Credo
"Sign on, young man, and sail with me. The stature of our homeland is no more than the measure of ourselves. Our job is to keep her free. Our will is to keep the torch of freedom burning for all. To this solemn purpose we call on the young, the brave, the strong, and the free. Heed my call, Come to the sea. Come Sail with me." -- John Paul Jones
"Pardon him, Theodotus; he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature" --George Bernard Shaw, "Caesar and Cleopatra"
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."--Friedrich Nietzsche
"A kind Providence has placed in our breasts a hatred of the unjust and cruel, in order that we may preserve ourselves from cruelty and injustice. They who bear cruelty, are accomplices in it. The pretended gentleness which excludes that charitable rancour, produces an indifference which is half an approbation. They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate."--Edmund Burke
“You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”--General Sir Charles Napier
"Μολὼν λαβέ" -- Leonidas
"Blogito Ergo Sum" -- Neptunus Lex
I guess I would call her a plebe.
Uniforms, very funny… Able to project force when needed, not so funny.
She obviously has no clue about military history and how some of uniforms came to be. Commanders needed to be able to tell at a glance regiments, commissioned from the NCOs from other ranks, hence the plumes, cockades, button groupings, facing colours, and the like.
Now, the uniforms that look silly are the Evzones. I can’t get over the pompoms on the shoes.
How about Greek skirts? When I saw a piece about the Greeks going up against the Germans, the footage showed Greeks marching of in skirts and tights. My 8th grade brains sez, “that ougther scare the Krauts to death.”
The guys in the film weren’t Evzones either. The uniforms, other than basic form, were entirely different.
Careful there — rocks and glass houses and all…
w/r, SJS
That “elastic waistband” oughta be known as the “3XL-CPO” option…
That there Navy “Cammo” uniform is silly.
Oh, yeah, and let me count the ways.
1. It incites pointing and laughing.
2. It does not camouflage you against the paint of your ship.
3. It does not camouflage you against any background ashore.
4. It does camouflage you in the water if you fall overboard,in which case you generally want people to see you.
5. (I might be wrong here) It is made of a synthetic fiber which might stick to yer skin and make yer burns worse, in a fire.
6. There was no reason to change, except some bureaucrats wanted to look busy.
7. The country is broke and we can’t afford necessary stuff, let alone silly stuff.
8. Dungarees and Blue Chambray are Kewl&Manly.
You’re right, Joe, about the Evzones. How can one believe in or be frightened by a guy in a tutu? With pom-poms on his shoes. Come on.
Actually, the Life Guards look pretty nifty up there in the picture. I think that the Brits do uniforms almost better than anyone. And if you know their history and the stories of their battles, it’s thrilling to see them riding through Hyde Park or Green Park or whatever, past the Duke of Wellington’s house. That house was my favorite small museum, when we went to England back in 1981. Asprey House [?spelling] was rich and quirky with the Duke’s family memories.
I loved London, and the Tower, and our day trip to Bath. It was one of our best vacations. Downs usually goes to some almost inaccessible place on his own, like Azerbaijan, or Wrangel Island in Russia, or Ellesmere Island in the Arctic, or Brazil [four times]. Always places where you have to sleep in a tent, and modern bathrooms are a world away. He usually went places that no one else wanted to go to, but would love to read about. And then he’d write about it and get paid.
Marianne
“We can’t all dress in black on black”
LOL. Circa Dec, 1999 in NYC, I witnessed the CLASSIC uber NYC scene: A couple, BOTH dressed in all black, walking hand-in-hand, down the side-walk, EACH with a cell phone glued to their outer-ear, carrying on their own pvt conversation as they walked–I almost FELL OUT!
I really enjoyed the ’80s when I joined my sister-in-law at her watering holes with other like minded revolutionary types. Nonconformists every one and all dressed in black on black with black hats. To see them all studiously nonconforming was fun.
