Quotulatiousness

January 29, 2020

Patton | Based on a True Story

Filed under: History, Media, Military, USA, WW2 — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

The Cynical Historian
Published 30 Aug 2018

It’s finally time to review Patton! I have a lot to say about it, as you can tell by the time stamp. Way back when I started the Based on a True Story series, the second episode was a bit about what I considered to be the best ones — and this movie was at the top. I love this film, but for more reasons than most of you could know — so this is going to be a deep dive into the film and its subject matter. It’s ambiguous, narrowed in subject, and just a perfect examination of the man. As the New Yorker said during the movie’s release, “[Patton] appears to be deliberately planned as a Rorschach test.”
————————————————————
references:
Brian Sobel and George S. Patton IV, The Fighting Pattons (Westport: Praeger Publishing, 1997). https://amzn.to/2u2WI57

MacMillan Compendium, America at War (New York: Macmillan Library Reference, 1994), 726-727. https://amzn.to/2m6o4mx

John Keegan and Andrew Wheatcroft, Who’s Who in Military History: from 1453 to the Present Day, (London: Routledge, 1996), 231-232. https://amzn.to/2KWv53M

Paul Fussell, “Patton”, in Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies, ed. Mark Carnes (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1996). https://amzn.to/2J5iGc7

Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen, Based on a True Story: Fact and Fantasy in 100 Favorite Movies, (Chicago: A Cappella Books, 2005), 269-272. https://amzn.to/2m2sSZQ

Frank Sanello, Reel v. Real: How Hollywood Turns Fact into Fiction (Lanham: Taylor Trade Publishing, 2003), 177-181. https://amzn.to/2N072BB

http://www.historynet.com/patton-film…

https://dailyhistory.org/How_accurate…

http://jbell2ja.umwblogs.org/history-…

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2008…

https://www.moviemistakes.com/film960

Special thanks to my mom, dad, and uncle for making sure this was accurate and providing media for the end bit, especially my father (Mark Hall-Patton), who proofread the script as well.
————————————————————
Support the channel through Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorian
or pick up some merchandise at SpreadShirt:
https://shop.spreadshirt.com/cynicalh…

LET’S CONNECT:
https://discord.gg/Ukthk4U
https://twitter.com/Cynical_History
————————————————————
Wiki:
Patton is a 1970 American epic biographical DeLuxe Color war film about U.S. General George S. Patton during World War II. It stars George C. Scott, Karl Malden, Michael Bates and Karl Michael Vogler. It was directed by Franklin J. Schaffner from a script by Francis Ford Coppola and Edmund H. North, who based their screenplay on the biography Patton: Ordeal and Triumph by Ladislas Farago and Omar Bradley’s memoir A Soldier’s Story. The film was shot in 65 mm Dimension 150 by cinematographer Fred J. Koenekamp and has a music score by Jerry Goldsmith.

Patton won seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Original Screenplay. Scott won Best Actor for his portrayal of General Patton, but declined to accept the award. The opening monologue, delivered by George C. Scott as General Patton with an enormous American flag behind him, remains an iconic and often quoted image in film. The film was successful, and in 2003, Patton was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being “culturally, historically or aesthetically significant”. The Academy Film Archive preserved Patton in 2003.
————————————————————
#History #Patton #Review #Accuracy #GeneralPatton

January 13, 2020

MANNERHEIM | History and his Line

Filed under: Europe, History, Military, Russia, WW1, WW2 — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

TIK
Published 22 Jun 2017

Carl Gustav Emil Mannerheim towers over all other characters of the Winter War, and of Finnish history in general. This video is a brief introduction to one of the great leaders of the 20th Century (and according to a TV poll in 2004, the greatest Finn of all time). Full script is available as captions/subtitles, and the source I used for this video is –

Trotter, W. The Winter War: The Russo-Finnish War of 1939-40. Aurum Press Ltd, 2003.

