There was a reason he was known as “Give ‘Em Hell Harry.”
Truman was the last President to take office without a college degree and started his military career as an enlisted man in the Missouri National Guard. He wanted to join so bad, he memorized an eye chart to pass the Army physical – he couldn’t see well enough to get in on his own. He first enlisted in 1905.
By the time WWI rolled around, Truman re-enlisted and had been elected an officer. It was on the battlefields of France that he was given command of Battery D – dubbed “Dizzy D” for its bad reputation. The onetime Pvt. Truman was now Capt. Truman, in command of 194 men.
Those men tried to intimidate him at every turn, even giving him the “Bronx Cheer” after formations. But a guy like “Captain Harry” wasn’t about to take that garbage in his command. He began to hold his NCOs responsible for the junior enlisted behavior – and the discipline changed in a hurry.
His men began to obey him loyally, especially in combat, and Truman enjoyed his command. The only time they faltered was during an artillery exchange with the Germans in the Vosges Mountains, where both sides exchanged gas and high explosive shells for more than 30 minutes.
Truman was tossed from his horse, which fell on top of him into a shell crater. Panic and disorder gripped his company when they were supposed to fall back, but they had no horses to pull the artillery. The guns were getting stuck in the mud as German shells rained on them.
The company first sergeant ordered the men to make a run for it.
That’s when Capt. Truman was pulled out from under his horse. He stood on the battlefield and unleashed a string of curses so profane it actually shocked his enlisted men to turn around and run back into the hail of chemicals and explosions to man their guns.
Maybe it was his time as an enlisted artilleryman, or maybe the future President picked that language up while working on the Santa Fe rail lines and sleeping like a hobo. He sure didn’t pick it up at West Point – because he couldn’t get in.
During his presidency, Truman kept his spot as a U.S. Army reserve colonel, leaving after 37 years of service. When his presidency ended, he and his wife Bess drove back to Missouri, not to a corporate boardroom – which he considered it a black mark on the office of the president.
Who knew the President’s mobile command post was an E-4? With all the latest and greatest gear to keep flying in the midst of all-out nuclear war and all its top secret countermeasures, it should come as no surprise that each of the Air Force’s four converted 747s cost $159,529 per hour to fly.
The largest of the USAF cargo haulers, the C-5 can carry two Abrams tanks, ten armored fighting vehicles, a chinook helicopter, an F-16, or an A-10 and only costs $100,941 an hour to get the stuff to the fight.
4. OC-135 Open Skies
This plane was designed to keep tabs on the armed forces belonging to the 2002 signatories of the Open Skies Treaty, which was is designed to enhance mutual understanding and confidence by giving all participants, regardless of size, a direct role in gathering information about military forces and activities of concern to them. At $99,722 an hour, it’s one expensive overwatch.
5. E-8C Joint STARS
The airborne battle platform costs $70,780 to keep flying. The E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or Joint STARS, is an airborne battle management, command and control, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platform. Its primary mission is to provide theater ground and air commanders with ground surveillance to support attack operations and targeting that contributes to the delay, disruption and destruction of enemy forces.
6. B-52 Stratofortress
Squeaking in just under the JSTARS cost, The B-52 BUFF (look it up) runs $70,388 per flying hour.
7. F-35A Lightning II
A 33rd Fighter Wing F-35A Lightning II powers down on the Duke Field flightline for the first time. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Sam King)
Despite its ballooning development costs, the F-35 isn’t as expensive to fly as one might think, at only $67,550 an hour. (And that fact is one of the airplane’s selling points.)
8. CV-22 Osprey
The USAF’s special operations tiltrotor will run you $63,792 per hour.
9. B-1B Lancer
The B-1 makes up sixty percent of the Air Force’s bomber fleet and runs $61,027 per flying hour.
The Mutineers turning Lt Bligh and part of the Officers and Crew adrift from His Majesty's Ship the Bounty, 29th April 1789. (Wikimedia Commons).
The story goes that captain of the Royal Navy’s HMS Bounty, Lt. William Bligh, was a harsh captain, prone to giving out abuse and unfair punishment in an already-harsh environment. The officers and men had enough one day and set Bligh to sea aboard a rowboat, only to land in the Polynesian islands and live happily ever after, free from the sweat and toil aboard a British ship.
