About Me

Name: JPK
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

The Center that Failed to Hold

Christine O'Donnell's primary victory last night apparently sent shocked waves through the Beltway. GOP Operator and former Bush advisor Karl Rove had a meltdown on Fox News right after O'Donnell was declared the victor. This was preceeded by a week's worth of sludge thrown at O'Donnell- but the mud didn't come from the Left, but from the Right. The Beltway GOP Establishment (a collage of operators, lobbyists, pundits, pollsters, money-men, opinion-makers, and other assorted hanger-ons that are ensconsed somewhere between Fairfax and K-Street) had a lot riding on Mike Castle, the loser of the primary. Castle comes from a Republican pedigree that is all too familiar with conservatives. He hails from that noble tradition of Liberal Bluebloods that still haunt the GOP. One only needs to remember Lowel Weicker, Jim Jeffords, Nelson Rockefeller, and Lincoln Chafee. Castle is to the Left of the GOP on about every issue that counts. But his value can be found not in his politics, but according to Karl Rove in his name recognition, and the fact he could have put the GOP over the 50 seat threshold in the Senate.
 
But, as Marx once quipped: History repeats itself twice; the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce. After 20 years of "moderate" to "liberal" governence brought to us by those sophisticated Blue Blood Statists that dominate the GOP Senate caucus, rank and file conservatives are revolting. It matters not that O'Donnell cannot win in November. Better to have a flaky but conservative loser than a nuanced, sophisticated turncoat winner. But, the GOP Establishment doesn't see it that way. There is gold up in them that hills! The Weekly Standard began the attacks. And it wasn't that the smears were necessairily wrong; O'Donnell is wierd. But to make Mike Castle into a paragon of Centrist Pragmatisim goes too far. We all know that Barnes and Kristol would like nothing better than to see the Weekly Standard again be THE Beltway rag for political and legislative scoops, gossip, and influence. Ditto for an entire army of GOP careerists who have expensive mortgages, taste in cars, and hopes of future self promotions. These are the people who gave us $3 trillion of debt circa 2002-2006; No Child Left Behind, Ambrahof, and Prescription Drugs (not to mention TARP). In the end, the only thing that counts to these people is power, money, and influence. This class of GOP insiders were personified in the person of Paul O'Niel, Bush's first Treasury Secretary. He had excellent creds (East Coast MBA, CEO of ALCOA, Friend of the Bush Family). And what is he known for? Taking a 30 day trip to Africa with the rock start Bono while the nation's equities markets were collapsing, and Congress was embrioled in a monumental debate concerning the Bush Tax Cuts. Bush had to order him home. O'Niel it turned out enjoyed the life and the prestige, but not the job (He was agnostic about the tax cuts, it turned out).
 
The Center cannot hold anymore. And it shouldn't. If the GOP continues to fight with conservatives they will lose the only loyal block of voters they have left. And make no mistake, Crist, Murkowski, and Specter are a indication of things to come. Independents and Moderates cannot be trusted.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fear and Loathing

 

Lost in the spin and political posturing of the Ground Zero Mosque and the threat of Koran burning in Florida is the report that General Patraeous (Commander of the Afghanistan theatre of operations) issued a warning to Pastor Jones in Florida that if he went through with book burnings he would put soldier’s lives at risk. Besides being a rather odd statement for a Four Star General, Patraeous gave the obvious impression that he feared Islam. President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton voiced similar fears. And sensing an opportunity, the President’s unofficial Imam in Residence, Faisal Al Rauf, issued his own warning, “Allow Muslims to build the Mosque or incur our wrath.” What is amazing is the degree in which Americans (both Conservative and Liberal) already live in some kind of fear of Islam. Even conservative pundits recently have gotten into the act. Their beef isn’t with Islam, but with Militant Islam (whatever that is). They mirror former President Bush’s sentiments, who just a day after the WTC attacks visited a Mosque.

There is no need to go over the countless episodes of Islamic violence which hangs over the world like a dark cloud. From the civil wars in Niger, Somalia, and Thailand, to terror attacks in India, the Philippines, Bangladesh, and East Asia, Islam always seems to have problems with its neighbors. The problem is acute enough that some refer to this as Islam’s Bloody Borders. Some even suggest that Islamic violence isn’t just a feature of Radical Islam, but it is its feature. One only read the History of the Muslim religion. Violence and aggression appear to be its means of evangelizing.

And this brings us back to the proposed Ground Zero Mosque. The building itself, however, will not be a mosque. Islam has strict architectural rules governing its places of worship. And a mosque contains a prayer gallery with an atrium which points to Mecca. At least one minaret sits atop the mosque. This isn’t what Rauf intends on building. What Muslims refer to when speaking about the Ground Zero Mosque isn’t a mosque but a Rabat. A Rabat is a building erected inside the lands of the infidel. It is a place that houses, feeds, and trains ghazis, or “raiders”. Rabats historically precede large scale action of Islamic incursion. By action, I mean any kind of civil strife that can be used to undermine the infidel’s society. Simple protests to urban violence are the normal means. Rabats have been built in India, the old Byzantium Empire, the old Frankish Kingdom as well as East Asia and Africa. What is intended by Al Rauf et als Is not a place of worship but of strife. And it will be a Ground Zero. And we haven’t a clue what is coming.

Actually, based upon past behavior, it is easy to see what is in store for Lower Manhattan if the Rabat is built. Upon completion, neighboring businesses will be targeted either for extortion, or harassment. The adult businesses obviously will move, as the Muslims will target their patrons for harassment. Saudi money will finance the slow by steady purchase of adjacent real estate. CAIR and other organizations will also begin a steady stream of demands and accommodation from the NYC mayor and city councils. Look for clashes between those living in nearby Chinatown and Muslims who reside at the new Rabat. The Chinese will steadily leave Chinatown in the same way Jews and Hindis left London’s East End. Learning from other Shakedown Artists such as Al Sharpton, Muslims will begin shaking down Wall St Firms for money, hiring quotas for Muslims, as well as concessions for concerning investment portfolios. In short, Muslims will spread Sharia through-out Lower Manhattan. We’ve seen their playbook before.

Fear is a strong emotion. Progressives loathe Christianity but fear Islam. Make no mistake; the rhetoric of Mayor Bloomberg and other civic leaders is a mixture of Progressive posturing and fear.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Thoughts On the High Court

 

With the coming retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens, here are some scattered thoughts concerning our high court:

1)      While things like empathy, passion, sympathy, and compromise are perfectly good virtues for the legislative and executive branch, they do not belong in the makeup of a justice of the high court. The proper characteristics of a Supreme Court Justice are: sobriety, brevity in word and deed, intellectual vigor, humility, and long years spent in either the university or the courts –or both. However, the most important thing to look at in a justice is fidelity to the written Constitution, and the ideals of Federalism.

2)      As passions and political activism have increased within the federal courts, so has the youthfulness of our Justices. Since the Justices will more than likely sit on the bench decades after they’ve been appointed, the trend has been to appoint younger and younger justices. This goes against history, as being nominated to the Supreme Court used to be the final appointment in a judge’s long distinguished career. And because the courts have taken on such strong political polarizations since the 1930s, justices are very reluctant to step down. Justice Stevens is 90, and he will have served 36 years.

3)      One of the greatest dissents ever issued in a Supreme Court opinion was authored by Justice Jackson, “"The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either. There is danger that, if the court does not temper its doctrinaire logic with a little practical wisdom, it will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact."

4)      One of the most notorious lines ever put to pen by a Justice was from Oliver Wendell Holmes concerning the forced sterilization of a mentally retarded woman, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough!” (Buck vs. Bell).

5)      Justice Thomas was born dirt poor in Jim Crow South; Justice Stevens was born into wealth in Chicago; yet, many people believe Justice Stevens knows more about the plight of the poor than Justice Thomas.

6)      President Richard Nixon appointed 3 liberal justices (Berger, Blackmon, and Powell), and 1 conservative justice (Rehnquist).

7)       President Reagan appointed 2 moderate to liberal justices (O’Conner and Kennedy), and 1 conservative justice (Scalia).

8)      Today’s court has taken on powers that normally belong to Congress. Specifically it has ordered the EPA to begin regulating CO2, a power granted only to Congress.

9)      And finally, will the Senate ever begin to flex its muscle concerning the encroachment of the courts into its powers granted to it by the Constitution?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Papacy Reconsidered

 

Can this pontiff regain the kind of trust and admiration, for himself and for his office that John Paul II enjoyed? Not a chance.

Ross Douthat ended today’s Times Op-Ed on a kind of snarky, all knowing note that is the hall mark of today’s national opinion makers.  What began as a small but steady dribble of sanitized information (mainly from a well heeled lawyer who’s made over $60 million suing The Church), became a firestorm when famous atheist and ideologue Christopher Hitchens authored a hit piece that went to press before Easter. The new Catholic Scandal isn’t all that new. Most of the cases cited have either been litigated or closed; revelations about the slow, ponderous, and at times inept Vatican bureaucracy are really nothing new. Again, Douthat opines:

                 But the smoke is damaging enough. “The Failed Papacy of Benedict XVI,” ran a recent headline in Der Spiegel, the newsmagazine of the pope’s native Germany. If you judge a pontiff on his ability to do outreach, whether to lukewarm believers or the secular world, this is probably accurate. Amid the latest wave of scandal, Catholicism needed the magnetic John Paul, master of bold gestures and moving acts of penance. Instead, the church is stuck with Benedict, bookish and defensive and unequal to the task.

The problem that Douthat makes is treating the Pope like any other politician or celebrity, and the Vatican like any other political institution. The Chair of Peter occupies both a practical and mystical aspect that differs from say the UN Secretary General, and the President of the United States. The Church contains both political and mystical elements, which believers today still recognize as being true as they were when Peter was first described as being The Rock of Christ. But unlike past epochs, today’s Church is an entirely voluntary organization. Its laity isn’t compelled by force, and unlike the Church of earlier times it is a decentralized organization. The majority of the administrative decisions reside with the local bishops, and not inside the curia. With the exception of Church dogma, and the Church's core theological beliefs, the bishops are free to pretty much do as they please from an administrative point of view. Much of this new freedom (as it was formalized in the various councils of Vatican II) took into account that individual Bishops and their dioceses needed the breathing room to develop along local lines. This post war mindset was heavily influenced by Central European Protestant theologians, who themselves were invited to Vatican II to provide advise. This is not to blame Protestant Congregationalism for all of the sexual abuses that occurred from the 1960s through the mid 1980s. But, one must understand that the Church today is not the Church which the media has presented in such entertainments as the Godfather series. The Vatican itself hasn’t had that kind of clout in centuries.

To confuse matters even more, there has been a persistent, influential, and vocal minority within the Church that has lobbied for even more freedom (the freedom to ordain women, to ordain openly gay men, to remove the celibacy rules, and render even more reforms of the liturgy and the rubrics of the Mass – to name only a few). These groups of “reformers” lie mainly in the catholic universities. But, they are also fill influential posts in the dioceses’ chanceries, catholic education, and the USCCB (US Council of Catholic Bishops. Yes, there is yet another layer of bureaucracy). These people, all highly credentialed, seek to expand lay control of the Church step-by-step, and are always good for a quote in the Times or Post. To them, Vatican II wasn’t an end, but a beginning. They usually speak of the horizontal Church, and not the Vertical one. To these people, the Church has never been free enough, democratic enough, and is too European centric. The Church, in their eyes, is way too narrow, and the world is simply passing it by. The Sacramental Church, to them is an anachronism.  Sacraments such as confession and marriage are no longer valid in today's post modern world (Some of these reformers even question the divinity of Christ and the accuracy of the Gospels). Causes such as Nuclear Disarmament, Amnesty for Illegal’s, The Living Wage, AIDS Prevention, the Pro Choice Agenda, and the Environment are more important than say, Eucharistic Adoration, Family Prayer, and the Rosary.

