Heads up from Flag Gazer via email:

Sgt. Rafael Peralta: Act of Honor
This Saturday, May 19, 2007, at 6:00/7:00 p.m., Act of Honor about the hero Sgt. Rafael Peralta.

The History Channel’s summary:

On November 15, 2004, Sgt. Rafael Peralta died while fighting to secure a key insurgent stronghold in Iraq. Peralta and fellow Marines were ambushed by guerillas who then lobbed a grenade at them. Already seriously wounded, Peralta shielded his companions by covering the explosive device with his body, saving their lives and sacrificing his own. Watch Peralta’s extraordinary journey from Tijuana, Mexico to San Diego to the streets of Iraq. Included are interviews with his widowed mother and three siblings in San Diego. I urge you to watch and learn about a true hero, a Marine, an American.

For more information see my posts which include many comments by
Sgt. Rafael Peralta’s family and friends:
Sgt. Rafael Peralta – New Photos
HERO: Sgt. Rafael Peralta
[This is a reprint of my most recent blog post: Sgt. Rafael Peralta:
Act of Honor
*This email is a one time ever mailing to all of my Gmail contacts. If you don’t know me, don’t worry, you will never receive another
message from me. I apologize for any inconvenience. Thank you.
Don Danz
http://www.DanzFamily.com

Scanning the net before work, Lex’s post reminded me of the incident that shaped a variety of things in the days afterwards. The things not so obvious in the the story of a ship attacked and damaged with lives lost…..”Battle Orders” became a standard item in the daily underway routine. In addition to the long used “Night Orders” that laid out the Captain’s wishes for the hours when he would be getting that most valuable commodity, sleep. “Battle Orders” reflected the settings of the Combat System of the ship, and any anticipated changes in readiness already planned, that the watches in the night could operate on, without waking the CO.Damage control changed. New pieces of equipment were rapidly fielded: “FFE,” the fire fighting ensemble, the “NFTI,” an infrared detection device, exothermic torches to allow cutting of aluminum bulkheads and decks, and the Jaws of Life were the major ones. Along with those came training changes in the “train the way you fight” methodology.Lectures were held in the school houses discussing the issues of crew fatigue in the long effort, in a hot, smoky environment. New discussions were earnestly held about “what condition do you place the CIWS (Mk-15 Close in Weapons System) in and when? “Auto/Auto?” Much more was talked on.Last year, here’s what I posted about my arrival at work in regards to my part of involvement in this day in history.I’ve not only walked the decks of a sister ship for 18 months, and sailed in the same waters, doing the same mission as the STARK a little over two years after the incident, but earlier in my career, I ran the office that trained the FFG-7 (Flight I and II) Pre-Commissioning Combat Systems teams. STARK was one of the crews my shop worked with for 4 weeks in the FFG-7 Combat Systems Operational Team Training Course at Fleet Combat Training Center, Atlantic. It was an interesting journey across twenty years that kept interacting with the little ships that did so much, for such a bargain basement price. Brad Peniston’s book, “No Higher Honor” about the USS SAMUEL B ROBERTS (FFG-58) mine hit also covers the history of the acquisition and design decisions of the OLIVER HAZARD PERRY Class Guided Missile Frigates. I’d recommend the book again, to help frame some of the issues the STARK faced as a result of the work done in getting that class of ship to the building ways and to sea.A few more years later, and I think 10 years ago this month, I reported to the NAVSURFLANT Combat Systems Mobile Training Team as the Combat Systems Assessment Officer. On those hundreds of inspections I did over three years, I regularly walked up to talk with the lookouts during the Detect-to-Engage (DTE) exercise and asked them where the “threat” (usually a contracted Learjet) for the scenario. Most every time they hadn’t been clued in by the CIC team as to what was happening, let alone where to look. I’d spend a few minutes letting them know they were important eyes for the ship and how little time they were likely to have when a cruise missile came over the horizon at them, but it was maybe their only chance…..The STARK hit affected quite a lot of the “business as usual” conditions.Update: CDR Wm Boulay, USN (Ret), the XO of USS CONYNGHAM (DDG-17) left this comment today, but on the post from last year:

Thank you for this post. I was the XO of the Conyngham that you referred to. I am so very pleased to see that the contributions of the “Gus Boat” crew mentioned. I also drafted the message you read, using the immediate observation of my chiefs and officers for the body. Today is the 20th anniversary and as I do every May 17, I say my prayers for the men we left behind, and search the ever dwindling news stories for mentions of the anniversary. That is how I found this post and the absolutely correct summary of our message. I will finish with the observation that a few years later, Surface program Director under the watch of Joe Taussig, the Deputy Undersecretary of the Navy for Safety and Survivability, I helped make good on those words by deploying COTS solutions for the most serious material deficiencies and later, at the Office of Naval Research, helped develop a fire research program EX-USS Shadwell in Mobile Alabama. On her we can simulate the 2000 degree fire that almost took the Stark and from what we learned and continue to learn there, our fire fighting posture is vastly improved.