That’s not exactly what happened aboard the ship. Bligh wasn’t entirely unjustified in his treatment of the crew and the crew wasn’t entirely unjustified to kick him to sea. The Bounty’s mission was simply to bring breadfruit plants from the Pacific to the West Indies for use in feeding slaves there. It never made it. Here’s what happened.
Lt. Bligh was an accomplished sailor, having traveled around the world on Capt. James Cook’s third circumnavigation of the globe. Bligh served as the ship’s chief navigator, called the sailing master. Bligh paid attention to how Cook kept his men alive along the long voyage, paying particular attention to the quality of the food aboard the ship and its cleanliness. He never took a risk with the safety of his crew, even turning around when Cape Horn proved too treacherous to pass, and sailing the Cape of Good Hope instead.
On land, he gave his crew ample time to rest, recuperate and replenish their stores. He had hoped the entire voyage would pass without a disciplinary action, and for much of the longest parts of the voyage, that was the case. Bligh was not just the ship’s captain, he was also the purser and managed a few other parts of the voyage. He even took a huge pay cut from his regular work as a merchant seaman to make the voyage.
The handful of troublemakers aboard the ship on their way to Tahiti were still relatively light but laid the foundations for a much bigger problem. Chief among them was the surgeon, Huggan. A drunk, Huggan bled a sailor to death while treating him for asthma, but told the captain (and thus the crew) the man died of scurvy. As captain and purser, Bligh took this very seriously.
Bligh not only paid Fletcher Christian (the man who would lead the mutineers) when he didn’t have to, Bligh lent him money when he needed it while aboard the ship. When the crew finally reached Tahiti to acquire the breadfruit for their mission, Bligh made them work only light duty while enjoying their time on the island. So why did the men mutiny?
Once landed in Tahiti, the men had their way with the island’s women for months. Bligh didn’t bat an eye at this behavior until the men and officers began slacking in their duties. Many contracted sexually-transmitted diseases and Huggan drank himself to death. Equipment began to disappear, and discipline was slipping away. Bligh used the Royal Navy’s punishment system to maximum effect in an effort to reestablish it. Sailors even began to desert.
After five months, it was time to leave, but the men didn’t want to go. Once at sea, Bligh reinstated the disciplinary actions to an almost-paranoid degree. He would routinely embarrass the officers and men, especially Fletcher Christian. Everything came to a head when someone stole from the Captain’s coconut supply, for which they were punished by the book. That’s when they mutinied. They put Bligh on the ship’s launch along with 18 loyal men – two others wanted to go but couldn’t be spared in the operation of the ship.
With Bligh gone, they returned to Tahiti while some went to Tubuai the Pitcairn Islands. Bligh and his men, using the rations afforded to them by the mutineers, made their way 3,500 nautical miles to the Dutch colony of Kupang, where he informed the Admiralty of the mutiny.
The early 1970s were a weird time in the U.S. military in terms of the social fabric across the force. As was the case for the American public, the Vietnam War was increasingly unpopular among service members and that feeling had a big impact on morale and caused myriad challenges for military leaders trying to maintain mission focus. And one of the most dramatic examples of this dynamic was the race riot aboard the USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) in October of 1972.
A subset of the antiwar movement was a sense among African-Americans that they were being taken advantage of because of their economic status and were used as cannon fodder against the enemy without any consideration for advancing their quality of life in society. This was felt acutely by black service members across all branches of the military.
The seeds of unrest aboard Kitty Hawk were sown the night before the riot happened, which happened to be the ship’s final night in port at Subic Bay, Philippines. The ship’s crew had just received word that they would be headed back to the waters off of Vietnam and not heading home to San Diego as planned. Morale was lower than ever and tempers were ready to flare.
A group of African-American sailors from the crew got into a fight with some other sailors at the enlisted club on base. Once the carrier put to sea, one of the black sailors was called to the investigating officer’s space to answer some questions about the incident. That black sailor showed up with 9 others, all very belligerent. The sailor was informed of his rights under the guidelines of non-judicial punishment. He was told he could make a statement, and he refused. He was allowed to leave.