This was the scene that Pope John Paul II inherited 31 years ago. He was both an orthodox priest, and a man who perfectly understood the times he lived in. The majority of priests who committed their crimes were already ordained, and some cases they were Bishops. Pope John Paul II had an almost impossible task to complete during his reign as Pope. Church attendance was on the decline as fast as the old Mainline Protestant Churches. He faced serious dissent from within; the number of new seminarians was on the decline, as was the number of nuns and brothers who joined the Church. Hersey was being preached and practiced inside many Church parishes. And, as anyone who served in the Church at the time knew, there was a well organized, entrenched minority of practicing homosexuals that dominated many of the Churches dioceses, religious societies, and seminaries. The Holy Father not only reformed much of the antiquated religious thought and practices (Pray, Pay, and Obey was the euphemism), but he started a weekly lecture on many topics from the role of the modern Catholic women, to the understanding of sex as a Holy gift from God. He was an intensely mystical priest who constantly preached The Mercy of God (think of the elevation of the Divine Mercy Chaplet). He wished to do away with fear as a main religious impulse and replace it with a theology that not only inspired the Catholic, but also brought him/her into a life that was totally different from the popular culture at large. It was no surprise that he inspired an entire generation of young and old Catholics alike. Pope John Paul II’s also wished to elevate the role of mothers, wives, and female lay Catholics. He rightly pointed out the role of mothers in the Divine plan. Using the Holy Family as a model, and St Mary as the Christian role model par excellence; he forever changed how the post modern world view Our Lady. Pope John Paul II also elevated St Therese to a Church Doctor, and canonized Gianni Molla.

But Douthat gives a blistering assessment of the papacy of John Paul II:

But there’s another story to be told about John Paul II and his besieged successor. The last pope was a great man, but he was also a weak administrator, a poor delegator, and sometimes a dreadful judge of character.

In my untutored assessment, there was just too much rot in the Church for one Pope to correct within a single papacy. I myself have questioned  why Pope John Paul II tolerated the heresy of the openly gay Cdl Rembert Weakland, or the arrogant, heterodoxy of Cdl Muhony. There were scores of priests, superiors, mother superiors, theologians, and Bishops who were openly defiant of Church teaching. The gay sub-culture within the Church had many strong proponents. I cannot know for sure why it wasn’t dealt with twenty years ago other than to think that it would have caused a major and irrevocable split between Rome and the US churches. And I imagine, this weakness allowed the evil to fester. However, I might add that the same people who are now red with moral outrage were the same people who demanded more freedom and rights for the a wing of the Church that was and in many cases  totally out of control.

But Douthat gives this estimation and at least recognition of Pope Benedict XVI efforts:

…it was Ratzinger who pushed for a full investigation of Hans Hermann Groer, the Vienna cardinal accused of pedophilia, only to have his efforts blocked in the Vatican. It was Ratzinger who persuaded John Paul, in 2001, to centralize the church’s haphazard system for handling sex abuse allegations in his office. It was Ratzinger who re-opened the long-dormant investigation into Maciel’s conduct in 2004, just days after John Paul II had honored the Legionaries in a Vatican ceremony. It was Ratzinger, as Pope Benedict, who banished Maciel to a monastery and ordered a comprehensive inquiry into his order.

The filth and theological rot that entered the Church in the early part of the 20th Century mirrors the same rot which is hollowing out most of the West. The abuse of children goes well beyond the Church of Rome. But the Church in its own imperfect way is at least dealing with it. Can we say the same of other institutions?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Beginning of Defeat

 

The ongoing flare-up between President Obama and Afghan President Hamid Karzai apparently is reaching dangerous proportions. President Obama, who is attempting to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, while also trying to defeat the Taliban and Al Qaida in the field is losing patience with his Afghan partner. Corruption and ineptitude are the main complaints expressed by our President. However, the voicing of these concerns in public has set off a chain of events that now threaten the very counter insurgency that President Obama is trying to win. It is difficult to convince the Afghan people to join us in the fight when we tell these same people that their political leader is a crook.

When some aide pointed out to President Franklin Roosevelt that the Shah of Iran was a corrupt SOB President Roosevelt answered, “Yes, but he is our SOB!” Presidents when making foreign policy decisions must live with the allies dealt to them. President Truman and Eisenhower had to deal with Charles De Gaulle. President Reagan had to deal with France’s Prime Minister Francois Mitterrand. Reagan’s was a best case scenario. French pride and arrogance was satisfied, as was the US’s security interests in Europe. But during this period, President Reagan had to endure continuous French back stabbing, insults, and petty complaints. Mitterrand, a crafty old socialist pol extracted his pound of flesh. But you would have never known it by listening to Reagan. In public, President Reagan was all smiles. What went on behind closed doors remained behind closed doors. JFK and Vietnam was a worst case scenario. Vietnam’s President Diem was a corrupt, ruthless dictator. JFK wanted him out, and voiced this opinion though Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge. Diem was assassinated a few months later (some say with the help of the CIA), and Vietnam was never the same again. Diem was the last Vietnamese leader to keep the nation together until the fall of Saigon in 1975.

Afghanistan is more of a geographical area occupied by primitive tribesmen than a political entity. Centralized governments normally do not last long. And as we’ve found out, the real power lies with the tribal chieftains. Iraq is a bastion of cosmopolitan sophistication by comparison. From this perspective, a Karzai presidency is as good as it gets. The President and his allies must understand this if their surge strategy is going to work. Karzai, despite coming from a primitive tribe in Southern Afghanistan also speaks several languages (including French and Persian); his brother is a doctor; and his father was one of the main leaders who rebelled against the Taliban in the late 1990s (and it cost him his life). Karzai also was one of the early Mujahedeen who fought against the Soviets; his ties to the US go back thirty years.

Corruption is a way of life in Afghanistan. President Obama, who is no choir boy, made his political bones in one of the most corrupt cities in North America – Chicago. If this surge is going to work out to a conclusion that looks like anything like success, the President must put a lid on these infantile leaks and rebukes. Karzai in this respect is no different than the Iraqi Sunni tribal chiefs who became allies with the US in late 2006 and 2007. Ultimately it took millions of dollars in cold cash to get them onboard. The President needs to swallow his arrogance, eat a little humble pie, and win the war. One hundred thousand soldiers are depending on him.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What's Driving Wall St?

 

The roller coaster of the equities market continues. Expectations are everything when considering whether to buy or sell stock. I have to admit that no one in October of 2008 could have ever predicted that the Dow would make up almost 80 percent of its 2008 loses by March of 2010. But conversely, no would have predicted that unemployment would rise to 10 percent and stay there during the market rebound. Unlike the period 1929-1932, the lever pullers at Treasury and the Federal Reserve opened up the spigots of liquidity and have sprayed our financial system with cash and credit. And the lawmakers and our President haven’t been shy about spending either. Since he was inaugurated, the President has borrowed an amazing $2 trillion to fund and subsidize a huge expansion of our federal government. Even without taking into account HCR (Health Care Reform), the federal government saw huge increase in everything from transportation (over $300 billion) to green energy (nearly $100 billion, up from $14 billion). This year the federal government alone will spend nearly $4 trillion out of a $12 trillion economy. Of that, almost $1.6 trillion is borrowed. To facilitate the borrowing and encourage credit expansion the Federal Reserve has kept interest rates at 0%.

So with all of this bad news out there (jobs, sluggish GDP growth once federal spending is subtracted, continued home mortgage foreclosures), why the current Bull Market. ? Why are stock prices rising? The answer in many ways is complex. After the Dow bottomed out around 6000 in the early spring of last year, there were simply too many undervalued companies out there to ignore; once the investors saw that our financial system wasn’t going to collapse, they began buying again. Americans normally are optimistic people. And American businesses men tend to be very optimistic. The world changed considerably since the Dot Com bubble implosion in 2000-2001. The capital and financial markets are truly global. Out sourcing of labor to low cost nations continue to make up for lost efficiencies in other areas of a corporate portfolio. And one of the least talked about factors leading to the market recovery was the collapse of oil prices worldwide between June of 2008 and January 2009. That price plunge was the equivalent of a huge tax cut for the economy (of course oil prices continue to recover since then, and are now twice the prices of the January 2009 lows).

But there is something more fundamental going on. The injection of so much liquidity at a time with near negative interest rates created a new round of speculation. To make matters worse, the accumulation of so much new public debt has scared away foreign investors, which in turn made banks one of the government’s prime lenders. Here’s the basic scenario: the Treasury prints hundreds of billions of dollars of new cash. That cash is then deposited in the Federal Reserve Bank. Banks then borrow that money at 0% interest, and in turn they buy up short to medium term Treasury Notes. These notes are what fund all of the public borrowing. When the notes come due, the bank has made a nice 3.75% return. Three point seven five percent doesn’t sound like much, but calculate the interest on one hundred billion dollars over three or six months (roughly three and three quarters billion dollars). The near record profits for most of the big Wall St Banks are a result of this arrangement. The US government is a much better risk than say Caterpillar Tractor, or Boeing. The banks essentially risk nothing. And the federal government is in effect starving this nation’s credit markets.

The other area where this easy money policy is having a big effect is the equities and commodities market. As the federal government continues to run up huge amounts of debt, there is downward pressure on the dollar in relation to gold and other commodities. Large investment firms are borrowing money at 0% interest and pouring that money into the markets. The more money playing the game, the more prices will rise. Add in the natural optimism of American investors (more like hope), and the political pressure to see any financial news as positive, and you have the makings of a new speculative bubble. Where the bubble will finally establish itself (commodities? stocks?) is still open to question. But, with the doubling of oil prices despite weak demand, as well as the steady increases in Gold prices indicate that commodities end up the winner. Stocks are still bought and sold in dollars, and right now dollar denominated stocks are still a risk. In any event, there have been long periods of prices increases for both oil and stocks. But warning signs are out there that signal the general economy lags far behind the stock and oil prices. So, what keeps this engine of speculation going? Two things: massive government spending and borrowing; and 0% interest rates. This jump start applied by the Treasury, the Fed, and Congress failed to do what it was intended to do –create consumer demand, and with it new jobs.

One of the mistakes politicians from both parties make concerning recessions is that they do not allow natural market forces to function. After the TARP bills were passed, and after Secretary Paulson injected the first shots of liquidity into the financial system, the federal government should have concentrated on three things (a) Reform of the financial system (b) Short term tax relief with the intentions of jump starting job creation, and (c) The protection of our currency (or as some call it protect King Dollar). The Obama Administration  never allowed the stock market or the real estate markets to find their natural bottom. Yes, if he did the short term pain would have been sharp; but, it would have also been short. With the TARP funds in place, and some kind of tax holiday instituted, and with a strong dollar, not only would foreign cash be flowing in, but credit markets would have thawed. Instead of receiving another dose of bad news concerning private employment, the opposite would be occurring. Instead, we’ve not only put off the day of reckoning, but we’ve re-created the Bush Bubble. Instead of real estate, speculation is occurring in stocks and commodities.

Sometime soon interest rates must go up. With oil again threatening the $100 barrel price (despite weak demand), the Federal Reserve Chairmen, Ben Bernecke, must remove excess liquidity from our markets. And when that occurs, this new wave of speculation will come to an end. But, Wall St will not be the only victim. With higher interest rates, the federal government will have to rein in spending. And again we will find ourselves in another recession.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why I Remain Catholic

 

The level of indignation and rage continue to build. Once again the Church is under assault. Old cases of sexual abuse continue to make their way to the headlines via the New York Times and other foreign media outlets. The target originally was the Pope, but now they have spread to other leaders. Just when you thought it was safe to breathe again, all of the old scandals are resurrected. People are calling for everything from Pope Benedict being called to face a prosecution to calls for a Vatican III. Friend and foe alike are saying the Church now is irrevocably hurt; membership will suffer, and the Church will be in permanent decline. And many ask, “Why would any Catholic remain so?” Here is my response:

The Church is both physical and mystical. The Body of Christ is made up of both the living and the dead (Church Militant, Church Triumphant, and Church Suffering). But Christ remains at the head. Jesus Christ, of course is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. He is fully Human, Fully Devine, and Fully Spirit. In the Gospels Christ makes abundantly clear that every person must eat His Flesh and drink His Blood in order to be saved (In St John Chapter 6 he repeated this 3 times to make his message clear). The Last Supper began Christ’s History of Redemption, and it continues with every Mass celebrated by an ordained priest. For it is not the Homily (sermon), nor the music, or chants, incense or other rubrics that draw us to Mass. It is Holy Communion. That is the highlight. For during the consecration of the bread and wine become Christ’s suffering body on the Cross. And it is that from which we find our redemption. And as St Paul warned against taking the body and blood of Christ with sin on our souls, every Catholic must confess his sins and receive absolution.