If you’d like to help me make these videos, consider supporting me on Patreon https://www.patreon.com/TIKhistory

January 10, 2020

Pierre Poilievre’s bid for federal Conservative leader

Chris Selley on the varying reactions to the notion of Pierre Poilievre as Andrew Scheer’s replacement:

Glee is spreading among Liberal partisans at the thought of Pierre Poilievre succeeding Andrew Scheer as Conservative leader. The theory is he is so pugnacious, so obnoxious, so poisonously, sneeringly partisan as to be literally unelectable.

Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre at a Manning Centre event, 1 March 2014.
Manning Centre photo via Wikimedia Commons.

It is true that the man longtime Conservative cabinet minister John Baird nicknamed “Skippy,” in tribute to his enthusiastic Question Period performances, does not suffer from an excess of gravitas — though Poilievre’s reported support for his leadership bid from Baird and Jenni Byrne, a former senior adviser to Stephen Harper, lend him some within party ranks. His candidacy hasn’t made any measurable dent thus far in public opinion polls. And the opposition war rooms would certainly have fun unpacking his baggage.

Never mind Poilievre questioning the value-for-money proposition of compensating residential school victims (for which he apologized), or his use of the term “tar baby” in the House of Commons (for which he did not, and nor should he have, because it was a perfectly apt and inoffensive analogy in the context he used it), or the dreaded Green Light from the Campaign Life Coalition. Having been Harper’s parliamentary secretary, Liberals will blame him for every supposed atrocity of the Harper era.

All that said, the notion that people widely viewed as pugnacious, obnoxious and partisan-to-a-fault can’t win in Canadian politics is belied by reality. A quick glance around the federation brings Jason Kenney, Doug Ford and Justin Trudeau immediately to mind.

That’s not to say they won because of those character traits: Kenney’s and Ford’s leadership opponents would likely have fared just as well. Trudeau hoodwinked many with his Sunny Ways fraud, but he might well have won as the classic born-to-rule Liberal he turned out to be. If his government continues venting credibility at the rate it established late in its first mandate, the next Conservative leader could well become prime minister no matter who he is.

After recounting the dismal tale of Sheer’s “leadership”, Selley recounts a favourite story about Boris Johnson which contrasts strongly with the Milk Dud’s occupancy of the job.

Again, that degree of swagger and eloquence is far too much to ask of Canadian politicians. But it shouldn’t be too much to ask a party leader to have enough confidence in his party, his members, his movement and his ideas to arouse him to at least some degree of annoyance when they’re unfairly deprecated. If Conservative members aren’t excited by the prospect of a Poilievre leadership, they shouldn’t be half as mortified as Liberals think they should be.

January 7, 2020

History Summarized: Alcibiades

Filed under: Europe, History, Humour, Military — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Overly Sarcastic Productions
Published 11 Jan 2016

The oracle at delphi simply tells him, “congratulations”. The standard of nudity was his idea. Narcissus gets shy around him. Patroclus was his boyfriend first. He is … the most interesting man in Ancient Greece.

Extra special thanks to Blue’s professor, Mr. Samons, who taught him about Greek history and the comedic potential of marshmallows and triremes.

January 3, 2020

The Battle of Alesia (52 B.C.E.)

Filed under: Europe, France, History, Military — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 06:00

Historia Civilis
Published 24 Apr 2015

Patreon | http://patreon.com/HistoriaCivilis
Donate | http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?…
Merch | http://teespring.com/stores/historiac…
Twitter | http://twitter.com/HistoriaCivilis
Website | http://historiacivilis.com

Music is “The Life and Death of a Certain K. Zabriskie, Patriarch” by Chris Zabriskie. (http://chriszabriskie.com/)

December 15, 2019

The Nine Situations | The Art of War by Sun Tzu

Filed under: Books, History, Military — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Eudaimonia
Published 26 Nov 2017

Support the channel: https://www.patreon.com/EudaimoniaCha…
Buy the book on Amazon: http://geni.us/xgng

November 22, 2019

Battle of Savo Island 1942: America’s Worst Naval Defeat

Filed under: Australia, History, Japan, Military, Pacific, USA, WW2 — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Montemayor
Published 26 Aug 2017

(Animated Map) – WARNING: lower the volume if you are using headphones. sorry for the audio.