I wonder about the uniforms of the UK and if they are not responsible for some of the subject’s complaint of waste/waist in the military. I think all that is left of the UK Army has uniforms like those pictured above but in the AUSA we only have one regiment that wears ceremonial uniforms. The Old Guard and they are, just like the regiments of Great Britain, dual tasked. They are both a ceremonial regiment and a fighting and deployable regiment. Thus, they’re not an almost daily in the face personification of waste that liberals could point to and claim with disdain, were ‘useless unneeded hobby horses’.
We only have a tiny number of navy in ceremonial uniform on the Constitution and the entire Corps of Marines who bleed ceremony.
What can you say concerning the ignorance and arrogance of youth? Lena is out of her depth. Silly? Look in the mirror, kid.
Well, the Blues and Royals are black on black, rather stunning in full fig and tin bellies. And the Life Guards (along with the Blues and Royals) are still a combat unit. I am sure one or both served in Iraq. The uniform she belittles, well, that’s just several hundred years of history, pride and tradition, something I doubt she has any inkling of. Telling one or both of the members of The Household Cavalry that their uniforms are silly, stepping on said hundreds of years of tradition, history and pride, might entitled one to a Glasgow Kiss.
Don’t the Blues have red plume, dark blue jacket with red collar?
Could very well be (the uniform color), never seen them in person. Always looked like a black tunic and trousers to me on TV and in photos. I believe you correct on the helmet plumes, but I always thought the uniform was a black one.
Silly? Absolutely not! Only the ignorant or the uninitiated would say such! The uniform history and tradition is a rich, national treasure to be revered. (Even if they oppressed my ancestors.)
As a youth I played with colorful tin soldiers as depicted. Like many kids I once yearned to be a warrior so vibrantly and spectacularly dressed; to somehow share in a part of that storied history.
Unfortunately later as an adult, I learned that any ostentatious military attire – while perhaps suitable for parades and ceremony – made for one to become an easy enemy’s target.
Indeed the most efficient warrior would be an entirely invisible one . . . and if not totally invisible physically, then at least very surreptitious, ethereal, and at least to the public invisible, like our SEALs… who don’t have to dress up and march in parades.
Flit, I would say that only became true after rifled weapons became the standard long-arm. Those British Imperial uniforms seemed to wear quite well on the battlefield up to the Napoleonic Wars.
Casey – Disagree! Those uniforms wore “quite well” only because everyone played by the same ridiculous ROE at the time. Warfare Stupidity!
The Napoleonic Wars occurred after our Revolutionary War. In our War of Freedom we targeted their bright “red-coats” successfully – including the predecessors of those pictured! We won the war in no small part to guerilla tactics, not by polished and uniformed massed phalanx! We were rag-tag! But we fought well! (Unfortunately we didn’t learn the lesson when we sent years later, mostly Immigrant Fodder into the face of enemy artillery foolishly, in our Civil War.)
Killing the king, the leader, and the general in armed combat as a tactic has long predated rifled weapons in most every civilization or war. Sorry.
There you go, applying what we know NOW to what they knew then.
Let’s take a look back. Our on Rev. War. The linear tactics used by BOTH sides pretty much meant that both sides were out in the open and easy targets, no matter what colour the jackets. Rifles were few in number compared to the smoothbores. Tactics were derived from the weapons used, mostly fairly inaccurate smoothbores. Not many battles were like the opening act, with greatly outnumbered and pretty much unorganized colonists shooting from concealment at troops marching in a narrow column on somewhat restricted ground.
Napoleonic tactics changed that up some, really developing combined arms tactics with columnar tactics, using wide and deep formations to deliver a solid punch to an opposing line that was maybe 3 or 4 deep. The column was also easier to maneuver and to deploy into line if needed. Still worked for the smoothbores.
Now enter technology. Out goes the flintlock, in comes the percussion cap. Also the minie’ ball, which made the rifled musket a practical arm. Until the minie’ ball was developed rifles took two to three times longer to load than the smoothbore musket. This technology was so new that many federal units were still using the 1842 smoothbore Springfield musket.