Baptism, according to Canon Law, can be performed by the laity during times of extremis –that is when a person is dying and no priest is available. The Sacrament of Matrimony (the making of mothers) is conferred by the bride and groom on each other –the priest does not dispense this sacrament. But Confession and the consecration of the Eucharist can only be done by validly ordained priests (Bishops confer the sacrament of ordination). Saint Padre Pio once said that the earth could more easily survive without the sun before the Universe could survive without the Eucharist. And only priests can consecrate the host. The only 3 requirements for the Mass are unleavened bread and wine, and a Priest. Priests are required to say Mass daily, even if it is in the confines of the bedrooms. And only Priests, acting in Persona Christi (as shown in the Gospels), can forgive sins. And one must confess before he can partake of the Body of Christ. Priests perform incredible acts of mercy every time they hear confessions; and every time they bring us The Body, Blood, and Soul of Divinity of Christ (which is what Communion actually is) .  

But someone may ask, “Can a priest validly celebrate Mass when he has the stain of sin (and in many cases serious sin) on his soul?” The answer is an emphatic Yes. For the power of Christ’s Mercy outshines the sin of the priest. It is not the priest’s soul that works the wonders of Christ’s Redemption, but the miracle of Christ himself. During the travels of Saint Francis of Assisi, Francis was approached by an angry mob of people as he approached a village outskirts. Saint Francis, if you remember was only a humble Brother and not a priest. The villagers told him they found their parish priest in bed with a married woman. Francis asked the villagers to bring him the priest. The mob dragged the priest out of his bed and threw him at the feet of Francis. Francis then took the priest’s hands and kissed them, and said “I kiss the hands of the man who brings me Christ.” Even priests who committed the heinous crime of child molestation can validly celebrate Mass and hear confessions. If being perfect was a requirement of the priesthood we’d be all doomed to Hell.

The priests who used their ordination to fulfill their perverted desires are an abomination. The Bishops who tolerated this sin will eventually have to answer for this. But so must all of us. As most Christians know, we shall be judged. The only saving grace comes not from our efforts, but from Christ. And the Eucharist is the source and summit of our redemption. And it was the Priesthood that Christ chose to carry out His Mercy. Throughout History, God more times than not works his miracles through the charity of others. This Caritas, or God given Love, is conferred by Christ through His Body and Blood. And for this we must have priests.

I remain Catholic for the very same reasons St Peter remained with Christ when almost everyone else abandoned Him. Christ asked St Peter, “Will you leave too?” Saint Peter’s response, “And where shall I go?” Like Saint Peter, I have no where else to go.

Tags: catholic  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Unreliable GOP

 

The new battle cry was issued, “Repeal ObamaCare!” And like other past battle cries, this one has an immediate urgency. The federal government now directly owns nearly eighteen percent (or $2 trillion) of our national economy. One hundred new federal agencies are to be created, and over ten thousand IRS agents will be hired to enforce new compliance laws. Individuals and businesses are now subjected to mandates requiring the purchase of federally approved health insurance plans. Fines and prison are the punishments for non-compliance. Besides the new burdens to businesses and individuals, very recent speculation now warns that the CBO numbers significantly under scored the debt burdens taxpayers will be subjected to. Of course, the CBO never officially scored anything. And, of course the point is moot. ObamaCare is law; the Democrats were willing to even dance nude down Pennsylvania Avenue if that was what it took to get the bill signed into law.

The main question, to paraphrase Lenin is, “What is to be done?” The fires of the public rage have cooled since ObamaCare was signed into law. And already “cooler” heads within the Senate GOP Caucus are now reconsidering their early battle cry of Repeal! Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee for one is calling for calm. He rightly points out that many will be disappointed if they expect ObamaCare to be repealed in one congressional session. Even if the GOP was to run the tables this November, they will still be fifteen votes short in the Senate of a veto proof majority.   The junior senator obviously believes the grass root members of his party cannot count. As usual, one should never discount the ability of the GOP Senate caucus to surrender even before the battle is fought. But something more fundamental is wrong within the Party that Lincoln Built. There is a deep, corrosive cynicism that is difficult to elucidate, let alone explicitly pinpoint. But one doesn’t have to go very deep to see it. Just look at the abortion issue and one sees it very clearly.

Abortion as we know it in this nation is strapped to our collective backs via the now infamous Roe decision issued by the High Court over thirty five years ago. It is an issue which over time morphed from a primarily Catholic-Democratic issue into a Protestant-Republican one. That is not to say that the Catholic Church isn’t any longer involved in the issue; but since Roe, the Democrats –especially the younger ones began to identify themselves with the so-called Pro Choice Movement. In the decade that preceded Roe, the abortion issue itself wasn’t equated with any party. If anything, progressive Republicans backed abortion on demand as much if not more than Democrats. After all, Governors Rockefeller and Reagan were the first 2 governors to sign laws that made abortion legal in their two respective states (New York and California). And young up and coming activists such as Richard Gephardt, and Jessie Jackson were part of the Pro Life Movement. But, by 1977 things were changing fast. Since Roe made abortion an issue beyond normal democratic recourse (i.e. the ballot box), the issue began to be fought in other arenas. Disenfranchisement is an ugly term. It conjures up images of Jim Crow. But it also became a feeling many religious people had prior to 1980. The Supreme Court rulings vis-à-vis Griswold and Roe created a predictable political backlash. And nowhere was this more evident than with Protestants. The Moral Majority, The 700 Club, and Focus on the Family all grew out of this feeling of political and cultural disenfranchisement. And by 1980, significant numbers of Southern Baptists, Evangelicals, and ethnic Catholics flocked to the GOP.

But what did the GOP do for this constituency? Since 1972, five GOP presidents (Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush41 and Bush43) appointed seven Supreme Court Justices that supported or still support Roe (Berger, Blackmon, Powell, Stevens, Kennedy, O’Conner, and Souter). Harry Blackmon, a Nixon appointee authored Roe. And Kennedy and O’Conner were the swing votes in Carhart, which guaranteed Roe’s continued existence for another generation. And if one wishes to point out Roe’s greatest foe on the bench since its inception, one can look no further than the late Byron White –a Kennedy appointee and a Democrat. But the most astonishing fact is that the one appointee who could have changed the court significantly, Judge Robert Bork, was sunk thanks to two Republican Senators: Robert Packwood and Arlen Specter. Without these two Senators votes, the Bork appointment never stood a chance. Yes, Kennedy and Biden sunk the bar very low. But it was the cowardice of Snarlin’ Alren and Packwood that sealed the deal. And their cowardice centered on Roe.   

For the GOP, Roe has been a very profitable issue. Untold millions of campaign dollars were raised, and careers were launched. But Roe remains long after the promises of many GOP politicos are forgotten. Roe is now so entrenched within our political and cultural fabric that it is almost impossible to imagine a campaign season without it. For conservative activists it still remains a viable if somewhat dated issue. Promises are still made about its repeal; but repeal, as usual, remains just over the horizon.

The conservative should keep this in mind when considering the future of the drive to repeal ObamaCare. The GOP isn’t a very reliable party. And for every Arlen Specter or Lincoln Chaffee that retires or leaves, there is always a Lindsay Gramm waiting in the wings. Unlike the Democrats, the GOP lacks the nerve or the discipline to take an issue to the ring and fight it out. And with ObamaCare, there is certainly the opportunities’ for the Senate GOP members to equivocate. And we shall see all the ways our lawmakers will make common ground with such notorious Democrats as Max Baccus, Charles Schumer, and Diane Feinstein. And as before, these “centrists” will form a block of considerable influence. This political block will ensure ObamaCare will be with us until this nation goes bankrupt
Tags: The GOP  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

So, What Now?

  The ink on ObamaCare is barely dry. There is quite a bit of emotion out there on both sides. The Far Left is elated -even giddy. The GOP promises repeal with the same zeal that the Chicago Cub fans promise at the end of every season (Wait 'til next year!). But many ask, "What now?" The Left,  full of confidence that one gets only from winning a hard fought battle, promises that the public will love it, and nothing but the generous bounty of the HHS and Medicare can be expected here on out. As a matter of fact, Stanley Greenberg (remember him? Clinton's favorite pollster?) now says that ObamaCare is a win/win. The electorate will love what they see, and the Dems will actually gain seats in November. There is some degree of truth in this. Many in the GOP are predicting Armageddon. However, it will take a minimum of 6 months to get the bureaucracy going, new regulations written, and new protocols in place. Also, keep in mind that much of ObamaCare will be implemented over a period of 10 years. The new Medicare Tax withholdings will probably begin as early as Jan 1 2011. This will probably be the first thing voters will see. If a worker is already paying  say, $100 dollars a pay period in premiums, he could see an additional $100-250 per pay period increase due the new Medicare taxes. For a family of 4 earning $65000 a year, these increases are capped at $8000 per anum; for a family of 4 earning $90000, the caps are at $12000 per anum. Any subsidies that were promised by the President do not begin until after 2013 and will be phased in over a 5 year period. This will likely be the most onerous aspect of the bill early on. But there's more.

For users of prosthetics, wheel chairs, oxygen tanks, and even tampons, there will be a new federal excise tax of 2-3%. And after 2013, a new Medicare Tax on unearned income of 3% will be implemented. For those who purchase private insurance or MSAs, the amount they can deduct from their income taxes will be phased out over a 5 year period. Businesses will be faced with a $800-$1000 surtax for every employee they do not insure, and for those who do not purchase health insurance, the federal government will levy a new tax of 2% of the person's total annual income (ie a person who earned $50,000 a year and didn't purchase health insurance will face a fine of $1000). If a person cannot afford to purchase private insurance, the government will set up health exchanges to alleviate the costs; but these exchanges and their private subsidies do not kick in until after 2014. That is, the private individual will not be able to afford insurance, but he still is liable for the fine. All this begins  probably on 1 Jan 2011.

If you noticed, most of the benefits do not kick in immediately. There is a reason for this. During the debate, both the Congressional Democrats and Obama promised that their new health program would be deficit neutral. To do this, Senator Baccus used a 10 year period in which he front loaded the taxes and fees, but back loaded the actual benefits. Being a politician, the President made sure that the period in which he would serve as President (2009-2016) would escape the most deleterious economic ramifications of his new health care program. We've known for over 2 years that the Medicare Trust Fund will go bankrupt beginning in 2017. This has nothing to do with ObamaCare, and everything to do with demographics. Beginning this year, about 10,000 Baby Boomers a week will be retiring. These velocities of retirees will only accelerate over the next decade as the largest sub-group of this demographic begin to retire and draw on Medicare. Keep this in mind, as beyond 2011 the private health insurance market will get decimated. Here's why: one of the provisions of ObamaCare is that health insurance companies can no longer price risk. That is, by law they will no long be able to turn anyone away with pre-existing conditions. However, almost all workers who are employed receive guaranteed health insurance benefits via their employer, regardless of their health or risk. Less than 5% of Americans purchase their own health insurance, where risk factors are priced into their policy. And for those with chronic illness, it isn't that they are denied coverage, it just that the policy is priced at an unaffordable level. ObamaCare changes that. The large insurance companies were essientially offered a Faustian bargin. The federal government would push new customers thier way (mainly the fit and young through the new federal mandates), and in exchange they would have to forgo thier normal underwriting procedures. When this system is fully implemented after 2013, there is a regressive incentive as far as insurance companies are concerned. After 2013, it will be impossible for hospitals or doctors to turn anyone away (even illegals). This means, if a uninsured person shows up with a heart attack at the ER, the doctors must treat that person. At that point, an HHS rep will automatically enroll the patient in Medicare. Bingo, there's the regressive incentive.  From a consumer standpoint, it will be far less expensive for him to drop his insurance, pay the 2% fine and wait until he gets ill. The same holds true for the employer. They will just stop offering health benefits, pay the $800-1000 fine. That is, at the very moment Medicare is slated to go bankrupt, millions and millions of younger Americans will join its rolls.
 
