a hole in the enemy's line into which the infantry could penetrate. As time went on, and the quality of French conscripts deteriorated, Napoleon would increase the proportion of artillery in his armies and he would rely more and more on bombardment.[25] Due to the lower quality of conscripts, one of Napoleon's favorite battlefield techniques was through the use of the Grande Batterie. The Grande Batterie would be used in the later years during the Napoleonic era. This technique was essentially the physical massing of artillery fire in support of achieving his main objective on the battlefield, which would have the effect of blasting the enemy line to shreds to permit his infantry to advance. Even though Napoleon had raised the artillery branch from the status of an auxiliary to that of an equal compared to the infantry and cavalry branches, his use of artillery would still remain a contributing factor to his successes, however a very potent one.[26] During the era of Napoleon, no one was able to match his ability to perfect the use of weapons, technology and tactics as he did. As we have seen, Napoleon was not so much the innovator but the borrower, which provided the foundation for his string of successes on the European continent. The impact that Napoleon would have can be found through his losses. In his defeats, this is where we can see how his enemies adapted to Napoleon's war making capabilities. Overall, the impact on the European continent would be through the emergence of the "nation-in-arms," which demonstrated the ability to field masses of troops and dramatically increased production efforts with a nation behind the war effort. It would be the combination of Napoleon's war reforms and the French nation behind his forces in the field that would have the greatest resounding impact on Europe.
sources
MilitaryHistoryOnline.com