Mayhem quickly swept across the ship, mostly centered on the mess decks. Black sailors began attacking their white shipmates without warning. The Marine detachment was called into action to try and put down the violence. One Marine started to draw his weapon, which made things worse.
The carrier’s executive officer, the second in command, was Captain Benjamin Cloud. Believing the fact he was black would be a calming factor, he confronted a large group of rioters in one of the aft mess decks. Cloud ordered the Marines who were there to stand down and leave the area. Once the Marines left he tried to reason with the rioters, asking the leaders among them to join him in his cabin to discuss the nature of their grievances.
At that point the carrier’s commanding officer, Captain Marland Townsend (who was white), approached the discussion and saw the XO had things under control, so he left without letting Cloud know he was there. The lack of coordination between CO and XO proved to be a problem as the day wore on.
The CO, having noted the hostile attitude of the group being addressed by the XO, left the area and instructed the the Marines to establish additional aircraft security watches and patrols on the hangar and flight decks. The Marines were given additional instructions by their CO to break up any group of three or more sailors who might appear on the aircraft decks, and disperse them.
As the XO released the group with whom he had been talking, the major portion of them left the after mess deck by way of the hangar deck. Upon seeing the black sailors come onto the hangar deck, the Marines attempted to disperse them. The Marines at the moment were some 26 strong and, trained in riot control procedures, they formed a line and advanced on the black sailors, containing them to the after end of the hanger deck. Several sailors were arrested and handcuffed while the remainder, arming themselves with aircraft tie-down chains, confronted the Marines.
At this point, the ship’s CO appeared and, moving into the space between the Marines and the black sailors, attempted to control the situation. The XO, upon being informed of this activity, headed there, arriving in time to see a heavy metal bar thrown from the area of the black sailors land near and possibly hit the CO. At this point, the XO was informed that a sailor had been seriously injured below decks, so he departed. The CO, meanwhile, ordered the prisoners released and the Marines to return to their compartment while he attempted to restore order personally.
The XO, after going below, became aware that small groups, ranging from 5 to 25 black sailors, were marauding about the ship attacking white sailors, pulling many from their berths and beating them with their fists and chains, dogging wrenches, metal pipes, fire extinguisher nozzles and broom handles. The ship’s dispensary was busy with doctors and corpsmen working on the injured personnel. Alarmingly, another group of black sailors harassed them and the men waiting to be treated.
The XO was then informed by at least two sources that the CO had been injured or killed on the hangar deck. Not sure of the facts but believing the reports could be true, the XO made an announcement over the ship’s public address system ordering all the ship’s black sailors to the after mess deck and the Marines to the forecastle, thereby putting as much distance between the two groups as possible.
The CO, still on the hangar deck talking to a dwindling number of the black sailors, was surprised and distressed at the XO’s announcement. At this point he was still unaware of the various groups of black sailors assaulting their white shipmates in several different areas of the ship, and he was, obviously, neither dead nor injured.
He headed for the nearest public address system microphone, found the XO there, held a brief conference with the XO, and made an announcement of his own to the effect that the XO had been misinformed and that all hands should return to their normal duties. The announcements by the CO and XO, occurring around midnight, were the first indication to the majority of the crew that there was troubled aboard.
The black sailors seemed to gravitate to the forecastle. Their attitude was extremely hostile. Of the 150 or so who were present, most were armed. The XO followed one group to the forecastle, entered and, as he later stated, he believed that had he not been black he would have been killed on the spot. He addressed the group for about two hours, reluctantly ignoring his status as the XO and instead appealing to the men as one black to another. After some time he acquired control over the group, calmed them down, had them put their weapons at his feet or over the side, and then ordered them to return to their compartments. The meeting broke up about 2:30 in the morning and for all intents and purposes, the violence aboard Kitty Hawk was over.
The ship fulfilled its combat mission schedule that morning and for the remainder of her time on station. During this period Kitty Hawk established a record 177 days on the line in a single deployment. After the incident senior enlisted men and junior officers were placed in each berthing compartment and patrolled the passageways during night-time hours to ensure that similar incidents would not recur.