In many ways, Americans will be like frogs put into a pot set on medium heat. The changes will not come all at once; but when they do come they will come in a hurry. Once the heat begins to be turned up, the water will get hot quickly. One of the biggest and most drastic changes will be the empowerment of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). HHS will take on the authority to conduct mandatroy home visits for new parents, home schooling families, and private care providers. Like all federal bureaucracies, HHS is heavily lobbied and this lobbying will only get more intense. And the most vocal lobbiests such as unions, children rights activists, and educators will all get thier poind of flesh. We most certainly will see renewed efforts at gun control (yes, hand guns and other weapons will be put in the same category as the Swine Flu - a health risk) by other means. But why stop there? Trial lawyers will surely use the HHS as a means to wring money out of BigFastFood and BigAlcohol, etc... It wouldn't suprise me in the least to see future HHS child advocates getting the authority to inspect homes for junk food, alcohol, and as well as for licensed hand guns. This is already occuring in the UK, where parents are fined and are threatened with having thier children removed unless they comply with HHS "guidelines".
 
But all of that is in the future -still over the horizon. For the next few months we shall be inundated with assurances from the Left, and warnings from the Right. All the while, do not be surprised to see our anemic economic recovery stall, as thousands of health insurance underwriters and other health insurance employees lose thier jobs. Do not be surprised when all kinds of unintended consequences (large or small) kick in. A day before the House passed ObamaCare, Walgreens (the nation's largest pharmacy) announced that it will soon no longer take in new Medicaid customers. Medicaid is even in worse shape than Medicare. It's budget size now approaches that of the Pentagon ($502 billion). Yes, it is a Brave New World.
Tags: Obamacare  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Emperor of Ice-Cream

If any poem could capture the social, cultural, and civic decline of our society, I think Wallace Stevens eery poem about death comes to mind:
 
Call the roller of big cigars,
The muscular one, and bid him whip
In kitchen cups concupiscent curds.
Let the wenches dawdle in such dress
As they are used to wear, and let the boys
Bring flowers in last month's newspapers.
Let be be finale of seem.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.
 
Take from the dresser of deal,
Lacking the three glass knobs, that sheet
On which she embroidered fantails once
And spread it so as to cover her face.
If her horny feet protrude, they come
To show how cold she is, and dumb.
Let the lamp affix its beam.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.
 
The poem details the wake of woman, who lies under a sheet, On which she embroidered fantails once
And spread it so as to cover her face.If her horny feet protrude, they come
... all the while nieghbors and relatives gather
In kitchen cups concupiscent curds.Let the wenches dawdle in such dress As they are used to wear, and let the boys Bring flowers in last month's newspapers. They didn't even have the decency to bring her funeral bouqets in vases, but instead brought them in old newspapers. The lady's body lies dumb, while the guests enjoy themselves on ice cream. The young ladies dwadle and flirt with the boys -all of them ignoring the dead woman and what she represents.
 
What we call the West has been on a kind of death watch for decades. Some believe the West died in blood soaked fields of Flanders; while others, said the West died behind the barbed wires of Birkenau. What little legacy that remained continued on in the 2 or 3 generations of Americans who continued to transmit that legacy (in an ever thin veneer) to thier children. But what of that legacy? The thoughts, feelings, and consciousness of Americans in 1938 are a far cry from what we know and feel today. Tradition, no matter what the Buchanans and Reagans of America say otherwise, had a very shallow foothold in this nation of ours. For decades we were a nation of pure becoming -with very little inclination to look back. Most Americans were always moving forward as they ran from thier pasts. I can still remember reading about Nixon's Quaker parents. They originated from that pious colonial stock that ran from tyranny, and Nixon's parents eventually moved to Fort Wayne Indiana before settling in California. These people, children of the European bloodbaths, fleed Europe and its oppression only to settle in a land that was indifferent to thier mystic plight. Within 3 generations the US did what no European King or Papist could ever do - cause Nixon's family religious community to become extinct. Orginally, the Founders attempted to water down relifious passions with economic and civic activities. Thier assumption was that the citizenry would always retain the Christian Zeitgeist in the face of a plurisitc society. All religions were welcome. This tolerance wasn't just a pie-in-the-sky sentiment, but was the results of clear hard thinking. Europe was just beginning to recover from the disasterous Thirty Years War (which witnessed the near total destruction of Central Europe). The memories of charnal houses and mass grave still haunted thier memories. It is far better to have a society too busy with becoming than a society locked in a circle of endless bloodshed.
 
What evolved was not luke warm Christianity, of which the prophets warned, but religion's wholesale destruction. Protestant ministers now talk of sustainable energy instead of Heavan and Hell; Catholic Bishops decry pollution and the lack of gay rights. Children and grand children are raised on the thin gruel of diversity and empty tolerance. And traditionalists are branded with that most effective label - they are simply called Insane. With each passing year our ability to fight off would be oppressors, buffoons, and civic messiahs weakens. The coming of President Obama is only a symptom of what ails us. Today's Christians have no more in common with Christians of 18th Century Europe than do today's citizens of Greece with that of ancient Anthens. 
 
And one only has to look to Europe to see our future. The Europeans are much farther along. Comfortable, genteel, and childless, the Europeans simply are dieing off. Thier legacy is about gone. And like the passengers on the Titanic they arrange the deck chairs of thier sinking ship. Thier souls are barren; they rejected the mystic chords of Tradition for  the pleasures of the moment. But there is a new, darker future in store for them. A wise man once said, "Nature Abhors a Vaccum". An Islam is just the cure for our brethren across the Atlantic. Like the Quakers of the 19th and early 20th Century, the Christian worldview is an extinguishing its light. It is not that Europeans are converting to Islam in droves (that may come in the next 2 decades), but Muslims are the only ones there having children.
 
So, as we gather around the corpse and indulge in our pleasures, will anyone of us look upon the "horny feet" of the deceased and let the lamp light affix its beam?
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Grand Strategy Revisited

 

Grand Strategy, as defined by Colin Gray, comprises  the "purposeful employment of all instruments of power available to a security community”. As opposed to tactics, or general military strategy, grand strategy looks at a nation’s security from a 50,000 foot view and not a ground view.  In the past, a nation usually looked no further than their own neighbors (allies or enemies). For instance, the grand strategy of Napoleon was focused mainly on the European continent. All other theatres of operations such as the Americas, Asia, and India were considered secondary to Europe. This was a much different point of view as compared to Great Britain, which has vital interests spread across the globe. This difference of focus was to doom Napoleon in the long run. The same could be said of Hitler and Japan during the 1930s and 1940s. Both were too focused on their own regional theatre of operations to ever coordinate their 1941 offensives.  If Japan and Germany focused on the destruction the United Kingdom as a super-power, Germany would have foregone its invasion of the Soviet Union and chose the Mediterranean as a likely battle ground; Japan would have likewise avoided a confrontation with the US and chose a southern strategy. Against such odds, the UK would have had likely been knocked out of the war, or at the very least neutralized as a super power.

This brings us to the current problems facing the Obama Administration.  Let me say this first, the final authority or author of a nation’s grand strategy lies within the civilian realm. Even in Hitler’s Third Reich, the Werhmacht didn’t set policy –Hitler did. In the old Prussian tradition, the King and Defense Minister (who was usually a very senior Prussian staff officer) shared this duty. But in the United States, especially after World War II, the obligation as well the privilege of setting grand strategy always officially resides in the Oval Office. The President since 1949 has an entire bureaucracy that does nothing but theorize, plan, and implement grand strategy. Whether this power resides in the office of the National Security Advisor, The State Department, or the Pentagon depends upon the President. In Nixon’s case, it was Henry Kissinger –first as National Security Advisor and then as Secretary of State.  For Reagan, it was a George Schultz and Caspar Weinberger. In both the case of Nixon and Reagan, the Presidents themselves took a leading role, and put their imprimatur on their policies. President Bush the junior relied initially on Rumsfeld the Defense Secretary, but over time added Condoleezza Rice and various UN and NATO offices.  President Obama, a man who never advertised himself as a foreign policy expert, is following the traditions of Reagan and Nixon. And he is finding out how lonely it is at the top.

One of the fantasies that should be dispensed with is the narrative that President Obama is only trying to get the strategy right. The President announced in March his long term strategy vis-à-vis East Asia. We know now that in 2008 President Bush ordered an over-all re-evaluation of Afghanistan, and that revaluation was waiting for the Obama Administration in January. From the looks of it, President Obama accepted the policy recommendations and then some. In June, he abruptly fired General McKiernan and replaced him with a counter-insurgency specialist in General McChrystal.  He also gave McChrystal an additional 16,000 combat troops. General McChrystal promised the President a report in August, which he delivered on time. From that point on, it’s been like Alice in Wonderland, or Abbot and Costello (Who’s on First?). After a flurry of well placed leaks, political recrimination, and political gotcha ensued. Finally, the President said he wishes to go slowly on this and “get it right”. Of course, the logical rejoinder is, “What have you been doing these last nine months?” The President, in essence, is telling the world that he is re-thinking his strategy on Afghanistan which he so eloquently laid out in March. It is too bad he failed to mention this to Secretary of Defense Gates, CENTCOM Commander Petreous, or General McChrystal.

For those who understand the principals of simple military strategy, it is almost impossible for a theatre commander like McChrystal to devise a military strategy without having the grand strategy laid out in a formal no nonsense plan. FDR did this after we went to war when he ordered General Marshall to put his focus on the European Theatre of Operations and not the Pacific. This simple decision controlled how the Pentagon allocated and deployed its forces. Yet, once a decision is made, it can become very difficult to change it once the subordinate branches begin to plan. Things can get even more difficult when active operations are on-going (such as they are in Afghanistan). General McChrystal has the unenviable task of at least stabilizing his area of operations while planning his next major move from scratch. Now he must also take into account second guessing from the Oval Office. For 90-120 days he has been planning his next major move on the certainty he would be given the resources to do the job. This is much more difficult than what meets the eye. His forces are already dispersed; rotation of existing forces continue as before; and one cannot plan for the kind of counter-insurgency he has in mind without securing logistical points; administrative centers, as well as gathering operational intelligence. In Iraq, General Petreous and he were given everything they needed and only one demand –win the war. What President Obama is doing is upsetting the established protocols. The end result is chaos, loss of morale in the troops, and possibly disaster.

If news accounts are accurate, it appears there are several people in the loop concerning this change in strategy. The President obviously is taking advice from his political team of Emmanuel and Axelrod; Vice President Biden also appears to have some leverage here. But what of General Jones (USMC ret), the President’s National Security Advisor? Or what of Secretary Gates, the President’s Defense Secretary? From his public utterances, he is as out of the loop as General’s Petreous and McChrystal. Now, out of the blue, we are talking about smaller footprints, special operations, and drones. None of this makes any sense from an operational perspective, and smells of pure politics. The President obviously is feeling the heat from his political base; however, he differentiated himself from both his primary opponents and McCain in that he could do Afghanistan better. To everyone who paid attention, the President promised over and over again that he would defeat both the Taliban and Al Qaida in Afghanistan. His military leaders told him the best way to do it, but all of a sudden Vice President Biden and Rahm Emmanuel know better.