The "Green Beret Affair": A Brief Introduction

2009-04-30T18:44:00.000-07:00

By the year 1969 United States involvement in South Vietnam was in its fourth year with no end in sight. Major U.S. ground combat forces, to include elite paratroops and marines, had been first committed in country during the spring of 1965. The fighting had increased in scale and intensity until by 1969 U.S. military strength stood at 536,000 on the ground. The Navy's 7th Fleet in the Tonkin Gulf, and Air Force strategic bombers flying from bases on Guam and Thailand provided major sea and air support for US forces on the ground. The South East Asia Treaty Organization nations of Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Thailand and the Philippines would provide yet another 62,000 allied troops fighting against the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Communist forces.[1] The Vietnam War, and peace talks in Paris, continued to drag on in 1969 with little end in sight. The year of 1969 would also see one of the most interesting, controversial, and little understood events of the Vietnam War, the "Green Beret Affair." This affair, involving the identification and execution of a Communist Viet Cong double or triple agent by U.S. Army Special Forces working with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), is an illustrative example of the morally ambiguous nature of modern day unconventional warfare. Such issues are still being faced by our Special Operations Forces in the current Global War on Terror (GWOT). I will attempt in this article to examine the "Green Beret Affair" from 1969 and outline how similar issues are faced daily by our forces around the globe. In many respects the war in Southeast Asia was tailor made for the newest and most controversial force in the U.S. Army, the Special Forces (SF). Special Forces would be popularly know as the "Green Berets," much to the chagrin of the troopers themselves, who were quick to point out to outsiders that they were not a headgear but a highly trained and capable force of professionals. The beret itself, jungle green in color, was not that important or functional but was a highly emotional symbol, at least to the stiff necked conventional Army, of the attitude of the man who wore it; unconventional, more concerned with substance over form, and quite willing to defy conventions in order to accomplish a mission. The troops themselves were fascinating, a unique organization that attracted square pegs that often would not fit into the round holes of the spit and polish Conventional Army. Ranks were full of colorful nonconformists and extremely dedicated soldiers such as the Eastern European Lodge Act enlistees who volunteered for service in the American army and SF in the hopes of returning to their homeland with a victorious force. SF was probably the closest organization to the French Foreign Legion that the American Army had, and made many uncomfortable. Their willingness to defy convention, and discipline at times, would prove troublesome to many in the Army. Many generals could not hide their open disdain for Special Forces, with one Army Chief of Staff in the 1960's describing SF troops as "refugees from responsibility" and that they "tended to be nonconformists, couldn't quite get along in a straight military system…"[2] Note: this nonconformist trend has continued to the present day, the author is proud to report. Organized into small 12 man teams with specialists in weapons, engineering, demolitions, medicine, communications, operations and intelligence, the Special Forces Operational Detachment Alpha, SFODA, or A Team, was, and is, a compact, highly trained small unit capable of building, healing and destroying. The Special Forces Operational Detachment Bravo, SFODB, or B Team, provided command and control for 6 A Teams and operated as the Company Headquarters. B Detachments in Vietnam would additionally run special projects or missions, often involving intelligence collection and reporting. SF soldiers were capable of operating independently behind enemy lines with little outside support and could train, organize and lead resistance forces against occupying powers. Unconventional warfare (UW), as a mission, would be the "bread and butter" for SF. Defined as a broad spectrum of military and paramilitary operations, unconventional warfare are normally of long duration, predominately conducted through, with, or by indigenous or surrogate forces that are organized, trained, equipped, supported and directed by an external source. UW includes guerrilla warfare, subversion, sabotage, intelligence activities and unconventional assisted recovery.[3] The troops adopted the Trojan horse from classical history as their distinctive unit insignia and the Latin phrase De Oppresso Liber, "To Liberate from Oppression," as their SF motto. President John F. Kennedy would visit the Special Warfare Center at Fort Bragg for an orientation on Special Forces by then Brigadier General William P. Yarborough, wearing an unauthorized headgear, the Green Beret. Much to the chagrin of the Army and Department of Defense, JFK would come away so impressed with Special Forces that he would shortly authorize the wear of the controversial beret and call it "a symbol of excellence, a badge of courage, a mark of distinction in the fight for freedom."[4] Army Special Forces would forever be linked to JFK; members of SF served in the honor guard at his funeral in November of 1963, with one of the soldiers spontaneously placing his beret on the grave at the end of the ceremony as a mark of respect. President Kennedy's legacy would be further remembered when the Special Warfare Center and School at Fort Bragg, NC would be named the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School.[5] The Special Forces in the Sixties would go through a period where they captured the public's imagination, beginning with the best selling book The Green Berets by Robin Moore in 1966. The paperback book became a best seller, followed by the surprise hit song Ballad of the Green Berets, by Staff Sergeant Barry Sadler, an SF soldier who had served in Vietnam and received the Purple Heart for wounds, which would ultimately become the number 1 single record in the US for 1966. GI Joes, bubble gum cards, comic books, and Mattel toys would all celebrate Army Special Forces during the craze. Finally, the ultimate honor would be accorded the force in 1968 when John Wayne would produce and star in the action film The Green Berets, with David Janssen and Jim Hutton.[6] The strongly anti-communist, and pro-South Vietnam film, was a labor of love by Mr. Wayne, a stanch supporter of the war, who was openly disgusted by the anti-war protest movement in the United States at the time. All of this would have a profound effect on many American youths coming of age, to include the author, who can remember receiving a miniature Green Beret one year as a Christmas present during that timeframe, a foretaste of things to come years later. Army Special Forces was born in 1952, the brainchild of World War II Office of Strategic Service (OSS), and Philippine Island Guerrilla veterans. These veterans, such as Colonels Russ Volkman, Aaron Bank and Wendell Fertig, had come out of the Second World War convinced of the effectiveness of unconventional warfare in an era of "pushbutton" warfare and atomic weapons. They had seen, first hand, the effectiveness of unconventional warfare against heavy handed occupying powers such as Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan. To use an example from both major theatres of war, accepted figures are that ultimately upwards to 200,000 were involved in the resistance in occupied France and some 250,000 fighting in the Philippines after Japanese occupation in 1942.[7] It is difficult to quantify exactly how effective the pro-Allied resistance movements were in Europe and Asia but General Eisenhower is said to have said that the forces of the resistance in Europe had done the work of some 15 divisions, and had shortened the Second World War by two months.[8] The Army was not particularly keen upon the unconventional warfare concept in general but saw the utility of using a group of misfits and foreigners in Europe against the expected Soviet led blitzkrieg from the east. Thus, the 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne) (10th SFGA) was formed in 1952 under the command of Colonel Aaron Bank, an OSS/SOE veteran and shipped to West Germany. The expected onslaught never occurred from the Soviets but SF trained hard throughout Europe and soon proved its worth to the Big Army. Additional SF forces were formed, to include the 77th SFGA at Fort Bragg in North Carolina and 1st SFGA in Japan. New roles and missions, in addition to UW and the familiar one of training potential guerrillas against expected communist invasions, emerged. One of these new missions included assisting friendly governments in the Foreign Internal Defense (FID) mode, mainly training allied armies to resist insurgencies. The gauntlet had been flung by Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev in 1961 who would pledge support for "wars of national liberation" throughout the world, a communist challenge to the free world that would not go unanswered.[9] SF would soon be one of the instruments of choice throughout the 1960's in resisting these "wars of national liberation." After the departure of the French from the states of Indochina, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, in the wake of the disastrous defeat at Dien Bien Phu in 1954, a power vacuum existed in Southeast Asia. All French troops and trainers left the area leaving behind weak governments and armies attempting to combat unrest and communist led insurgencies. A limited program of assistance was begun by the US Government in support of these pro-western governments to include economic and military assistance. Enter institutions such as the CIA and SF. In 1956 Army Special Forces Detachments would be stood up in Japan and soon began training allied armies in Taiwan, Thailand and South Vietnam. In South Vietnam, SF teams, working with the CIA, was soon training indigenous cadres in unconventional warfare and long range Ranger type operations. It is interesting to note that the first SF soldier, CPT Harry Cramer, was killed in 1957 near Nha Trang, a foreshadowing of sacrifices to come. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Special Forces were joined at the hip in Vietnam, both working and relying upon each other for better or worse. Both institutions were probably more similar than each wanted to admit as they represented the beau ideal of a Kennedy inspired muscular response to the Communist led challenge of the "Wars of National Liberation." Roles and missions for the CIA and SF would overlap and conflict at times, causing friction inherent in war. Both were involved in various counterinsurgency programs to include collecting intelligence on the communist enemy and training and advising our South Vietnamese allies. For SF the war in Vietnam would include various highly classified programs to include cross border operations into Laos and Cambodia; in addition to gathering intelligence and running agent networks in support of operations. Since the Bay of Pigs disaster in 1961, the CIA, or Agency, as many then and now refer to it, had moved away from such large scale military and paramilitary type operations to concentrate upon more traditional activities to include intelligence collection and analysis. The agency had been deeply involved in Southeast Asia just as long as Special Forces. Many of there intelligence oriented programs, with an appropriate code name, in South Vietnam would involve both the CIA and SF. The Phoenix program was one of these intelligence programs. The Phoenix program was born of the desperate need to identify and eliminate Communist Viet Cong infrastructure hidden deep within the South Vietnamese civilian population. The communist insurgency in the south was organized along classic Maoist cellular lines, with covert units responsible for everything from logistics and procurement to guerrillas and secret police. Phoenix, using Vietnamese agents "run," or controlled by Americans, quickly achieved results but became know as an infamous terror and assassination program. In each of the 44 provinces of South Vietnam CIA run interrogation centers were established to process suspects. And process they did as the numbers rolled in, 17,000 asking for amnesty, 28,000 captured, and 20,000 killed in action. Saigon and Washington were heartened by such numbers but others were not so sanguine. A State Department official who was an advisor to the South Vietnamese stated that "It was a unilateral American program, never recognized by the South Vietnamese government. CIA representatives recruited, organized, supplied and directly paid counter terror teams, whose function was to use Viet Cong techniques of terror—assassination, abuses, kidnappings and intimidation—against the Viet Cong leadership."[10] The numbers were impressive; however, one analyst would claim "They assassinated a lot of the wrong damn people."[11] Excesses were definitely committed and old scores settled as less than trustworthy informants pursued individual vendettas. All true, but one must remember that the individuals involved in intelligence and unconventional warfare often deal with unsavory characters. Eventually William Colby, CIA official in charge of all activities in Asia, himself an old OSS veteran of World War II, had to issue a reminder to all that torture and assassination were not part and parcel of the Phoenix program. Additionally he informed all involved with the program that if individuals found the Phoenix program so distasteful on moral grounds, due to the excesses committed by our allies, they could be immediately reassigned with no harm to their subsequent careers.[12] Soldiers to include Special Forces would not be given such an opportunity for reassignment. They would continue, then as now, to be bound by the laws of war and military justice system, no matter how imperfect. To the uninformed the concept of rules and regulations limiting warfare may seem strange; after all, is it not true that "all's fair in love and war," to use a somewhat hackney phrase. The laws of war, again, which all military personnel are bound by, tolerate no such grey areas as the Phoenix program or targeted assassinations, at least in theory. Attempts to modify or regulate behavior in warfare are as old as war itself, with numerous examples going back almost to the dawn of time. Alexander the Great, in 335 B.C., is said to have informed his troops before assaulting a besieged town that "Do not destroy today what will be yours tomorrow," a clear attempt to moderate the looting of a city after it had fallen, acceptable behavior in warfare during the classical period.[13] Plato, in the Republic, writing on war, attempted to establish the principle of burial for the dead and prohibition on despoiling the dead, after the heated fury of battle had passed. Later, in the Middle Ages, additional rules limiting warfare became established practice, at least in Europe, due to the efforts of the Roman Catholic Church. Restrictions on targets began to be codified, to include prohibiting the attacking of churches, religious buildings and priests or nuns by armies. In modern language, these were protected places or forbidden targets. Additionally the concept of non-combatants began to be understood with the sick, old, women and children no longer considered worthy opponents. Other influences toward moderating wartime behavior would include the formation of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Switzerland in 1863 by Henri Dunant, and international agreements in the 20th century designed to control the impact of war both on participants and bystanders. The Hague Convention Number 4 of 1907 and the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 would establish beyond a doubt the law of war.[14] Purposes of the law of war would be many but would mainly exist for three purposes; one, to protect both combatants and noncombatants from unnecessary suffering; two, to safeguard fundamental human rights of persons who fall into the hands of the enemy, particularly prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, and civilians not involved in the hostilities, and finally, to facilitate the restoration of peace. However, the communist nations of our globe would claim not to be bound by any such laws of war, and would infamously mistreat any prisoners who fell into their hands as "war criminals."[15] American soldiers, to include the Special Forces, would continue to be bound by such laws of war, even in the unconventional war going on in Vietnam. All U.S. Army Special Forces, in 1969, operated under the control of 5th Special Forces Group, headquartered at Nha Trang, on the southeast coast of South Vietnam. Colonel Robert B. "Bob" Rheault took command of 5th SFGA in Vietnam in May of 1969. Colonel Rheault was a 1946 graduate of the US Military Academy, who had missed the Second World War but would go on to win the Silver Star, our nation's third highest combat decoration fighting in Korea. Rheault was a unique officer in a unique force; additionally he was independently wealthy, coming from an old Boston family. He spoke French without a flaw, would be educated at Phillips Exeter Academy, West Point, and finally the University of Paris for a masters degree in international relations. No stranger to Special Forces, his initial tour was with the 10th SFGA in Germany during the late 1950's. Colonel Rheault would attend the SF Qualification course, the "Q" course, in 1961, and would command the 1st SFGA on Okinawa before being assigned to Vietnam to take command of the 5th SFGA. It would probably be no exaggeration to say Rheult was one of the most respected and beloved officers ever in SF, a "must promote" to General Officer rank if his command, and career, had not been ended prematurely by the Green Beret affair.