I have been very busy the past few days, I had already preloaded "Monday Music", that is why it posted as scheduled.
Last week I went to my Boy Scout Camp to set up the range layout for the coming up Klondike shoot that I was running for the Boy Scouts.
I did this on Thursday, This took me several hours, then I returned home and continued doing stuff around the house and other errands.
On Friday it was my Dads 75th Birthday, and that is kinda a big deal
My brother had come up from Florida and surprised him and he was glad to see both of his sons at the same time and he was very happy
I then went to the camp to run the BB's shoot, what I do is tell the scouts is "5 rounds only, standing, not sitting, proning, kneeling, bracing the bb rifle on a fellow scouts shoulder and so forth. This is a contest of skill and paying attention to the fundamentals".
This was the patch we got for attending.
I then went to work and we had some stuff going on. I saw this at my employer location.
The plane is a flyworthy B-17, she has the primer gray paint on her. The final coat will be put on her in February. I will post details.
I also saw this after the Patriots plane dropped off the team for the super bowl.
I heard this song several times on my Sirius/XM and I never got the name of the song or the singer and it was one of those quirky fun songs that flourished in the 1980's. Well Last Monday on the way to work, I actually got the name of the song and I was flabbergasted by the title. I decided to use this song on my next "Monday Music". You know how many pics there are on the internet Using "Girls with Guns".
This one is very mild, there were some that were NSFW
Girls with Guns is the debut solo album from Styx guitarist/vocalist Tommy Shaw. It was released in October 1984 by A&M Records.
The title track was a top 10 hit at rock radio, peaking at #6 on the BillboardMainstream Rock Tracks chart and reaching a high of #33 on the Billboard Hot 100. "Girls With Guns" was featured in the first season Miami Vice episode "Glades".
A second single, the ballad "Lonely School", was released in late
1984 and peaked at #60 on the Hot 100 in January 1985. The videos for
both singles received premiere status and strong rotation at MTV, and the network aired a concert special featuring Shaw.
The CD and cassette formats of the album feature extended versions of the ballad "Kiss Me Hello" and the dance-rock track "Outside in the Rain".
The Girls With Guns album charted on the Billboard 200 Albums chart for 25 weeks, peaking at #50.
About a year ago, I did a Post on Fanta and I also touched on Coca-cola in this post. I was walking through a Kroger and happen to see a section of "processed meat" A.K.A. "Spam". I figured that it would make a good blogpost. Some people don't like spam, but I do, I can eat it straight but I prefer to fry it or grill it. As I understand it, the Pacific Rim loves the stuff.
Food has often been an important part of warfare. What is less known
is how food developed for warfare changed people’s lives after the war.
The most important development happened after World War II, though the
canning process has been around for a long time.
Canned food
started by using tin cans to preserve various items in the early
19th century. British sailors and explorers found that canned food was a
relatively easy way to supplement their rations. For example, the
Arctic explorer William Parry took canned beef and pea soup on his
voyage. By the middle of the 19th century many of the middle class in
Europe bought canned food as novelty items.
The American Civil
War, Crimean War, and Franco Prussian War introduced hundreds of
thousands of soldiers to the novelty and enjoyment of canned foods,
which expanded their consumption even more. Yet at this time they still
remained relatively fringe items used by explorers and militaries The Berthold-Weiss Factory, one of the first large canned food factories in Csepel-Budapest (1885) How canned food was made, picture from Albert Seigneurie’s Grocery Encyclopedia (1898). Retorts can be seen.It
was the millions of men fighting in World War I and II that created an
explosion in demand for canned food. The American government in
particular faced problems connected to supplying troops in multiple
theaters of combat around the world. They had to supply and feed
millions of men with items that transported safely, survived trench
conditions, and didn’t spoil in transport.
Canned
foods thus became a pivotal part of the wartime experience. The C
rations in particular were pre-made meals that could be eaten either
warm or cold, so they often became the main staple of the war weary
troops. Recreation of a American Civil War rations storeroom at Fort Macon State Park, North Carolina. A
1941 C Ration B unit, with contents: 3 biscuits, cellophane wrapped
chocolate fudge, 3 pressed sugar cubes, and a small tin of soluble
(instant) coffee. WWII; On the front lines, eating a Canned Ration, note the O3A3 against the wall.Sometimes
got lucky in being able to supplement their canned rations with local
foods, and in World War II the rations of Allied servicemen often
included M&Ms and Coca-Cola. The M&M candies were particularly
liked because their hard outer shell prevented the chocolate interior
from melting during transport to hot and humid locations in southeast
Asia.
“Coke” became the preferred drink of the troops due to a
marketing campaign in the States: any American in uniform could buy a
Coke for a nickel regardless of its listed price. But there were few
sources of the drink for Americans serving in Europe, Africa, and Asia. A pile of plain M&M’s candies.
Accordingly,
General Eisenhower requested 3 million bottles of Coke be shipped to
his current location in North Africa, along with the equipment and
supplies to refill them as needed so they could maintain a permanent
supply of Coke.
Coca-Cola did one better and sent 148 personnel to
install and manage the overseas bottling plants. The specialists were
given uniforms and a rank of “technical adviser.” They were often called
“Cola Colonels” by the soldiers, and they were often treated very well
because they were a great boost to morale. G.I.’s drinking some “room temperature” Coke Cola.Both
Coca-Cola and canned goods remained popular after the war. Coke
products inspired a worldwide thirst, and the canned food companies sold
their surplus goods on the civilian market. They also developed a
marketing campaign to relate the convenience of canned foods to the
demands of busy modern life. Panama City, Florida 1942. Mass
production of instant meals in factories extensively lowered their cost
and expanded their use across the lower and middle classes. Some of
these items included powdered cheeses, instant drinks, and cured meats,
which were all developed during World War II but later became staples in
the civilian world. These developments in turn changed the palate of
the American consumer.