General McChrystal laid out his force requirements. Some say President Obama will split the difference between what McChrystal wants, and what his liberal base demands. Instead of 40,000 additional troops, the General will get 20,000. These half measures have a way to lead to more half measures, and if 20,000 troops turn out no to be enough, will the President be willing to order more? If the operation fails due to a lack of resources, will the President be willing to take the blame?  Will General McChrystal resign if he doesn’t get the resources he needs?

Again, much of the contention lies at the feet of the President. He is the one who sets grand strategy. If he had doubts about the so-called surge strategy (a strategy that requires many more troops that on currently on the ground now), why didn’t he voice said concerns last spring? Why hire General McChrystal at all? Why is he having high visibility meetings concerning Afghanistan now and not last March? Why are so many of his key policy advisors out of the loop? The shadows of Vietnam certainly hang over the Whitehouse now.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Good War

  The last ten days have seen the saturation of news stories focusing on Acorn, Health Care Reform, the UN ceremonies, Iran, Israel, and European Missle Defense. Lost in this miasma was a Washington Post memo leaked allegedly by General McChrystal. The White House has been silent on the memo, and with the exception of a few blogs and media stories, very little has been made of it. Yet, in any other time this memo would have been earth shattering. After almost 8 months in office, the President doesn't have a Afghan war strategy.
 
Let's face it; the President has been given an easy ride vis-a-vis Afghanistan. President Obama used the Afghan conflict as a campaign device to show his hawkish bonofides. Afghanistan, he argued, was the correct and necessary war. Iraq was a strategic disaster, which caused the US to take its eyes off the prize -namely the hunt for Bin Laden, and the destruction of Al Qaida. Even after the election, the President assured us that Afghanistan would remain the focus of his efforts, and if neccessary, he would allow incursions into Pakistan to destroy Taliban and Al Qaida strongholds. For a few weeks, the US conducted joint operations with Pakistan that witnessed the defeat of Taliban forces advancing towards the Pakistani capital. The President fired the commander of the CENTCOM forces in Afghanistan and appointed General McChrystal as CINC. He also promised that he would unveil his own strategy for Afghanistan.
 
That was March. It is now almost October. According to some sources, the Taliban now occupy about 80% of the Afghanistan, and raids on NATO forces there occur almost daily. The recent Afghan elections were a bust, and General McChrystal's staff complain of rampant corruption inside the Karazai regime. General McChrystal wrote a high level memo to the President dated 30 August (the same one that was leaked by the Washington Post last weekend). According to the Post, the President had exactly one short meeting with his NSA, retired General Jones. Also in the Post article, many Pentagon staff officers complain that none of them can get access to the President to discuss long term strategy. In early August, General Jones told General McChrystal that if he asked for additional troops for Afghanistan (this is in addition to the 16000 troops President Obama sent last summer), the President would have a WTF Moment. That is, the President was certainly not prepared to authorize more soldiers. The only public comments the President made concerning Afghan strategy was that he was not prepared to make any rapid decisions.
 
What to make of this? First, the President promised his own strategy would be forth coming as far back as March. He has at his disposal an abundance of experts, intelligence officers, as well as the entire bureaucracy of the DOD and State Department. It is for this reason that  Truman authorized the post of National Security Advisor (and his own staff the National Security Agency). With a war raging in Afghanistan, it is difficult to believe that the President was not aware of the situation there. Besides the ideas he developed on the stump during the campaign, the President had ample time during the interregnum period (November through January) to solidify his political strategy for this part of the world. His press remarks leave the strong impression that it is the DOD's fault that we are losing this war, and not his. But that's not the way the system works. The Generals come up with a combat strategy only after the civilian leadership (ie the President) outlines the political end game. This is what General McChrystal was complaining about. He has not been given the political goals.
 
The President appears to not have a clue on how to proceed. As late as today, Vice President Biden suggested that we might just withdraw from Afghanistan and redeploy special forces to Pakistan instead. It is this kind of confusion that will lose us the campaign. The President owes it to the soldiers to provide the leadership he is obligated to supply. This is his war now. He ran a campaign that said he could do it better than President Bush; he knew what he was getting himself into. Perhaps the President should schedule less time with Letterman, student bodies, and photo-ops, and spend a little more time being Comander-in-Chief.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama, Our Post-Modern Fuerher

   
Hänschen klein ging allein
In die weite Welt hinein.
Stock und Hut steht ihm gut,
Er ist wohlgemut.
Doch die Mutter weinet sehr,
hat ja nun kein Hänschen mehr.
Da besinnt sich das Kind,
         kehrt nach Haus' geschwind.
     18th Century German Nursery Rhyme

The lyrics haunted the opening moments of the Sam Peckinpaugh film, Cross of Iron. In a simple stroke of genius, Peckinpaugh  demonstrated in 4 minutes what writers and other artists failed to accomplish in much longer and loftier works. The dubbing of an innocent child's voice over footage taken from Nazi propaganda and war footage set the tone of the movie, but also served as a reminder about the prevalence of fascism -the reach of the state is everywhere; no one is safe.
Perhaps the longest lasting legacy of JFK is his 1961 inauguration speech, in which he stridently called Americans to "bear any burden...in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." A generation of babyboomers marked this speech as their political or civic coming of age. Despite their actions in later years, which was filled with youthful hedonism and indiscretion, the babyboomers still buy into President Kennedy's "Call to Action". And now 47 years later, another Democrat recently uttered this promise:
 
 "So when I'm President, I will set a goal for all American middle and high school students to perform 50 hours of service a year, and for all college students to perform 100 hours of service a year. This means that by the time you graduate college, you'll have done 17 weeks of service."
 
Barak Obama, a 46 year old Harvard trained lawyer, has plenty to say to the electorate. The Junior Senator from Illinois, whose curriculum vitae includes the authorship of 2 autobiographies, serving 2 terms as an Illinios state senator, and serving less than 4 years in the US Senate (of which he's spent 2 full years campaigning for President), has gazed upon our nation and found it wanting. His wife, Michelle, is even more critical. On the campaign trail she sniffed:
 
"That we have to compromise and sacrifice for one another in order to get things done. That is why I am here, because Barack Obama is the only person in this who understands that. That before we can work on the problems, we have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation."
 
Barak's wife was not finished.  She promised:
 
"Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zone . . . Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual - uninvolved, uninformed."
 
Now the exhortation of politicians is nothing new. In times of national crisis it is considered a virtue. Ever since Teddy Rossevelt and Woodrow Wilson, it has become the hallmark of progessive politicians to create crisis in order to "lead" the unwashed masses to Utopia. But problem solving and the mobilization of the masses are just part and parcel of a larger project that began in the late 19th century. Nietszche wasn't the only intellectual who noticed that Europeans were reading the newspapers more than their Bibles. While Nietszche didn't envision the State taking the place of the Roman Curia, a young Italian school-teacher-turned-socialist preached just that. Benito Mussolini's aphorism, "There is no concept of the State which is not fundamentally a concept of life: philosophy or intuition, a system of ideas which develops logically or is gathered up into a vision or into a faith, but which is always, at least virtually, an organic conception of the world". Faith, is a word closely aligned with Revealation, and has since Voltaire's time been considered an enemy of Reason. Mussolini was the first major political activist who dispensed with Scientific Marxism in favor of the German idea of Gemeinschaft - Community. Lenin picked up his cue and soon followed. For the next 8 decades socialism evolved into different strains -each reflecting regional differences based upon the character of the different nations it made itself home in.
 
In the US, the Germanic strain of socialism found a ready home. While National Socialism died a violent death in Berlin in 1945, the theoretical underpinnings of Fascism remained most agreeable to our post-war intelligentsia. Enlightenment ideas such as Enlightened Self Interest, and Constitutional Democracy were not enough. Imported terms such as valuescommitment and charisma injected a bit of the irrational into our civic and political virtue. The religious impulse, now dead, would re-enter into political life through the back door. Faith in the Almighty would be replaced by Belief in The Cause. Never mind that Nazi Germany recently taught the world a most unpleasant lesson concerning politics and the irrational. The various Youth Movements of the 1960s had one thing in common: they were all fascist in nature in spite of their Marxist rhetoric; they were all about value commitment. Men and women would no longer look to God but to the State or the Party. As the religious sentiment in our civic life was repressed there grew a tendency to further adapt or purloin its ideas. The idea that political commitment can also be a spiritual experience is not a new one, but it surely was considered  a novelty in the US. This idea found its home with Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun. Lerner mixes the socialism of the Isreali kibbutz, new age spirituality, and pop pyschology, in order to confect a social arrangement that eerily resembles Nazi Germany - or at the very least comes out as Jonah Goldberg would call Liberal Fascism. The State, in Lerner's view, would not only provide jobs, vocational training, and ensure labor standards, but also the State would provide both spiritual and pyschological guidance. The State would "co-ordinate" all aspects of the individual. The Nazis had a word for this:  Gleichschaltung - or coordination. In Learner's Utopia, the institutions that in millenia past provided "meaning" to the person (churches, civic associations, and the extended family) would be replaced by a benevolent state. The First Lady Hillary Clinton caused quite a stir in 1993 when she delivered her "Politics of Meaning" speech. Clinton, a Methodist, found nothing theologically offensive in what Lerner, a Reformed Jew, wrote. As a matter of fact, they are both kindred spirits, despite their different confessions.  Both Clinton and Lerner are devoted socialists where religion, or better yet religiosity is at the service of the State. Both Yaweh and Christ can be reconciled if they can be woven in the same Seamless Garment.
 
We now can frame the ideas or utterances of the Obamas if seen through the perspective of History. From Teddy Roosevelt's Muscular Christianity through the pop-spirituality of Rabbi Michael Lerner, no matter who's the writer, there remains the shadow of The State. Today, most people are so used to the idea of an all-encompassing State, that Obama's campagin rhetoric elicits either shrugs or sympathy. Ideas, which in decades past would have engendered horror, today are considered mainstream. When Obama proposed making school aged children no more than corvees of the state (forced conscription into a federally mandated Community Service Corps) he received a standing ovation. To my surprise, many of my conservative acquaintances thought this was also a good idea. It was all about
'giving back to our Community,"
and "teaching our young people to respect and appreciate what they've got." When I politely reminded them about a) the Constitutional prohibitions against indentured servitude and b) our Constitutional rights come with no conditions, and c) the civic virtues which they would like returned are actually religious virtues (namely Caritas or better known as Charity) and are taught in the home and the church, and not at a community center staffed by federally funded social workers. 
 
Many people may think that this little essay is a bit strident in itself. Obama, after all, is just a politician and is only appealing to his base. All of this talk of Nazis and Fascists is a bit much. For everyone, toute le monde, knows it cannot happen over here. There are constitutional protections and all that. My answer to the first response is that unlike other politicians, Obama is quite up front and has made his promises in full view of the cameras. In the age of You Tube there is no pulling a Clinton (the famous tactic of Bill Clinton of giving one speech in the morning endorsing an action, and then giving another speech later that day diametrically opposing his earlier speech). It should also be remembered that Obama has carefully cultivated the persona of Der Fuehrer. Obama and his handlers know full well the power of today's media age. Emphasis on his youth and virility mirror that of Hitler. During his recent trip to Berlin, his handlers demanded that he be given permission to deliver a speech at the historic Brandenberg Tor; after politely being denied this, they managed to get access to the famous Victory Column. The predicted photo op lacked even a hint of irony. I seriously doubt any dedicated Democrat in past decades would even consider selecting such a symbol of past Prussian aggression. In an age where the Fuehrer Prinzip at times appears to be making a comeback (even Christian Conservatives have built institutions with emphasis on Leadership), it is only a matter of time before the electorate demands a Leader who can inspire the kind of confidence only a Feld Marschall can deliver. And as far as Constitutional protections go, one need only look at recent cases such as the Kelo case to see what could happen to even our enumerated rights. As we learned with Prussia and then the 2nd Reich, the lack of institutional and constitutional protections provided the Nazis a means to capture the 1933 elections. And Hitler didn't even have the Internet. Today, with all of the technology the Federal goverment has at its disposal, and a judiciary that cannot be depended upon to protect basic constitutional rights, and a large swath of the citizenry already dependent on "benevolent" goverment, it does give one pause when someone like Obama enters the political stage.
 