And rifled artillery was brand new. Accepted into the inventory in 1861. Heck, it had been less than 20 years since the 6 pounder was phased out and replace with the 12 pounder.
You are faulting our ancestors for not instantly knowing all the capabilities of the new technologies and being able to apply them overnight. More than that, you are faulting them for not applying what we knew now back then.
And yes, picking off the command has long been a tactic, but not as easy as it sounds. Look at how long Hitler lasted, and it wasn’t as if no one knew where he was.
crud…again.
Here is an interesting read:
Report addressed to the Hon. Jefferson Davis, secretary of war, on the effects of firing with heavy ordnance from casement embrasures: and also the effects of firing against the same embrasures with various kinds of missiles: in the years 1852, ’53, ’54, and ’55, at West Point, in the state of New York
Actually, while the rifle-musket had an effect, the organizational deficiencies and lack of adequate cavalry had a greater effect on the Great Unpleasantness Between the States.
A smoothbore musket had an effective range of 100 yards – in volley fire with service ammunition. It was MUCH more effective at close range, and smart tactics were to reserve fire until the last possible second. The British were especially good at this, and at integrating fire with an immediate follow-up with the bayonet.
The rifle-musket had a theoretical range well in excess of 500 yards, but the practical range was more like 200 yards. Recent research has shown an average end-of-war engagement range of 150 yards. It’s worth mentioning that even today, anything over about 400 yards is considered a shot for a dedicated sniper, not a line infantryman.
This shifted emphasis to fire over shock, but did not eliminate shock at all.
What really influenced the Great Unpleasantness was the refusal of the Federals to concentrate their artillery command until mid-1863. Until then, the artillery had usually been attached to infantry regiments in direct support – which negated the ability of artillery to reach across a significant portion of the battlefield. Meade put his artillery under a single commander – as Napoleon had done 60 years earlier – and dealt Lee a devastating surprise at Gettysburg.
The other problem was that both sides were short of cavalry – and usually squandered it in raids anyway. As Napoleon said, “Without cavalry, battles are without effect.” A cavalry charge into a retreating foe would shatter morale and unit cohesion. They would take many prisoners, and severely degrade the fighting power of the survivors.
I STRONGLY recommend that anyone interested in this subject peruse the works of Brent Nosworthy.
Neither side fully understood the power of teh rifled musket until the end. And then the Confeds learned it, to their regret. Lee had reasoln to regret not taking Longstreet’s advice and sliding on past Gettysburg to a position that threatened Philly, Baltimore and DC. preparing positions then letting Meade break his teeth instead. If Lee could have staged Cold Harbor north of DC instead of Cold Harbor, he could have come close to breaking the north.
Um, no. One of the more insidious myths of the Revolution goes back to farmers hiding behind fences while picking off redcoats. I blame Bill Cosby.
A careful review of the actual campaigns shows that nearly all of the major battles were fought in European-style, marching in ranks, firing by ranks, formal order. In fact, most of the time the local militia were fairly useless as front line soldiers.
In fact -if memory serves- the Battle of Cowpens by Daniel Morgan relied on the fact that the militia tended to break quite easily.
Joe does a nice job of rebuttal as well; I’ll just add the observation that smooth-bore tactics essentially utilized a unit as a giant shotgun, depending on volume of fire for effect.
Yes, the Civil War was vastly different from earlier wars, but it is absurd to expect military leader to accurately anticipate the effects of the widespread use of rifled muskets, since such a war had never been fought before. The comment about “cannon fodder” is (excuse the pun) wide of the mark, as long-arms fire caused the majority of casualties. Artillery did not regain her traditional seat until near the end of the century, after rifled, rapid-fire, smokeless pieces became prevalent.
Clearly, this explains why the world is now ruled by the Ninjas.
Obviously Lena baby can’t even pronounce the word “Heraldry” let alone spell it…or understand the concept.
VX, well said.
…I have a suggestion for the girl who wrote that tripe. Let us equip her and her friends with Brown Bess muskets, arrange them in a firing line, then have a couple squadrons of the Life Guards charge them at full gallop.