So
the next time you don’t feel like cooking and open up a can of soup, or
grab some M&Ms and wash them down with a Coke, or open a can of spam you’ll appreciate
the fascinating history of how your tastes for such foods resulted from
developments during wars, and how some of those foods were first
experienced by soldiers that were often thousands of miles away.
Good leaders lead by example...so do bad leaders. We all have had good leaders inspire us to do greater things or do things that we thought were not doable. We also had those people that showed us by their bad example what NOT to do. I remember my leaders in the Army, I have had good officers and officers that well........they sucked. They were all about advancing their career over the backs of their troops. They would promise the earth, moon and the sun, and after we got the latest awards or other marker for their career, well the promised reward never happened. I also have had officers that we would march through the gates of hell and smack the crap out ol scratch hisself to prove a point.
NCO's also were the same way, I had an NCO that as soon as I got to advanced training in early January 1986, I was on his crap list, don't know what I did, but I basically spent the first 4 months restricted to the quad, my friends hung with me out of loyalty and we played a LOT of AD&D. I was at an AIT for people that were geeks. Well the NCO that gave me all the trouble, got himself chaptered out of the service and I got a new NCOIC. She immediately removed all the restrictions and I was allowed off Fort Devens for the first time in 4 months. As soon as I was allowed off post, we would go to Boston and that is where I developed my love for the city. I was walking in Fanuel Hall and saw this basket of stuffed Lobsters with a sign that said "Help me, I am trapped in Boston..." Well I was trapped in Massachusetts so I understood the reference.
I picked up several of them for some lady soldier friends of mine and I kept one....Turned into my navigator for the entire time I was in Germany so for 5 years he sat on my dash....that is why he is grungy and not bright red and somehow he lost an eye.....How he hides in my bonus room.
Well anyway, I digress. But I think highly and fondly of SSG Story who restored my faith in the NCO corp after what had transpired...
In many organizations, one of the primary duties of leaders
is to develop their subordinates. Air Force Handbook 36-2618, “The Enlisted
Force Structure,” or, as it’s known among Airmen, “The
Little Brown Book,” lays out responsibilities associated with each
tier of the enlisted forces, making sure to note that the first three
responsibilities of a Noncomissioned Officer (NCO) include leading and
developing subordinates, mentoring those same subordinates, and helping their
subordinates to develop their resiliency in order to help accomplish the
mission. Once they reach the Senior NCO tier, their first responsibility, in
addition to all NCO responsibilities, is to serve as a role model for others.
These responsibilities are listed before anything having to do with the NCO or
SNCO’s occupation in the Air Force, whether they are a Loadmaster, a Crew
Chief, a Plumber, a Paralegal, or anything else.
Most people who have served in the military, or likely any
other career, can probably remember leaders who helped them succeed or who set
good examples. Whether that was in demonstrating the best way to accomplish a
task, helping them out when they had problems, or giving them valuable advice
on how to improve themselves or deal with challenges, these people made great
role models to look up to, and hopefully to emulate when you have subordinates
of your own. Of course, I’m not here to write about those folks, but rather
about the other guys.
Bad Examples
There’s a Demotivational Poster – part of a series of
parodies of the motivational posters that used to be quite popular – showing a
shipwreck, with a caption suggesting that your purpose in life might be to “serve as an
example to others.” It is a simple and unfortunate fact in life that
people make mistakes, whether due to poor instincts, poor training, poor
judgement, or simply poor character. When that happens, others will often
discuss those mistakes, viewing with the benefit of calm hindsight all of the
things that went wrong and what should have been done differently. Which brings
me to my central point: As one NCO told me when I was a brand new airman, you
learn from your good leaders and you learn from your bad leaders. The important
thing is learning which is which, and whether you want role models or
cautionary tales.
We’ve all had bad bosses and leaders. Some were verbally or
physically abusive of their subordinates, while others abused their authority
by having their troops run personal errands for them or to coerce them into
taking unethical actions themselves. Then there were those simply unwilling to
stick their necks out to help their people when they needed it, or else chose
not to stick their necks out at all, becoming deadbeat bosses who were never
seen and rarely provided mentorship or feedback.
Learning Right From Wrong
So how can we learn from such people? Well, first figure out
that they’re doing something wrong. If you don’t know what a good leader looks
like, you might not recognize a bad one when you see one. Also, it’s easy for
people to justify poor leadership. An abusive leader might be “trying to
toughen us up,” while it could be said of a lazy boss that “he doesn’t
micromanage us!” Now, the hard part can be finding that fuzzy border between
good and bad. A boss leading you through an intense workout to help you improve
your PT score might be a good thing, but a boss forcing you to over-train and
injure yourself, or to violate a medical waiver to PT despite injuries, is
definitely doing more harm than good. A boss who trusts you to accomplish your
tasks and mostly stays out of your hair could be good, but one who doesn’t care
to train you properly or check on your work at all might simply be negligent. A
lot of this will come down to judgement and circumstances, and you may very
well not recognize a bad leader until well after the fact.
So, once you’ve identified a bad leader, what can you learn
now? Try to figure out what they were doing wrong as a leader, and try to
figure out why they made that mistake. Maybe they were simply imitating the
leaders who trained them. Maybe they’re overtasked, or distracted by personal
concerns, or in some cases blinded by their own prejudices. On rare occasions,
you may have a boss who is simply malicious towards others. Then, once you get
this far, you get to the really hard part: Determine if you might be a bad
leader.