 
 
 
Tags: Politics  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Battle of France and its 68th Anniversary

 

If someone were asked to describe the defeat of France by German forces in 1940, most people think of swarms of sophisticated panzers, Stuka dive bombers, and motorized infantry conducting a blitzkrieg attack on an outnumbered and hapless French Army. May 10th was the 68th Anniversary of the Battle of France, and I wish to briefly correct some misconceptions as well as highlight areas of that forgotten battle that still can offer us lessons.

The Germany of the inter-war years was in many respects not what it seemed. On the one hand, it was a defeated nation teetering on anarchy, civil war, and economic ruin. Within a period of just 6 years it went from being one of the most dynamic, advanced and feared nations in Europe to a nation that could be pitied. Yet, on the other hand, Germany still had pockets of vitality, energy, and an ability to put the past behind. France, the victor had every desire, at least when Clemenceau was Prime Minister, to keep Germany down permanently. Germany, while not suffering from actual war damage like France, just the same had deep scars. Over 1 million of its sons perished; the Reich ran up huge wartime deficits, and its political institutions had no idea on how to civilly conduct peaceful elections. To make matters worse, Germany had to admit that it was the aggressor and cause of the Great War, cede ancient territories to both France and Poland, pay a large indemnity to the victors, and most of all, its entire military was limited to 96000 enlisted men and 4000 officers. The Treaty of Versailles also precluded Germany from establishing an air force, a tank force, and a  navy. The years 1920 through 1930 were painful years for the Reich. Besides rampant inflation, the occupation of the Ruhr by French soldiers, and territorial incursions by the Poles, the Germans were greatly divided by various reactionary political parties. Finally a middle of the road socialist party was able to form various coalition governments, but the fact remained that many Germans longed for the order and leadership of  the Kaiserzeit. Surprisingly there was, however, a short period from 1926-1930 that saw a rapid improvement in the German economy. With the help of American credit and favorable trade, the German economy  began to recover, and with it gave their fragile democracy a fighting chance. This economic period was also a Golden Age for the Berlin art scene. For a short period of time, the Artistic Left made Berlin the center of theatre, the study of literature and architecture, as well as psychology and philosophy.  

Through these social, political and cultural changes stood the Reichswehr. The tiny German Army on the face of it appeared no stronger than a national constabulary. Deprived of the tools for both offensive and defensive warfare, the German Army was a mere shell of its former glory. But, like everything else in Germany, all was not what it appeared. The architect for the Reichswehr was the relatively unknown Prussian general and staff officer by the name of Hans von Seekt. Within the old General Staff, Seekt made a name for himself as a brilliant organizer and tactician, primarily on the Eastern Front. Serving as Chief of Staff to Field Marshall Mackensen, Seekt planned and executed successful mobile campaigns in Galacia-Tarnow and the Balkans. Chosen to carry the flame, for a defeated peacetime army, Seekt brilliantly carried out a series of reforms that would be far reaching. The first set of reforms was with personnel. Only those officers who had outstanding wartime records were retained. Seekt was not just looking for courageous officers, but men with very high intelligence who could also do advanced staff work as well as speak foregin languages. He also looked for officers with an eye to future tactics and weapons. But most of all, Seekt attempted to ingrain an apolitcal attitude in his officers. His men would only concentrate on military matters, and would not involve themselves in viscious domestic battles of Weimar Germany. He wanted his men to concentrate on the ressurection of the mobile offensive. For Seekt, an officer who conducted highly elastic operations in the vast plains of the East learnt vitally different lessons than officers who served in the trenches of the West. The seeds of the panzer blitzkrieg laid in the mind of this man. For the next half decade, he would lay the foundations of the Wehrmacht. If the Reichswehr would ever be allowed to expand, Seekt wanted its nucleous to be energetic, forward looking, and professional.  He encouraged his junior officers to translate foreign  military manuals and books (especially those of Great Britain and the US); he created a small department which did just that. He also encouraged officers who had the means to travel abroad. Seekt started an exchange program where his officers could train with the tank commanders of the Russian Red Army. Seekt changed totally the doctrine of enlisted training. Corporal punishment became a thing of the past; junior officers were encouraged to fraternize with their NCOs. The enlisted pay was increased, and barracks life was improved. NCOs had to pass rigorous exams for promotion, and Seekt made sure that enlisted promotions were celebrated with great fanfare. NCOs also trained to be platoon leaders, junior lieutenants trained to run companies, and company commanders trained to run battalions and regiments. Another reform was the encouragement of officers to become technically proficient in the operation of motor vehicles and tanks (of course done primarily in Russia). And while the Germans were not allowed to have an Air Force, they did create a glider corps. Young enlisted men and officers received top notch training in  airmanship and aerodynamics as a result. When Hitler finally rescinded the Versailles Treaty, there were thousands of men already trained in the basics of aviation.

But probably the greatest reforms of the German Army occurred because of one other man: Heinz Guderian. This brilliant, courageous, but ultimately flawed individual single handily created the tank arm of the German Army. No other person, not von Manstein, not Montgomery, nor Patton or Rommel understood both the theory and operation of large armored formations as Guderian did. Through out the 1920s and 1930s he fought the military bureaucracy to get his dream made into reality. Guderian spent countless lonely hours working out mock combat simulations with mock tanks and motor vehicles. Through hundreds of exercises him and like minded officers and NCOs discovered both the strength and weaknesses of the panzers. By the time Hitler recognized the potential of armored warfare in 1934, Guderian worked out most of the theoretical and operational problems. Unlike the British, Guderian demanded that every panzer formation have at least 1 motorized infantry regiment; every panzer formation must also have an engineering battalion, and a light armored reconnaissance battalion. Guderian also demanded that the armored division should be made up of no less than 2 panzer regiments, and that all panzers must be equipped with wireless radios. Guderian himself gave quite a lot of credit to the English and the groundwork laid by men like JFC Fuller and Liddell Hart. By 1936, Guderian had organized and established a number of ad hoc panzer formations. The re-introduction to conscription, the speed of rearmament, and the complexities of creating panzer formations de novo put severe pressures on all of those officers and NCOs who toiled to make the Panzer Waffen a reality.

By 1939, the German Army was a vastly different force than what is was in 1933. The teething problems the panzers saw during the Anschluss with Austria, in which thousands of broken down vehicles littered the autobahn were fixed. The Army High Command (OKH) worked out the distribution of panzer forces to the traditional infantry corps -something Guderian fought against. He demanded an independent tank arm.. The fact remained that most of the older, higher level staff officers and senior officers still had lingering doubts about Guderian’s ideas concerning the deep armored thrust.

The idea of the deep armored thrust was actually English. Two officers, JFC Fuller and Liddell Hart saw what the British tanks could do during the Great War. They saw the obvious potential of the tank as both an offensive and defensive weapon. Despite some initial tests during the 1920s, the British gave up the idea, and assumed like everyone else that the tank was nothing more than an infantry support weapon. However, in Germany both Guderian and another officer, Major Lutz, saw things from a different perspective. Both of these two officers realized that the mobility of the tank could be welded to the firepower of elite storm troops. During the Great War, the German Army experimented with elite infantry assault troops they called Sturmtruppen. Much like the US Marines, these soldiers considered themselves elite specialists in the art of the assault. Armed with tommy guns, bayonets, machine pistols, grenades, and pulling light towed artillery, these soldiers would quietly penetrate No-Mans-Land, find a weakness, and violently assault it. These storm troops spent 2 years perfecting their art so to speak in the trenches of the Western Front. The German High Command began to form batallion sized storm troop units, and used them during the spring offensives of 1918 to drive deep narrow thrusts into the Allied lines. Some of these thrusts were as much as 3 miles deep. German infantry should have then poured into these breeches and hopefully flank the enemy. However, without mobility and reliable signals, the German Army could never take full advantage of the work the storm troopers accomplished. Without speed and rapid communications, the Germans could not seize the oppurtunities that these storm troopers created.

By the 1920s  Major Lutz, and then Captain Guderian realized  what was needed was a fully integrated fighting unit that contained panzers, motorized infantry, towed artillery, engineers, and signals. Guderian envisioned a unit that could strike along a narrow front, drive a deep breech into it, but most importantly take full advantage of this breech with its own fast infantry. The panzer division, in other words had the concentrated firepower of several artillery regiments, the speed of the cavalry, and the strength of the infantry. Guderian went a step further and argued that entire panzer corps should be established in order to double or triple the firepower at the point of attack. The infantry, like their storm trooper forebears would probe for weaknesses, violently assault those weak areas, while calling up the panzer regiments to make their assault. The infantry would stand by while the panzers destroyed the enemy defensive positions with a concentrated firepower of 200-300 tanks along a breech of only 2 kilometers. Once the tanks over ran the positions, the motorized infantry and other units would follow. With aircraft reconnaissance, fast moving motorized reconnaissance, and wireless signals, the panzer commander, leading from the front, could quickly move miles into the enemy rear before the enemy knew what hit him. If the panzer division was the vanguard of a panzer corps, the breech into enemy lines could be filled with up 400-600 tanks and thousands of fast moving infantry within hours.

Such was the theory. But Guderian wasn’t happy with just panzer corps; he also envisioned organizing entire panzergruppen or panzer armies. But this was not to be when the Second World War broke out in 1939. The German Army in 1939, or for that matter 1940, was still 80% massed infantry. The panzer formations were made up of inferior tank models (at least from a British or French perspective) such as the Pzkw II and III. Also, about a third of the panzer units were designated “light” because of the large number of obsolete Pzkw Is and IIs, and an overall shortage of Pzkw IIIs . Guderian was given command of a corps that was a mix of both motorized and foot infantry. However, despite all of these problems the fast moving panzer formations were more than a match for the Polish army. Within 3 weeks Poland was conquered in a series of classical envelopment operations. The West was stunned. Newspaper reporters from Great Britain were the ones to dub the German tactics blitzkrieg. By early October, most of the German 65 divisions that served in Poland began to redeploy to the West. The OKH was given fresh orders to plan an attack on France.

France, in 1939, was considered the preeminent military power on earth. After mobilization she could boast 75 infantry divisions, over 2000 tanks, a first rate navy  as well as a reserve of colonial troops stationed in Africa. Her artillery was world class, and her main battle tank the Somua, was considered one of the finest in the world. France had a military tradition that went back to Charlemagne. The toughness of her infantry was legendary. Whether it was fighting it out in Russia under Napoleon, fighting to the last man in Mexico, or withstanding the carnage and horror of Verdun, the average French fighter was considered one of the best in the world. So, how did the French Army collapse so quickly in 1940?

France never got over the loses she suffered in the Great War. In a 1920 census, about a third of the males ages 18-35 were either dead or crippled when compared to the 1910 census; her industrial heartland in Flanders was laid waste through 4 years of trench warfare. After the victory celebrations of 1919, France sank into a political and social impasse. The Left and the Right kept a running political struggle that became progressively worse once the communist parties began flexing their electoral muscles. Unlike Germany, which also suffered from extremism from Right and Left, France’s problem laid in the deep philosophical divisions which Enlightenment only made worse. Class struggles, religious strife, rancorous debates over proposed modernization of agriculture led to a poisonous partisanship. France was always a nation of the book –its population absorbed western culture, ideas, and philosophy like the Germans absorbed beer or the Italians operas. There remained a deep rift between what it meant to be French. In one shape or another, the Revolution of 1789 continued right up to 1940. Inside of this rift stood the clerics, the aristocracy, the farmers, and the military on the one hand, and the professors, the urban professionals, the artists, the unions, and the activists on the other. The 1936 Popular Front victory of Leon Blum only deepened the schism between management and the workers, the solider and politician, and  was simply poisonous to France's economy. This divisions went much deeper than the political and social divisions in the US, and would eventually sap the strength of the French as a whole.