I do not own the rights to the songs or images. This video is purely for educational purposes.

No copyright intended, all image rights go to:

-Wikipedia Commons
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ba…

-Naval History Heritage and Command
https://www.history.navy.mil/

-Portrait of Richmond K. Turner
https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Onli…

USS Jarvis
http://www.navsource.org/

Images contained on this site that are donated from private sources are © copyrighted by the respective owner. Images credited to the National Archives (NA, NARA); Naval History & Heritage Command (NHHC), formerly Naval Historical Center (NHC); and U.S. Navy (USN) are believed to be in the public domain. Some images credited to the United States Naval Institute (USNI) are from © copyrighted collections, the rest are believed to be in the public domain.

All songs by Ross Budgen https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQKG…
-“Welcome to Chaos”
-“House Lannister Theme” – Game of Thrones Season 4 (Original composition)
-“Run”
-“Parallel”

Sources-

Hammel, E. (2017, March 6). “First Battle of Savo Island: The U.S. Navy’s Worst Defeat”. Retrieved August 25, 2017, from http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/dail…

Hornfischer, J. D. (2011). Neptunes Inferno: the U.S. Navy at Guadalcanal. New York: Bantam Books.

Newcomb, R. F., & Newcomb, R. F. (2002). The Battle of Savo Island. New York: H. Holt.

Stille, M. (2013). The Naval Battles for Guadalcanal 1942 (Vol. 225). Oxford, UK: Osprey Publishing.

Toll, I. W. (2016). The Conquering Tide: war in the Pacific Islands, 1942-1944. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

USMC Casualty list taken from:
https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USMC…

October 25, 2019

QotD: Command and control in the US military

Filed under: Military, Quotations, USA — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 01:00

A book excerpt in Foreign Policy caught my eye. It is by Thomas E Ricks, a long time critic of the US military’s leadership, and it is about the US Army’s failed command and control (C²) system which has been adopted, holus bolus, by Canada. I’m guessing that the article was written for American military officers because it is full of the bafflegab and jargon that is characteristic of their system ~ never use a short, simple, English word when a long, fancy one, with French or, preferably, German roots will do.

The crux of the author’s complaint is that military commanders have been relegated to the status of administrators and managers because the US Army is all about process and seems to care too little about results. The author complains, with reason, that headquarters, from battalion to the highest levels, have gotten larger and larger and more and more complex but appear to actually accomplish less and less. I think the same complaints can be, validly, made about Canada.

It is not surprising that Canada, like Australia, Britain, Chile and Denmark, has adapted at least some of the US military’s system ~ the USA has, after all, the most powerful military in the world. They must be doing something right, right?

Actually, since about 1950s, the US military has been distinguished by blunders and defeats at least as often as we have seen periodic displays of operational prowess: Viet Nam, Bay of Pigs, the failed hostage rescue in Iran, the invasion of Grenada, the second Iraq War all come to mind. The American military legacy has even spawned American satirical films about (constantly failing) American military command. That’s something I though only the Brits could do.

Ted Campbell, “Military command and control”, Ted Campbell’s Point of View, 2017-09-16.

September 24, 2019

Bill Belichick’s secret is that he doesn’t have a secret

Filed under: Football — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

I’m not a Patriots fan so I don’t think of Patriots head coach Bill Belichick as some sort of demi-god … although I have wondered if he’s got some sulfur burns from suspicious handshakes with diabolical representatives … but Severian makes the case that his big secret is that he doesn’t have one:

Head coach Bill Belichick of the New England Patriots watches the preseason game against the Washington Redskins at FedExField on August 28, 2009 in Landover, Maryland.
Photo by Keith Allison via Wikimedia Commons.