[16] In 1969, Special Forces Detachments or A Teams were placed throughout the country in 80 or so isolated camps. The A Teams were the "point of the spear" working, living, advising, fighting and dieing with the locals. SF was uniquely positioned to gather and report intelligence. The Military Assistance Advisory Command Intelligence Officer, or J-2, at one point during the war estimated that some 50% or so of all intelligence gathered daily was from SF and its sources. Some camps had such a level of knowledge that they were able to successfully identify Viet Cong, by name, operating in their area, and then quietly go about eliminating same. In order to accomplish its intelligence gathering mission in Vietnam, a number of intelligence oriented special missions would be established and given code names, similar to the Phoenix program. One of these intelligence programs established by 5th SFGA in country was Project GAMMA, a unilateral, covert intelligence collection operation targeted against North Vietnamese Army and Viet Cong base camps in Cambodia, to include the weak Cambodian government's aiding and abetting of the communists. In February of 1968 SF Detachment B-57 was transferred from Saigon to Nha Trang and officially designated as Project GAMMA headquarters, with responsibility for managing the entire program. The program itself had potential very serious international repercussions due to the then secret B-52 strategic bombing missions being flown at the time against those communist base camps across the border in Cambodia. If the classified program was discovered, political repercussions in the U.S. and elsewhere would be most serious, given the poisonous political atmosphere of the day.[17] Personnel working on Project GAMMA were given cover as civil affairs, CA, and psychological operations, PSYOPS, officers augmenting A Teams near the Cambodian border. Five collection teams were authorized and soon had some 13 nets established with 98 codename agents providing intelligence of some manner. In October of 1968 the top intelligence officer in Vietnam on General Abrams staff estimated that Project GAMMA was providing 65 per cent of the information known on North Vietnamese Army (NVA) strength and locations in Cambodia, and some 75 per cent of the same information known on NVA within South Vietnam. The Special Forces in Vietnam, and Detachment B-57 led by Major David Crew, had developed into arguably the most productive intelligence collection project the U.S. had throughout Southeast Asia.[18] It has been said that the reason that Project GAMMA was so successful was due to the fact that the South Vietnamese had been not "read on" to the program. As a successful 1968 turned into 1969 for Project GAMMA, it was noticed by Detachment B-57 that many extremely valuable intelligence nets and agents had began to disappear, and many feared the worse, that the highly classified operation had been compromised by a double agent. The S-3 or Operations Officer, Captain Budge Williams, for the project felt that Project GAMMA was in danger of going under from an unseen and unknown communist spy. Other intelligence and counter-intelligence officers, to include Captain Leland Brumley, Major Thomas Middleton, and Chief Warrant Officer Edward Boyle became convinced also there was a security leak somewhere in the organization. All began investigations but made little headway until the spring of 1969, but did discover the unpleasant truth that some of the South Vietnamese SF working for US forces were involved in selling weapons and medical supplies to the communists. Then, ironically enough, an SF reconnaissance team, in a classified area across the border where US troops officially did not operate, discovered documents and a roll of film in a communist base camp. When the film was developed one of the Viet Cong pictures on the roll was believed to be that of Project GAMMA Vietnamese agent Thai Khac Chuyen.[19] The leak has been discovered, or had it? After conferring with the Agency, the SF soldiers involved in the investigate were told that the best way of handling the problem would be to get rid of the double agent, but the CIA could not authorize the execution, somewhat disingenuously. The agent handler for Thai Khac Chuyen, Sergeant Alvin Smith, identified him from the captured photo. It is interesting to note that Sergeant Smith was not a Special Forces soldier but rather an intelligence specialist who had been assigned to Project GAMMA and Special Forces. Sergeant Smith's supervisor, Captain Robert Marasco, ordered that the agent in question be brought in for questioning to include a polygraph test; which ominously the agent had not been given when recruited for Project GAMMA. If standard operating procedure had followed, the test would have already been conducted during his recruitment. Other doubts existed about the Vietnamese agent to include the fact that he was originally from North Vietnam, still had family north of the border, his English language skills were uncommonly good, and he had gone from job to job working for US forces fighting in South Vietnam, with trouble always following his departure.[20] Eventually Mr. Chuyen would undergo some ten days of rigorous interrogation and solitary confinement to include the use of polygraph tests and sodium pentathol, commonly known as "truth serum." The bad news, at least for the agent, was the fact that the polygraph tests would indicate that Mr. Chuyen was not telling the truth when he denied having compromised any Project GAMMA security details and working for the Viet Cong. Additionally the possibility existed that Chuyen was also working for the South Vietnamese intelligence service on the side, a triple agent. For the SF officers of B-57 and Project GAMMA, the leak that everyone had been looking for had been found. It would be distasteful but they knew what must be done; if Chuyen was turned over to the South Vietnamese Army or National Police, there was the chance he might go free due to the actions of another communist plant, and cause further damage and loss of American lives. Thus, in June of 1969 three of the B-57 officers would drug Thai Khac Chuyen, put him on a boat and take him out into Nha Trang Bay, not far from the 5th SFGA headquarters. He was shot twice in the head, weighed down with chains and dumped into the dark shark-infested waters of the South China Sea. Without a doubt a killing but one could make the argument the time tested standard procedure for identifying and eliminating a known double agent during wartime. An appropriate cover story was developed to explain the now obvious absence of the agent, if questions were asked he was believed to have disappeared after being sent on a mission behind enemy lines to test his loyalty to the cause. The Group Commander, Colonel Rheault, knew of the execution and approved the execution and cover story as above.[21] It was then that control of the affair began to be lost, never to be regained. Sergeant Smith, Mr. Chuyen's handler, began to be concerned for his security and safety, and sought sanctuary with the CIA office in Nha Trang. It would not take long for that to get out, even in a war zone, and soon all eight officers and noncommissioned officers involved in the execution, to include Colonel Rheault, were arrested on charges of premeditated murder, an offense punishable under the UCMJ, and confined in the infamous in country military facility known as the Long Binh Jail, or "LBJ" for obvious reasons.[22] To make matters worse, if that was possible at the time, was the fact that Colonel Rheault had given a four star general, General Abrams, the cover story when asked about the agent's whereabouts. Unfortunately, at least for 5th Special Forces Group in Vietnam, the commander of all U.S. Armed Forces in Vietnam that crucial year of 1969 was General Creighton W. Abrams. General Abrams, for better or worse, was perhaps one of the most forceful and dynamic leaders in the post-World War II Army. A graduate of the United States Military Academy, USMA, at West Point in 1936, Abrams has served in the old horse cavalry before the war, transitioning to tanks and armored forces during the war. Fighting in Europe, he soon proved himself to be one of the most capable young officers in the Army, serving in both the 1st and 4th Armored Divisions. Abrams became one of General George S. Patton, Junior's favorite officers. Patton reportedly said to a reporter during the war that "I'm supposed to be the best tank commander in the Army, but I have a peer—Abe Abrams."[23] High praise indeed. During the Battle of the Bulge, Abrams successfully led the tank and infantry task force that relieved the besieged 101st Airborne Division at Bastogne in Belgium. General Abrams came out of the war one of the most decorated officers, and was clearly a rising star in the Army's stable of combat hardened commanders. General Abrams would die in 1974 while serving as the Army Chief of Staff. The Army's high regard for him would be shown in the following decade by naming the newest and most modern tank, the M-1 tank, the Abrams. But along with all that capability, General Abrams was a man with strong opinions. His top intelligence officer in Vietnam, a classmate from USMA, has written that "This commonsensical, well-read, sophisticated man harbored some of the longest lasting, strangest, and most unusual prejudices. For one, he hated halfbacks, football halfbacks…Abrams held another unusual, and more serious, bias: he disliked paratroopers."[24] General Abrams had played sixth string football at the academy, fighting in the trenches of the line. This experience seems to have developed in him quite the distaste for "glamorous" half-backs, which at some point was transferred to airborne forces, to include Special Forces. In a profile piece on General Abrams in the New York Times from 1969, the writer claimed that the post-World War II Army was run by the "Airborne Club," which included the Special Forces, and that Abrams "as a square-shooting, traditional soldier, he was shocked when some of the ‘dirty tricks' customary in Green Beret activity became known to him forcefully," and believed that "battles should be fought with feet planted firmly on the ground and that making a fetish out of jumping out of airplanes is puerile."[25] It is probably not surprising that General Abrams never volunteered for or served a tour of duty with any airborne unit. I believe this is most unfortunate given the fact that he would have perhaps developed a better understanding of Airborne or Special Forces purposes and functions. Thus, when the Green Beret Affair would surface the Special Forces would most definitely not have a friend in court. The article 32 investigation held by the U.S. Army in Vietnam, before General Courts Martial against all eight, quickly became engulfed in a firestorm of publicity. Most of the American public, and the Special Forces, believed that Colonel Rheault and all involved had been made scapegoats for a matter that reflected poorly upon the Army. One former member of Special Forces in Vietnam commented to the author that "We were thunderstruck, and thought what did he [Colonel Rheault] do wrong?"[26] National newspapers and television picked up the story, most likely due to the involvement of the Special Forces, and the affair became another lighting rod for pro and anti-war feeling. The hearing in Vietnam became somewhat of a circus after one of the Army defense lawyers for the 8 soldiers, Judge Advocate General Captain John Stevens Berry, called General Abrams and CIA officials to the witness stand. Both declined to get involved in the proceedings and testify. Finally in September of 1969 the Secretary of the Army Stanley Resor announced to all that all charges would be dropped against the 8 soldiers charged since the CIA, in the interests of national security, had refused to make its personnel available as witnesses, therefore making any manner of a fair trial possible. Colonel Rheault requested immediate retirement from the Army and all others charged in the affair had their careers effectively ended, also leaving the service afterwards.[27] The affair continued to have unfortunate repercussions for Special Forces and the Army. General Abrams, after having Colonel Rheault arrested on murder charges, had one of his headquarters staff officers, Colonel Alexander Lemberes, assigned to take over command of the 5th Special Forces Group in Vietnam. The obvious problem with the assignment was that this officer was neither a qualified parachutist nor Special Forces officer; a bit like having a United Methodist preacher assigned to a Roman Catholic Church, rather nonsensical at best. When Colonel Lemberes attempted to wear an unearned Green Beret in his new command, the 5th SFGA Command Sergeant Major told him in no uncertain terms to take the beret off. Eventually the Army Chief of Staff, General Westmoreland, no stranger to the airborne, would step in and assign a qualified officer to command Special Forces in Vietnam. By the end of 1969 the Green Beret affair would be over, but questions raised and issues involved would come back again years later.[28] The 1969 Green Beret Affair brought up issues that continue to resonate in our Global War on Terror with SF continuing to operate in that shadowy world of unconventional warfare. Occasionally these issues surface and come to the attention of the press and American public as per the 3rd SFGA Special Forces Detachment that faced recent charges of premeditated murder for shooting an "enemy combatant." Last year on 13 October 2006 at the small village of Ster Kalay near the Pakistan border, members of Special Forces Operational Detachment Alpha 372 of 3rd Battalion, 3rd Special Forces Group, positively identified and killed Nawab Buntangyar, an Afghan national on the approved Operation Enduring Freedom target list. Spotted outside a residential compound, dressed in civilian clothes, not wearing a uniform, or carrying a weapon, Buntangyar was shot in the head while speaking the local police from 100 yards away by a concealed SF sniper. The enemy target had been involved in suicide and roadside bombing attacks; thus, the "take down" of the target, an enemy combatant, was considered "a textbook example of a classified mission completed in accordance with the American rules of engagement."[29] But for reasons that still remain vague, murder charges were preferred against the SF Detachment Commander, a Captain, and the Operations Sergeant, a Master Sergeant. Once again, just as in 1969, an Article 32 hearing was held, as per the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), before a General Court-Martial. Both soldiers were charged with violating Article 118 of the UCMJ, premeditated murder. Once again, SF soldiers became the objects of national press attention to include two ends of the ideological spectrum, the New York Times and Fox Network and Bill O'Rilley. However, after the hearing the two star general in charge of all SF at Fort Bragg dismissed the charges, an outcome just as in 1969.[30] An isolated incident perhaps but an illustrative example of the rules of engagement that our soldiers operate under on a daily basis, where a split second decision made on the battlefield to shoot or not shoot, can be reviewed later in the cool comfort of the court room. This is a level of oversight that will continue, even in the shadowy world of SF and unconventional warfare. Army Special Forces will continue to work with the CIA, FBI, and other agencies; commonly referred to in today's lexicon as Other Government Agencies, or OGAs. One could say some of the OGAs at times may not be bound by laws and rules but our Armed Forces are, make no doubt. Rules of engagement, carefully drawn up by military lawyers, will continue to govern what our troops can or cannot do, with legal review from higher always a possibility. Conclusion In the end what would the "Green Beret Affair" signify? Was it, as one author has suggested, a sort of a "Caine Mutiny of the Vietnam War," raising complex issues of morality, murder and professional jealousy?[31] Was the execution of an identified double, or perhaps triple, agent murder, or simply standard operating procedure old as warfare itself? Did General Abrams and the Army leap upon the case in order to make a point and discredit and discipline an unruly child, Special Forces? The affair was ultimately a tragedy. Committed and capable officers found themselves on two sides of a chasm in warfare; on one side World War II era officers to whom events were black and white, right and wrong. The other side was a younger generation, less respectful of rules and regulations, perhaps, but completely committed to winning. Both main players in the affair, Colonel Rheault and General Abrams, were graduates of the Military Academy at West Point, separated in time by 10 years. That is were the similarities end. The affair became a clash of philosophies, world views and personalities. Ultimately we will never know whether or not the executed agent, Thai Khac Chuyen, was truly working for the Communist Viet Cong, the American Special Forces, the South Vietnamese government, or a combination of all three. Evidence suggests that he was guilty of at least attempting to conceal the truth, a dangerous game, and one that led to his execution in the summer of 1969. He became just another causality in unconventional warfare. As we have seen above, the 1969 Vietnam "Green Beret Affair," is not unique as our forces continue to face similar moral and legal issues daily in the current Global War on Terror. However, as seen above, all Americans can take comfort in the fact that even our "best and brightest" remain subject to the law of war and military justice. That is one certainty in an uncertain war that will not change.
sources
MilitaryHistoryOnline.com