The First Step in Fixing a Problem
Self-reflection is a difficult trait to develop, but an
indispensable one, especially for leaders. People often assume that they’re
doing just fine and never stop to reflect on what they need to improve on. Of
course, it is also common for people to assume that they’re doing terribly, and
everyone either knows it or is about to figure it out, something known as “Imposter
Syndrome.” This is why the “Little Brown Book” that I mentioned
before also specifies that an NCO should provide feedback and counseling to
their subordinates.
In the absence of that feedback, or ideally in addition to it,
developing a healthy practice of checking yourself (before you wreck
yourself) will help you to find your problem areas and their causes. If
you are doing something you shouldn’t, or failing to meet some
responsibility, realizing this is the first step to fixing it. And if
you can identify root causes, such as being overloaded with work,
school, and family, you can reach out for help or re-prioritize your
responsibilities. If it turns out that you’ve just fallen into bad
habits due to complacency, these periodic self-checks might just be the
way to jolt yourself back onto the sometimes arduous path of being a
quality leader. About the Author: This piece is from the able hands of Sergeant Swivel, who can be found on Twitter @SergeantSwivel
I know a bit about the 777 series of airplanes, my employer operates about 20 of them. They are big airplanes, and they are used for long distance hauls like going to Johannesburg,Tel Aviv, Mumbai or Dubai. The airplane was made for long distance cruising. Boeing designed a new variant of the 777 and they are calling it the 777X.
The Boeing 777 (Triple Seven) is a long-rangewide-bodytwin-enginejet airliner developed and manufactured by Boeing Commercial Airplanes. It is the world's largest twinjet and has a typical seating capacity of 314 to 396 passengers, with a range of 5,240 to 8,555 nautical miles (9,704 to 15,844 km). Commonly referred to as the "Triple Seven",its distinguishing features include the large–diameter turbofan engines, long raked wings, six wheels on each main landing gear, fully circular fuselage cross-section, and a blade-shaped tail cone.
Developed in consultation with eight major airlines, the 777 was
designed to replace older wide-body airliners and bridge the capacity
difference between Boeing's 767 and 747. As Boeing's first fly-by-wire airliner, it has computer-mediated controls. It was also the first commercial aircraft to be designed entirely with computer-aided design.
The 777 is produced in two fuselage lengths as of 2018. The
original 777-200 variant entered commercial service in 1995, followed by
the extended-range 777-200ER in 1997. The stretched 777-300, which is
33.25 ft (10.1 m) longer, followed in 1998. The initial 777-200,
extended-range -200ER, and -300 versions are equipped with General Electric GE90, Pratt & Whitney PW4000, or Rolls-Royce Trent 800 engines.
They have since been collectively referred to as 777 Classics.
The extended-range 777-300ER and ultra long-range 777-200LR variants
entered service in 2004 and 2006 respectively, while the 777F, a freighter version, debuted in February 2009; these second-generation variants all feature high-output GE90 engines and extended raked wingtips.
The 777-200LR is one of the world's longest-range airliners, able to
fly more than halfway around the globe and holds the record for the
longest distance flown non-stop by a commercial aircraft.In November 2013, Boeing announced the development of the third-generation of the 777, the 777X,
consisting of the 777-8 and 777-9 variants. The 777X features composite
folding wings and GE9X engines plus further technologies developed for
the Boeing 787, and is scheduled to enter service by 2020.
The 777 first entered commercial service with United Airlines on June 7, 1995. The 777 has received more orders than any other wide-body airliner; as of July 2018, more than 60 customers had placed orders for 2,013 aircraft of all variants, with 1,582 delivered.The most common and successful variant is the 777-300ERwith 799 delivered and 844 orders; Emirates operates the largest 777 fleet, with 163 passenger and freighter aircraft as of July 2018.The 777 has been involved in six hull losses as of October 2016; the Asiana Airlines Flight 214 accident in July 2013 was its first fatal crash in 18 years of service, and the shootdown of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in July 2014 is its deadliest crash as of January 2019.
The 777 ranks as one of Boeing's best-selling models, making it
the most-produced Boeing wide-body jet, surpassing the Boeing 747.Airlines have acquired the type as a comparatively fuel-efficient
alternative to other wide-body jets and have increasingly deployed the
aircraft on long-haul transoceanic routes. Direct market competitors
include the Airbus A330-300, the Airbus A350 XWB, and the out-of-production A340 and McDonnell Douglas MD-11. The 787 Dreamliner, which entered service in 2011, shares some design features with the 777.
Some
of the world’s most prestigious airlines are on tenterhooks as the
first flight of an aircraft that could change long-haul travel for
decades looms ever closer.
Executives
at Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Qatar Airways, among others, will
have their eyes cast to the skies this spring when Boeing is expected to
fly one of its new 777X planes for the first time.
The
777-9, the first of the X family to be developed, will have the biggest
jet engines ever seen, attached to the longest wings of any aircraft
ever made by the Seattle-based manufacturer.
The
777X has been said to be the result of the very best of the existing
777 plane, as favoured by the likes of British Airways et al, and the
game-changing 787 Dreamliner, which has been praised as one of the most
technologically advanced aircraft in history, garnishing plaudits from
passengers on BA, Norwegian and Virgin Atlantic alike.
It's
an “absolute peach”, said Emirates president Tim Clark of the aircraft.
The Dubai airline has staked its future on the 777X, ordering 150, the
largest single firm order in history. “It is a step change in aircraft
design and a step change in propulsion. We are very happy we have got
what we wanted,” he told Australian Aviation.
The
777-9 (the smaller sibling, the -8, will follow) is listed as $426
million but will likely sell, considering typical bulk airline
discounts, for around $200 million (£155m), making it Boeing’s most
expensive plane.
View photos
The -9 will be longer than a 747Credit: boeing
What’s so good about the 777X?
It
depends who’s asking. On the one hand, it promises a vast increase in
fuel efficiency, working towards an operating cost reduction of up to 18
per cent, which in turn should lead to a fall in fares on long-haul
flights. Boeing says it will be the largest and most efficient
twin-engine plane on the planet.