Belichick isn’t some kind of super-genius. Nor does he have some unique insight into the game. He’ll never write a book on “The Bill Belichick System,” because unlike every other celebrity coach, he doesn’t have a “system.” He simply does what he needs to do to win, one game at a time, with the pieces he has. That’s just leadership, in the traditional sense of the term, but so few people in our modern Media-driven culture have seen it that it totally fries our circuits. Surely he must have some double-secret grimoire of football excellence that he consults on the sidelines …?

Nope. Belichick’s secret is what he doesn’t have: A huge ego, a “system,” the my-way-or-the-highway mentality that infects nearly everyone given the tiniest smidgen of real power. An example: He once countered (and, of course, defeated) a ferocious defense on crappy field conditions by lining up a sixth offensive lineman as a tight end. Perfectly legal, but nobody else would’ve ever dreamed of doing it.

The Patriots are famous for using their (perennially excellent) tight ends more than any other team in the league, so naturally the opponent spent all week scheming to take away the TE. When Belichick kept his tight ends off the field, the opponent had no idea what to do; their quick cover linebackers got plastered by the extra linemen, and the Patriots’ running backs ran wild.

The lesson from this is twofold: First, that he would think to do it in the first place. Again, it’s perfectly legal. Teams do it all the time, actually, except they do it in goal line situations — instead of cramming the ball up the middle, they send a soft-handed lineman over into the corner of the end zone. He’s too big for anyone back there to cover, so if the QB can get it to him it’s an easy score. All Belichick did was run the same personnel out in the middle of the field. Simple, but football is the most conservative sport in existence — nobody does anything that hasn’t been done a million times before.

The second takeaway is that Belichick had enough control to pull it off. Nobody likes getting his playing time reduced, and tight ends in the modern game are highly-paid gentlemen accustomed to frequent success. Even if they wanted to, most coaches wouldn’t be able to take their glory boys off the field for an extended period — the players would riot, the Media would crucify him, and the fans would go nuts. Belichick’s guys bought in enough to follow the gameplan without complaint. He gave them the credit when the team won, but he would’ve taken the heat if they’d lost. Again, that’s not some special football coaching technique; it’s just leadership.

September 14, 2019

QotD: America and its army

Filed under: History, Military, Quotations, USA — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 01:00

Before 1939 the United States Army was small, but it was professional. Its tiny officers corps was parochial, but true. Its members devoted their time to the study of war, caring little what went on in the larger society around them. They were centurions, and the society around them not their concern.

When so ordered, they went to war. Spreading themselves thinner still, they commanded and trained the civilians who heeded the trumpet’s call. The civilians did the fighting, of course — but they did it the Army’s way.

In 1861 millions of volunteers donned blue or gray. Millions of words have been written on American valor, but few books dwell on the fact that of the sixty important battles, fifty-five were commanded on both sides by West Pointers, and on one side in the remaining five.

In 1917 four million men were mustered in. Few of them liked it, but again they did things the way the professionals wanted them done.

The volunteers came and went, and the Army changed not at all.

But since the Civil War, the Army had neither the esteem nor the favor of public or government. Liberal opinion, whether business-liberal or labor-liberal, dominated the United States after the destruction of the South, and the illiberal Army grew constantly more alienated from its own society.

In a truly liberal society, centurions have no place. For centurions, when they put on the soldier, do not retain the citizen. They are never citizens to begin with.

There was and is no danger of military domination of the nation. The Constitution gave Congress the power of life or death over the military, and they have always accepted the fact. The danger has been the other way around — the liberal society, in its heart, wants not only domination of the military, but acquiesence of the military toward the liberal view of life.

Domination and control society should have. The record of military rule, from the burnished and lazy Praetorians to the juntas of Latin America, to the attempted fiasco of the Légion Étrangére, are pages of history singularly foul in odor.

But acquiesence society may not have, if it wants an army worth a damn. By the very nature of its mission, the military must maintain a hard and illiberal view of life and the world. Society’s purpose is to live; the military’s is to stand ready, if need be, to die.

Soldiers are rarely fit to rule — but they must be fit to fight.

The military is in essence a tool, to be used by its society. If its society is good, it may hope to be used honorably, even if badly. If its society is criminal, it may be, like the Wehrmacht, unleashed upon a helpless world.

