H/T: Capt B

Tracked back @: Yankee Sailor

I may have stumbled across the next great social commentator of our time. The person will remain anonymous, but in an email discussion about massive amount of blog hits, here was the salient comment:

If you really want a lot of hits, it seems the best tactic is to write lunatic rants about one or another political side, yielding no sense of an idea that others’ have motivations that might be in the least valid, and that those on your political side (so long as they hew to your personal interpretation) are angels. That’ll reliably draw the 0.5% of the population that gets no affirmation anywhere else.

Whadda ya think? Did he nail it?

I think he does, as evidenced in “Map: Welcome to the Blogosphere”by Stephen Ornes from Discover magazine:

Courtesy of Matthew Hurst

The blogosphere is the most explosive social network you’ll never see. Recent studies suggest that nearly 60 million blogs exist online, and about 175,000 more crop up daily (that’s about 2 every second). Even though the vast majority of blogs are either abandoned or isolated, many bloggers like to link to other Web sites. These links allow analysts to track trends in blogs and identify the most popular topics of data exchange. Social media expert Matthew Hurst recently collected link data for six weeks and produced this plot of the most active and interconnected parts of the blogosphere.

1 MR. POPULARITY
On the map, white dots represent individual blogs, sized according to number of links. Nearly 500,000 people visit the DailyKos every day, making it one of the world’s most popular blogs. A link from DailyKos is a guaranteed way of attracting Web traffic (and therefore advertising revenue), and as a result DailyKos has a strict link policy. Green links represent one-way links (that is, blog A links to blog B), and blue links indicate reciprocal links (blog B returns the favor).
[…]

Update 5/2/2007: Tech Crunch nails another web phenomena: Digg users determine the news….as they say “Viva La revolution!” (and you thought it was bad when MSM editors decided what would be aired/printed….)

H/T: Little Green Footballs and LGF reader Ward Cleaver

Tracked back @:

The US Embassy in Saigon, RVN, 4/29/1975
Operation”Frequent Wind”: 32 years ago. What: The evacuation scores of friendly Vietnamese, rushing to get away from the onslaught of the North Vietnamese Army, rolling into Saigon. Why: Because we are Americans and we value loyalty and we are compassionate and we didn’t want our friend to die by the hands of the Communists.How did this come to be? The “defeatocrats” had won the battle and “defunded the war.” First they pulled money from our troops, then for all military aid to the South Vietnamese government.Sound familiar? Yes, it does. Toss this into the intellectual mixing bowl: In 1968, a new president, Richard Nixon, began pulling our troops out, based on the political pressures within our nation. He just didn’t load them up and bring them home, but put into place “Vietnamization” as a palatable strategy to fight the war, but not with US troops directly.

Soon after taking office. President Richard Nixon introduced his policy of “vietnamization”. The plan was to encourage the South Vietnamese to take more responsibility for fighting the war. It was hoped that this policy would eventually enable the United States to withdraw gradually all their soldiers from Vietnam.

In other wrods, it was a different strategy than had been in place under the Johnson Administration, which essentially was taking raw military might as the main “tool” in the diplomacy tool box.

The net result of Vietnamization was it was working, with the US supplying the air power to support the RVN ground units. Once funding for US military units was taken away, then the RVN forces began to loose the fight. Then when the funding for supplies for those troops was pulled, the war was lost.

Who had control of the Congress? The Democrats. Who had pushed for this? The Democrats. Sound like the same news could be on a newspaper headline near you soon? Yes. How about historians who can cut and paste from their works on Vietnam and then search and replace for a few names and dates and titles of bills in the Congress to record what happens next?