I suspect said uniforms would -quite quickly- become less silly. The only question in my mind is whether they wet themselves, then, run, or the reverse.
Heck, all they would have to do is form square. Especially good if they have some of the regiments guns for the corners.
Forming requires a certain type of discipline that I very much doubt the Wired bunch has in any great quantity.
Forming requires a certain type of discipline that I very much doubt the Wired bunch has in any great quantity.
Her little bio says, “Lena is a science journalist fascinated by any and all combinations of biology, philosophy and design.” Too bad interested doesn’t mean she’s learned anything. She comes across as horribly ignorant. Worse still… someone published it.
Danger Room goofing up something about the military. More like a tradition for them.
I used to be a big fan of Wired the magazine and I was a subscriber for years. I got tired of all the crap that came across the Danger Room feed and decided it wasn’t worth it to try to find the gems in the feed. So, I cancelled my subscription and removed DR from my RSS feed. After reading this POS article, I’m glad I made that decision.
Funny how the fashionista’s effect on the teen generation’s attempt to `be different` has made them all look the bloody same. As for the Life Guards and Blues and Royals, they can change into drabs and ride armoured combat vehicles quite quickly. Most of the guys in the picture were enjoying a little break from a certain shooting war going on `out east`.
All fun and games till a warrior smashes through the front of your Starbucks eh Hog
@Sim
“Good Morning Gentlemen, we’re The Blues and Royals and your front door is in the rest rooms”.
At least they don’t have to wear the modern USN Sea Smurf uniforms. Bring back dungarees and chamabray shirts! Let Sailors look like Sailors!
Shout that out loud in Portsmouth, Scott, and you’ll know what being badgered really means
Didn’t the RN wear similar dungarees, and light blue shirts?
AMEN Scott!
Someone should let her know (gently) that ignorance is not a point of view.
Ah uniforms. Little Lena would have a stroke if she saw a USMC Brigadier General in full dress uniform at a Navy League Ball. I saw that spectacle in San Diego once and it was quite a sight to see.
I went to a trendy new restaurant “Mohawk Bend” in the Echo Park area near downtown Los Angeles Saturday night. For you beerheads–and I’m talking about you Lex–the restaurant featured 65 California artisanal brews on tap. It’s a big place with a big wait staff–mainly of young hipsters from the Echo Park neighborhood. The ladies on the staff were, of course, dressed in various black costumes. The young men all sported a three day growth of beard. One of the waiters had his jeans rolled halfway up his bare legs pirate style. Didn’t see many tattoos on the staff, so to that extent they were out of uniform.
My older daughter lives in Echo Park and when her mother and I described the “look” of the wait staff, she laughed and said “That’s the Echo Park Uniform”.
If only she could have seen GEN. Mattis at the Midway Dinner three years ago
I think this comment from the link says it all:
Laugh it up, but there’s a Beretta auto pistol under the cloak of each of those Italian cops. And those funny Swiss Guards. Their uniforms are for show, the auto pistols and assault rifles they carry on patrol around Vatican City are for real. And the British parade cavalry units, the Life Guards, they ain’t just for show. Those fancy uniforms aren’t the ones they usually wear. The Life Guards went ashore on D-Day. Life Guards units are on patrol in Afghanistan right now. So laugh it up.
Right on.
I believe that it was James Warner Bellah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Warner_Bellah) in his classic short story “Spanish Man’s Grave” who remarked that fancy uniforms only look good on veteran troops.
Jerry Pournelle had that story in one of “There Will Be War” anthologies. Good story, that.
The Swiss Guards Vatican uniform was designed by Leonardo da Vinci… hardly a man known for promulgating impractical military technology. They were highly practical for their purpose, part of which is to be visible, as a deterrent.
I’m surprised in her ignorance that she left the Beefeaters uncommented. Likely, she is sufficiently untraveled as to never have seen one except on a gin bottle.