Tracked back @: Yankee Sailor

Hey, I’ll keep doing this until someone tracks back! But, I’ll keep doing it anyhow.

So last week, SteelJaw Scribe posts “Reflections – Sympathy for an HT” discussing a unique condition where biology, man made items and the environment all conspired to make for a most fragrant setting on his carrier, just prior to the visit of a VIP.

This day, I add a story I heard, just after arriving aboard to become the Engineer Officer.

USS CONOLLY (DD-979) was on the annual UNITAS XXIV (1983) cruise, part party cruise, part show the flag, and part actually conduct maritime operations with the navies of the countries of Central and South America. She was the flagship for the group of ships that fall, and therefor carried Southern Command, RADM Clint Taylor, USN. ADM Taylor was berthed in the Captain’s Inport Cabin, while the CO occupied the At-Sea Cabin just aft of the Bridge, on the starboard side.

So, one dark evening, somewhere in the Pacific Ocean, south of the Panama Canal (I believe) ADM Taylor had a call from nature and proceeded to the head in his cabin.

Several decks below, in the bowels of the ship, where the “upper deck” types fear to tread, were the components of the forward sewage system, made by Jered. There was a duplicate set of parts, arrayed similarly, aft in the engineering spaces, to handle, under normal conditions, the “effluent” from the after three Enlisted Berthing compartments and Officer’s Country. The two systems were connected, forward to aft, by a pipe so waste could be transferred to the other systems for disposal, in the case of an equipment casualty. The sewage system placed aboard the SPRUANCE Class destroyers, as well as the similarly built hulls of the TICONDEROGA Class cruisers and KIDD Class guided missile destroyers, in the manner of conserving water, used a vacuum system to draw the by products of the human digestive system to a holding tank, where it was ground up and incinerated.

In order to effect the transfer, valves would be realigned to close the “downcomers” from the berthing areas and open the pipe to the other tank. A charge of air would then be used to push the mass to the other tank.

So, on this dark (and I don’t know if it was stormy) night, HT2 Mergner (so I’m told) was to transfer sewage from the forward system, to the aft….but it seems one critical downcomer value wasn’t in the closed position.

As the Admiral stood, in front of the toilet and preparing himself to use the facilities, the air charge not only entered the forward tank, and the aft running pipe, but the line to the Inport Captain’s Cabin head, propelling a significant volume of “material” from the toilet to the overhead, and some of it managed to find it’s way all up the Admiral’s back, as he stood in his white t-shirt and khaki trousers.

I’m sure there was no way to have a lookout plan the “discharge” in such a timely manner, but the net result was it found it’s unwitting, surprised, and according to reports from those who were there, unwilling, target.

The story went on to say the Admiral, attired as mentioned just above, and with slippers, stepped onto the darkened bridge of his Flagship, and, in a loud, commanding tone, demanded the presence of the Auxiliaries Officer IMMEDIATELY! The AUXO, LTJG Steve (for this tale the last name is slipping my memory), was summoned by the Officer of the Deck and then had a one way discussion with the Admiral, while trying not to laugh out loud.

And so, on that dark night in the Pacific in 1983, a sea story was created. It is, too this day, speculated that the entire event may not have been caused by an accidental misalignment of valves, or oversite, but only one petty officer knows that answer for sure.

Tracked back @ SteelJaw Scribe

Found the link to a post at Strategy Page @ Captain B’s One Marine’s View blog.

I suspect it was done by CPT Allison Crane, RN, MS, a mental health nurse observer-trainer from the 7302nd Medical Training Support Battalion, and is titled “When a Soldier Comes Home From War”.

Fine work, expresses much, and the best 2-3 minutes (but you can spend many more) looking at the 21 slides that comprise this excellent reminder of a combat soldier’s return to “the World,” but about life in general, too.

Here’s a few of the slides:

They all are worth looking at. Do yourself a favor, go and check it out and see small pictorial of how our service members live in the current combat zone.

We’re off and running. Lots of hands to shake, some from last year, and the opportunity to put more faces with blog headers.

One group had the opportunity to run off to Walter Reed to do a little counter-protesting, then through a few contacts, got into one of the barracks to shake the hands of some of the soldiers there.

AW1 Tim and I, along with Soldier’s Dad and I sat and told “sea stories,” or in Soldier’s Dad case, “war stories” for a while before the reception began.

And off to the races…

And, I can’t help but thing it is fortuitous that this day is also the anniversary of Desmond Doss’ action that won him the CMOH (see story below) and how fitting that is.

Today, Soldier’s Angels will hand out the 1000th ValOUR-IT laptop computer to a wounded warrior, all made possible by the bloggers who helped spread the word and continue to support that program. I spoke with Jim Riley of Soldier’s Angels Medical Programs last night and he informed me the laptops are being issued to the service members as their own now, and we are out of the “library mode.” He also said the funds from the drive last November allowed them to satisfy the backlog on the books, and then set up for several hundred more, but he’s now back to taking the contributions trickling in and the list is beginning to grow again (hint, hint!).Just think, 1000 laptops in 20 months. Great sponsors and lots of people doing what they can, in large and small donations are making a huge difference in the lives of our troops. BZ to you who have made this happen…

This is a repeated post, but a story worth reading and remembering on this day.

---

This is, by necessity, a long post. It is a story to honor those who have braved combat, and displayed great courage. Please read it through, and then tell others about it.Somewhere in a box, I have a picture. It is three elementary school children and a blonde German Shepard-Elkhound mix puppy standing next to a monument. The picture was taken in 1962 or 63, and it is my two sisters and I, and our dog, Scooter.All of that is important, and it’s not. What is not as important is how my life has been intertwined with the name cast on the brass plate, and what is is the bigger story, the story of how that name came to be placed on the monument.

As I sat down to gather the links, I re-read the Medal of Honor citation. It covered a period from April 29th through May 21st. One some web pages, the day of this man’s most significant action, is listed as May 5th, 1945, which, was a Saturday, by the way. Hang on to that fact, you’ll need it by the end of the post.

The monument was then, the day of the picture of my sisters and I, located near a sugar cane field on the island of Okinawa. It was there my father told us a story of an Army Medic by the name of Corporal Desmond T. Doss, who distinguished himself (that day) by climbing an escarpment, repeatedly, venturing out onto a machine gun fire swept battle field of open, relatively flat ground, to recover his fellow soldiers, and lower them down the escarpment to safety. A brave man indeed, but he was braver still, in the context of then, and even today than those key points describe.Desmond T. Doss is (he is still living) a 7th Day Adventist. This Christian denomination does not believe in the taking of life. Desmond Doss could have easily avoided service in WWII. Because of his upbringing and personal faithfulness, a request for CO status would have, most likely, been granted without question. Yet, Desmond T. Doss joined the Army, not to kill, but to save lives.

Note before the “jump:” Desmond Doss passed away 3/23/2006.

Read the rest of the post here in original form

Update: See update at the end to get a better picture of the fallout of the new Army Policy on blogging from the Sandbox
———————–
I was in the car driving late into the evening, but I first heard the bad news and an audio clip of Matt of Black Five saying the leadership ordered soldiers to check their blog posts and personal emails with their chain of command. I know it’s not been presented in those terms yesterday and over night (Here’s Matt’s post: “The End of Military Blogging”), mostly it’s a wave of hysteria (and I agree this needs to be raised to the point of the top of the heap), but it requires soldiers to “consult” with their chain of command before posting/sending info.
From Black Five, quoting an email he received from a writer for Wired magazine:

Army Squeezes Soldier Blogs, Maybe to Death
Noah Shachtman Email 05.02.07 | 2:00 AM

The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The directive, issued April 19, is the sharpest restriction on troops’ online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say.
[…]

One of the authors at MilBlogs, Army Lawyer, point ot the regulation published doens’t say you can’t blog:

By its terms, the new OPSEC regulation does not require approval of all communications beforehand, rather, the obligation is to consult. But as Noah’s article points out, the proponent doesn’t envision all communications to be monitored nor would it be practical to do so. When a regulation’s proponent gives you that kind of guidance, you hang your hat on it.

But even without that, the guidelines still place the authority (or burden) on the commander. Commanders are as varied as snowflakes. Will some lean too far forward and say “no blogs”? Yes. but they could have done that before. While a commander may technically say “No Myspace” “No Ebay” and “No AKO forum posting” they are not obligated to do so under the regulation and, truth be told, commanders that ARE so lacking in common sense probably have other concerns within their units.
[…]

Army Lawyer brings sanity to the table, and also points out my concern: How will each chain of command member implement this? Some will look at their troops and know they are trustworthy, sane, loyal, sold soldiers, aware that slips not only endanger their lives, but those of comrades in arms, in their units, in their service and in other arms of our combat forces, and will not let things slip. Other commanders will make the “default” decision and say “no more” so they 1) lift a possible time consuming administrative/security burden off their plate, but more likely 2) do it to CYA the situation: “No posts, no risk!”

All that being said and you’re wondering what the terrorist reference is in my title?

I pick up my free copy of USA Today and the headline that is (quite literally) above the fold (The bold print is, the article copy is below) Terrorists not countered on the Web” (titled “Report: Net is key extremist tool” on the “front page” of the online edition – I like that better for a one line synopsis) Key assaults my eyes. We know that, and thanks to General Casey, there is one more weapons we had to take them on, the real daily inputs of soldiers in the sandbox, taken out of the arsenal.

by Mimi Hall

WASHINGTON – Government and community leaders aren’t doing enough to counter media-savvy terrorists from using flashy websites, provocative video games, hip-hop music and gruesome images of bloodied Muslim children to recruit young people online, according to a new report that says the internet may be the extremist’s most powerful frontier.”
[…]

Now, contrast this to the report filed by Major Robbins “Muddy Boots IO (Information Operations): The Rise of the Soldier Blogs” stating thse blogs have a global reach.

[…]
Soldiers understand that the public has become increasingly distrustful of mainstream news, and milblogs are a way to circumvent the media’s power to select news content.
[…]

And that has been a good thing. It equally applies for the bad guys, where the media’b’Allah will choose to possibly not report the beyond the pale horrific activities the terrorists still want the world to see.

Now, possibly, no countering “good” reporting. The only good thing about this news is that I had begun a post a few weeks ago about sitting in a seminar and chafing at the statement of the Army general in charge of public affairs saying we (the room had members of all services in it) had to become experts at public affairs. I thought as a Surface Warfare Officer I had enough to be an expert at, and we were paying “staff corps” officers to be PAOs. At least the time invested in that work will not be lost, now this has come up…

I’m sure the Saturday discussions at the 2007 MilBlogging Conference will be full of this issue.

Update 4/3/2007 Evening:

As I drove today, I wondered if the MilBlog Community reaction (mine included) was a little too shrill and maybe we should take a breathe and use the 24 hour rule. like “we” like to advise others. It would have been good advice, but at least it elicited this response (H/T: Andi):

Fact Sheet
Army Operations Security: Soldier Blogging Unchanged

Summary:
o America’s Army respects every Soldier’s First Amendment rights while also adhering to Operations Security (OPSEC) considerations to ensure their safety on the battlefield.
o Soldiers and Army family members agree that safety of our Soldiers are of utmost importance.
o Soldiers, Civilians, contractors and Family Members all play an integral role in maintaining Operations Security, just as in previous wars.

Details:
• In no way will every blog post/update a Soldier makes on his or her blog need to be monitored or first approved by an immediate supervisor and Operations Security (OPSEC) officer. After receiving guidance and awareness training from the appointed OPSEC officer, that Soldier blogger is entrusted to practice OPSEC when posting in a public forum.

• Army Regulation 350-1, “Operations Security,” was updated April 17, 2007 – but the wording and policies on blogging remain the same from the July 2005 guidance first put out by the U.S. Army in Iraq for battlefield blogging. Since not every post/update in a public forum can be monitored, this regulation places trust in the Soldier, Civilian Employee, Family Member and contractor that they will use proper judgment to ensure OPSEC.
o Much of the information contained in the 2007 version of AR 530-1 already was included in the 2005 version of AR 530-1. For example, Soldiers have been required since 2005 to report to their immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer about their wishes to publish military-related content in public forums.
o Army Regulation 530-1 simply lays out measures to help ensure operations security issues are not published in public forums (i.e., blogs) by Army personnel.

• Soldiers do not have to seek permission from a supervisor to send personal E-mails. Personal E-mails are considered private communication. However, AR 530-1 does mention if someone later posts an E-mail in a public forum containing information sensitive to OPSEC considerations, an issue may then arise.

• Soldiers may also have a blog without needing to consult with their immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer if the following conditions are met:
1. The blog’s topic is not military-related (i.e., Sgt. Doe publishes a blog about his favorite basketball team).
2. The Soldier doesn’t represent or act on behalf of the Army in any way.
3. The Soldier doesn’t use government equipment when on his or her personal blog.

• Army Family Members are not mandated by commanders to practice OPSEC. Commanders cannot order military Family Members to adhere to OPSEC. AR 530-1 simply says Family Members need to be aware of OPSEC to help safeguard potentially critical and sensitive information. This helps to ensure Soldiers’ safety, technologies and present and future operations will not be compromised.

• Just as in 2005 and 2006, a Soldier should inform his or her OPSEC officer and immediate supervisor when establishing a blog for two primary reasons:
1. To provide the command situational awareness.
2. To allow the OPSEC officer an opportunity to explain to the Soldier matters to be aware of when posting military-related content in a public, global forum.

• A Soldier who already has a military-related blog that has not yet consulted with his or her immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer should do so.

• Commands have the authority to enact local regulations in addition to what AR 530-1 stipulates on this topic.

There you have it. Advice: When you feel the urge to “launch,” take a deep breath and see what happens in the morning…

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

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

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!