And when the Democrats are successful, either in this year or January 2009, know that we, the Americans people will demand that our faithful Iraqi friends and their families be spared from the quite real possibility of a horrible death, with a rapid immigration measure. And they will come…..It happened before, as we absorbed not only Vietnamese, but Montagnards and Laos, who had served us in holding the line against Communism. This will happen again.I foresee two scenarios with the massive immigration of Iraqis to this nation that put the Democrat’s policies at risk:

• The beleagured Iraqis, who risked their lives, and those of their families (and most likely did lose family already), believing we would, in the post-Saddam era, help them forge a free and safe country will be disillusioned. As they become US citizens, they will most likely not forget the petty political power struggles between Democrats that caused them to have to flee their native land for political asylum. Their votes will not fall in the Democrat’s column, nor will a few generations (at least the one following) either. Not good for the Dems.
• While the process is streamlined, much as we have done for the Cubans when they fled Castro, some who are able to get in the line to head to the US will be moles from al-Qaeda. They will, because of the rapidity with which each applicant will be handled, manage to avoid detection and then be set down in our midst, to begin to work from the inside. Whatever the next “9/11 Commission” we hold will have to struggle with a hard fact: It was some who we granted asylum to, who would not be here except for the fact that we pulled out before the job was done.

I don’t think one or the other are too far fetched. In the larger picture, I think it will be a combination of both scenarios, and the only question will be which plays out before the other?

The wave of immigration the Dems surely don’t want, but I’m sure they haven’t thought that through for gaming out the possible futures seems to be their extremely weak suit.

Tracked back @: EagleSpeak, Third World County

The story continues to “push back.”

A commenter at Little Green Footballs got me thinking…

Just where did we get the evil we associate the the legends of vampires? Well, it was the Romanian Prince Vlad Tepes, also know as “Dracula,” which translates to “son of the Dragon.” Vlad pcked p the nickname “Vlad the Impaler,” due to his means of dispatching his (Islamic) Turkish enemies.

Was Vlad some random nutcase? Possibly, but he was also a hostage“guest” of the Ottoman Empire, from 11 to about 17 years old, to keep his father’s commitment to the Turks intact. Maybe his vacation in Turkey had something to do with it:

We know little about Vlad’s early childhood in Sighisoara. His mother was apparently Cneajna, of a Moldavian princely family. He was the second of three sons; his brothers were Mircea and Radu. The family remained in Sighisoara until 1436 when Vlad Dracul moved to Targoviste to become voivode of Wallachia. Here, young Vlad was educated at court, with training that was appropriate for knighthood. But his father’s political actions were to have major consequences for him and his younger brother Radu. On the death of Sigismund, Vlad Dracul ranged from pro-Turkish policies to neutrality as he considered necessary to protect the interests of Wallachia. To ensure the reliability of Dracul’s support, the Sultan required that two of his sons — Vlad and Radu — be held in Turkey as guarantees that he would actively support Turkish interests. The two boys may have spent up to six years under this precarious arrangement. Young Vlad would have been about eleven years old at the time of the internment, while Radu would have been about seven. It appears that they were held for part of the time at the fortress of Egregoz, located in western Anatolia, and later moved to Sultan Murad’s court at Adrianople. The younger brother Radu, a handsome lad who attracted the attention of the future sultan, fared better than Vlad, a factor that helps explain the bitter hatred and rivalry that developed between the brothers later. Apparently, no serious physical harm came to the boys during these years of captivity, though the psychological impact on Vlad is difficult to assess. After their subsequent release in 1448, Radu chose to remain in Turkey. But Vlad returned to Wallachia to find that his father had been assassinated and his older brother Mircea buried alive by the nobles of Târgoviste who had supported a rival claimant.

Vlad was voivode for three separate periods, totalling about seven years. Not too much is known of his first brief period of rule (in 1448). This reign was short-lived, and Vlad spent the next eight years plotting his return to power. Finally in 1456 he was successful and ruled for the next six years, the period about which most is known. After major battles against the Turks in 1462, he escaped across the mountains into Transylvania and was held as a prisoner by the Hungarian king Matthias Corvinus until the mid-1470s. His recovery of the throne for a third time in 1476 was brief, for he was killed in battle during the subsequent winter.

Though Vlad was to reign for less than seven years, his reputation throughout Europe was widespread. There are several primary sources of information, which offer a variety of representations, from Vlad as a cruel, even psychopathic tyrant to Vlad as a hero who put the needs of his country above all else. Consequently, it is a virtually impossible task to reconstruct his political and military activities with certainty.