But when the Wehrmacht dashed against the world, it was brought to ruin, not by a throng of amateurs, but by well-motivated, well-generaled Allied troops, who had learned their military lessons.

T.R. Fehrenbach, This Kind of War: A Study in Unpreparedness, 1963.

September 2, 2019

The Inca Empire – Earth-Shaker – Extra History – #2

Filed under: Americas, History, Military — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Extra Credits
Published on 31 Aug 2019

Join us on Patreon! http://bit.ly/EHPatreon

Pachacuti, the Earth-Shaker, was the ninth leader of the Inca and the one who took the ambitions of the city of Cusco into an all-out military campaign to expand the empire — alongside bribing and engineering and negotiating their way to expansion.

Pachacuti turned out to be a good name for this ninth ruler of the Inca, because while the name did mean “earth-shaker” it was also a philosophical concept. In Quechua, the Inca’s primary language, a pachacuti was a historic event, a cataclysm that overturns space and time, remaking the world. It was a good title for the man who would forge the Kingdom of Cusco into an empire.

August 6, 2019

QotD: Sheep and goats

Filed under: Australia, Britain, Cancon, Humour, Quotations, USA — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 01:00

… the major English-speaking countries of the world (England, the USA, and to a lesser extent because of their longer history as colonies, Canada and Australia (no, New Zealand isn’t “major” yet, but it’s getting there)) have tended to be more inclined to view their people as citizens who can make their own decisions in most things than as subjects who need to be told what to do. Despite the depredations of power-hungry bureaucrats and politicians, all these nations are still in many ways more free than almost the entirety of the rest of the world. None of us have official bodies telling us what words we can use or what the proper spelling of new words is.

It’s the little things like this that point to the mindset under them. Or as Pratchett memorably put it in Small Gods: “Sheep are stupid and have to be driven. But goats are intelligent, and need to be led.” European nations treat their people like sheep. The USA treats its people more like goats, although the would-be shepherds keep pushing. Pratchett did not add that trying to drive goats will often earn the would-be driver a kick in the nadgers, but it’s worth remembering. Because Americans are goats. We can be led by the right people for the right reasons. Try to drive us, and you will find your family jewels suffering.

Kate Paulk, “The Difference Between Citizens And Subjects”, Kate Paulk, 2017-07-17.

July 30, 2019

Mark Steyn: Boris Johnson is “Bertie Wooster with Jeeves’ brain”

Filed under: Britain, Politics — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

The new British PM is quite different from anyone else inhabiting Number 10 in my lifetime, certainly:

Prime Minister Boris Johnson at his first Cabinet meeting in Downing Street, 25 July 2019.
Official photograph via Wikimedia Commons.

… unlike most media or entertainment figures who progress into politics, Boris has not abandoned his old self — for the very good reason that it’s a hit persona: The great-grandchild of Jews, Muslims and a distant cousin of the Queen, he invented himself in his teens as what his Oxford chum (and another old editor of mine) Toby Young calls a Wodehousian buffer — one might say a Drones Club character, were it not for the fact that he is not, as it happens, terribly clubbable.

It was a canny choice of shtick: It duped the left and half of the right into dismissing him as a buffoon. And, even more cleverly, chuntering his way around the country as a toff with a massive thesaurus gave him, somewhat counter-intuitively, the common touch. The famous image of him stuck on the zipline in a beanie-like helmet waving plastic Union Jacks is so ingeniously endearing one assumes he paid them to stall the thing — because a failed photo-op is way less tedious than one that goes off like clockwork.

This is the genius of the act: He’s Bertie Wooster with Jeeves’ brain. Out on the street, he’s everybody’s friend; among his actual alleged friends, he’s utterly ruthless: Within twenty-four hours of entering 10 Downing Street, he’d pulled off the bloodiest cabinet reshuffle of “modern times”, as the papers say — although actually I can’t think of a bloodier one even from non-modern times. (Only four members of the May regime were retained: Michael Gove, Amber Rudd, Baroness Evans and Matt Hancock.)