The 21 men who were charged with offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and who requested civilian counsel, were put ashore at Subic Bay to be later flown to San Diego to meet the ship on its return. The remaining 5 charged were brought to trial aboard the ship during its transit back to the United States.
(The Naval Historical Center contributed to this article.)
Reports emerged in late July that the Pentagon has devised a plan to arm Ukrainian forces fighting Russian-backed separatists with defensive weapons, such as Javelin missiles.
But many Ukrainian soldiers on the ground believe the plan would give them more of a psychological edge than anything, according to The Daily Signal.
“The weapons themselves will not have a decisive impact on the course of combat operations,” Andrei Mikheychenko, a lieutenant in the Ukrainian army, told The Daily Signal. “Deliveries of lethal weapons, in my opinion, will primarily have psychological significance for both the Ukrainian army and the terrorists it fights.”
The war in eastern Ukraine started shortly after Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 when pro-Russian Ukrainians proclaimed parts of the Donbas as independent states known as the Donetsk People’s Republic and Luhansk People’s Republic.
And since then, both sides have been engaged in a full-fledged psychological war.
In an effort to intimidate and vex their enemies, Ukrainian troops have at times pretended to be members of US Navy SEAL Team 6 and give orders over the radio in English, The Daily Signal said. Other times, they’ve even raised American flags above their lines.
In 2015, Ukrainian troops changed the name of a street in the village of Krymske, which is on the front lines near the LPR, from some old Soviet hero to “John McCain Street,” The Daily Signal said.
A few months ago, one journalist with Ukrainian troops received a text message, as did all the soldiers with whom she was embedded, saying “Ukrainian soldiers, they’ll find your bodies when the snow melts,” according to the Associated Press.
“Leave and you will live,” other text messages will say, or “Nobody needs your kids to become orphans.”
Russian-backed separatists have also been known to use more brutal psychological tactics.
A Ukrainian soldier is forced to eat his own army badge by Russian-backed separatists. Screenshot from YouTube user PavelDonbass
In early 2015, videos emerged of rebel commanders forcing captured Ukrainian troops to kneel on the ground and eat their own army badges.
While many Ukrainian soldiers believe that the US supplying them with defensive weapons would help them in the psychological war, they also believe it will give them a combat edge and help deter attacks, The Daily Signal said.
Russian-backed separatists currently have about 478 working tanks, The Daily Signal said, and most of these can be taken out by the Javelin.
However other European nations, such as France and Germany, are worried that supplying Kiev with such lethal weapons would only increase the fighting.
While fighting slightly increased in July, the three-year old war, for the most part, has ground to a stalemate in which the two sides lob mortars and grenades from afar and trade sniper fire.
At least 10,090 people — including 2,777 civilians — have been killed, and nearly 24,000 have been wounded, through May 15, according to the UN. More than 1.6 million people have been internally displaced.
President Donald Trump has yet to approve the weapons deal, and is expected to make a decision in coming months.
But Mattis, a retired Marine general, is not the only US military officer who has supplemented his martial knowledge with academic achievement.
In that spirit, the US Army has distributed reading recommendations so soldiers and civilians alike are able “to sharpen their knowledge of the Army’s long and distinguished history, as well as the decisive role played by landpower in conflicts across the centuries.”
Below are some of the books recommended by Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley to help better understand the world’s current strategic environment, along with his explanations for their inclusion.
“Blending historical evidence with interviews of an amazing array of individuals, [Singer] shows how technology is changing not just in how wars are fought, but also in the politics, economics, laws, and the ethics that surround war itself.”
“Contending that states throughout history have been driven to acquire greater power and influence as a means of guaranteeing their own security, [Mearsheimer] concludes that current efforts at engagement and seeking harmonious relations between states will ultimately fail and predicts that the U.S. security competition with a rising China will inevitably intensify.”
Kennedy’s “far-ranging survey explores the relationship between economics, strategy, technology, and military power. He argues for the primacy of economic factors to explain why some states achieved great power status. By the same token, nations stumbled and declined when their financial resources could no longer support their military ambitions and commitments.”
