Posted on 06/07/2003 3:17:55 PM PDT by risk
Edited on 06/07/2005 12:36:34 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
When he was promoted to officer rank at eighteen, S. L. A. MARSHALL was the youngest shavetail in the United States Army during World War I. He rejoined the Army in 1942, became a combat historian with the rank of colonel; and the notes he made at the time of the Normandy landing are the source of this heroic reminder. Readers will remember his frank and ennobling book about Korea, THE RIVER AND THE GAUNTLET, which was the result of still a third tour of duty.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
I think the answer is deceptively simple, and comes in two forms:
There's really nothing I can offer to thank these men enough. But I will say this: we must stop teaching our children that WW2 was as bad as it gets, and it was the great war to end all wars. Democracy is never free. The success of freedom will always rile the hatreds of wicked men who want to take what braver souls than theirs have earned. We will have to do this again and again. We must build the martial spirit in each new generation. Otherwise, what these men preserved will soon be lost.
We have men who fought just as bravely in Vietnam, for an equally just cause -- among us on FR today. It's one of the best things about having a chance to participate on this forum.
Due to the draft (10 million according to Wartime Draft Comparisons), you may be correct that many didn't go because they felt compelled by their own motivations. However, the soldiers I've known personally each did. My grandmother sent four sons to war, and her husband reenlisted. And they all went for a variety of personal reasons, but the common factor was preservation of the republic.
For an example of a personal reason, my youngest uncle had been captured by the Japanese on Wake, so my younger father immediately enlisted in the army airforce thinking his contribution would help end the war sooner and bring home his closest brother. But he also knew about the Jewish concentration camps, and he knew that if we didn't stop Hitler, he would enslave the whole human race, aside from a few brainwashed or greedy Germans. This kind of fear awakened both patriotism and a will to action that placed their own lives at a lower value than that of the republic.
My family arrived here in 1655, and our British-born forebear was a military man. I think that story has repeated itself throughout American history: the men who built this country bore sons who knew when to answer the call of liberty. What about me? I'm not as brave, I haven't given anything. But I'm fiercely proud of my family, and even more grateful for the troops who engaged in amphibious assaults like D-day and the island-hopping war in the Pacific.
I certainly concur with that.
Opposition to the Viet Nam War seems to be just as much in vogue today as it was in the 60s and 70s.
Every time I hear one of these cretans proudly exclaim he was opposed to that war I see red.
In everything that has been written about Omaha until now, there is less blood and iron than in the original field notes covering any battalion landing in the first wave. Doubt it? Then let's follow along with Able and Baker companies, 116th Infantry, 29th Division. Their story is lifted from my fading Normandy notebook, which covers the landing of every Omaha company.
The 116th Infantry (Virginia), also known as the "Stonewall Brigade" of CSA Civil War fame. When the initial assault divisions were chosen by General Eisenhower he picked the 1st and 4th Infantry Divisions of the "Regular" US Army, and the "National" Divisions (later redesignated Regular) 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions. To round out the assault Regimental Combat Teams of the massive operation Overload, General Eisenhower chose the National Guard 29th Infantry Division - the "Blue and Gray", specifically its 116th and 115th RCTs.
He chose well.
dvwjr
And you as well, sir. 82d ABN, CSC 1/504, 80-83.
I'm glad you shared about your brother.
First of all, I want to thank you and your men for their selfless service in Vietnam. Second, I'll ask ALOHA RONNIE and SAMWolf for their indulgence because I've already expressed these same ideas elsewhere.
I agree with you that that the draftee who did his duty with honor during the Vietnamization phase of the war (or for that matter, at any time during the Vietnam or Korean conflicts) was among the truest of patriots. When Americans fought in WW2, they knew that failure to win meant almost certain capture of North America. However, during the Cold War, Korea and Vietnam were more like battles in a long conflict. Loss of Vietnam might not mean that communists would march into Washington D.C. and seize power. Men who served during those Asian conflicts were well aware that their blood was a drop in a huge ocean of sacrifice that could go on for generation after generation beyond theirs. In the Cold War, many believed there would be no final conflict other than nuclear holocaust. Few men had the faith shared by Ronald Reagan that we could win. Where was the glory? Where was the sense of impending loss of homeland? They had to fight without either, just on the knowledge that this was what their country required of them. And they even fought knowing some disapproved.
I see our troops who fell in the service of freedom in Korea and Vietnam much like the Spartans and Greeks who battled the Persians at Thermopylae in 480 BC. A few hundred died to hold off an invasion force while their comrades could fall back and reinforce their defenses of Greece. The democracy was saved, and a Golden Age ensued. A monument was erected at the mountain pass with these words inscribed:
"Go tell the Spartans, you who pass us by, that here, obedient to their laws, we lie."Had we lost the Cold War, there is no doubt in my mind that the results would have been equally tragic as had we lost WW2. History will show that our sacrifices, which often seemed hopeless and meaningless, were essential in proving American resolve against communism. Every American and allied soldier who served in Vietnam showed the communists masters that they could not win their war of global domination. They would have to fight against a superior force with superior arms who would go into battle with the determination and selflessness of the Spartans. Ho Chi Minh's tin pot revolution might make inroads, but the Cold War would eventually be won by free men who would fight no matter what the odds.
Like the Spartans at Thermopylae, our draftees were obedient to the laws of their democracy.
I know. They even raised me to believe in the possibility of a world without war, an idea I've abandoned since 9/11. But hardly a night goes by that I'm not kept awake by the feeling that I need to do more than just write about defending this country. Thank you, though.
I just finished reading a historical treatment of the Pellopenisian Wars, lasting 29 years, between, mainly Athens and Sparta. It was a remarkable account in many ways but the landings in Normandy were different in very small ways from some of the battles during this period. The Athenians were rulers of the sea and attempted, and succeeded or failed, in many landings. The Spartans were rulers of the land battles yet were largely unable to project their power because of their lack of naval ability.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.