Is he a nice person? Well, he’s left an awful lot of human wreckage in his wake. Some of the women he’s used and discarded seem to me, without naming names, to be sad and profoundly damaged from their brief intersection with his wandering zipper. His latest squeeze seems likely to be moving into Number Ten without benefit of clergy – a first for the Tories and a sign of how desperate they are after years of letting all the sober, serious, earnest types turn their party into a laughingstock.

What does he believe in? Other than himself, not terribly much. About a decade ago, I was in London for a couple of days and had lunch with him and Stuart Reid at a favorite Italian restaurant. Stuart was the deputy editor who did all the hard grind at the Speccie, while Boris was the great fizzing impresario fronting the operation — a business model he transferred successfully into his mayoral regime, and will no doubt be trying again in Downing Street. He was going on the BBC’s “Question Time” that night and was worried that he didn’t have anything sufficiently arresting to say, so asked if I had any tips. I gave him a few thoughts on the passing scene, and he considered them not in terms of his own public-policy positions (if any) but in terms of attitudinal cachet. Finally, I said, “Why don’t you really stir them up and put in a word for social conservatism?”

“You mean abortion and all that? Oh, God..,” he sighed, and ordered dessert.

If that seems to be (for self-interested reasons) his most firmly drawn red line, don’t nevertheless overstate his ideological flexibility. Like Boris, Theresa May schemed and maneuvered for decades to reach the top spot … and, by the time she pulled it off, she’d spent so much time and effort on the scheming and maneuvering that she had no idea of what to do once she got there. Boris is likewise invested in himself, but, having reached the finial of Disraeli’s greasy pole, he doesn’t intend to be just the latest seat-filler. Mrs May wanted to be prime minister; Johnson wants to be a great and consequential prime minister.

On another brief pop-in from the thirteenth century, David Warren also takes note of the new British PM:

It has come to my attention that Britain has a new prime minister, BoJo the Clown (known to his friends as “Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson”). I gather Mrs Maybe, previously raised to that office under some gender equality programme I suspect, didn’t work out. Mr BoJo has already been criticized for having unkempt blond hair (and small eyes, I have noticed). Too, he was educated at Oxford University, which is still somewhat élite. He was able to use the word anaphora in a sentence (here), and shares with Churchill (and Trump) an ebullience, a buoyant exuberance, that his enemies invariably discount to their cost. He is a reminder that one man (and I have named three) can change the course of history, and the fate of nations.

Not necessarily for the better, of course.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, Member of Parliament for North East Somerset, is suddenly elevated from the backbenches to the front bench; from persistent articulate rearguard rebel, to House Leader in the Mother of Parliaments; and, Lord President of the Council.

Born to rule (the son of an editor of The Times), the now right honourable gentleman stands as a throwback to 1529, when the last indigenous Catholic was appointed to that office. (Though I am not entirely clear what were the Privy Council arrangements under Good Queen Mary, before the return to Erastian apostasy under Bad Queen Bess.)

Not merely a Conservative but a member of the party’s (“Faith, Flag, and Family”) Cornerstone Group, and a diligently practising Roman Catholic with forty children or so, Rees-Mogg has already made a mark in his new rôle, by imposing rules of civility upon the Tory caucus. He was able to do so while characteristically exhibiting them, in a talk that kept everyone in stitches.

Mr BoJo, too, was christened a Catholic, though it has not so far had much effect. He has rabbinical Jewish and infidel Turk antecedents, too, and learnt Anglican hymns at Eton. He is thus a kind of one-stop shop for nominal Abrahamic associations, but to the point, the Orangemen of Ulster are already calling him “England’s first Catholic prime minister” — and what’s good enough for Belfast is good enough for me.