The French military in the interwar years remained strong. It projected itself around the globe. Its colonies ranged from Algeria to Indo-China. On paper, the French in 1939 called up 70 combat divisions, which included combat tested colonial divisions. Its best formations had some of the finest field artillery in the world, and almost all infantry regiments had anti-tank guns, large caliber machine guns, and tanks. Like French society as a whole, however, the French field army suffered from some serious deficiencies. The French Army's biggest problem laid in its demographics, its outlook, and its theory. The lessons they drew from the Great War were opposite of the Germans. While the Germans spent a decade in intense soul searching and reform, the French High Command went to sleep. Like everyone else (including the Germans), the French believed that modern weapons made offensive combat operations obsolete. The nations with the highest caliber artillery could decimate a better trained and armed enemy –so the French believed. Going in a 180 degrees opposite of what  their forbears of earlier generations believed, the French General Staff stressed static, defensive operations over offensive ones. Also the French High Command relied on the French Foreign Ministry to keep the German nation down. Aggressive foreign policy vis-à-vis the bullying of Berlin and various alliances combined with a large standing army would prevent the German military monster from ever rising again. To go a step further, the High Command proposed that a series of fortifications and bunkers (The Maginot Line) be built from the Swiss border to the border of Luxembourg to guard against any future German invasions. Treaties with Holland and Belgium would give the French combat divisions right of passage in the case of another Schliefflen like plan (a German assault on France through Belgium). Later treaties with Great Britain would assure the French ample support from north of the Channel. It is also important to realize that all of these provisions, treaties, and military structures were done from a perception of weakness. The loss of so many husbands, future husbands, and future sons via the Great War put severe manpower shortages on the French Army. France itself was in a long demographic decline vis-à-vis Germany. Even after the Great War, the Germans were producing more children than France. In order for the French to meet its military commitments it had to rely on the recall of older less fit inactive reservists, as well as  cadres of North African colonials. The all important 9th Army which was tasked with guarding the area between the Maginot Line and Belgium opposite the Ardennes Forest was filled with 2nd and 3rd tier reservists. This army group was assigned to an area thought to be perfect for defense. That is, an area least likely to be used by the Germans for a concentrated armor attack. The Ardennes was a hilly heavily wooded area with few modern highways. Only a fool would attack from there thought the French.

From 1936 on the French attempted to get a defensive treaty with the Soviets. Like the Russia in 1914, the Soviets were the Allies ace in the hole. There was no way the Germans would ever again fight a war on two fronts. Even Hitler wasn’t that crazy. As the French watched idly while Hitler broke with the Treaty of Versailles and began to re-occupy the Ruhr and re-arm again, the French suddenly became desperate to re-form close ties with Moscow. Nineteen thirty-six was the watershed year for Europe. It was the last time the French had an overwhelming military advantage over Germany. In 1923 the French sent combat troops into the Ruhr Demilitarized Zone as punishment for Germany's deliquiencies in reparation payments. In 1936 Hitler sent a few companies of motorized infantry into the Ruhr in direct violation of Versailles. Hitler himself was ready to recall his soldiers if the French became belligerent. At that time, the German army was still tiny, and ill equipped to fight anyone. Even if the Nazis reverted to guerrilla warfare, the outcome would have been the same. Yet, the French did nothing, and Europe sighed a big relief. War had been avoided (And  with it History was perverted). Germany began to re-arm shortly thereafter. And the Soviets? Stalin was too much of a cynic not to realize that the balance of power was steadily moving eastward. In August of 1939, the Nazis and Communist signed a non-aggression pact with each other to the shock of both London and Paris. Two weeks later the Germans invaded Poland; the Soviets occupied the Baltic as well as Eastern Poland. In the winter of 1939-40, the Soviets invaded Finland. The Allies obviously were caught with their pants down.

This brings us to the autumn of 1939. No one, including Hitler believed the French and British would declare war on Germany over Poland.  The German High Command (OKW) was not prepared for a 2 front war in 1939. It deployed only 15  weak second rate infantry divisions along the French border -the best of his army was fighting Poland. For almost four weeks the French had the opportunity to invade Germany via the Rhine while the bulk of the German army fought in Poland. Without a doubt, the French could have mobilized at least 3 powerful corps of infantry, armor and aircraft, and pierced the lightly manned German positions; from there it could wheel north into the Ruhr and Rhine Valleys, or wheel south into Baden Württemberg. In either case, cities vital the German war effort would have been lost (Essen, Bochum, Dusseldorf in the north, or Heilbronn, Stuttgart, and Munich in the south). The powerful German mechanized forces were at least a week’s march out. One does not disengage an entire army group from combat; redeploy them four hundred miles in the opposite direction overnight.  The Germans were masters of improvisation and battlefield management, but they were not that good. From what we know of the Poles inside the Poznan Pocket at the Burza River, a strategic catastrophe awaited the Nazis if the French had actually invaded Germany in September 1939. The Poles were anything but beat, and if Rundstedt was forced to remove either of Riechenau’s 10th Army or von Kleist’s Army Group, the German’s mobility in Poland would have been halved. The Poles ultimately would have lost anyway, but a French invasion would have reduced the German advantage in Poland – and brought the war to German soil. But, none of this transpired, as the French and British did nothing. By the end of September, large formations of victorious Germans began to redeploy along the Western Front. 

The fact that OKW hadn’t a clue on how to continue the war once Poland was conquered, only indicated how weak the high command was in Berlin. Hitler, seeing how well his panzers performed in Poland, immediately ordered the OKH  to begin preparations for an invasion of France. No one in OKW or OKH wanted an autumn campaign. But Hitler was adamant. General Halder, Chief of Staff to General von Braunstisch (Chief of OKH) just dusted off the old Schliefflen plan and presented it to Hitler. Hitler responded with fury. For all of their skill, education, and training, OKH couldn’t come up with something more imaginative? From November 1939 to March 1940, a see-saw of indecision on the part of the Army and of impatience on the part of Hitler ensued. But there was one general, Eric von Manstein, who proposed something daring, if not reckless. Manstein proposed that instead of deploying the bulk of the army into Belgium-that is the right wing- that OKH send at least one panzer corps through the Ardennes Forest towards the Meuse River and Sedan (That is, shift the main attack to the left wing). From there the panzer corps could either wheel south behind the Maginot Line or wheel north towards the coast. The panzer corps Manstein envisioned would only be a vanguard of an entire army group. The French 9th Army the Germans knew was weak. Not only would the German panzer corps smash this French formations near the Luxembourg border, but by capturing Sedan and moving behind the British and French forces in Belgium, it could in effect enact an envelopment. Manstein still called for strong forces to invade Belgium and Holland. He knew the French and British plans called for deep movements into Belgium to meet the Germans at the point of attack. Little would they know that the Germans main shwerpunkt (point of attack) was far to the south. If things went to plan, Belgium wouldn’t be the Allies battle ground, but their grave. Manstein, who at that time was von Rundstedt’s Chief of Staff, began a long paper war with OKH. He argued forcefully his ideas both on paper and on the war games table. By February, OKH  grew tired of Manstein and promoted him to the command the 39th Infantry Corps in Stettin (which was really a demotion. Everyone knew Manstein had the ability not only to command an army group, but also to do Halder’s job. By putting Manstein away in the sleepy city of Stettin, officers at OKH got him out of their hair). However, Manstein  had friends in high places. Manstein was friends with a  Major Arthur Schumdt, Hitler’s personal assistant. When Schumdt heard that Manstein was passing through Berlin on his way to Stettin, he invited Manstein to take lunch with Hitler and explain his own strategy. As it turns out, Hitler independently came up the same ideas as Manstein. When Hitler found out that Manstein actually had Guderian do a feasibility study concerning armor transiting through the Ardennes (Guderian said it could be done under certain preconditions), Hitler was overjoyed. Their meeting was a complete success from Manstien’s point of view, and within days Hitler ordered Halder to draw up a new operations plan. In the mean time, Hitler and OKW would direct a stunning operation in Scandinavia, which resulted in the occupation of both Denmark and Norway.

The Allies remained passive. Their plans called for an immediate strike into Belgium  with thier best formations once the Germans crossed into the lowlands. Confident that their continuous front, which was heavy with artillery and heavy weapons, could deal with anything the Germans threw at it, the French High Command settled into a dull routine. As autumn turned into winter, and winter into spring, many French and British dubbed the war, The Phony War. Compared to the Great War, it was a piece of cake. Perhaps an accord could be reached with Hitler, they thought? Maybe the Germans were losing heart? Hitler’s strike into Scandinavia and the allied failure to stop him shook at the least the Brits from their slumber. The seriousness of the situation would later hit Churchill when he was on a visit later that spring to French Headquarters. He asked Generalissimo Gamelin about his strategic reserve. The General admitted that he had none. If the Germans for any reason flanked the Allied forces in the lowlands, there would be no reserves available for a counterblow.

From March through April, the OKH worked furiously to add operation flesh to Manstien’s plan. The very same people who ignored the future field marshal's plans suddenly became its biggest proponents (that is when Hitler got involved). The plan in the end called for not one but three armored corps and one mechanized corps to pass through the Ardennes. Behind this powerful armored group (total 1300 of the German 2000 panzers), would follow an entire infantry army (General List). Younger generals with exceptional abilities would command the armored formations. Besides Guderian, Generals Hoepner, Hoth, Kleist, and Reinhardt would fill the corps commands with Kleist commanding the entire Gruppe. Commanding the lower formations of panzer divisions and panzer regiments would be men who would quickly rise to fame in other theatres. Names such as Balk, Schweppenburg, Shaal, Model, Mantueffel, and of course Rommel dotted the list of senior officers commanding the mechanzied divisions and regiments. Rundstedt’s Army Group would have overall command of the shwerpunkt. Generals Bock and Leeb along with their respective army groups would lead the charge into Holland and Belgium or provide flank guard against the Maginot Line .Kluge's 4th Army would also provide panzer support (of which Rommel's 7th Panzer would lead the way) To give the impression that the shwerpunkt would land farther north, Colonel Kurt Student’s paratroopers would lead a daring airborne assault on the Belgium fort Eban Emael. Little did the Allies suspect that nearly a quarter million men 1300 panzers and 10000 vehicles were stuck in the biggest traffic jam known to man. From the Luxembourg border and stretching back as far as Frankfurt, Rundstedt’s army group qued up for the assault.

On May 10th, Bock's army groups invaded Belgium and Holland. Predictably, the Belgians gave the green light for the Allies to meet the Germans at the point of attack; for the next 3 days, fierce battles were fought as hundreds of thousands of French, British, Belgian, Dutch soldiers fought the Nazis invaders. In the meantime, French armored cavalry from the 9th Army and 2nd Army noticed the Ardennes was filling up with panzers. Advanced reconnaissance units from the French 9th Army were defeated on the first and second days. Guderian’s 2 panzer divisions and one motorized regiment –the Gross Deutschland- made good progress. Their goal was the Meuse River and the ancient city of Sedan. By the third day the first of Guderian’s infantry crossed the river and made up a bridgehead. Hoth's panzers did the same farther north. Weitersheim motorized infantry were less than a day behind. High above, German bombers and fighters created a thick air umbrellas which prevented any Ally recon flights or interceptors from interfering. As French and British forces fought valiantly farther to the North, the soldier’s of the French 9th Army were about to be torn to pieces. By the 13th of May, Guderian, Hoth and Reinhardt had finished assembling their bridgeheads. On the afternoon of the 14th, Guderian ordered a full assault on the French positions in and around Sedan. Initially, the French fought with stubbornness, and the German gunners took heavy casualties. It was at this time that the Stukas made their presence felt; the French reservists cowered as the siren blaring Stukas rained high explosives up and down the Meuse at Sedan and farther north around Dinant. Already French infantry and tank crews began to scatter in the face of hundreds of panzers. The French 9th Army was already losing control. By nightfall Guderian had one panzer division across the river. It was ready to wheel north when Kleist got cold feet. He ordered Guderian to hold the panzer division until the rest of the panzer corps crossed that evening. Guderian fumed. His biggest fear was that British and French would realize the danger to their southwest and act accordingly.