“Between 1500 and 1800, the West sprinted ahead of other centers of power in Asia and the Middle East. … Today, that preeminence is in decline as China, India, Brazil, and other emerging powers rise. Kupchan considers how those principles associated with the West — democracy, capitalism, and secular nationalism — will continue to endure as new states outside the Western world gain greater economic and political prominence.”
O’Hanlon “wonders where large-scale conflicts or other catastrophes are most plausible. Which of these could be important enough to require the option of a U.S. military response? And which of these could, in turn, demand significant numbers of American ground forces for their resolution?”
“He is not predicting or advocating big American roles in such operations — only cautioning against overconfidence that the United States can and will avoid them.”
“Zeihan examines how the hard rules of geography are eroding the American commitment to free trade; how much of the planet is aging into a mass retirement that will enervate markets and capital supplies; and how, against all odds, it is the ever-ravenous American economy that — alone among the developed nations — is rapidly approaching energy independence.”
“He concludes that geography will matter more than ever in a deglobalizing world and that America’s geography is simply sublime.”
“In this masterful study of urban warfare, DiMarco explains what it takes to seize and hold a city literally block by block and provides lessons for today’s tacticians that they neglect at their own peril.”
“Burrows examines recent trends to forecast tectonic shifts that will drive us to 2030. A staggering amount of wholesale change is happening — from unprecedented and widespread aging to rampant urbanization and growth in a global middle class to an eastward shift in economic power and a growing number of disruptive technologies.”
“In an era of high technology and instant communication, the role of geography in the formation of strategy and politics can be undervalued. … In a series of case studies, Grygiel, a political scientist, highlights the importance of incorporating geography into grand strategy. He argues that states can increase and maintain their position of power by pursuing a geostrategy that focuses on control of resources and lines of communications.”
Dale Dye is a veteran of the Vietnam war, accomplished actor, author, and entrepreneur, but most of the filmmaking world knows him as Hollywood’s drill sergeant. In a wide-ranging interview with Dye at his home, we spoke on a variety of topics, but one that really caught my interest were his thoughts on the military draft.
Before he became the legendary technical advisor that helped shape everything from “Born on the Fourth of July” to “Saving Private Ryan,” Dye served three tours as a Marine on the ground in Vietnam, and was a three-time recipient of the Purple Heart and recipient of the Bronze Star (with combat “V”) award for heroism. While conventional wisdom maintains the “all-volunteer force” of the modern U.S. military is the best approach, Dye thinks that ending the draft was a “terrible mistake.”
“There is a difference between a wartime draft and a peacetime draft,” Dye told WATM, in an interview at his home north of Hollywood. “Wartime draft, you take whatever shows up. Whatever comes, you know. Peacetime draft you can be more selective because of selective service pools in the neighborhoods and so on, so you get good guys. The reason I like it is this: with the all-volunteer force, and with the advent of social media and a number of other things, what’s happened is that we have become a ‘Me Generation.’ Its me, me, me. Its all about the sun rises and sets on my ass.”
The 70-year-old combat veteran — who volunteered to join the Marine Corps in 1964 and retired in 1984 — uses a colorful expression and doesn’t mince words. In his view, the draft brings people together to appreciate service to something higher than themselves.
“Now enter the military, and that rapidly changes. Our way of looking at it is that yours and mine is the antithesis of that. You worry about me, I worry about you. And then we both worry about the mission. Our personal crap is secondary. Nowadays, personal crap is primary, and it’s because there is no view of a larger mission. There is nothing bigger than me. [Veterans] know there is something bigger than us. And that is the country, our nation, and our Corps, and each other. And that is bigger than either one of us personally and we know that from our military experience.”
In Dye’s view, if people were drafted into the military, if would have a “huge beneficial effect” that would take people away from ‘me first’ into an ‘us first’ viewpoint — something that might close the civilian-military divide.