But then again, she apparently thinks the Venice police are a “military” unit.
Soldiers may not fight for pretty uniforms and bits of metal on their chest…until you try to them away.
Pournelle put a lecture on that subject in the mouth of a Codominium Naval Academy Colonel instructor. Can’t remember teh exact words, but he did say that without the bright and shiny stuff, and ceremonial, you wouldn’t have much of a force left. Such things are part of what binds a unit together.
And thats where I got it from…the old Fleet 0-3 breaking in Midshipman Falkenberg.
One wonders if Bruce Greenwood would make a good Falkenberg, if they ever made a movie…
I would suggest the journalist try to force her way past the guards at Buck House. She would find the bayonets aren’t for show. The guards regiments don’t play.
I have another one for you: Rhodesian Selous Scouts.
Speaking of uniforms and combat….
It should be noted that the Celts fought NAKED! It was quite intimidating to the enemy Roman armies.
Not quite naked, Flit.
Plentifully decorated with woad. Or so was commonly thought. Some recent studies are casting doubt on that.
Of course, they were not the only ones who did. Both Greeks and Romans write of fighting against naked opponents. If you peruse the accounts they seem to indicate that some, but not all, fought naked.
Shortsword against Longsword, as it were?
Let get accurate here… a Pedantic Pecker-Wood moment follows…
…it was the noble Roman soldier and his Gladius against a naked blue painted savage or some such with a club/stick and extremly bad breath…
…the Longsword…to be developed some 1,000 + – years from that time, is a two handed sword referred to in some locals as a Claymore… Best
Snake, methinks your years of keeping your head prudently low let the double entendre’ of my post whizz right over it.
Jus sayin’.
Sarge…Oh I got the double entendre’ all right…its just that the inflexible rules of Pedantic Pecker-Wood-dom do not allow their acknowledgement. Best
Snakes is inflexible?
To paraphrase SNL, “Lena, you ignorant slut.” Obviously she considers history to be last week’s fashion news and has never been seriously exposed to military history of any kind. If she had been, she would have understood the importance of such historic uniforms to those that have served those storied units.
Joe – “Oh ‘woad’ is me!” said the ancient Pict! (Sorry)
Woad tattood Celtic Warriors
Related
((pelts Flit with rotten cabbages))
Dammit, Flit, I was already feeling a bit blue!
Bad. Very very bad, Flit! We had best leaf this thread alone.
I expect by the time this shows up all the bad puns will have been pretty well pict over…
Casey – Thanks for my tonight’s laugh… honestly.
I fleetingly had what I thought would be a very good, ‘punny’ sequitor.
I thought it would be clever, but alas it now escapes me. So yours will rule, as I enjoy. Best.
Actually, I think the Blues are better-looking, but then I’m partial. Mah Kitteh’s previous human had a Grandfather in The Blues at Balaklava, in the Heavy Brigade (thank Lord Lucan for his survival and Mrs. S’s consequent existence).
The family folklore was that he was never the same afterward. Miss Nightingale wasn’t kidding about the diseases.
Well, the chap at the front has done Iraq, Afg and Bosnia, as well as 22 years service as an NCO.
If you are interested in the orders of dress for H Cav, try this website:
http://householdcavalry.info/uniforms.html
Why is there no Household Artillery? Just seems odd that the King of Battle is not represented.
King’s Troop, Royal Horse Artillery exist, they’re just not in the picture!
If I were to guess, the picture is taken at “Trooping of the Colour”, and if it was, the Artillery are ahead of the Cav.
Ah! I didn’t know that was part of the Household Division. Thanks.
Sure, those Swiss Guards at the Vatican look funny, in their 14th-century uniforms and pikes. But the ones you don’t see, the ones on the roofs with the battle rifles, they are not so amusing.
A calvary charge would have helped during the latest unpleasantness in London a couple of weekends ago. I would have paid big money to see that.
Yup, with Pointing Swords, Pattern of 1907!
Nope, for clearing streets you want
Pike and Shotte