On
the other, it is another step in the evolution of passenger comfort,
with the same benefits showcased on the Dreamliner expected on the 777X,
including large, dimmable windows, higher ceilings and an anti-dry,
jetlag-beating ventilation system.
What’s
more is its pin-up potential. With a wing-span of up to 71.8 metres and
a length of 76.7 metres (longer than a 747), the 777X is a beast, and
one that is set to become Boeing’s flagship aircraft.
Dominic
Gates, aerospace reporter for the Seattle Times, was part of a press
group allowed inside the Everett assembly plant in north-east American
ahead of the aircraft’s rollout. “It will be an impressive sight in the
sky,” he said. “While most planes look much the same to harried air
travellers, early in 2019 Boeing's newest jet may manage to catch and
arrest even the casual eye.
“Passengers
about to board will see its long, long carbon-fiber wings arc up and
away from low on the fuselage, gull-like, then curve downward to the
tips. There the wings will end in what will surely be the iconic image
of this plane: scythelike wingtips painted with a 777X and folded upward
so the jet fits at the airport gate.”
Carrying
as many as 414 passengers in a two-class set-up (in the longer 777-9;
349 in three classes), the X is set to become the mainstay of many an
international airline.
Can it fly further than any existing plane?
Not
quite. Its range is not at the heart of its appeal. The -8 has a
projected range of 8,690 nautical miles, and the -9 7,525 nautical
miles, both shorter than the 9,700 nautical miles of the A350-900ULR,
the aircraft currently serving the world’s longest flight between New
York and Singapore.
That
said, it has been reported that the 777-8 could serve the “holy grail”
of routes, between Sydney and London, carrying perhaps fewer passengers
(280) and heading west with favourable winds.
"We
think our airplane has the legs and the capability," said Dinesh
Keskar, Boeing Senior Vice President Sales Asia-Pacific and India in
2017. "If the 787-9 can do Perth-London, we think that when the 777-8
comes out in the 2021 timeframe we will have a lot more improvement in
technology."
It
is the Boeing 787 currently being used on the groundbreaking London to
Perth route by Qantas. The route’s success makes the likelihood of the X
family being put to use on UK-Australia services.
Who will fly it?
Despite
the 777 being a stalwart of the British Airways fleet (BA has 58 of the
aircraft), the British flag carrier has not yet signalled interest in
its younger, shinier sibling, instead placing orders for its Airbus
rival, the A350-1000.
But
why doesn’t BA want to fly to Australia, too, we hear you cry. It just
doesn’t. Willie Walsh, chief executive of IAG, of which BA is a part,
said last year: “Code sharing is an option but in terms of using our
metal, we're not considering it.
“Personally the idea of sitting on an aircraft for 21 hours to get from Heathrow to Sydney, it does not appeal to me.”
As
it stands, seven airlines have orders placed with Boeing for the 777-9,
with Emirates boasting the largest. Qatar, Etihad and Lufthansa also
have orders placed, while Turkish Airlines has shown willing. Qatar,
Emirates, and Etihad are the three to places orders for the -8, too.
Qantas
has not yet decided between Airbus and Boeing for its aircraft of
choice to forge ahead with plans for “Project Sunrise”, the endeavour to
link any city in Australia with anywhere else in the world with a
direct flight.
Iran
Air previously had $38billion worth of orders placed with Boeing,
including 15 777-9s, but these were all but cancelled when President
Donald Trump withdrew from the Iran Nuclear Deal in 2016.
The first deliveries of the 777-9 are expected to be made next year.
I remember hearing this song while I was in Germany. It is still very
popular in the radio stations and on Sirius/XM. I think the song is ok
personally, I like their "Sunday bloody Sunday and "new Years Day and of
course "where the streets have no name " as my personal favorite songs
from U2.
I decided to run this song on "Martin Luther King Day" because it was a song about Martin Luther King Jr. I understand and agree with what Martin Luther King was doing, but I don't think he would appreciate oh how his legacy and dream has been squandered and wasted by the new generations.
The melody and the chords were worked up in a November 1983 War Tour sound check in Hawaii and completed in Windmill Lane Studios during The Unforgettable Fire recording sessions.
The guitar part is subtly varied through each verse, chorus, and melody, such that no riff is exactly repeated.
The song contains the erroneous reference to King's shooting as
"Early morning, April 4," when it actually occurred after 6 p.m. Bono
acknowledges the error and in live performances he occasionally changes
the lyric to "Early evening..."
Chrissie Hynde of the Pretenders sang backing vocals on the recording. She was married to Jim Kerr of Simple Minds at the time and she is credited as "Christine Kerr".
"Pride" reached number number 3 on the UK Singles Chart
and number 8 on the Dutch Singles Chart. The song was the band's first
top 40 hit in the United States where it peaked at number 33. It gained
considerable US album-oriented rock radio airplay and its video was on heavy rotation on MTV, thus helping U2 continue its commercial breakthrough begun with the War album. It reached number 1 in New Zealand, the first time a U2 single topped a country's singles chart.
Initial critical reactions to "Pride" were mixed, especially in regards to the lyrics. Robert Christgau in The Village Voice complained of "the moralism with the turn-somebody-else's-cheek glorification of Martin Luther King's martyrdom."Meanwhile, Kurt Loder of Rolling Stone wrote that "'Pride'
gets over only on the strength of its resounding beat and big, droning
bass line, not on the nobility of its lyrics, which are unremarkable."