The Role of the Forward Observer and Artillery during the Korean War

2009-04-30T18:42:00.000-07:00

The Role of the Forward Observer and Artillery during the Korean War by Anthony J. Sobieski To understand the role and importance that the artillery Forward Observer played during the Korean War, you must first understand a few basic facts and figures about the overall strategy and use of artillery during the war. With its rolling hills and valleys, high-peaked mountains, large irrigated farming areas, brutal winters and boiling summers, Korea presented all the worst for the U.S. to deal with in the United Nations' first effort dealing with the attempted expansion of communism. And, after it was all said and done, even after fifty-plus years of analyzing the conflict, Korea was, is, and will forever be known as 'The Artillery War'. Much has been written over the years about the infantry and Marines who served there, and of the battles they fought. No one is suggesting or attempting to take any credit away from their accomplishments, because when it comes down to it, the foot soldier was the one who re-took and defended what is now the country of the Republic of Korea, commonly referred to as South Korea. Many a book and article has documented their valiant efforts, but too many times, the role of artillery in these battles, skirmishes, and trying times is summed up in a few sentences. 'Artillery was called in', 'artillery was used' and 'overwhelming artillery thwarted the attack' are the most common phrases that are used in a large majority of books. These are very easy and simplistic statements which have become over-used and commonplace when talking about 'artillery' and 'The Korean War'. Unfortunately they simply do not tell the real story of what 'artillery was called in' meant, and who, what, when, and how it happened. Infantrymen simply did not snap their fingers and artillery shells suddenly appeared and blew up the enemy. Reality was, there were artillerymen loading and firing the guns, handling the communications, tracking the enemy, serving with the infantry, and sometimes giving their lives for their service. At one time or another, over sixty different United States artillery battalions served on the Korean Peninsula. Regular Army, Marine Corps, Reserve, and National Guard battalions all played a part and served with distinction. Republic of Korea (South Korea), or ROK, artillery battalions and also a few United Nation artillery battalions also were extensively employed. Additionally, naval vessels - from destroyers to cruisers to battleships - added their heavy 'punch' of 5-inch up to 16-inch might to the mix of available firepower at the fingertips of the Forward Observer and his team in their bunker or foxhole. All this might was concentrated on a small peninsula land mass no bigger than the state of Wyoming and eventually more concentrated into a jagged uneven 155-mile front line called the 'Main Line of Resistance'. The eventual intent of the U.S. 8th Army, who had overall responsibility for the combatant zone, was to have a breakdown of artillery units roughly divided evenly between the three U.S. Corps, I, IX, and X, and the ROK I and II Corps. By 1953, there were seventeen infantry divisions across the front (ten ROK, six U.S., and one combined UN), with two divisions in reserve (two U.S.). All of the U.S. divisions were assigned four artillery battalions each, usually consisting of three 105mm units for direct support of each regiment, and a 155mm unit for heavier general divisional support. Also, four of the U.S. divisions had an additional 155mm artillery battalion attached to their chain of command, and there were two U.S. Regimental Combat Teams (RCT) with one 105mm artillery battalion each. The ROK Army artillery was a less sizable force, with seven Field Artillery 'Groups', each with two battalions assigned, and eight independent battalions for a total force of twenty-two battalions, which roughly worked out to two artillery battalions per ROK division. Outside of this divisional firepower, were the U.S. Corps artillery battalions, which were for general support of each Corps front and were readily moved if needed to support whatever combat actions were or would be about to take place. Each U.S. Corps had six artillery battalions assigned, usually consisting of a 105mm self-propelled (SP), four 155mm (some being SP), an 8-inch howitzer battalion, and additionally a artillery 'observation' battalion that did not have any howitzers, but tracked enemy artillery by various means including radar and 'flash and sound' observation posts, and then would proceed to call for fire on them. Late in the war, two units were converted to handle the 240mm howitzer, and these battalions were also added to IX and X Corps. When the sheer numbers are looked at, some eighty-two plus artillery battalions, with roughly 400-plus men in each battalion (32,800 men total), five-hundred and twenty-two (522) 155mm howitzers, eight-hundred and ten (810) 105mm howitzers, thirty-six (36) 8-inch and twelve (12) 240mm howitzers, were utilized in Korea by 1953. All for a 155-mile front…simply incredible. Who dared to think that artillery was anything other than “The King of Battle” in Korea?!"The Korean War, and artillery, was before the time of computers and satellites and high speed electronics. Today, the U.S. military is researching mobile artillery mechanisms that can plan, calculate, load, and fire ten rounds of 155mm ammunition in less than one minute at a target ten miles away with deadly accuracy, all with a crew of two, done simply by pushing a few buttons. During the Korean War, all of this was done by the human brain and physical strength. Each artillery battalion was divided up into five 'batteries', three 'firing' batteries, which actually had the howitzers and fired them. There were six guns per battery for the 105mm and 155mm, four per battery with the 8-inchers, and two per battery with the 240mm. As the size of the weapon went up, so did the manpower required to fire it. There also were a 'service' battery, and a 'headquarters' battery. The service battery consisted of troops who made sure the battalion had everything it needed to fight a war with, from the artillery shells to the food rations, and the headquarters battery was just that, the headquarters section that ran the battalion. Sometimes these batteries served next to each other, but many times the batteries were separated by miles. Each battery operated a Fire Direction Center, or FDC, which was in direct communication with each howitzer section and with any Forward Observer team that they might have on the front lines. The FDC was the brains behind the brawn. Each battery's FDC was linked into the battalion FDC, which had overall control of the combat situation for the unit, and directed the battalion where it was needed the most. The Battalion Commander ran his unit through the FDC, and the Aerial Observers and the Forward Observer teams worked with both the battery and the battalion FDC's. Each FDC was manned by approximately eight men and two or three officers. Tracking the tactical situation was the life blood of the artillery battalion, and the effectiveness of the Forward Observers was directly related to the ability of the FDC to do its job well. Connecting the FDC to the individual howitzer sections, Observation Posts, and other FDC's with the other batteries were the wire section crews, using thousands of yards of phone lines to get the job done, sometimes even navigating enemy held ground to do their jobs. Early on in Korea, it was clear that there was need for the services of someone who knew and understood the use of and employment of artillery in a fluid tactical situation. Later in the war, this expertise changed to a requirement of knowing the battlefield on intimate terms, to be ready to call fire missions on multiple actions and areas at the same time. This stemmed down from 8th Army, to the three U.S. Corps and two ROK Corps, to the divisions, regiments, battalions, companies, and individual leaders of patrols and small units throughout the front lines of Korea. The Korean War had both the outright brutality of fighting that WWII had in the Pacific, while drawling from the battlefields of Europe in it's etiquette on fighting. The brutality of the Pacific war, short battles of pure intensity, there was no falling back and regrouping, thousands of men, trained to slaughter their enemy, collocated on a small area of land. And then the war in Europe, with its huge armies thrusting and counter thrusting, moving over large areas of land, sometimes encompassing an entire country in a particular battle. In the beginning stages of the war from 1950 to 1951, movement of artillery in Korea was very similar to that of WWII, firing and movement, firing and movement. The mobility of artillery units was invaluable to the successes of the infantry and movements of the UN forces in general. By the beginning of 1952, when the war entered what is generally considered the 'stalemate' phase (although there are plenty of combat veterans from that time that would strongly disagree with that statement) and on into 1953, the Korean front began to resemble the trench warfare of WWI, with shells raining down on both sides of the front lines (hence the term that WWI veterans had 'shell-shock'). Through all of this, all artillery units used some form of artillery spotters, or Forward Observers. These ranged from FO's that served with the infantry units directly, sometimes never even knowing or seeing anyone in their firing unit for months, to FO's who were positioned in bunkers (either on or in front of the MLR) to Aerial Observers flying in an un-armed, un-protected scout plane. Also, many an infantrymen doubled as FO's in their duties when artillery battalion FO's were killed, wounded or not available. The U.S. Navy also had it's version of a Forward Observer. Naval Fire Control Officers and Liaison Officers who worked on the front lines were utilized as far inland as the guns of a particular ship could fire, and also acted as just that, liaisons for the artillery battalions and units to use the firepower of the Navy. For direct support artillery units, established OP's were not generally used, the FO parties serving directly with the assigned infantry unit they were supporting. These OP's were fluid according to the situation. Each infantry division maintained a number of divisional Observation Posts, which tended to be located and numbered across the front from 'one' to whatever number of OP's were required by Divisional Artillery (DIVARTY) or by the battalions or tactical situation, and were for the heavier divisional artillery units in general support. Corps artillery units used their own OP's which they established in their support roles of divisional artillery. These OP's were not numbered with the divisional artillery OP's and, depending on what units they were supporting, they were frequently located with UN or ROK forces. These OP's also sometimes overlapped divisional artillery OP's in their respective Corps area. Aerial Observers have a long history going back to WWI of pilots and ground troops or artillery working together to suppress the enemy. In Korea, artillery units used 'spotters', Air Observers who were flown over the battlefield by brave pilots usually in a small single engine airplane called an L-19. They were no more than flying targets, and had provided little protection and had no armament, except flares they would sometimes use to mark targets. These crewmen were U.S. Army personnel attached to the artillery units, and they sometimes rarely even knew the men of the firing batteries, flying out of airstrips miles from their units. In the beginning, the Korean War was fought with antiquated equipment, mostly 'leftover' items from WWII. Not many improvements were added to the US Army from 1945 to 1950. The attention was on demobilization, return to civilian life, down sizing, crating up, and putting away in storage the items of war. The US participation in WWII, the last 'good war' left a distinctive taste in the mouths of those who fought it and suffered from it. No one wanted that kind sacrifice, but it was done, hence the term 'The Greatest Generation'. When the fighting in Korea splashed across the headlines of American newspapers, most said 'Where?' The fact that our forces were going into combat again caught some by surprise, but the thought process was that we had the best army in the world and that we would take care of business. The U.S. military became woefully depleted by 1950, not just with men, but with supplies and equipment. The service members who were on duty, and those that were called up reservists and National Guardsmen, certainly were the best. But times had started to change, and their equipment wasn't ready for it. Not until later in the war did our fighting men see improvements, such as 'Mickey Mouse' boots, Flak vests, and bazookas that could knock out a tank. These new assets did not make the fighting any easier on our troops, but it gave them the advantage of preparedness. U.S. artillery was no different. Loading, aiming, and firing artillery had not changed much, and the weapons not at all, since WWII. Most if not all artillery shells were of WWII vintage as well. Korea was a very different type of war indeed. By 1953, trench warfare reminiscent of WWI was the standard, but the use of more accurate artillery, with better knowledge in fire direction planning, shell trajectories, types of shells, and overall destructive power were incredible. Not before or since Korea can it be said that artillery ruled the battlefield. It truly was 'The Artillery War', and one of the major factors in making all of this possible was the men and teams who performed the role of artillery Forward Observer. For the men assigned to Forward Observer duty, this meant being literally on the front lines, close enough to see and observe enemy actions, for the purpose of giving fire support when ever and where ever needed. These men regularly became the focus of unwanted attention by the enemy, sometimes even being caught right in the middle of a raging firefight. Artillery battalion Observation Posts (OP's) were almost daily shelled by enemy artillery and mortar fire, and at times took small arms fire. Sometimes a simple entry in a unit's daily morning reports, such as a statement like 'OP #2 received rounds' was a very polite way of saying that that position was being targeted and fired on. The communists realized that knocking out these OP's meant eliminating some of the allies' ability to fire at them. Also, the need to have the FO team either right with the infantry or in close proximity to them endangered their lives even more. The fact that so many FO's have called fire onto their own positions brings to light a startling realization of what Winston Churchill said 'Uncommon valor was a common virtue'. These men KNEW what they were doing. They had a choice: be killed or captured, or fight it out and possibly lose their life and the lives of their FO team also. This was not a decision made lightly. There are numerous documented cases where the FO called artillery fire onto his own position because they were being overrun. What FO does not readily know or understand what they are asking their firing battery to do? And at the same time, what FDC and firing battery does not understand what they are hearing on the radio or field phone? A man that they more than likely knew, yelling to them to shoot high explosives at them, knowing that this might be the last time their voice is ever heard on this earth? The 'cause and effect' rule is in full swing, and they, the FO and his team, know it. Fire a 37 or 100 pound shell filled with high explosive at a specific coordinate and destroy (kill) whatever is at that coordinate. The following information was compiled with the grateful assistance of 1st Lt Joseph Reynolds, who served as an artillery Forward Observer with the 936th Field Artillery Battalion in 1952. This provides an excellent overview of what goes through an FO's mind, and what has to be thought about and calculated to call a fire mission on the enemy. Most, if not all, of the following happens in minutes and seconds, where inaction and delays could cost American or UN lives. As with any career field, there is 'technical jargon' that must be understood and applied by those that work in that career field. For an artillery battalion FO, the following would apply 'in a nutshell': The Army prescribes a set method of making fire request information to the Fire Direction Center in order to minimize confusion and to facilitate rapid fire as much as possible. These commands are designed to be logical and in an easily used manner. Fire requests must contain certain information to enable the Fire Direction Center to compute the firing data. In divisional artillery battalions, each firing battery usually used the standard method of having two Forward Observers and crew on the Main Line of Resistance (MLR). The use of two Observation Posts usually covered the complete arch of trajectory of the firing battery. In Corps support units, any number of OP's was used to support the tactical situation, sometimes one, sometimes three OP's per battalion. The 'tools of the trade', the binoculars and BC scopes, included a graduated reticule that enabled the Observer to measure lateral distances with some degree of accuracy. The value of the 'mill method' of measuring angles was effective in that with the mill method, there was an arc of 1 unit in 1,000. When an Observer, with the use of the reticule, measures a lateral distance of 20 mills and the estimated range to the target is 3,000 yards, then the lateral adjustment would be 60 yards. Vertical graduations are 5 mills each, and vertical scale would be used for such positions as machine gun emplacements. Horizontal graduations are 10 mills each. Military maps, when available, show contour lines that enable the Observer to better identify the target location coordinates. In layman's terms, the BC scope was to a Forward Observer as an M-1 rifle was to an infantryman. Some Fire Request types are as follows: • Identification of the Observer. The fire direction center must know who is requesting fire. This can be a code name or any other method acceptable to the commander. • Azimuth. Direction which the observer is looking at the target. This is very important especially if the observer is at an angle to the direction of fire from the guns. • Target location. This location can be in many different forms. It can be identified as coordinates, range and azimuth from a known location, and range and direction from the observer to the target, or shift from a previously fired upon target and others. Circumstances determine what method the observer will use in identifying the location of the target. • Substance of the target. The fire request should identify the type of target for the fire direction to order the proper shell and fuse type. These are examples of fire requests made by Forward Observers. They will vary in content but notice that they generally follow a set procedure in transmission. Not all fire missions were done in this format, taking into account the expediency of the mission being called. If a position or OP were about to be overrun, or were already overrun, as was the case numerous times in Korea when faced with the Chinese 'human wave' attack style, some missions tended to be called in somewhat 'colorful' ways. As 1st Lt Joe Adams (213th Field Artillery Battalion) recollected when talking about the Battle of White Horse Mountain, Hill 395, in October 1952, he remembers when the Chinese stormed over his OP and surrounding positions, his call to the FDC went something like "The Chinese are all over the fucking place start shooting at my bunker!". Sometimes units set up a 'Final Protective Line' where pre-registered final protective fire coordinates would be given so as to, again, deal with an assaulting force that was about to overrun a position. These were at times referred to as 'Flash Fires' such as were used during the defense of Pork Chop Hill in April of 1953, when the order was given by 2nd Lt Richard Jaffe (57th Field Artillery Battalion) "Give me Flash Pork Chop!", which in essence meant for all available artillery to fire directly onto the hill with variable time (VT) fuse shells. FIRE MISSION #1. Observer is from Able Battery, and is their second Observer. Target is small group of enemy setting up a mortar. The target is in an area easily identified on a map and the coordinates of the target can be determined with some degree of accuracy but adjustment will be necessary. Request #1: "Fox Oboe Able No. 2, Fire Mission! Azimuth 2300, coordinates 236-421, enemy mortar digging in. Will adjust!" The Fire Direction Center transmits confirmation to the firing battery and will repeat the information, adding such information as "Battery one round in effect". This means the eventual fire for effect will be six rounds, one round per tube. The initial fire would be two rounds fired simultaneously which the observer would adjust from the center of the burst of the two rounds. The classic adjustment would be a left or right adjustment to get the rounds on line with his line of sight and the target. From there he would give add or drop with the first adjustment of 400 yards; then 200 yards followed by 100 yards and then an add or drop of 50 yards, then the command "Fire for effect" is given. This method was generally used but after becoming familiar with the target area a Forward Observer would quite often make adjustments for line of sight along with the initial add or drop and many times the initial rounds would be within 100 to 200 yards of the target. FIRE MISSION #2. Observer is from Baker Battery and is the Observer number 1. Target is near Check Point 210. The target is enemy squad in open. Request #2: "Fox Oboe Baker No. 1, Fire Mission! Azimuth 3200, from Check Point #210, right 300 add 500, Enemy squad in open, will adjust!" The Fire Direction Center transmits confirmation adding such information as "Battery one round fuse VT in effect". FIRE MISSION #3. Observer is from Charlie Battery and is the Observer number 1. Target is 1000 yards from the observer. The target is an enemy bunker. Request #3: "Fox Oboe Charley No. 1 Fire Mission! Azimuth 0400, Coordinates 234-146, Range 1500, enemy bunker, request precision fire, will adjust!" Fire direction transmits confirmation and adds such information as "Precision fire, fuse delay in effect". The battery will fire one round on adjustment and then when fire for effect is called for, the guns will fire fuse delay and a succession of rounds will be fired with the Observer reporting the landing point of each round in regards to the target. Fire Direction Center will average 'overs', 'shorts', 'lefts', and 'rights' to make corrections until the target is destroyed. FIRE MISSION #4. Observer is from Charlie Battery and is the Observer number 2. Enemy is in attack on a front of some 500 yards. The Observer sends estimated target center and calls for additional fire. Request #4: "Fox Oboe Charley No. 2, Azimuth 2800, coordinates 354-456. Spread sheaf 500 yards, enemy infantry in attack. Request all available fire!" Fire direction responds by repeating the request to the Observer and adds: "One battalion in initial fire, requesting support from Corps. Report observation!" Artillery Forward Observers surely did not 'win the war'. But the power and responsibility that was placed into a twenty-two or twenty-three year-old lieutenant's hands was amazing to say the least. One call on a field radio or EE8 field phone could bring in more destructive power than an entire company (and sometimes battalion) of infantry. For those FO's that had the distinction of calling in a DIVARTY or Corps 'shoot' where all available artillery within reach of the target was at their disposal, the terms most used to describe the experience was 'awesome' and 'unbelievable' when the destructive power is witnessed. Many a Chinese and North Korean soldier lost their lives, and many U.S., ROK, and UN lives were saved, by a man who did not even pull a trigger. He simply and professionally said 'Fire for Effect!' ReferenceFire For Effect! Artillery Forward Observers in Korea By Anthony J. Sobieski ISBN: 1-4208-3836-9