But he also sees military service as a way of bringing people together working toward a common goal, and building relationships from the shared experience. He continued:
“Point two, which is perhaps even more important, you know we are seeing deteriorating social relationships. Why? Well, I don’t have to talk to you, I can email your ass and never meet you. And furthermore, if I’m a white guy from Southeast Missouri, and you’re a black guy from Trenton, New Jersey, we would never run into each other and wouldn’t want to. Why would we? Nothing in common. So you give the nation a common denominator. That black guy from Trenton, New Jersey and the Hispanic guy from Albuquerque, New Mexico, and the white guy from Missouri and you shuffle them together in a military experience, and for the first time you find out that black guy is a human being just like I am. And all these prejudices and nonsense are just that, nonsense. And you learn about the Latino guy, and the Latino guy and the black guy learn about you. And what happens is, you lose some of these preconceptions. This nonsense, and I saw it happen when the draft was there. And its wonderful for the country. We are no longer living in little cliques. [Military service members] have been there. We’ve been in the military … we know the black guys are the same as the white guy, and the white guy knows that the Latino guy is the same as he is. And I think that is exceedingly valuable. And that’s point two, and we lost it when we got rid of the draft.”
After serving in Vietnam as an infantryman and a combat correspondent, Dye served for a number of years before he retired from the Marine Corps and moved to Los Angeles with the idea of bringing more realism to Hollywood films. Despite the door being shut in his face plenty of times, his persistence paid off when Oliver Stone took him on as a military technical advisor for “Platoon.”
The firm believes the Russian Federation will not survive the decade in its present form, after a combination of international sanctions, plunging oil prices, and a suffering ruble trigger a political and social crisis. Russia will then devolve into an archipelago of often-impoverished and confrontational local governments under the Kremlin’s very loose control.
“We expect Moscow’s authority to weaken substantially, leading to the formal and informal fragmentation of Russia” the report states, adding, “It is unlikely that the Russian Federation will survive in its current form.”
Russia is the world’s largest country and its 8,000 weapons are fairly spread out over its 6.6 million square miles. According to a Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists study, Russia has 40 nuclear sites, which is twice as many as the US uses to house a comparable number of warheads. This policy of dispersal makes it difficult for an enemy to disable the Russian nuclear arsenal in a single attack, but it also makes the Russian stockpile difficult to control.
The Bulletin report also found that the Russia was uncertain exactly how many short-range “tactical” or city-busting “strategic” nukes it has, nor what the weapons’ state of assembly or alert status may be.
Stratfor fears that the dissolution of the Russian Federation could cause an unprecedented nuclear security crisis. Not only could the command-and-control mechanisms for Russia’s massive and highly opaque nuclear arsenal completely break down. Moscow might lose its physical control over weapons and launch platforms as well.
“Russia is the site of a massive nuclear strike force distributed throughout the hinterlands,” the Decade Forecast explains. “The decline of Moscow’s power will open the question of who controls those missiles and how their non-use can be guaranteed.”
In Stratfor’s view the US is the only global actor that can formulate a response to this problem, and ever that might not be enough to prevent launch platforms and weapons from falling into the wrong hands.
“Washington … will not be able to seize control of the vast numbers of sites militarily and guarantee that no missile is fired in the process,” the Forecast predicts. “The United States will either have to invent a military solution that is difficult to conceive of now, accept the threat of rogue launches, or try to create a stable and economically viable government in the regions involved to neutralize the missiles over time.”
The forecast doesn’t go into detail about what kind of “military solution” might be appropriate. US Special Forces could conceivably transport fissile material out of the country or temporarily secure the most vulnerable sites, but those materials would have to be evacuated to another country, something that would undoubtedly raise tensions with whatever authority still rules in Moscow. In fact, the surviving Russian government would probably consider any US or allied military action to be an act of aggression.
Regardless of the extent of the collapse, Stratfor predicts a major security vacuum in Russia in the next decade.
On July 11, 1804, Aaron Burr killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. Hamilton fans — grab your second and let’s get into it.
Alexander Hamilton was born in the British West Indies before emigrating to the American colonies to study in 1772. His hard work and impassioned persona would drive him to become a key figure in the Revolutionary War, one of America’s most influential Founding Fathers, and a defender and champion of the U.S. Constitution.