Now the “timeline” of the effects of Jihad, in my accidental iterative study recedes fro 1492 to about 1448.

Who knows, without Mohammed and his being “offened” by his rejection by his own tribe, we may not have ever heard of Bela Lugosi.

James Hornfischer’s second work is a wonderful a read as his first, “Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors,” which I discussed in this post.

“Ship of Ghosts” tells the story of the history of the USS HOUSTON (CA-30), from her time as the Flagship of the Asiatic Fleet to her loss in combat action, which is a remarkable tale in itself, then proceeds to document the life of the survivors, captured by the Japanese, to become the slave labor, intermingled with Japanese engineers, natives, Australian, British, and Dutch POWs that built the Thai-Burma railroad. Once captured, the crew of the HOUSTON had their lives intertwined with the crew of the RMAS PERTH, which was in company with and fought alongside HOUSTON, suffering the same fate, and the “Lost Battalion,” an Army National Guard form Texas (2 Bn/131 Regiment of the 36th Div). It is a story that sheds the light of truth on combat actions not well told before, but possibly more importantly, the actual conditions and situations that existed in the building of the Japanese railroad, dispelling the myths from “The Bridge Over the River Kwai” and “King Rat.”There is heroism, courage, determination, persistence, and sheer guts displayed on almost every page. The range of personal accounts, from the most junior to the most senior involved in this history are remarkable. The writing is, as in his last book, engaging and draws you into the story.I began reading this as the crisis of the British sailors and Marines was occurring a few weeks ago, and found the stories of how POWs handled their captivity at opposite ends of the spectrum of military character.The stories of the naval battles, between the massive Japanese Fleet and it’s supporting Imperial Army and Naval air forces and a out-numbered set of surface vessels from several allied nations trying to do their best to hold the Japanese back with out the luxury of air support, dedicated port facilities of logistical support. Some insight into the tactics used by both sides are discussed, useful to historians of Naval Warfare.Within the book are many stories with in the story, or natives who assisted the Allied prisoners, the medical conditions and how they were handled in the deep jungle under extreme circumstances, the Japanese freighters, carrying POWs to mainland Japan being sunk by US submarines and stories of US POWs who worked in the shipyards and factories of the Japanese.An interesting historical note is when the HOUSTON was sunk, the citizens of the Houston, TX area collected money to buy a new USS HOUSTON. The money ($34M) was sent to the War Department and not only funded a new light cruiser, but also money to build an escort carrier, the USS SAN JACINTO (CVL-30). This was the CVL that President George H.W. Bush flew from when he was bombing Chi Chi Jima and was shot down.

Not only did the Texans open their wallets, but they had a recruiting drive and more than 3000 men stepped forward to join the armed services to replace the lost 1,168 crewmen of the HOUSTON.

As the book works it’s way to it’s conclusion, there is information of the War Tribunals for those in the Japanese chain of command.

Well worth the time to read this well researched work.

Additional Notes:

• A blog for the USS HOUSTON (CA-30) is here.
• Notes on a dive on the USS HOUSTON by the son of a survivor.

Tracked back @: Yankee Sailor, Third World County

I’m not kidding. Go watch the video.

Good for those desiring a profession in the National Speed Packing League.

Presley Neville O’Bannon, USMC
Credit: Find A GraveChinpokomon points out one 1st Lt Presley O’Bannon of the USMC laid a thumpin’ on the “pirates” from Tripoli on this date, but way back in 1805. You know, as in “…to the shores of Tripoli, we will fight our country’s battles…”Note the time lag from authorizing a Navy in 1794 until the forces were on station for the mission they were established for. 11 years.Why can’t the Democrats take a breath?

---

Update 4/28/2007: In looking for a good link for the famous LT, I came found this: How do you feel about Ridley Scott directing a movie depicting some hacking and slashing way across parts of the North African coast line in the early 1800s?

‘O’Bannon’ May Make
Big-Screen Debut

Presley Neville O’Bannon is likely to make his big-screen debut within the next two years, alongside such notable talent as Russell Crowe and Ben Kingsley. There are two film projects underway focusing on the American-sponsored expedition against the Tripolitan tyrant in 1805. (Read WGT’s feature about Presley O’Bannon’s role in the expedition.)