World War II

2009-04-30T18:38:00.000-07:00

Momentum Lost: The Battle for the Arnhem Startline by Thomas Leckwold
window.google_render_ad();
After the capture of Antwerp on September 4, 1944, the Second British Army commander, Lieutenant General Miles Dempsey, ordered its spearhead, the XXX Corps, to halt because it had outrun its "administrative resources."[1] The order was in response to the supply issues that were constraining the Western Allies offensive, and though not recognized at the time, the British Army offensive reached its culmination point and was suffering the effects of strategic consumption.[2][3] The British did not view the pause as being permanent and they maintained an offensive orientation in preparation to advance into the Netherlands to pursue their primary strategic objective of seizing the Ruhr industrial region. The battle of northwest Europe is often viewed as restarting with the launching of Operation Market-Garden on September 17th, which was to pursue this objective, but in actuality the offensive restarted on September 7th with limited objectives for a future offensive into the Netherlands. This transitional offensive led to a series of short and unexpectedly fierce engagements against a rapidly strengthening and determined German defense. SHAEFs pre-invasion planning, finalized on May 3, 1944, designated the objective of capturing the Ruhr area in western Germany to the British Twenty First Army Group.[4] The Ruhr was a significant industrial center for Germany and its occupation would cripple Germany's ability to continue the war. The Allied strategy was for a broad front offensive advancing on two axis with one axis north and other south of the Ardennes. The Twenty First Army Group would be operating in the northern axis with the intermediate objective of clearing the Channel coast, West Flanders, and to secure Antwerp and its port.[5] Once Antwerp was secured, the British could focus on their primary strategic objective of capturing the Ruhr which was believed would end the war with Germany. This broad front strategy adopted by General Dwight Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander, was not full supported by General Bernard Montgomery, the commander of the Normandy invasion ground forces and commander of the Twenty First Army Group, and in August he vigorously proposed a single thrust policy with his army group leading the Allied assault.[6] This single front assault was believed to allow the Allies to maintain the momentum of their offensive while husbanding their limited supplies. Montgomery's proposal was expected to open the way for his army group to seize the Ruhr via the Netherlands. The British capture of Antwerp and the supply situation allowed Montgomery an opportunity to press his argument for a single thrust in an attempt to end the war.[7] The objective of controlling the Ruhr following the capture of Antwerp led the Allies to naturally look at the necessity of crossing the Neder Rhine in the Netherlands. This was the last natural obstacle to be breached to reach the Ruhr. The XXX Corps, commanded by Lieutenant General Brian Horrocks, after it was ordered to halt was not in a good position to invade the Netherlands because two major canals in Belgium needed to be crossed. Montgomery and Dempsey both were known for maintaining tight control over the movements of their troops, but Horrocks disagreed with the halt order but he complied. However, he continued to move units to improve his position for the next offensive phase.[8] Horrocks operated on the assumption that the offense would resume shortly. He needed to secure bridges across the Albert and Meuse-Escaut Canals to position his corps to reach the Neder Rhine with the likely crossing point being Arnhem and its two bridges across the Rhine.[9] As a result of this belief, Horrocks ordered the Guards Armoured Division to occupy Louvain to improve its position for a future operation to capture crossings over the Albert and Meuse-Escaut Canals.[10] The British formalized their focus on the Arnhem area when they proposed Operation Comet. Operation Comet was to be launched as early as September 5th with the overall plan of air dropping the British 1st Airborne Division and the 1st Polish Parachute Brigade to capture the bridges in Nijmegen and Arnhem in conjunction with an advance by the XXX Corps. The operation was cancelled on September 10th by Field Marshal Montgomery because of bad weather and evidence of increasing German resistance. Despite the cancellation of Comet the British continued to focus on the desire of launching an airborne operation in the Comet target area.[11] Montgomery and Horrocks were of the same mindset and were focused on the crossing of the Rhine and they both ignored the fact that Antwerp's port was unusable because the Scheldt Estuary was controlled by the Germans. Montgomery ignored this fact, and SHAEF's priority, and rationalized that he could launch his single thrust offensive if he was given priority of supplies. This included the use of the smaller port facilities along the Channel coast including an expansion of supplies being processed through Le Havre.[12] The result of Montgomery's rationale was that he unilaterally downgraded the importance of Antwerp and he assigned the opening of the Antwerp port as the last priority for the First Canadian Army.[13] While the Allies were determining their next move, the Germans were rapidly implementing measures to re-establish an effective defensive line. The British supply issues that halted the XXX Corps came at precisely the right time for the Germans. The Germans retreating into the Netherlands had three factors to their advantage in creating a defensive front. The first factor was that their supply lines were growing shorter as the British supply lines were growing longer. This allowed the Germans to reinforce from Germany, including the First Parachute Army, quicker as they retreated closer to their border and its still operating transportation system then the British could reinforce and re-supply their offensive that was suffering the effects of strategic consumption that was directly and indirectly caused by overstretched supply lines. Oberbefehlshaber West, OB West, was relying heavily on the newly created German First Parachute Army under Colonel General Kurt Student. This force was created the day after Antwerp fell in an attempt to re-establish a defensive line to defend the Netherlands. Student's new force comprised of 10,000 paratroopers of various experience throughout Germany and were to assemble immediately to defend against the British offensive.[14] Student was also assigned General Reinhardt's LXXXVIII Corps already in place along the Albert Canal which brought the First Parachute Army up to a total strength of thirty two battalions.[15] Student was assigned to Army Group B and was to defend the area between Antwerp and Liege-Maastricht area along the Albert Canal which would be in the path of the British XXX Corps.[16] Student was able to get his first paratroopers from Germany to the Albert Canal by September 7th.[17] The second advantageous factor was the deployment of Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe fortress units in the Netherlands. This included the 719th Infantry Division that was being moved from its coastal positions in the Netherlands to the front facing the British ground offensive.[18] The Luftwaffe had a number of security units available in the Netherlands as reinforcements and these were sent to help defend the primary defense line along the Albert Canal.[19] These units were of a low combat value and were inadequate for a full defense to stop the British Second Army, but these units were immediately available to create a hasty defense line against the waning British offensive and create collection points for retreating German units from France and Belgium. The third factor was the evacuation of the German Fifteenth Army from northern France through an amphibious evacuation through the islands of the Netherlands. The Fifteenth Army, according to German General Eugen Schwalbe, who was responsible for the evacuation, was able to evacuate remnants of nine infantry divisions for a total of 65,000 men, 225 guns, 750 trucks, and 1,000 horses by September 23rd and to deploy them into the Netherlands to help bolster the new German defense line.[20] These reinforcements were arriving into the country when the British were starting and conducting their offensive into the Netherlands and attempting to breach the Rhine River. Lieutenant General Kurt Chill, the commander of the German 85th Infantry Division, is the single most influential leader in slowing the British probes when they resumed their offensive, and his action allowed the Germans the time to enable their three advantages. Chill was retreating from France with his shattered division and collected remnants of the 84th and 89th Infantry Divisions along the way. He arrived in Belgium on September 4th with orders to enter Germany to refit his division. But after the fall of Antwerp, Chill deployed his troops, on his own initiative, along the Albert Canal and placed himself under the command of the LXXXVIII Corps.[21] He set up collection centers from retreating German units and added them to his scratch force to defend his new positions on the Albert Canal.[22] Chill's action put a force in place of sufficient strength to allow time for the First Parachute Army to deploy and allow the Fifteenth Army to continue its escape and redeploy through the Beveland isthmus. The German efforts to deploy an ad hoc force to defend the Albert Canal had an immediate impact on the British advance when it was allowed to restart on September 7th. The British offensive up to the point of capturing Antwerp had been a rapid advance across a 50 mile wide front by the XXX Corps from the Seine River. In just four days, between the halt order and the continuation of the offensive, the British found that the Germans were no longer retreating but were now tenaciously defending the renewed advance.[23] General Horrocks ordered the Guards Armoured Division to capture two bridges over the Albert Canal on September 7th in preparation for the invasion of the Netherlands. The advance was rapid from Louvain until elements closed within the main German defense line along the Albert Canal. The Guards Armoured Division discovered one of the two bridges was destroyed. However, the bridge at Beringen was only partially damaged and the Germans had abandoned the town. The Welsh Guards infantry crossed the canal to establish a bridgehead and were assisted by Belgian civilians and the Royal Engineers. The German abandonment of Beringen allowed the Welsh Guards time to establish a bridgehead while a Bailey bridge was completed and tanks could be deployed across the canal and the advance could be resumed.[24] The Welsh Guards pushed onto the cross road towns of Helchteren and Hechtel between the Albert and Meuse-Escaut Canals. The Irish Guards stayed behind to clear Beringen of the German defenders who had returned as the Welsh Guards deploying tanks across the canal. The Welsh Guards captured Helchteren but they were slowed on the road to Hechtel. They could not clear the crossroads which was defended by the II Abteilung of the Herman Goering Division that managed to stop the Guards advance.[25] Horrocks was forced to bring forward the 11th Armoured Division and part of the 50th Infantry Division to assist the Guards Armoured Division maintain its momentum because it found itself in exposed, dispersed, and stalled between the two canals.[26] Horrocks' decision allowed the Coldstream Guards to join the Welsh Guards and they both engaged the II Abteilung over three days in a battle that required its near annihilation before it gave way to the British. The commander of the Guards Armoured Division ordered the now free Irish Guards and the Grenadier Guards supported by the Household Cavalry to bypass Hechtel and continue to the Escaut Canal. The Household Cavalry was able to lead the Irish Guards uncontested within a mile of the De Groot Bridge where it captured the bridge by coup de main and establish a bridgehead.[27] The seizing of the De Groot Bridge on September 12th, near Neerpelt, meant that the last water barrier that separated Belgium from the Netherlands was breached. The seizing of the De Groot Bridge also meant that the British held a bridge on Highway 69 led to Arnhem via Eindhoven and Nijmegen.[28] This bridgehead, known as the Neerpelt bridgehead, is where Operation Market-Garden would be launched, and also meant that the XXX Corps had opened the way for the next phase of its expected operations. The Germans did not give way once they lost the De Groot Bridge and aggressively defended the expansion of the Neerpelt bridgehead and defending and expanding the bridgehead became more costly to the Irish Guard defenders the actual operation to seize the De Groot Bridge.[29] The Germans launched the first of a series of counterattacks starting on September 13th as Kampfgruppe Walther arrived to defend and attempt to eliminate the bridgehead. These attacks were aggressively executed but were inadequately supported by artillery and armor to dislodge the Irish Guards.[30] The counterattacks failed, but it prevented the Guards Armoured Division from being able to expand its bridgehead in preparation for future operations into the Netherlands. The German defensive measures that were enabled by the British stop order demonstrated that Germans were able to stop their retreat and defend effectively against the XXX Corps. The energetic leadership of Student, Chill, Model, Walther, and von Runstedt combined with effective staff work allowed them to turn the rapid retreat into a defensive line that did give way but was able to prevent the British from gaining offensive momentum. The Germans were still short of fully constituted combat divisions, but were able to take remnants and ad hoc units to make the best use natural water barriers and key road junctions to delay and stymie the British armored advance.[31] It served as an indicator to the British that any advance was going to be stubbornly contested. The Germans were further assisted because Army Group B had correctly ascertained the direction of the British Second Army's objectives which allowed it to make advantageous decisions toward their defense. Starting on September 9th the G2 (Intelligence) section issued warnings of a British offensive in the direction of Nijmegen, Arnhem, and Wesel, and though the Germans misinterpreted the Allied objectives in the Netherlands they did anticipate the overall Allied objective would be the occupation of the Ruhr.[32] This allowed them to determine the direction and to establish defensive priority against the British. The German assumptions of the direction of the British offensive were formulated four days prior to the Allies accepting the plans for Operation Market-Garden and certainly mitigated the surprise aspect of that future operation. The British and German commanders shared the view of the importance of the Ruhr industrial region to Germany and its war effort. The British promoted a single front campaign to rapidly seize a bridge across the Rhine River and to catapult into Germany to secure the Ruhr. The Germans were shocked by the loss of Antwerp and also recognized the vulnerability of the Ruhr. They used this assessment and took advantage of their shortened lines of communication to cobble together a defensive front that was allowed to form because the British offensive had reached its culmination point. The Germans stopped their retreat and effectively used geography by deploying along the Albert, Meuse-Escaut Canals and the holding of critical road junctions between the canals to create a tenacious defense. This surprised the British and prevented them from re-gaining their offensive momentum. The result of the determined German defense was that the XXX Corps offensive to capture the canals turned into a series of tactical battles that were unexpectedly fierce and should have been a warning that the advance out of the Neerpelt bridgehead or as Horrocks called the "Arnhem start line" would not an easy or a rapid task.
sources