Aaron Burr was born into an influential family and, though orphaned at the young age of two, he would go on to graduate from college at just 16 years old and serve with commendation during the American Revolution. He defended a free press, abolition, and women’s rights. Soon, however, Hamilton’s star would begin to outshine Burr’s, who was often seen as an opportunist with shifting allegiances.
Both men served in the Continental Army and then began their decades-long political rivalry, finally culminating in the presidential election of 1800. An unprecedented tie split Congress between Thomas Jefferson and Burr; but Hamilton’s support of Jefferson helped break the deadlock in Ol’ Long Tom’s favor.
Four years later, Hamilton campaigned against Burr and attacked his character. Defeated and bitter, Burr decided to restore his reputation by challenging Hamilton to a duel.
There are conflicting accounts as to how the duel went down. Some say Hamilton deliberately fired into the air — an act of honor. Burr’s second claimed Hamilton shot at Burr and missed. Either way, Burr shot Hamilton in the stomach and Hamilton died the next day.
Burr’s political career fell into ruin after that, with the nation outraged that a sitting Vice-President could brazenly shoot someone.
202 years later, Dick Cheney asked history to hold his beer.
Featured Image: Duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. After the painting by J. Mund. Note: Possibly due to artistic license and the problems of perspective and canvas size etc, the duelists are standing at an unusually short distance from each other. However, it is known that some duels did indeed take place at very short distances such as this, though most were fought where the opponents were standing approximately 50 feet apart. The protagonists are dressed in anachronistic 18th century dress, not the common fashion of the early 19th century.
Although the H-6 was initially fielded by the U.S. Army in the early ’60s, it wasn’t until the failed “Eagle Claw” mission in 1980 that the service started getting serious about supporting special operations with helicopters.
Since that time “Little Birds” have been used in crucial special operations missions across the globe from Panama to Somolia to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Little Birds are operated by the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), the “Night Stalkers”
The Night Stalkers operate a variety of helicopter models including the Chinook and Blackhawk, all modified for special operations missions.
Little Birds come in two basic variants — troop transport and attack. The attack version — the AH-6 — is armed with two M134 miniguns, two M260 7-shot Hydra 70 rocket pods. Alternately, the AH-6 can be armed with Hellfire anti-tank missiles, air-to-air Stingers, Mk-19 40 mm automatic grenade launchers, or .50 caliber machine guns.
In September 1987, Night Stalkers participated in Operation Prime Chance, engaging and neutralizing an Iranian ship that was being used for mine laying. Little Birds attacked the threat while using aviator night vision goggles and forward-looking infrared devices over water, the first successful night combat engagement under these conditions.
The Little Bird can carry up to six troops, three on each side, but usually they limit the number to two per side.
Little Bird pilots get specialized training in close quarters flying and night ops and those skills are heavily leveraged once they get to the Night Stalkers.
When not at war Little Bird pilots train as intensely as the special operators they carry.
After all, they set themselves to a very high standard: According to it’s mission statement the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne) is constantly ready to arrive time-on-target plus or minus 30 seconds.
And here’s the last thing an insurgent might see . . .
SureFire has released a number of shiny shining products recently, and one of them is the Maximus Headlamp. The Maximus (not to be confused with any of the brutal killers from Ridley Scott’s Gladiator or a concert in São Paulo) pushes out one thousand (1,000) lumens of light from an organic lithium-ion battery. It also features a “long-running” SOS beacon for exigent circumstances. (“Long-Running” was SureFire’s phrase; we’re not sure how many hours that actually is).
It’s rechargeable and directional with a variable-outfit LED headlamp. This will allow you to go full potato like Gort, or to dial it back down to just enough lumens sufficient to navigate a campsite or shady bordello…or any level in between. This will also of course affect the runtime, though it’s important to note this thing comes with a gas gauge (which we reckon is a welcome feature). Its readout gives you the battery charge status.
The Maxiumus features a large, knurled dial to make those adjustments, which you can do with one hand. This should help you get it where you want it under stress, in inclement weather, or when wearing gloves. You can also aim it with one hand, as the light assembly rotates up and down 90 degrees.