The filming schedules and indeed, even the bulk of the casting have not yet been unannounced, according to a report in February in Variety, the trade paper for the American film industry.

The project that seems most solid is headed by Mark Gordon Productions (“The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen,” “The Day After Tomorrow”) and Scott Free Productions (“Man on Fire,” “Captain Kidd,” with 20th Century Fox on board as distributor and Ridley Scott (“Black Hawk Down,” “Gladiator,” “Hannibal”) as director.

The film, titled “Tripoli,” would bring together Russell Crowe, cast as U.S. Navy agent William Eaton, and Scott, both last together in the blockbuster “Gladiator.” According to Greg Dean Schmitz, a columnist for Yahoo! Movies, Ben Kingsley is also in this film, which reportedly has a $100 million-plus budget.

Though Eaton reportedly is the chief protagonist in screenwriter William Monahan’s treatment, O’Bannon, the leader of one of the two main attack forces in Eaton’s expedition, is likely to represent a plum role, as well.

According to Schmitz, Touchstone Pictures and Valhalla Motion Pictures are also developing a film focusing on the Tripolitan war. Jean-Jacques Annaud (“Enemy at the Gates,” “Two Brothers”) is the likely director, using a script by John Collee (cowriter of “Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World”).
— WGT

Now there are some possibilities! BRING IT ON! I know the story, I know the ending and I liked “300.”

I just hope it hits the screens before terminal PC sets in.

Also, for those wanting to understand the Marine Corps traditions in more detail, Lt O’Bannon is the one who began the traditional outfitting of Marine officers, which stands to this day: The Mameluke Sword.

[…]
On the 25th day of April, the forces under Eaton and O’Bannon reached Derne and terms of surrender were offered to the enemy. The flag of truce was immediately returned. “My head or yours,” came the reply from the Government’s stronghold.

O’Bannon then swung into action. With the support of naval gunfire from American ships in the harbor and accompanied by his seven Marines, he spearheaded a bayonet charge which resulted in the capture of the fort on 27 April, 1805. O’Bannon personally lowered the Tripolitian flag and hoisted the Stars and Stripes for the first time on foreign soil, securing the War with Tripoli.

Hamet Karamanli promptly took as ruler of Tripoli and presented the Marine lieutenant with his personal jeweled sword, the same type used by his Mameluke tribesmen. Today, Marine officers still carry this type of sword, commemorating the Corps’ service during the Tripolitian War, 1801 – 05.

Appropriately, the actions of O’Bannon and his small group of Marines are commemorated in the second line of the Marines’ Hymn with the words, “To the Shores of Tripoli”. These same words were also inscribed across the top of the Marine Corps’ first standard, adopted around 1800.
[…]

And, lest you believe there is something new under the sun, here’s a short recounting of the days after the victory at Derna and commentary on betrayal, the “what happened next” and the story of an embittered general who comes home to critisize the administration from About.Com: Military History – Barbary Glory, Barbary Shame:

[…]
Betrayal in Barbary

Eaton’s victory celebration was short-lived. The pasha’s reinforcements arrived the day after the battle and surrounded the town. For a month, Eaton held out against a force more than three times the size of his own. Constant skirmishes and raids kept his troops on edge. A plot to poison him was foiled only when a local Muslim mullah revealed the plan.

On June 11, the Pasha’s forces launched a last furious attack. Hamet’s cavalry bore the brunt during a confusing, four-hour slugfest of charge and counter-charge from which Hamet eventually emerged victorious. The road to Tripoli was open.

But the Marines never made it to the now-famous “shores of Tripoli.” The next day, the USS Constellation arrived with news that the United States had signed a peace treaty with the Pasha in Tripoli. Eaton was ordered to evacuate with his Christian forces, Hamet, and a handful of the former pasha’s retainers. The rest of Eaton’s army was to be abandoned.