MilitaryHistoryOnline.com, LLC
militaryhistoryonline.com

World War I

2009-04-30T18:35:00.000-07:00

Decisions of Disaster: Jutland 1916 by Alan R. McGahey
window.google_render_ad();
In the Shadow of Nelson On the morning of October 21, in the year 1805, three naval fleets met at Cape Trafalgar off the Spanish coast. Napoleon had ordered his admirals to mass the French and Spanish fleets together against Lord Horatio Nelson and the British Fleet. Admiral Horatio Nelson went to sea at age twelve and fought in many battles throughout his career. Because of one of these battles, he received a wound in his right arm by grapeshot (a clustered projectile used against boarding parties) forcing the doctor to amputate his arm. Admiral Nelson’s thirty-five years at sea coupled with his combat experience refined his leadership abilities.[1] Although Lord Nelson died at the Battle of Trafalgar, the British decimated the combined fleets of France and Spain. Through the superior leadership, training, and number of weapons per ship, Lord Nelson and his men defeated Napoleon’s combined fleet. This victory at sea secured the supremacy of the Royal Navy for the next 100 years, and ended the French plan to invade England. Lord Nelson told his officers and sailors during the battle, “England confides that every man will do his duty”. After the battle was over and as Nelson lay dying, Capt Hardy gave Nelson the good news that they had defeated the enemy. Nelson responded, “Thank God I have done my duty” and then died at 4:30 p.m. [2] Nelson became a national hero and the spirit of Trafalgar instilled a deep patriotic fervor in the British heart that thumped in tune with their second national anthem, Rule Britannia! “When Britain first, at heaven’s command, Arose from out the azure main; This was the charter of the land, And guardian Angels sung this strain: Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves: Britons never will be slaves.” [3] I. Controversy A looming controversy has lasted almost a century over the Battle of Jutland in First World War. The Germans inflicted heavy losses on the British Grand Fleet but then retreated, making a run for home. The British chased the German High Seas Fleet from the North Sea, maintained control, and enforce the naval blockade; however both sides claim victory. During the battle, at least three ships suffer catastrophe by massive internal explosions resulting in nearly all hands lost. Was it a result of poor tactics, design flaws, a lack of training, bad luck, arrogance, or German superiority? If Jutland was a victory for the British, then why did Admiral Jellicoe receive a backlash from the public for robbing England another Trafalgar? In Germany, Admirals Scheer and von Hipper received a hero’s welcome. What is puzzling is if Jutland was a German victory why resort to unrestricted submarine warfare eventually drawing the United States into World War I sealing Germany’s fate? Many factors contribute to success or failure on the battlefield. The results can be analyzed usuallMany factors contribute to success or failure on the battlefield. The results can be analyzed usually by casualty figures or territory gained or lost. In battle, the fog of war obscures visibility making it difficult to assess the movements and position of the enemy. The fog of war has migrated from the surface of the waters of the North Sea across the pages of history obscuring the outcome of the largest and only fleet engagement of the First World War. An analysis of each factor, the men who made critical decisions prior and during the battle, the machines of war, and materials used such as armored plating, ammunition, and the torpedoes. Only after this analysis, can deciphering of events explain the results and answer the questions, who really won the Battle of Jutland and the answer to Sir David Beatty’s exclamation, “There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!” [4] II. Control of the SeasFor almost one hundred years, the Royal Navy enjoyed supremacy of the seas and the world’s greatest powers had a relatively calm period known as the “Pax Britannia.” During this peaceful time, technology and tactics evolved changing the face of naval warfare. Ships that once were wooden hulled transformed into iron and steel clad warships with steam replacing sails and turret-mounted naval guns replaced muzzle-loaded cannons .[5]Queen Victoria's father Edward, Duke of Kent, the fourth son of King George III was Hanoverian. He was a descendant of King George I, who arrived in England in 1714 to ensure protestant succession. King George II and III both married German wives to reinforce the ties with Germany. Victoria also married her German cousin Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg. Until Victoria was three years old, she had a German governess, who included German as one of her lessons. Queen Victoria and Prince Albert had a daughter also named Victoria known as “Vicky” within family realms. She later married Kaiser Frederick III and became the Crown Princess of Prussia. She gave birth to a son, who would grow up to be Kaiser Wilhelm II. [6] Wilhelm had a fascination with the sea. He had written about his love for the sea when recalling childhood memories of growing up and playing at his grandmother’s seaside estate on the Isle of Wight. He had often seen the naval yard at Portsmouth and the grand ships there. Something in his “English Blood” stirred and he wrote, “There awoke in me the wish to build ships of my own like theses someday, and when I grown up to possess as fine a navy as the English.” His relationship to his mother soured over time because she was determining to mold him and instill in him a sense of “British Independence” however to Wilhelm, she was an iron-fisted taskmaster. When he had grown to manhood, Wilhelm found happiness ad a sense of family when he joined the Germany Army. The army hardened him and he started distancing himself from his parents, especially his mother, the “English Princess.” His father even wrote to the Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, informing him that his son’s vanity and presumptions added to his overweening of himself and his inexperience would make him a danger to foreign affairs. The tension between Wilhelm and his parents seemed to parallel the tensions brewing between England and Germany. [7] Monarchs on their own cannot move their nation into becoming great sea powers. They require naval taMonarchs on their own cannot move their nation into becoming great sea powers. They require naval tacticians; admirals to lead their fleets into combat. The English Admiralty had men such as Admirals George Callaghan, John Fisher, John Jellicoe, and David Beatty. Germany had Grand Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz, Admirals Reinhart Scheer, and Franz von Hipper. These men played the most crucial roles building the fleets and devising the tactics used during the battle. Men of the Sea Part 1: The AdmiraltyIn the years prior to World War 1, Sir George Callaghan served as Britain’s Naval Commander-in-Chief. However; Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill and Admiral John Fisher thought he was incapable of handing the job if England went to war with Germany. So on the same day England entered World War 1; two months prior to his retirement, John Jellicoe promptly replaced him. This swift move proved an embarrassment to Jellicoe as outrage rang through the Royal Navy. Prior to his removal Callaghan introduced new methodology to the naval operations including initial anti-submarine tactics and requested the start of depth charge production. [8] On 20 July 1913, he requested that the Admiralty increase the amount of ammunition carried on the ships increased from 80 rounds per gun to 120 rounds per gun. This would eliminate reliance on supply ships and prevent ammunition shortages in battle. [9]The next Admiral to discuss is Admiral John "Jacky" Fisher, who joined the Royal Navy at the age of 13, on 12 June 1854. His first assignment was aboard the HMS Victory, the famed flagship of Nelson’s at the Battle of Trafalgar. He first experienced combat during a failed attack on the Chinese Taku forts on 25 June 1859. Fisher worked hard and soon established himself as a gunnery and torpedo expert. By the age of 21, Fisher became an instructor at the Royal Navy’s gunnery school teach classes in torpedo and mine warfare. In 1882 during the bombardment of Alexandria, Egypt, gunners were extremely accurate on the HMS Inflexible, which Fisher captained. Within the next 20 years, he had constructed “flotilla defense” plan that provided coastal and shipping lane defense using torpedo boat destroyers and new submarines. In the late 1890s, he became Commander of the Mediterranean Fleet. He improved the fleet readiness and instructed the junior officers to develop independent tactical strategies because in battle decisions may rely on their judgment for their ship after assessing the factors. From 1904-1910, Fisher served a First Sea Lord and developed plans to upgrade the Royal Navy to meet the increasing threat from Germany. [10] His greatest achievement was the development of the Dreadnought Battleship. The name of the first ship of its type was HMS Dreadnought. A quote from Admiral Fisher in February 1909 describing what the new Dreadnought class battleship is in comparison to other warships of the day:
“The only issue is the number of Dreadnoughts. No matter who tries to fight the dreadnought, the dreadnought gobbles them all up; it is the armadillo and the ants. The armadillo puts out its tongue and licks up the ants” [11]
The officer handpicked by Fisher to counter the German threat was John Jellicoe. John began his naval career at the same age Fisher did, at age 13, in 1872. Assigned to a training ship, HMS Britannia, and passed at the top of his class in 1874. A promotion to Midshipman provided him with his first sea-going assignment aboard the HMS Newcastle. He left the HMS Newcastle to serve aboard the battleship HMS Agincourt. Jellicoe spent time studying at the Royal Naval College at Greenwich and afterwards received his next promotion to Lieutenant in 1880. At this point, he had made his goal to become a Gunnery Specialist and within a year, he returned to the HMS Agincourt. During the 1882 Arabi Pasha’s rebellion in Egypt, Jellicoe disguised himself as a native to courier secret messages to and from Sir Garnet Wolseley through the enemy lines. Between the years of 1883 to 1889, he served with distinction on three other ships, ending on the HMS Excellent. In 1889, Captain John Fisher transferred Jellicoe from HMS Excellent to his staff to assist with the implementation of the Naval Defense Act. In 1891, Jellicoe became the Executive Officer on HMS Victoria where he suffered Malta fever while on board. An unfortunate accident occurred during naval maneuvers in 1893, when another ship rammed the HMS Victoria causing it to sink. After recovering and serving three years on the HMS Ramillies, Jellicoe received his promotion to Captain. During the Boxer Rebellion, in the midst of a failed attempt reach the legations in Peking, Jellicoe suffered a gunshot wound in the chest. By 1907, Jellicoe assumed the rank of Rear Admiral and with the start of World War I, took command of the HMS Iron Duke and the Grand Fleet stationed at Scapa Flow, Scotland. [12] The last of the Admiralty’s officers to discuss is David Beatty, who in the tradition joined the navy at age 13. He served on the HMS Trafalgar and later received his promotion to Lieutenant in 1892. Beatty led a quite ordinary career until the late 1890s during General Kitchener’s Sudan invasion while serving in the flotilla of gunboats. The flotilla commander, Cecil Colville, incapacitated by a wound, had Beatty take command. He acted courageously in a series of engagement that later is better known as the Battle of Omdurman resulting in Beatty receiving the Distinguished Service Order. One unique event in Beatty’s career was tossing a bottle of champagne to a young officer of the 21st Lancers on the bank of the Nile. The grateful officer was Winston Churchill. On January 1, 1910, at age 39, Beatty received promotion to the rank of Admiral, which was the same age Nelson was when he became an Admiral. [13] Now let us look at those responsible for the tactics and strategies from across the North Sea in Germany in the Kaiserliche Marine or better known as the German Imperial Navy. Men of the Sea Part 2: The Kaiserliche MarineAlfred von Tirpitz was secretary of the Imperial German Navy from 1897 until just prior to World War I and had support from the Kaiser to build the navy into the High Seas Fleet that included a submarine fleet. Tirpitz joined the Prussian navy in 1865 as a midshipman and commissioned in 1869. He served as a commander of a torpedo flotilla and eventually became Inspector General of the Torpedo Fleet. During this time, he became quite interested in submarine warfare. He received his promotion to Rear Admiral in 1895. After serving with a cruiser squadron for a year, Tirpitz became the Secretary of the Navy and soon afterwards, he introduced two Fleet Acts, the first in 1898 and the other in 1900, reorganizing the navy, putting in to action a seventeen-year plan to build the fleet comparable to the British Navy. Finally, he received the rank of Grand Admiral in 1911 followed by Commander of the German Navy with the start of World War I. [14] Next is Admiral Reinhardt Scheer, who commanded the German High Seas Fleet at the Battle of Jutland. He entered the navy in 1879 and became a battleship commander by 1907. During the period of the 1890s, he established himself to be a torpedo specialist. In 1910, Scheer received promotion to Chief of Staff of the High Seas Fleet. Three years later, he became commander of