The LED is backed by one of SureFire’s proprietary reflectors, which enables it to throw out a wide, diffused beam they describe as “optimized for your natural field of vision.”
As for what it does to your noggin, SureFire says this:
“Built from tough, lightweight magnesium, the SureFire Maximus thrives in harsh conditions. It’s also comfortable to wear, thanks to its no-chafe fine-weave headband and moisture-wicking Breathe-O-Prene forehead pad.”
Be forewarened, the MSRP is $275. SureFire lights ain’t cheap, and neither is their performance. If you want a task light you can afford to lose in a drunken stupor or something to just look around your tent with, this might not be for you. If you’re doing serious work where serious gear is important, the Maximums might be worth a look.
Here are the specs:
Virtually indestructible LED emitter regulated to maximize output and runtime
One-hand output adjustment from 1 to 1,000 lumens
Precision reflector produces a wide, smooth beam optimized for your field of vision
Light assembly rotates up and down 90 degrees
Built-in SOS beacon can run for days on end
Tough, lightweight magnesium body with durable black finish
Comfortable no-chafe headband with moisture-wicking Breath-O-Prene® forehead pad
Includes long-life lithium-ion rechargeable battery with wall (AC) and car (DC) chargers
About the Author: We Are The Mighty contributor Richard “Swingin’ Dick” Kilgore comes to us from our partners at BreachBangClear.com (@breachbangclear). He is one half of the most storied celebrity action figure team in the world. He believes in American Exceptionalism, holding the door for any woman, and the idea that you should be held accountable for every word that comes out of your mouth. He may also be one of two nom de plumes for a veritable farrago of CAGs and FAGs (Current Action Guys and Former Action Guys). You can learn more about Swingin’ Dick right here.
The USS North Carolina was what they called a “fast” battleship, designed for long range shooting matches with other ships of war. She was faster than any other ship in the U.S. fleet when she was built.
“I was 17 when I came aboard this thing,” says James Bowen, a World War II veteran and USS North Carolina sailor. “I saw that thing and said ‘Nothing can hurt me on that thing.’ So I think of this as my second mother.”
“It brings back a lot of memories, if you walk around the ventilators,” says Louis Popovich, another USS North Carolina veteran. “It’s amazing how you can be reminded of an area by breathing some of the air.”
By the end of WWII, submarine warfare and aircraft carriers made the more expensive heavy gun warships like North Carolina all but obsolete. The last use of a battleship in combat was in Desert Storm, but by then they were firing Tomahawk missiles. Slowly over the next 50 years, the battleships of WWII were decommissioned one by one.
The North Carolina was opened to the public in 1963 and is now moored at Wilmington, N.C, where those interested in hearing more stories from the men who fought aboard her can visit.
While the ship will be there for the foreseeable future, the veterans’ firsthand stories will not. An estimated 430 WWII veterans die every day and by 2036, they will all be gone — but not forgotten.
As such, they can not only strike within six feet of their aim point thanks to their precision guidance (an optional low-cost laser seeker will give the rounds the ability to engage a moving target), they can also travel over 12 miles when fired from a baseline mortar like the M120 120mm mortar or the M252 81mm mortar.
Now, imagine if these were dropped from a UAV from, say, 25,000 feet, as opposed to being fired by a mortar on the ground. During a presentation at the 2017 Armament System Forum in Fredericksburg, Virginia, hosted by the National Defense Industrial Association, Alan Perkins of UTC Aerospace Systems discussed how these mortars could be used on UAVs like the MQ-1 Predator and the MQ-9 Reaper instead of the usual AGM-114 Hellfire missile.
The reason: The mortar rounds will have long range – in excess of 30 miles – when dropped from a UAV’s normal altitude. Furthermore their warheads are much smaller than the Hellfire’s. The 120mm mortar’s M57 round has about four and a half pounds of high explosive. Compare that to the 20-pound warhead on a Hellfire. That greatly reduces collateral damage, but when a 120mm mortar round lands six feet away from some ISIS terrorists, it still ruins their day.
In short, the old way of hitting ground targets for airplanes has become new again.