July 11, 2019

To lose one VCDS may be regarded as misfortune; to lose five looks like horrific leadership failure

Filed under: Bureaucracy, Cancon, Military — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

(Apologies to Oscar for my misappropriation of his phrasing for the title of this post.) The current Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff has announced his resignation. Lieutenant General Paul Wynnyk will resign from his current role after rumours circulated that he was to be replaced with former VCDS Vice-Admiral Mark Norman. Ted Campbell has more:

I see, from a story on Global News, broken by Mercedes Stephenson, of Global and David Pugliese (Post Media), two journalists with very good sources inside DND and the Canadian Armed Forces, that “The second in command of Canada’s military Lt.-Gen. Paul Wynnyk is resigning after he said Chief of the Defence Staff General Jonathan Vance planned to replace him as the vice chief of the defence staff with Vice-Admiral Mark Norman … [but] … Vance then reversed that plan weeks later, according to Wynnyk, when Norman settled with the government and retired from the military.

Lieutenant General “Wynnyk was the fifth vice chief to serve under Vance, and questions are now being raised about his leadership, senior military sources told Global News … [and, the report says] … There are now questions about who will fill the job next. No one appears to be ready, the sources said.” With the utmost respect to Mercedes Stephenson’s sources, who are, I suspect three and two-star admirals and generals, almost any general officer is “ready” to be Vice Chief of the Defence Staff or to fill almost any other “flag” appointment (jobs like surgeon general and the judge advocate general being obvious exceptions). I lived through times when the head of the Army’s equipment engineering branch was not an engineer ~ but was picked specifically because he could lead and manage people and could leave the “engineering” to subordinates, and when a logistics officer ran the Army, to the horror or a few combat branch dinosaurs, and when a Signals officer was Chief of the Defence Staff, too, because, at the time, the top leaders still understood that generals are generalists. I will assert, some will disagree but they are wrong, that almost every rear admiral and major general, from almost every corner of the military, is “ready” right now, to be Chief of the Defence Staff and almost every commodore and brigadier general is equally “ready” to be the Vice Chief. If that is not the case then the Canadian Forces’ leadership system is in a crisis right now, which only a wholesale slaughter of admirals and generals will rectify … or else there will be a slaughter of young Canadian men and women when our armed forces muct face a near-peer enemy.

At the risk of repeating myself:

  • The current military command and control (C²) superstructure is beyond bloated, it is morbidly obese;
  • The military C² system has things back-asswards ~ staff officers outrank combat commanders. We have commodores and brigadier generals sitting behind big desks in Ottawa when they ought to be commanding flotillas, brigades and air groups. The desks in HQs should be occupied by Navy captains and commanders and Army and RCAF colonels and lieutenant colonels, all of whom are, already, proven executives;
  • The CDS should be a three-star officer, a vice admiral or a lieutenant general ~ Canada, with only about 110,000 men and women, regular and reserve, in uniform, doesn’t need a four-star CDS. Reducing her or his rank would be an act “pour encourager les autres;”
  • The military’s command culture must start with getting the foundation right. The recruiting, selection, training and development of junior leaders, corporals and 2nd lieutenants (using the Army as my example), must be the highest priority for every single senior officer. If the foundation is solid then developing admirals and generals will not be a problem. If, as I suspect, the foundation is weak, if there is rank inflation, as I assert there is, at the tank/rifle section and troop/platoon command levels, then problems are going to persist and be magnified at the unit (ship, regiment or squadron), formation (group, brigade, wing and higher) and command levels and in National Defence HQ, too. Eventually, if the foundation is weak then we, Canadians will pay the price in blood … the blood of our sons and daughters and grandsons and granddaughters.

June 28, 2019

Lesser-known details of the France 1940 Campaign

Filed under: Britain, France, Germany, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

The_Chieftain
Premiered on 22 Jun 2019

Your friendly history lesson, with a little bit of Op-Ed thrown in, some parts of the 1940 campaign in France of which many folks weren’t aware.
Why was Guderian relieved of command?
Why might condoms have changed the course of the war?
What’s a Niwi?
Was the French failure one of doctrine, or execution?
You get the idea.

Patreon link here:
https://www.patreon.com/The_Chieftain

World War Two channel, if you haven’t already found it… : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCP1A…

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress