Mike Lask’s Selected Rants And Other Ravings

November 26, 1899 – March 31, 1945

This was America’s other General Patton. He also led from the front, with unending drive and aggression, but without the flamboyance or the headlines. In fact the exploits of his last command, 1rst Army, 3rd Armored Division, were often confused with the exploits of Patton’s 3rd Army, much to the chagrin of the hard fighting 3rd Armored soldiers. As great as Patton’s 3rd Army was, the 3rd Armored Division was every bit as significant to Allied victory, particularly with General Rose leading them on.

General Rose was the son of a Rabbi and the highest-ranking Jewish soldier in the U.S. Army during World War II. Tragically killed in action while scouting the front lines during the last days of the war, he has been buried under a Christian Cross, Star of David, and finally a Latin Cross (he likely had a battlefield conversion to Christianity after being wounded in WW I). Regardless of the nature of his faith, his story is woefully under-represented in the history books. His long and distinguished military career stretched all the way back to the World War I. His decorations included the Distinguished Service Medal, the Silver Star, the Purple Heart and the French Legion of Honor and the Croix de Guerre.

By far the best site I found was The U.S. 3rd Armored Division History Website. A whole sub-section within the World War II section is devoted to him, complete with an extensive collection of photos:

http://3ad.com/

The rest of the few sites I could find are just OK…

http://pages.cthome.net/inspector/3rd_armored/mg_maurice_rose.htm

http://www.3ad.net/mg_rose.htm

http://www.3ad.org/wwii_heroes/rose_maurice/rose_maurice_home.htm

And there is also a great History Channel Production on the 3rd Armored:

http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=71052

In my second installment of less well-known military things of note, I bring you one of my favorites from the American Civil War: Berdan’s Sharpshooters. Actually, these Special Forces are rather familiar to Civil War nuts like me but probably unknown to just about everyone else.

The following link is to part of a much larger site, Company "C", 2nd Regiment, Berdan’s United States Sharpshooters. They are a re-enacting unit and their site has a little treasure trove of historical information. You can access the rest by simply going to their home page.

http://www.berdansharpshooters.com/tactics.html

This just about sums it all up, as only Mr. Steyn can:

AND so the "looming Iraqi election fiasco" joins "the brutal Afghan winter" and "the brutal Iraqi summer" and "the seething Arab street" and all the other junk in the overflowing trash can of post-9/11 Western media fictions....


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12107390%255E7583,00.html

"A suicide attacker blew himself up, killing a policeman and badly injuring a number of voters. But severed limbs were swept aside, the torso of the suicide bomber removed, and, with the pavement still bloody, people gathered once again in a patient queue, waiting to vote."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4224435.stm

Well, at least they printed part of it (mine’s at the bottom):

http://www.freep.com/voices/letters/ewar25e_20050125.htm

It would be nice if they at least indicated the edits.

Here is the original story that set me off:

http://www.freep.com/news/nw/iraq22e_20050122.htm

What I actually wrote in response:

I come in from shoveling the 12 inches of snow that the media tells me is only six, pick up my Free Press and there right at the top I am greeted with the ridiculously simplistic headline that the U.S. is in danger of losing the war in Iraq! Well, I suppose it's always true in every war, that there is a danger of losing. However I couldn't escape noticing the annoying link between the headline and the key premise that we will lose because the "insurgents" will simply survive "until the will of the occupying power is sapped." Gee, do you think histrionic headlines like yours might have anything to do with sapping our will?

You report on the war as if one has never been fought before. You cite the increasing casualties and combat action as evidence that we are losing. History (which didn't start yesterday) actually teaches a quite different lesson. The last year of our own Civil War saw far more casualties and constant combat action than the previous years, all in the prelude to ultimate Northern victory. During the Second World War, similarly, the greatest number of U.S. combat casualties occurred in the final months of the war (Hurtgen Forrest, Battle of the Bulge, etc.). In fact, the Battle of Okinawa, easily one of the most bloody engagements ever fought by the U.S. military, started less than four months before the surrender of the Japanese. Russian combat casualties (let alone civilian!) were far greater than any other participant in both world wars. Yet Russia was a far more powerful and victorious nation at the end of World War II than at any other time in history. Conversely, in Vietnam, a war which most would argue we lost, or at least gave up, US combat casualties actually dropped precipitously from 1969 on. All the while the casualties of both the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong were both grievous and relatively constant in their extreme numbers. Nonetheless they persevered, they prevailed. Which really is one of the important lesson of war, that is, the side that perseveres usually wins.

If President Lincoln had believed the headlines of many of the newspapers during his tenure, we would be at least two nations today, maybe only one of them free. At least back then, the papers had the decency of stating who they supported. No feigned absence of bias. A little more analysis and historical perspective and less, dare I say, politics, at least on the front page, as you endeavor to report on the war, would not only be helpful and more honest, it might actually help us persevere. Imagine the Free Press actually on the side of Victory and Freedom. If you are going to take a side, it would be nice if it was ours.

Michael Lask
Huntington Woods

A Postmodern War
by Victor Davis Hanson
City Journal, January 13, 2005

In this essay, Hanson basically summarizes his entire philosophy, which guides his analysis of, well, just about everything. This is how we win or lose.

http://victorhanson.com/articles/hansonWin05.html


And then the myopia of evaluating the war in real time through the media...

Triangulating the War
Yesterday's genius, today's fool, tomorrow's what?
by Victor Davis Hanson
National Review Online, January 14, 2005

HEADS YOU LOSE, TAILS WE WIN

http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson011405.html

A Second-Term Retreat?

Norman Podhoretz follows up his outstanding essay on WW IV with this current piece just as much worth your time.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/special/A11902025_1.html

A link to the earlier essay can be found below...

January 10, 2005
Heartbreak aside, Iraq progresses
by Victor Davis Hanson

This New Year, Americans should reflect on what we have accomplished in more than three years of hard war since being attacked on Sept. 11….

Such a remarkable revolution is comparable to the ancient liberation of the Spartan helots or the horrendous task of ending chattel slavery on our own shores….

http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson011005.html