But the 1984 Pazz & Jop
poll of 240 music critics ranked "Pride" as the 12th best single of
that year, a higher ranking than the overall album, which finished 29th. The single's ranking remained the highest of any U2 single until "One" achieved 8th in 1992.And in 1989, Spin named the song the 65th-greatest single in history. Rolling Stone magazine later (2010) placed the song at number 388 in their list "The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time".[12] The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame selected "Pride (In the Name of Love)" as one of 500 Songs that Shaped Rock and Roll. Music television network VH1 ranked the song number 38 on the "100 Greatest Songs of the 80s" countdown in its series The Greatest. In 2004, Mojo placed the song at number 63 on its list of the "100 Epic Rock Tracks"
Three music videos were made. The first was shot in August by director Donald Cammell and features opening and closing shots of the Dublin Docklands
area. Two versions of this video exist; black and white and colour
(sepia). The band was not satisfied with Cammell's video, and they
agreed to their principal photographer, Anton Corbijn,
shooting an alternative. The second video was filmed in a basement near
London's Heathrow Airport, it features U2 standing sternly in front of a
wall under poor lighting conditions. The U2 camp was also unimpressed
with this video and a third video is produced by compiling footage shot
during The Unforgettable Fire recording sessions at Slane Castle. The original (black and white) Cammell video was primarily used in promotion.
I got this from my Online friend Brad Torgersen, he had picked it up off USA Today. I was surprised as was everyone else that the liberal USA Today would print something that wasn't a character assassination on President Trump. I have blogged repeatedly about the Trump effect and why he got elected, he was the first president that spoke of the forgotten man. the one that seemed to get forgotten in the inter-sectional identity politics of the modern age. he surprisingly has become the spokesman for the middle class, you know the one that the GOP traditionally ignores and the Democrats discarded. You know the ones that President Obama called "Bitter Clingers" and 2016 democratic candidate Hillary Clinton called "Basket of deplorables". We are the ones forgotten about when the politicians play their games in D.C on the Potomac. It seems like we play by the rules and "do right" by society by working, paying bills and the myriad of taxes. Our kids are the ones joining the service and sacrificing but "Our Betters" children go to the Ivy League schools to learn how to network and then use the system to their advantage.
The article from USA Today:
To understand events around the world today, one must think in terms of the class struggle.
This
sentence sounds like something that could be written by a doctrinaire
Marxist. But it is nonetheless true. Much of the current tension in
America and in many other democracies is in fact a product of a class
struggle. It’s not the kind of class struggle that Karl Marx wrote
about, with workers and peasants facing off against rapacious
capitalists, but it is a case of today’s ruling class facing
disaffection from its working class.
In the old Soviet Union, the Marxists assured us that once true communism was established under a “dictatorship of the proletariat,”
the state would wither away and everyone would be free. In fact,
however, the dictatorship of the proletariat turned into a dictatorship
of the party hacks, who had no interest whatsoever in seeing their
positions or power wither.
Yugoslav dissident Milovan Djilas called these party hacks the “New Class,”
noting that instead of workers and peasants against capitalists, it was
now a case of workers and peasants being ruled by a managerial new
class of technocrats who, while purporting to act for the benefit of the
workers and peasants, somehow wound up with the lion’s share of the
goodies. Workers and peasants stood in long lines for bread and shoddy
household goods, while party leaders and government managers bought
imported delicacies in special, secret stores. (In a famous Soviet joke,
then-leader Leonid Brezhnev shows his mother his luxury apartment, his
limousine, his fancy country house and his helicopter only to have her
object: “But what if the communists come back?”)
Djilas’ work was explosive — he was jailed
— because it made clear that the workers and peasants had simply
replaced one class of exploiters with another. It set the stage for the
Soviet Union’s implosion, and for the discrediting of communism among
everyone with any sense.
Elites of postwar institutions don't want change
But
the New Class isn’t limited to communist countries, really. Around the
world in the postwar era, power was taken up by unelected professional
and managerial elites. To understand what’s going on with President
Donald Trump and his opposition, and in other countries as diverse as
France, Hungary, Italy and Brazil, it’s important to realize that the
post-World War II institutional arrangements of the Western democracies
are being renegotiated, and that those democracies’ professional and
managerial elites don’t like that very much, because they have done very
well under those arrangements. And, like all elites who are doing very
well, they don’t want that to change.
The
postwar era saw the creation of international institutions ranging from
NATO to the United Nations to the World Bank, along with a
proliferation of think tanks and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to
accompany them. It saw the vast expansion of higher education in the
United States, and the transformation of academic degrees into something
close to must-haves for the upper-middle class. It saw a great
expansion of power on the part of media organizations, and on the part
of government bureaucrats and lobbyists, both of whose numbers increased
enormously.
But after the turn of the millennium,
other Americans, much like the workers and peasants in the old Soviet
Union, started to notice that while the New Class was doing quite well
(America’s richest counties now
surround Washington, D.C.), things weren’t going so well for them. And
what made it more upsetting was that — while the Soviet Union’s
apparatchiks at least pretended to like the workers and peasants
— members of America’s ruling class seemed to view ordinary Americans
with something like contempt, using terms such as “bitter clingers,” “deplorables” and flyover people.
Class wars in America disguised as culture wars
Suddenly,
to a lot of voters, those postwar institutional arrangements stopped
looking so good. But, of course, the beneficiaries showed no sign of
giving them up. This has led to a lot of political discord, and a lot of
culture war, since in America class warfare is usually disguised as
cultural warfare. But underneath the surface, talk is a battle between
the New Class and what used to be the middle class.
If
you look at the “yellow jacket” protests in France, the election of
Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and events in places like Italy and
Hungary — or, for that matter, the Brexit movement in Britain — you find
a similar unhappiness with institutional arrangements and the sleek and
self-satisfied elites who benefit from them. People who, in President
Bill Clinton’s famous phrase, worked hard and played by the rules now suspect that the rules were rigged, and that they were treated as chumps.