the Second Battle Squadron. He was a strong proponent of submarine warfare and used them quite recklessly, eventually antagonizing a powerful neutral country, the United States in 1918. Scheer’s next assignment made him commander of the High Seas Fleet in January 1916. He devised plans to reduce the size of the British Grand Fleet by drawing out small numbers of ships into traps to eliminate the much larger British navy ship by ship. [15] The last German Admiral is Franz von Hipper. Franz von Hipper Franz Hipper was born on 13 September 1863 in Bavaria.. On 15 April 1881, he joined the Imperial Navy and by May 1882, he was a Sea cadet. On 21 November 1884, Franz received promotion to Unterleutnant. By 1901, he received promotion to Korvettenkapitän. In 1915, he received the rank of Vice Admiral. The ships in which he served on were the full spectrum on naval ships from small cruisers to battleships. [16] From 1912-1914, Hipper commanded the High Seas Fleet Scouting Forces and when war broke out his battlecrusier squadron score many early successes against the Royal Navy. In 1915 at the Battle of Dogger Bank, Hipper escaped through luck and skill from Admiral Beatty. [17] II. Naval Machines of WarSince men first set sail upon the sea and engaged in combat atop the waves, coastal nations have build navies to ensure trade and provide protection for other seaborne nations. There was no difference prior to the First World War. In 1908, the British Foreign Secretary, Sir Edward Grey, informed the German ambassador “the whole world was now watching rivalry between German and English shipbuilding.” This rivalry came into world focus between the years 1906 to 1914 and proved to be the “coal heaped on the fires” leading to war. The German government passed legislation to support the buildup on the navy causing concern in England. Admiral Tirpitz wanted to undermine England’s control of the seas to promote the Kaiser’s plan of an expanded empire overseas to equal or exceed the British Empire. The advancement of the German navy sparked severe debates in the English Parliament concerning defense policy. The mainline policy makers saw the way to be clear-cut; the British navy will remain superior. Admiral Fisher described the situation,
“Germany keeps her whole fleet always concentrated within a few hours of England. We must therefore keep a fleet twice as powerful as that of Germany always concentrated within a few hours of Germany.”
The naval buildup was a problem for the new Liberal government in England that came to power in 1905. Their platform base was on the idea of homeland social reform. They decide to try a policy of arms control to defuse the situation. This became fruitless since both militaries and traditionalist had already made up their minds thus the machines of war continued to crank out ship after ship, matching, and counter matching the opponent’s naval strength. [18] By 1914, the British Royal Grand fleet consisted of 28 dreadnoughts, 9 battle cruisers, 8 armored cruisers, 26 light cruisers, 77 destroyers, 1 seaplane carrier, and 1 minelayer for a total force of 250 warships. The Imperial Navy’s High Seas Fleet consisted of 99 warships that consisted of 16 dreadnoughts, 5 battle cruisers, 6 pre-dreadnoughts, 11 light cruisers, and 61 destroyers. [19] A young navy officer, Lieutenant Eric Woodruff, wrote a letter to his brother in September of 1914 stating, “There is a great enthusiasm and recruits are flocking in daily. If only the German fleet would come out, we would wipe them out in a few minutes.” [20] For the nonprofessional, it is difficult to know the difference between a cruiser and a dreadnought so a brief overview is in order to prevent confusion during the discussion of the Battle of Jutland. As previously discussed, the dreadnoughts were the biggest and most powerful ships afloat at this time. These ships were heavy armored with large main guns and support guns for torpedo defense. This also meant that they were slower than other ships. The battlecruisers were similar in size to the dreadnoughts but had smaller main guns and varied in amount of smaller support guns. It had less armor but had increased speed. The German navy still had some pre-dreadnoughts. These ships were warships built prior to the construction of the HMS Dreadnought (1906) and only had four main guns. Most of these ships were obsolete in the First World War because they were too weak and slow to fight against the modern battleships thus demoted to coastal defense. Next, is the cruiser which is broken down into light cruisers and armored cruisers. The armored cruiser derived its name from the belt of armor around the ship. Both types of cruisers were multi-faceted warship capable of accomplishing many tasks such as scouting missions, patrolling, protection of trade routes, leading destroyer flotillas and supporting main fleet actions. The last of the main ships are destroyers. The name Torpedo Boat Destroyer (TBD) eventually changed to just Destroyer. These ships were originally large, fast vessels armed with a main gun and torpedoes. By the end of the First World War, the destroyers were primarily used for convoy escort and screening against torpedo attacks from ships and submarines. [21] Submarines were widely used by both sides in the First World War, however; the role of the submarine was much different with the British, who used them as support for fleet actions, whereas the Germans, used them as lone hunters and there was no distinction of their prey…seaman, merchant, or civilian. The conditions of submarine duty were difficult on those assigned to them. Leading Seaman W. Schlicting served on a U-Boat and describes life aboard when submerged,
“The atmosphere below was beyond description. An appalling burst of heat funneled backward. At any moment would be standing at 45 degrees Celsius. The men were standing over the engines in the bare minimum of clothing and their faces covered with oil and filth. They looked like black skulls” [22]
In September 1914, a demonstration of how lethal one U-boat was during the encounter with three aging battleships, HMS Aboukir, HMS Cressy and HMS Hogue. Midshipman W. Wykham-Musgrave was stationed on the HMS Aboukir and survived the day’s events,
“Dear Granny …I was awoken by a tremendous crash that shook the whole ship, the Aboukir went down suddenly. I slid down the side into the water and swam to the Hogue and was just going on board when it was hit. It went down in three minutes so I swam to the Cressy and when I finished having a cup of hot cocoa it was hit and sunk. I was rescued after three hours in the water.” [23]
Over 1400 men were lost from those three ships. On February 22, 1915, unrestricted U-Boat warfare began and within three months, sunk 115 ships. One of the U-Boat Commanders, W. Furbringer stated, “At last it arrived. Unrestricted U-Boat warfare had begun. We lost a burden that we carried since the day the war broke out.” Unfortunately, one U-Boat went too far, sending over 1400 civilians to a watery grave by sinking the luxury liner RMS Lusitania. [24] PropellantA key component to any battle is the ammunition used. In Nelson’s day, the cannons were loaded with gunpowder and then one of three types of ammunition rammed down the barrel of the cannon. The types of ammunition were, ball, chain, or grapeshot. [25] In WW1, the purpose of the naval shell was to penetrate the armor of the ship and then explode. The British used a propellant called Cordite MD while the Germans used Nitrocellulose. So what is the difference? First, Cordite is actually nitrocellulose (Nitroglycerin is a liquid and nitrocellulose a solid) mixed with stabilizers then rolled into cords and coated with a plasticizer. This plasticizer in the past was paraffin, however; the British used Vaseline that has temperature sensitivity. The Germans, also used nitroglycerine but with better stabilizers with more traditional paraffin. [26] We have looked at the men, machines, and the material propellants used by both fleets especially at the Battle of Jutland. Another question may arise, “Where on earth is Jutland?” The peninsula connected to Germany and makes up a large portion of Denmark is “Jutland”. The area was home to a Germanic tribe called the “Jutes” who invaded Britain in the fifth century A.D. The battle was approximately 100 miles off the coast of Jutland in the North Sea due south of Stavanger, Norway. [27] IV. The Battle of JutlandPrelude:The Admiralty developed a plan prior to 1914, a set of tactics to employ to destroy the German High Seas Fleet. This plan included firing multiple salvos at medium range. Following the quick destruction, the fleet would take a quick turn away to counteract any German torpedo attacks. The standing orders for the Grand Fleet were of a defensive stance that overruled offensive strides, especially with the threat of torpedo attacks. The Fleet command structure focused on centralization command, the same tradition of Lord Nelson’s tactics at Trafalgar. Even though the British guns out ranged the Germans, it was decided that medium range firing, interestingly, was still within the range of fast-moving torpedoes that is 7,000-10,000 yards, would provide the best results. [28] The Germans realized that their fleet was outnumbered and wanted to avoid a mass fleet battle so Admiral Scheer developed a plan to lure parts of the British fleet into the North Sea from Rosyth and Scapa Flow by bombarding the eastern coast of England. German warships and U-Boats would be waiting for them. Admiral Hipper would lead Admiral Beatty’s battlecruisers right into Scheer’s hand. If the plan worked, British warships would be enticed into an ambush thus slowly diminishing the Grand Fleet’s strength. The U-Boats proved to be unsuccessful being that they did not sink a single British warship. British Naval Intelligence intercepted encoded messages from Admiral Scheer to Admiral Hipper. The decoded messages informed Admiral Jellicoe and he deployed the whole Grand Fleet, under the cover of darkness, totally slipping passed the U-Boat patrols. [29] First ContactOn May 31, 1916, both Fleets were on a collision course in the North Sea, but unaware of it. Interestingly, a small Danish tramp steamer, N.J. Fjord, sailed between both fleets catching the eyes of the spotters on board the German Light Cruiser, Elbing, which ordered two torpedo boats to investigate. At the same time, the British light cruisers, Galatea and Phaeton accompanied by the Inconstant and Cordelia, veered on to investigate also. As the Galatea neared the Danish steamer, the saw the funnels of the approaching torpedo boats, the signal flag was raised at 3:20p.m., “Enemy Sighted” and then across the wireless Commodore Alexander-Sinclair sent the following message, “ Urgent, 2 cruisers, probably hostile, bearing south, southeast.” [30] Within 8 minutes, the cruisers open fire on the torpedo boats starting the Battle of Jutland. The torpedo boats signaled the Elbing and it turned toward the British. Within two minutes she opened fire at arrange of 14,000 yards. She soon found herself under intense enemy fire, however; she score the first hit, a shell crashed into the Galatea just below the bridge and sailed through two deck yet failed to explode. Now both main fleets turned toward the ensuing cruiser combat and at 3:51 p.m., the Galatea reported seeing smoke from the stacks of much larger ships besides that of the cruisers. Beatty’s battlecruisers started to close of Hipper’s position. On board the Derfflinger, the gunnery officer, Korvettenkapitän Georg von Hase reports,
“A message from the captain reached me in the fore gunnery control position that enemy battlecruisers had been reported. I passed this message on to the gun crews. It was now clear that within a short time a life-and-death struggle would develop. For a moment there was a marked hush in the fore control. But this only lasted a minute or so, then humour broke out again, and everything went on in perfect order and calm. I had the guns trained on what would be approximately the enemy's position. I adjusted my periscope to its extreme power, fifteen diameters, the adjustment for perfect visibility. But still there was no sign of the enemy. Nevertheless, we could see a change in the situation: the [German] light cruisers and torpedo boats had turned about and were taking shelter behind the battlecruisers . .. The horizon ahead of us grew clear of smoke, and we could now make out some English light cruisers which had also turned about. Suddenly my periscope revealed some big ships. Black monsters: six tall, broad-beamed giants steaming in two columns. They were still a long way off, but they showed up clearly on the horizon, and even at this great distance they looked powerful, massive.” [31]
Battlecruiser EngagementBeatty gave the deployment order and the ships fell into the line formation. As they approached, Hipper on the bridge for his flagship, Lutzow, was at a loss why the British had not opened fire since the range of the British guns was 18,000 yards. Hipper was amazed that by the time the British came within range of the German guns, the British were still in the process of changing their formation. Admiral Hipper gave the order to his ships to open fire and within half a minute the British returned fire. The battle line was set with the HMS Indefatigable firing on the SMS Von den Tann, the HMS New Zealand and HMS Tiger attacking the SMS Moltke who was returning fire to the Tiger, the HMS Queen Mary against the SMS Seydlitz, and the HMS Princess Royal and HMS Lion against the SMS Lutzow. The SMS Derffinger was not receiving any enemy fire but had targeted the Princess Royal.. Georg von Hase, on board the Derffinger recalled, “By some mistake we were being left out. I laughed grimly and now I began to engage our enemy with complete calm, as at gun practice, and with continually increasing accuracy.” [32] As Korvettenkapitän von Hase poured fire into the Princess Royal, the Queen Mary scored two devastating hits on the Seydlitz. The first hit penetrated the side armor, passed though coal-chute, and exploded destroying cabins and starting multiple fires and the second hit cut through the 9” armor on the rear turret igniting four charges in the turret destroying the gun and causing a flash fire that killed the crew operating the gun. The flash-proof doors were in place preventing the fire reaching the ammunition magazine. Also during this time, the flagships of both fleets had score hits on each other, Beatty on the Lion and Hipper on the Lutzow. A salvo from the Lion hit the forecastle of the Lutzow and in the return salvo the center turret on the Lion was penetrated. Captain Chatfield on the Lion gave this account of what ensued next,