The news was a crippling blow to Hamet, whose long-held mistrust of American intentions was confirmed. Eaton protested that his orders went against his sense of “duty or decency.” But in the end, Eaton obeyed his superiors. In a secret midnight maneuver, he pulled out of Derna. The story goes that when the townspeople awoke to find the Americans gone, their wails carried to the Constellation, where Eaton heard them in silent agony.

Most of those who remained in Derna either fled or were later massacred by a vengeful Pasha.
An Ignoble End

Eaton’s adventure is, at its heart, a story of missed opportunities — for Eaton to fulfill his military destiny, for Hamet to reclaim his throne, and for U.S.-Arab relations to find some common ground. While no one would claim that a successful end to Eaton’s mission would have led to friendly relations with the Muslim world, it is hard to look at the midnight retreat from Derna and not see in it the kernels of a profound Arab-American mistrust that echoes through to this day.

America greeted Eaton as a hero, his daring victory credited with freeing the hostages and ending the war. But he returned an embittered man, his rants against the administration soon driving away even his closest supporters.

General William Eaton spent the rest of his days a lonely drunk in the taverns of Boston. He died in 1811 at the age of 47, and was buried somewhere in Massachusetts in an unmarked grave.

Barr Seitz is a former journalist with ABCNews and is writing a book about Eaton’s march and the Battle of Derna, titled “The Sword and the Scimitar.”

History: Don’t leave home for a debate without it!

Stumbling about and I find more “peripherial” knowledge:

Green Side of the Air Force is posted on one of the recently added MilBlogs: Jarhead Trader.

Interesting. A large photo voltaic array is going in at Nellis AFB and they are experimenting with JP-8/syntheitc fuels in a 50/50% mix for B-52s.

I can’t imagine that I have a shot at being rewarded as a randomly picked person (via my email addy) to help bring Saddam’s treasury holding home to the Good ‘Ol USA…

FROM: Sgt. Smith David Fitte,
Important Message

Good day,

My name is David Smith Fitte, I am an American soldier, I am serving in the military of the 1st Armored Division in Iraq , as you know we are being attacked by insurgents everyday and car bombs. We managed to move funds belonging to Saddam Hussein?s family in 2003. The total amount is US$25 Million dollars in cash, mostly 100 dollar bills, this money has been kept somewhere outside Baghdad for sometime but with the proposed troop in increase by president Bush, we are afraid that the money will be discovered hence we want to move this money to you for safekeeping pending the completion of our assignment here. You can go to this web link to read about events that took place there:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2988455.stm

We are ready to compensate you with good percentage of the funds, No strings attached, just for you to help us move it out of Iraq. Iraq is a war zone, so we plan on using diplomatic means to shipping the money out as military cargo, using diplomatic immunity. If you are interested I will send you the full details, my job is to find a good partner that we can trust and that will assist us. Can I trust you? When you receive this letter, kindly send me an e-mail signifying your interest including your most confidential telephone numbers for quick communication also your contact details.

This is risk free.
With regards from,
Sgt. David Smith Fitte
This is risk free.

Respectfully,

Sgt.Smith David Fitte

I’m doing well right now, but if you feel so inclined to help Sgt. Fitte with his “problem” be my guest!

From Lion in Oil blog, and interview with a college football player who decided to enlist in the Marines. A first person view with some real solid thinking revealed…

The “teaser:”

[…]
(2) As a college graduate, you had the option to attend Officer Candidate School (OCS) and become an officer in the Marines. Yet, you decided against that path. Why did you decide to enter the Corps as a enlistee, or as you put it a, “grunt?”

I looked into going to OCS, but the more I talked to people the more I was told that this war was being fought on the enlisted level. Corporals and Sergeants lead patrols over here, not Lieutenants and Captains. I wanted to lead, but I wanted to make sure that I was in a position to lead men where its needed most, in combat. I’ve been blessed/burdened with that responsibility.
[…]

Some would say they wanted to care for their political future while enrolled in Army ROTC, and some men, like Jake, look at the future and know it’s about doing it right.

Thanks, Jake, from afar for taking the high and hard road.

H/T: Little Green Footballs