Talking
about the yellow-vest movement, French geographer Christophe Guilluy
observes: “Immediately, the protesters were denounced as xenophobes,
anti-Semites and homophobes. The elites present themselves as
anti-fascist and anti-racist, but this is merely a way of defending
their class interests. It is the only argument they can muster to defend
their status, but it is not working anymore.”
That’s right. It’s class war masquerading as something else, but people have seen through the mask.
Understanding
this won’t make the conflict less intense, but it might make it clearer
what’s really at stake. What’s happening in America is an echo of
what’s happening in democracies around the world, and it’s not happening
because of Trump. Trump is the symptom of a ruling class that many of
the ruled no longer see as serving their interest, and the anti-Trump
response is mostly the angry backlash of that class as it sees its
position, its perquisites and — perhaps especially — its self-importance
threatened.
28 years ago, Desert Storm started. I remember the January 15 deadline for Saddam withdrawing from Kuwait via UN Resolution. Saddam blew off the deadline, in my mind he truly believed that we wouldn't attack, because we were a paper tiger and the decadent West can't handle casualties from the "Mother of All Battles"from his battle tested Army and with the exception of a few soldiers from the Vietnam conflict the American Army and armed forces were "green". Saddam had the worst timing possible. If he had waited a couple of years he probably could have seized Kuwait and got away with it. The wall had come down, the soviet were not threatening anymore , there was discussion of drawdown and demobilization from certain members of congress that was in a hurry to spend the :Peace Dividend". Saddam didn't take into account changes in our doctrine, from the Red flag exercises, where we used the old Caesar saying, "I want our training to be bloody battles and our battles to be bloodless training". The American Armed forces after 10 years of flush spending from the Reagan military buildup. We had trained with "Airland Battle", where we were trained to decimate the soviet 2nd and 3rd echelons of battle. We would use our air forces to go after the 2nd and 3rd while the ground forces fought the 1st echelon. The Army was well trained, the Airforce was well trained and the Navy and Marines were well trained., well equipped, and highly motivated. Especially since we were told "For the duration + 6 months," this told us that we were here to start it and finish it. no rotation policy like they did in Vietnam, General Schwartzkopf forbid it, he saw the destructive influence such a policy had on the U.S. Military. The Iraqi's with the exception of the Republican Guard was a conscript Army and they were tired from war after 8 years with Iran. The equipment they had was worn out and poorly maintained. The Air War started on January 17th at 3:30 in the morning we were woke up and told to "stand to" in full MOPP Gear level 4. We suited up as fast as we could because we were convinced that the Iraqi's would counterattack with Chemical weapons. We had no reason to doubt this because they have done it before to the Iranians and to the Kurds. We had a couple of M-8 alarms but we really didn't have any real faith in the equipment. To assist us, we had a real live chicken in a cage. We were told that if there are any chemicals in the air, the chicken will keel over first before we got affected. Granted we spent a lot of money building up the force in the 10 years, but the NBC gear wasn't as advanced as some of the other stuff.
Czech Chemical Detection vehicle
The Czech Military(The former communist adversary sent over all their Chemical detection equipment and soldiers to help out. I thought that was ironic former Warsaw Pact adversaries joining us to defeat the same stuff that they trained for. We had the Chicken for several weeks then he just vanished..I figured that someone scarfed it up and cooked it.
After the Apache's took out the Sam sites clearing the way for the massive air strikes to punish the Iraqi Capital,
As the Air Force methodically went after the Iraqi C3 Nodes, the Command, Control and Communications Nodes. We had spent the buildup logging the location of every single one and waited until the Air War kicked off and we went after the logistic and infrastructure during the air war. We also started going after the Republican guard which was the center of gravity for the Saddam regime. The air War went on for 6 weeks until the ground war kicked off and whatever C3 nodes that survived the air war we blew up so they couldn't coordinate their ground forces when we crossed the berm.
This was me and my brother after the War was over. We both were over there.
The Iraqi's would throw SCUD missiles at us and the Israeli's to provoke the Israeli's into attacking and fracturing the coalition against them. It was a close thing, the Israeli's did launch a few times and Dick Cheney calling the PM of Israel and assuring them that we were doing everything possible to hunt them down. After the war we found out that the SCUDs could be set up and launched in less than 30 minutes. Much quicker than the original estimates that the Soviets had. Our casualties were very low especially compared to the pasting the Iraqi's took. I lost a couple of friends in this war and it was due to "Blue on Blue" which is called "Friendly Fire" but it was anything but friendly..The legality of the new generations of weapons exceeded the capability of "positive target Identification" which usually was "Mark 1 eyeball. The United States hasn't operated large formation of troops and tanks since WWII and the weapons were far more lethal.
I atill think that it is funny that me being an Army guy pays attention to Naval history and I have Blogged several times about "Yamato class Battleships". From the historical stuff to the Anime series "Star Blazers" that is known as "Space Cruiser Yamato" and its fight to save Earth.
The largest battleships ever built were Yamato and Musashi of
the Imperial Japanese Navy. These behemoths were triple the tonnage of
some other battleships of their day and each one had three turrets, with
three huge 18.1″ guns per turret. They also mounted numerous smaller
guns to annihilate secondary targets.
They could outrange and
outlast any ship of the line in World War II. Each ship was eventually
sunk by aircraft carrier-based planes, proving that the aircraft carrier
was now the true image of might in any navy during WWII and beyond.
In 1906 the British Royal Navy launched the 18,000 ton HMS Dreadnought. Its revolutionary design heralded the new age of the truly all-powerful “Battleship.
This new breed of battleships had an all steel design with very large
caliber guns in rotating turrets. Despite being heavily armored, their
powerful steam turbines enabled them to be incredibly fast, too.