“. . . blew half the roof of the turret into the air, so that it fell on the upper deck with a resounding crash. It ignited the cordite in the loading cages, which were about to be entered into the guns. The explosion and fire. . . had killed every man in the gun-house and working chamber. The igniting of the charges in the gun-house … when the battlecruisers altered course 180 degrees to the northward, bringing what wind there was ahead. It was at that moment that the other charges, eight in number, in the supply hoist, caught fire and a considerable explosion took place, a flame shooting up as high as the masthead. . . The turret's magazine and shell-room crews-some seventy men-were all instantly killed.” [33]
The Indefatigable and the Von den Tann had traded salvos for about 15-20 minutes when suddenly there was a massive explosion on the Indefatigable and a cloud of black smoke hurled hundreds of feet into the air. The ship staggered out of the formation and started sinking by the stern. Two more salvos came in sending smoke and flames from her hull shooting fragments 200 feet in the air, and then she disappeared beneath the waves taking 1,017 of her crew with her. A German torpedo boat rescued two survivors. [34] Now the Derffinger had switched targets to Queen Mary and joined the assault by the Seydlitz. The Queen Mary took a tremendous. The Queen Mary took a tremendous pounding from both ships and at first seems to have little effect until she exploded to smithereens. Midshipman Lloyd Owen was aboard the Queen Mary at that moment and recalled,
“A tremendous explosion occurred that must have blown the bow to atoms and then another explosion. I sank a considerable distance and after reaching the surface could only see wreckage and oil floating on the surface.”
From the deck of the Lion, Admiral Beatty under his famous words, “There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!” [35] Regroup with JellicoeThe battle had raged for over two hours and both sides had launched torpedo attacks and scored multiple hits. Two British Battlecruisers had sunk the a German destroyer, the HMS Nomad was out of the battle due to two torpedoes from S51, a German torpedo boat. Two British destroyers, HMS Petard and HMS Turbulent, each fired a torpedo and sank the German torpedo boat, V29. Within 30 minutes, the light cruisers, HMS Southampton and HMS Champion, spotted the rest of the High Sea Fleet, a large number of dreadnoughts surrounded by torpedo boats. The “recall” order went throughout out Beatty’s ships 15 minutes after the sighting. The fleet turned 180 degrees and heading toward Jellicoe and the rest of the Grand Fleet. Between the intense shelling from both sides and the smoke screen laid down by the British destroyers each fleet lost track of the other. [36] Admiral Jellicoe dispatched reinforcements, the 3rd Battle Cruiser Squadron commanded by Rear-Admiral Hood. The squadron comprised, in single line formation with destroyers positioned as a submarine screen, HMS Invincible, HMS Inflexible, and HMS Indomitable. The weather deceased visibility and sporadically spotted the enemy through the mist. Rear-Admiral Hood led his squadron and opened fire with his port side guns on the German light cruisers. The Germans launched torpedoes at Hood’s ships then turned from the battle. The HMS Indomitable spotted five torpedoes tracks and the Invincible and Indomitable turned to starboard to avoid the torpedoes. Three of the five torpedoes nearly hit the Indomitable. The Inflexible turned to port. During the same time, four British destroyers, Shark, Acasta, Ophelia and Christopher, launched an assault on the destroyer force that was behind them. The Acasta’s injuries were not fatal; however, the Shark sank.[37]The Main Battle EngagementAs the Germans closed the distance, a tremendous exchange of ordinance ensued. Rear-Admiral Hood, on the bridge of the Invincible, called the gunner control officer, Commander Dannreuther, “Your firing is very good. Keep at it as quickly as you can; every shot is telling.” flagship, Lion, reaWhen Beatty’s flagship, Lion, reached the Iron Duke, Jellicoe’s flagship, Jellicoe asked Beatty via a message, “Where is the enemy?” Unfortunately, during this time, the Invincible sailed out of Jellicoe’s sight right into the German’s sight. [38] Within 5 minutes of the call, the Invincible, received a hit to one of the main turrets. The shell exploded inside the turret resulting in the roof blowing off. A large explosion suddenly occurred equivalent of the magazine exploding. The ship broken in two and sank. Commander Dannreuther and five others were the only survivors of 1,032 crewmembers. During this time two light cruisers, HMS Falmouth and HMS Yarmouth fired a volley of torpedoes toward the leading German battlecruiser with at least one of the torpedoes hit their mark resulting in a humungous underwater explosion. [39] Admiral Scheer’s main ships thought they were only chancing Beatty’s battlecruisers found themselves heading straight for the force of the Grand Fleet. He gave the orders to turn 180 degrees while the destroyers deployed smoke. Oddly enough, Scheer the turns again resulting in having his “T” crossed. This maneuver allowed the Grand Fleet to concentrate all their guns in a broadside attack on the leading German ships while the Germans could only fire their forward guns. Retreat to Wilhelmshaven and KielFacing defeat, Scheer orders a massive torpedo attack to cover the retreat of the German High Seas Fleet. Admiral Jellicoe was very cautious of those types of attack so he orders the Grand Fleet to turn away in order to avoid the torpedoes. This decision broke contact with the High Seas Fleet allowing them to escape. Sporadic fighting occurred during the night and by June 1, 1916 the German High Seas fleet was safely back in their homeports. [40] V. The AftermathAs the waves calmed and the smoke dissipated on the North Sea and mighty ships of war rested on the bottom revealing cost of men’s lives and ships of this battle. For the Britannia the casualties are as follows: the loss of the battlecruisers, Queen Mary (1,266 of her 1,274 crew lost), the Indefatigable (1,017 of her 1,019 crew lost), and the Invincible (1,026 of her 1,027 crew lost). Armored Cruisers Defence (all 903 crew lost), the Warrior (71 of her 107 crew lost), and the Black Prince (1,026 of her 1,027 crew). The Destroyers Tipperary (185 of her 197 crew lost), the Nestor (6 lost - 80 POWs of her 94 crew), and the Nomad (8 lost - 72 POWs of her 84 crew). Also the Destroyers Turbulent (96 of her 109 crew lost), the Ardent (78 of her 79 crew lost), the Fortune (67 of her 69 crew lost), and the Shark (86 of her 89 crew lost). The torpedo boat Sparrowhawk lost of all 6 crew. There were 65 wounded among these ships bring the casualty total for the Grand Fleet to 5,914. The German losses are as follows: The battlecruiser Lutzow, lost 115 of her 165 crew. The Pre-Dreadnought Pommern, lost all 844 of her crew. The Light Cruisers, Wiesbaden lost all 589 of her crew, and the Frauenlob (320 of her 321 crew lost). The torpedo boats Elbing (4 out of 16 lost), Rostock (14 out of 20 lost), V48 (all 90 crew lost), S35 (all 88 crew lost), V29 (33 out of 37 lost), V27 (total crew uncertain, 3 lost), and V4 (18 out of 22 crew lost). There were 80 wounded among these ships bring the casualty total for the High Seas Fleet to 2,195. [41] If by the number of casualties and sunken ships determine the winners of a battle then you might think the Germany were the victors of Jutland. At least Germany and the Kaiser thought this was the case initially. Flags waved as Germany celebrated that the “magic of Trafalgar was broken” and the crews each received the Iron Cross and Scheer and von Hipper would be offered Knighthood – Scheer turned it down because he was not convinced of the victory but he did take a promotion. [42] Kaiser Wilhelm II addressed the High Seas Fleet on its return to Wilhelmshaven, June 1916,
“I would like to thank you all. Whilst our army has been fighting our enemies, bringing home many victories, our Fleet had to wait their turn. A brave leader led our Fleet and commanded the courageous sailors. The superior English armada eventually appeared and our Fleet was ready for battle. What happened? The English were beaten. You have started a new chapter in world history.” [43]
However, Admiral Scheer expressed his thoughts in a confidential report to the Kaiser on 4 July 1916,
“Should future operations take a favourable course, we should be able to inflict serious damage upon the enemy. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that even the most successful outcome of a further battle will not force England to make peace.... A victorious end to the war within a reasonable time can only be achieved through the defeat of the British economic life - that is, by using the U-boats against British trade.... It is my duty to advise Your Majesty that in British waters, where American interests are strong, it will be impossible to avoid incidents, however conscientious our commanding officers may be....” [44]
The British still controlled the North Sea and Germany reverted to unrestricted submarine warfare. This battle was definitely a “black eye” on their face but they claimed victory! It was a costly one at that but they kept the main High Seas Fleet from controlling the North Sea. In RetrospectIf this was truly, a British victory then why was public opinion so distraught. The public was expecting another Trafalgar! When the casualty reports came in they felt as if they had suffered a defeat at the hands of Germany. Admiral Jellicoe was to blame for the catastrophe! On the other hand, was it his really his fault? It is true that Jellicoe appeared to be a “man unable to delegate” who developed a 200 page book of rules for every situation to centralize command resulting in subordinates that waited for orders before acting. He and Beatty did not take advantage of the long-range gunnery advantage the Grand Fleet had over the High Seas Fleet. Jellicoe was cautious, maybe too cautious of torpedo attacks and lost an opportunity to destroy the German fleet but he still kept them bottled up in the harbors for the most part. Remember the largest loss of life came when three battlecruisers, Queen Mary, the Indefatigable, and the Invincible experienced catastrophic explosions after only five hits, which included turret hits. [45] The interesting fact is that the German battlecruisers took many more hits than the three British ships and they did not explode. The Lutzow received 24 hits, the Derfflinger received 26 hits, and the Seydlitz received 23 hits. [46] Without those three battlecruisers exploding the whole tide of Jutland would have turned. So what was it that made the difference? Cordite MD! ConclusionIn 1910, Commander Frederic Dreyer developed a fire control system of “rapid-independent fire”. His machine marked gunnery range observations on paper then calculated “mean range-finder range” within moments. Averaging several plotted observations proved more accurate then plotting single range observations. The Admiralty adopted this technique in 1912, calling it the “Dreyer Table”. [47] This coupled with Sir George Callaghan 1912 decision to increase ammunition from 80 rounds per gun to 120 rounds per gun laid the foundation for tragedy. The brave sailors tried to fulfill the tradition of their ancestors and the words of Nelson, “England confides that every man will do his duty”. The extra ammunition and cordite were laying in the handling rooms and the hatchways from the turrets down into the magazine. an and diver, Innes Wreck historian and diver, Innes McCartney, confirmed this in 2001/2002 with expeditions. A more recent dive was recorded on the Discovery Channel production, “Jutland: Clash of the Dreadnoughts”, in which McCartney and other experts report that the Invincible’s remains run approximately east to west (bow to stern) at a depth of 50 meters. The center section is completely devastated; the bow section is upside-down and stern section upright. One of the turrets points over the starboard quarter with the turret roof missing, “it is a definite Cordite burn”. On May 31, 1916, a shell pierced one of the center turrets causing the initial explosion. The Cordite stacked in the passageways passed the fire, daisy-chained, from the turret down to the magazine. The final explosion in the magazine broke her in two. [48] The decisions of Jellicoe and Beatty may have lost another Trafalgar for England. A slap-in-the-face of British pride; however, the decisions of the Admiralty to adopt “rapid-independent fire” and the decision to overload the ships with ammunition and Cordite proved to be the “Decisions for Disaster” at the Battle of Jutland sending over 3000 sailors to a watery grave.

17th Century Articles

2009-04-30T18:29:00.000-07:00

sourcee
MilitaryHistoryOnline.com