The concept was quickly adopted by every major nation that could afford it. HMS Dreadnought had
cost the equivalent of what in 2018 would be roughly 151 million
pounds, sparking a huge and expensive arms race, especially between the
British and the Germans.
HMS Dreadnought (British Battleship, 1906) by WWI, she was obsolete by the quick increases in Naval Technology. This
resulted in these two countries entering World War I in 1914 with large
numbers of these cutting edge battleships, and continuing to build more
of them in ever increasing numbers throughout the war.
This resulted in even more refined versions, like the Imperial German Battleship SMS Baden, built in 1917, that weighed in at just over 32,000 tons.
SMS Baden Photo by Bundesarchiv, Bild But a fundamental flaw with these highly prestigious and costly war
machines became apparent: the concern that they were almost too valuable
to risk losing in battle.
So for most of the war, neither side
felt confident enough to commit them to a full scale battle. The
exception was at Jutland in 1916, which was and still is the only large
scale battle that involved a large number of battleships.
The
battle itself was inconclusive, due to being fought at very long ranges.
Both sides were hesitant to commit to a full-blown, head-on battle. HMS Indefatigable sinking after being struck by shells from SMS Von der Tann Battle of JutlandWith
the end of the war, large numbers of these battleships were scrapped
due to their formidable operational costs and the amount of manpower it
took to run one of these colossal monsters.
For example, the St. Vincent-class battleship HMS Collingwood needed a crew of 758 to keep her running while at sea. So in 1922, despite being only 12 years old, Collingwood was sold for scrap and sent to the junk yard for disposal. Collingwood at anchor, 1912Throughout the inter-war years, there were several attempts via naval
treaties to try to limit the size and number of battleships each major
nation could have.
Despite this, technology still helped to
further refine the battleship concept. Towards the end of this period,
Germany re-established itself as a naval superpower with such ships as
the advanced Scharnhorst (1939) and Bismarck (1940). At the same time, the United States and Japan began emerging as two other naval superpowers. THe BIzmark in 1940. By Bundesarchiv, Bild CC BY-SA 3.0 deBut
at this time, questions were starting to be asked regarding whether
such a valuable asset could survive in a battle environment that
increasingly included aircraft carriers.
For in the 1920’s, the
outspoken US Army officer William Mitchell set out to prove air power in
the form of aircraft carriers could easily destroy the incredibly
costly battleships. Brigadier General William L. Mitchell, United States Army Air Service.He did end up proving this to a degree when he sank or badly damaged
obsolete battleships in a series of tests. This caused the United States
to start to come around to his way of thinking.
So at a time when
nations were scaling back the production and development of
battleships, why did the Japanese use valuable and scant industrial
capacity to build the two largest battleships ever produced? Yamato and Musashi, the two largest battleships ever built
Japanese
logic for building such ships was to counter the fact that the U.S. had
a numerical superiority in battleships, something Japan could not hope
to match. So they concluded that a bigger and better class of
battleships would counter the numerical advantage that the Americans
had.
Thus, they came up with the Yamato class of Japanese battleships. This class ended up comprising just two ships: Yamato and Musashi. The Fuji, a member of the Fuji-class battleships of the Japanese Imperial Navy
There was a third ship, but as soon as WWII started, realization
dawned that aircraft carriers were what was going to win the Pacific
war. Therefore the Japanese decided they would convert the third
battleship before it was finished. It would become the Shinano, the largest aircraft carrier in the world at that time.
Another reason for going ahead initially with the Yamato
class of battleships was Japan’s ingrained respect for such ships. They
recalled with pride the Battle of Tsushima in 1905, which became
legendary after the Japanese fleet had crushed the Imperial Russian
fleet.
Admiral
Tōgō on the bridge of Mikasa, at the beginning of the Battle of
Tsushima in 1905. The signal flag being hoisted is the letter Z, which
was a special instruction to the Fleet.At the
center of that historic victory was the concept of using battleships
that were heavily armored and fast, and that had large caliber main
batteries.
Battle of Tsushima (1905)
Major Casualties/Losses
Imperial Russia
Japanese Empire
Battleships
7 lost, 4 surrendered
–
Cruisers
4 lost
–
Destroyers
6 lost
–
Total Tonnage Sunk
126,792 tons
*450 tons
Killed
Between 4,000 to 6,000
Around 110
Captured
Nearly 6,000
–
*3 torpedo boats sunk
It is easy to see why such a decisive victory might influence thinking in the Japanese Navy for decades to come.
Although
the big battleship concept was an important influence on Japanese Navy
planning in the inter-war years, nevertheless the Japanese Navy was also
forward-thinking, and started to build aircraft carriers as far back as
1921.
During the 1920’s Japan built Hosho, Kaga, and Akagi, and during the 1930’s they built seven more aircraft carriers.
Aerial view of Hōshō as completed in December 1922The
British raid on the Italian fleet at Taranto in 1940 was said to have
influenced Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor. The latter attack sank or
damaged many U.S. warships including four battleships, as well as
destroying large numbers of aircraft.
As if Pearl Harbor was not
enough to vindicate the belief in the air-power that aircraft carriers
could provide, just three days later Japanese aircraft attacked the
British Z Force, sinking a battleship and a battlecruiser with very few
casualties of their own.
Early Carrier Air Power Victories
Attacker/Target
Date
Attacker’s Aircraft losses
Target’s losses
Battle of Taranto
Great Britain/Italy
Nov 12th 1940
2
3 Battleships damaged
Pearl Harbour
Japan/USA
Dec 7th 1941
29
4 Battleships sunk 4 Battleships damaged
Attack on Force Z
Japan/Great Britain
Dec 10th 1941
6
1 Battleship Sunk 1 Battlecruiser
For
the rest of the war, the Japanese concentrated on building as many
aircraft carriers as it could, as well as converting a number of
existing or near completed ships into aircraft carriers. The fact of the
matter is after the two Yamato-class battleships were completed, Japan never built another battleship ever again.
Yamato during sea trials off Japan near Bungo Strait, 20 October 1941.As for Yamato and Musashi,
the design for these ships had been finalized in 1937, after a
protracted and detailed examination of twenty-four very different and
modern design proposals. Yamato was laid down in November
1937 and was commissioned into service on December 16, 1941, just days
after Japanese carrier-based planes had successfully attacked both Pearl
Harbor and Z Force. Therefore Yamato arrived in service at a time when events were starting to raise questions about the usefulness of battleships.
Musashi leaving Brunei in October 1944 for the Battle of Leyte GulfYamato‘s sister ship Musashi
was laid down in March 1938 and was commissioned into service on August
5, 1942. Thus both ships entered service after each taking over four
years to build.
Yamato under attack off Kure on 19 March 1945To
show you how much naval air warfare had progressed in that short time,
in 1937 the British Navy was using 150 mph Blackburn Shark biplane
torpedo bombers that could carry an 18-inch torpedo or 1,600 lbs of
bombs.
By the time Musashi was commissioned in 1942, the
U.S. Navy was using the 275 mph Grumman TBF Avenger torpedo bomber that
could be armed with either a 22.5-inch torpedo or 2,000 lbs of bombs.
Musashi, August 1942, taken from the bowThis rapid aircraft development caught the Yamato-class battleships by surprise. Initially, Yamato had only 28 anti-aircraft guns when commissioned in 1941. The Musashi,
commissioned a year later, incorporated lessons learned from recent
events regarding air defenses, and came into service with 40 AA guns.
With aircraft carriers now dominating the Pacific theater, by 1945 the Yamato had no less than 166 AA guns!
Landmark Battleships
Nationality
Year
Tonnage
Main Gun
Length
Crew
Speed
HMS Dreadnought
British
1906
18,410
10 x 12 inch
527
750
24 mph
SMS Baden
German
1917
32,200
8 x 15 inch
590
1,271
24 mph
Bismarck
German
1941
41,700
8 x 15inch
823
2,065
34mph
Yamato
Japanese
1941
65,027
9 x 18 inch
862
2,650
31 mph
South Dakota
American
1942
35,600
9 x 16inch
680
2,364
31mph
*HMS Darling
British
2009
8,500
1 x 4.5 inch
500
191
35 mph
*For comparison The UK largest Major Surface Combat Ship in service today (2018)
The Yamato-class
ships were truly breathtaking in their scale and armament. When fully
loaded they each weighed an incredible 72,000 tonnes and were fitted
with the largest guns ever carried by a battleship. Each one had a main
armament of 18.1-inch guns capable of firing 3,220-lb shells over 26
miles. Their turrets had armor over 25 inches thick.
The ships had
been built in secret and amazingly, the Allies were totally unaware of
their existence until 1942. U.S. Intelligence was shocked that ships
like this could have been built without their knowledge.
Yamato and Musashi in the war
But
the Japanese quickly became afraid to deploy these new battleships,
even being reluctant to allow them out to do patrols. The Japanese High
Command was forever fearful of Allied submarines or aircraft carriers
attacking them. Also later on in the war, there was simply not enough
fuel available to run them regularly, so both ships spent most of the
war inactive, berthed at various “safe” naval bases.
This fear and hesitation was further reinforced when Yamato was badly damaged by the U.S. submarine Skate in December 1943. Then in March 1944 Musashi was damaged by the U.S. submarine Tunny. Yamato hit by a bomb during the Battle of the Sibuyan Sea on 24 October 1944; the hit did not produce serious damageBut by late 1944 the Japanese Navy was forced to deploy the battleships, both out of necessity and desperation. Thus Yamato and Musashi
participated in the Battle of the Philippines on June 19-20, 1944, but
this was primarily a carrier to carrier battle and neither battleship
saw any real action.
Then on October 23-26, 1944 Yamato took part in the Battle of Leyte Gulf and for the first time saw real combat. During the battle, Yamato managed to help sink the escort carrier USS Gambier Bay and the destroyer USS Johnston.
But the Yamato herself was badly damaged by aircraft from the U.S. carriers Intrepid and Cabot, though she did manage to return to port. Musashi under attack by American carrier aircraft during the Battle of Leyte Gulf.Musashi was less fortunate and was attacked by several waves of aircraft from various aircraft carriers including the Intrepid, Cabot, Essex, Lexington, Enterprise, and Franklin. Finally, after multiple torpedo and bomb hits, the Musashi sank, taking nearly half of her crew of 2,399 men with her. In her short wartime career, Musashi did not sink or damage any Allied shipping.
As for Yamato,
it did not venture out again until April 1945, when Nazi Germany was on
the eve of surrender in Europe. Japan sent out a large fleet of
warships headed by Yamato to attack Allied shipping engaged in
the Battle of Okinawa. It was an act of desperation that was almost
suicidal since the task force had little to no air cover. Yamato steering to avoid bombs and aerial torpedoes during Operation Ten-GoThe Americans intercepted the Japanese force with hundreds of bombers
and torpedo bombers, launching wave after wave of aerial attacks. It was
an onslaught, and it took the Americans just over 100 minutes to sink Yamato. Ninety percent of Yamato’s crew was killed, including fleet commander Vice-Admiral Seiichi Itō.The explosion of Yamato’s magazinesAfter WWII battleships were quickly phased out. All 4 of the United States’ Iowa-class battleships lingered in service on and off until 1992, when the era of the battleship finally faded into history. There is talk about bringing the Iowa class ships back into service, if I recall 2 of the ships have to be kept in "deployable status". meaning that they can be brought back into service if needed.