Guderian had little to fear. The French suffered from a miserable breakdown in communications. It took hours if not days for orders and information to make it to and from the French High Command. General Gamelin still wasn’t aware of the significant danger lurking at Sedan. It would not be until after the 14th, when Kleist’s panzers were heading for Abbeville that the Allies understood a catastrophe was in the making. On the 15th, Guderian,  and Hoth’s panzers broke loose and were heading north. The French 9th Army at this time was finished as a fighting force; its individual units either smashed, scattered to the four winds, or they surrendered in mass. With thier Stuka escorts above providing cover, the panzers broke into open country. An unknown panzer general named Rommel made over 40 miles that day. He ran into various French infantry and tank formations and either destroyed them or frightened them completely off. By the evening of the 16th, Kleist had 6 panzer divisions and three motorized divisions heading north but had absolutely no infantry to secure their rear. Tensions on both sides would reach the boiling point the next 5 days. The Oise River to the north was the next and last physical obstacle that came between Kleist’s forces and the English Channel.

The picture was not clear on either side at this point. The dangers to Kleist’s men were real. One must remember that no one anticipated a complete breakdown in French moral. Nightmares of September 1914 haunted the German General Staff. All of them knew full what the French accomplished during the Miracle on the Marne in 1914. To understand the situation, try to picture each of Kleist’s panzer divisions as separate entities. Each division had between 16000 to 20000 men and thousands of vehicles and tanks. Each division at this point was separated by miles of unoccupied land. Here is where the seeds of danger existed. As each division is further broken down into regiments and battalions, one can picture even smaller entities –with each entity occupying a village, farmstead, or driving through a  meadow. Behind these combat units was the unprotected  supply tail, which consisted of trucks, fuel Lorries, field kitchens and support troops. From the front to the rear, a panzer division averaged 15 miles. It took dozens of staff officers and NCOs to keep the division moving forward, or to disperse or concentrate. All of these units were poised looking northward. From east to west they occupied 40 miles of frontage that was continually moving –some divisions moved faster (such as Rommel’s), some slower. To their rear was almost 100 miles of unguarded territory. And with each hour that area got longer. These were highly fluid operations with no continuous front. From Sedan, where a German army group headquarters was set up, the officers watched in trepidation as their panzers divisions out ran their supporting infantry by 2 days march. In the days before helicopters and mobile hospitals, all the seriously wounded had to be shuttled through this “Indian Territory”. Every drop of fuel and round of ammunition had to be sent over unguarded roads and highways and bridges. One can fully imagine the nervousness von Kleist felt. In the open meadows and woods of Flanders enemy infantry and armor could cause havoc. What if the French were able to recover and launch a flank attack on this area from the southwest? Or worse, what if the Allies were able to coordinate a counterblow from the southwest with another counter attack from the east? Remember, the Allies had over 300,000 men in Belgium.

It was now dawning on the French High Command that something was up. Despite broken to slow communications, rumors and reports from frightened civilians began to descend upon Gamelin. As his staff officers attempted to label and chart these reports on their tactical maps, confusing information was piling up. German panzer units pinpointed in one village in the morning would later be located 50 miles to he north by later afternoon. This of course was impossible. The Germans could never travel that fast, could they? And what of their 9th Army? They hadn’t heard from 9th Army Hq in 24 hours. Through the day and evening of the 15th, it finally dawned on the staff officers of the French High Command that a potential catastrophe was in the makings. General Gamelin, after all could read a map. A force of German armor of unknown size had broke through Sedan and was now somewhere between Sedan and the Oise River. The French finally began to act. However, the French Prime Minister Paul Reynauld saw clearly what had occured, and cried out to Churchill via a phone conference that France was defeated.

In the meantime, a full scale war of words broke out between Kleist and Guderian. Kleist sought and got permission from Rundstedt to order a halt to his armored forces. They were not to cross the Oise. Guderian, who could practically smell the Channel sea air was dumfounded. His corps was only a day or two drive away from Abbeville. Air reconnaissance flights reported few significant enemy formations between him and the English Channel. The cat was now bagged, and his superiors were about to let the cat out! However, it wasn’t only Kleist and Rundstedt who were worried about their exposed southern flank. Both Hitler and von Braunstisch also recognized the extreme dangers. Hitler backed Rundstedt, and now Guderian was fighting the entire chain of command all the way to the top. Guderian, in a fit of anger offered his resignation; Kleist, being a typical Prussian who would not back down, accepted it. When Rundstedt heard about it, he ordered some type of understanding be met. General List, who commanded the 12th Army (which still was making its way on foot through the Ardennes), came up with a compromise. Kleist could still have his halt order, but he should allow Guderian’s forces to make a reconnaissance in force across the Oisne. In other words, Kleist could save face, but his impetuous subordinate would get his way. By the 17th, Guderian was again on his way.

General Hoth’s corps wasn’t quite so lucky. By the 19th, the French and British realized the danger they were in. For once they acted with vigor, and planned a coordinated attack from both the east and west; their target was General Rommel’s 7th Panzer, which was isolated near the town of Arras. To the southeast of Rommel was the SS Totenkopf motorized division. Hothr’s corps was scattered over a thirty mile area on the inside track of Kleist’s armored advance. The British were able to withdraw one armored division from the fighting in Belgium and sent it westward towards Arras. The French, to the west of Arras were organizing their own attack with an infantry division. If the attacks were coordinated, they should have given a good account of themselves. Their goal was to force Rommel’s 7th Panzer to withdraw southward, and hopefully slow the Germans down until the Allies could throw something between the English Channel and the German armored spearhead. The British attacked on the morning of the 19th. For once it was the Germans who were surprised. The British Matilda, a heavy tank with a 75mm gun was too much for the German Pzkw II’s and IIIs. By noon, a crisis was brewing on Rommel’s front. The British were steadily knocking out every German tank thrown at them. Rommel was called to the Regiment and ordered a new defensive line formed around their anti-aircraft battery. He ordered the gunners to fire their 88mm long barrel guns at the British. Within a half hour the Matilda’s began to take heavy losses. The questions on the British minds were, “Where’s the bloody French infantry?” The French were 45 miles off  still“organizing” their attack. Without the French infantry, their heavy weapons and artillery, the British attack was just a waste of men and time. The French had a dreadful time in finding battle worthy units to launch the attack.

Meanwhile in Belgium, the Totenkopf Division was brought out of reserve and joined the panzer attack in Kluge's 4th Army sector. The SS Totenkopf, a group of former concentration camp guards, was a project of SS General Heinrich Himmler. In 1938, not wanting the Army to steal all the laurels as defender of the Reich, Himmler got permission to create the Waffen SS (armed SS). For the next year, the Totenkopf was expanded to include 2 regiments, signals, engineering, artillery, and other support formations. They attended army combat and technical training. The problem was that outside of murdering Polish civilians and Jews they had no actual combat experience in May 1940. They were attached to General Hoth's panzer corps near Le Paradis. On the 16th, they ran into a division of the Royal Norkfolks. Unlike the regular army, the SS were commanded by officers with full ideological training. All of the junior officers as well as the NCOs were fully indoctrinated into Nazis race theory. On the 16th, when they went over to the attack most were more than willing to give their lives for their Furher. And give it they did. The British were much obliged. By the time the British fully withdrew, and the attack was called off, the Totenkopf suffered 15% casualties. The casualties were much higher for the junior officers. Losses in machines were just a bad, and Hoth decided to pull the SS out of the line -but not before they murdered 95 British POWs. It appeared the Totenkopf needed more training in the finer points of combat (In Russia, the Totenkopf proved to be much better on defense. It survived the terrible winter of 1941-42 inside the Demyansk Pocket, and destroyed hundreds of Soviet T-34s through fanatical resistance. By the end of winter, however, the Totenkopf was reduced to less than 6000 officers and men. It went to France with just over 20000).

There was one other point of danger, and it was farther to the south. After the Germans over-ran Sedan, they did leave a mechanized regiment to guard the fulcrum point of their advance. Colonel Hermann Balck commanded the 6th Motorized Infantry Regiment, and his men were to form a flank guard at the base of the advancing panzers. They were to guard against any French counter attack from the southwest. From the 14th through the 17th his men came under heavy attacks from various ad hoc French units (one of these commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Charles De Gaulle). By the 18th, his regiment suffered high casualties, was running low on ammunition, but most of all, his 4 battalion’s were exhausted. They had just been forced out of a village and the heights it commanded. When Balk tried to rally the remainder of his regiment for a counter attack they remained immobile. “Well enough, I will retake the village myself,” he sneered. Humiliated that their commander, a man twice their age, still had the vigor to counter attack, the regiment gathered its strength and retook the village. They kept the village despite fierce counter attacks by French Colonials. By the morning of the 19th advanced elements from List’s 12th Army relieved Balk’s men.

The Allies finally realized the full measure of the catastrophe . By the 18th, Guderian’s panzers were within a half day’s march to Abbeville on the coast. The German  4th,,   6th,  18th and 16th  Armies had the bulk of the French and English armies engaged in Belgium and were pushing them back towards the French frontier and English Channel. With the hinge 9th Army destroyed, a gap between the 2nd French Army and the Northern Army group widened until the the Northern Army was pinned in an area of Belgium France with thier backs to the sea.  After their engagement at Arras, the British and French units reported back to the High Command that the Germans had at least 3 corps of mechanized troops situated in a deep narrow salient that stretched back to Luxembourg via Sedan. To make matters worse, intelligence reports from fighting near Sedan indicated that the Germans were pouring a full army group into this salient (This would be List’s 12th Army). It would not be long before the BEF and the bulk of the French army would be cut off from France. The Germans already captured or at least raided the many supply and rear support camps in Flanders. Chaos reigned at the High Command as they attempted to not only get an accurate and up to date picture of things, but also figure out what to do next.

Of course it was too late. Perhaps if Charles De Gaulle was in command instead of the aging Gamelin or Weygand things would have turned out differently. But the problem was not just in personnel, but in the entire structure of the Allied military. They were still fighting with a Great War mindset, where advances are measured in yards and not leagues. Their chain of command, signals, and general staff organization was antiquated, petrified, and calcified. In short, old men were fighting a young man’s war. The high proportion of older reservists coupled with the slow ponderous decision making system was a recipe for disaster. Most of the situation reports the High Command received were days old and obsolete. In other words, the French High Command hadn’t a clue what was going on. When Churchill visited Gamelin on the 16th to see for himself what was going on, he was aghast. His French ally and his staff were either totally overwhelmed, or completely serene in the face of paramount danger. It finally occurred to Churchill that no one was in charge. France was out of reserves, out of leadership, and out of time.  At least one man got the full measure what was going on, and the  Commander of the BEF, Lord Gort didn’t waste a minute in saving what was left of his nation’s army. Churchill and Gort were on a race against time. The BEF must get back to England.

On the other side of the hill, one other man saw the full measure of the situation. General Halder was the most unlikely candidate for risk taking; however, in this situation he followed Moltke’s old dictum, “First reckon, then risk.”  The Reich was on the verge of a victory of literally historic proportions. But time was of the essence; this was not a situation that warranted caution. Kleist’s panzers were within three to four days of not only sealing off the Allies from the west, but also capturing the vital seaports that served as the Allies only life-line. The Nazis had a golden opportunity of surrounding and destroying the military elite of both England and France. After the break through at Sedan, General Franz Halder supported fully the rapid deployment of Kleist’s panzers to English Channel. He was Guderian’s only ally at OKH or OKW. Now that Kleist was within striking distance to minister a coup de grace, the Gods of War smiled upon the Allies. First Kleist and than Rundstedt wished to halt the panzers at the coast instead of having them wheel northeastwards for the seaports, especially Dunkirk. These two officers from the old school did not wish to see their panzers get bogged down in the swamps and beaches along the coastline -that was a job for infantry who were still 3 or 4 days away. Then Hitler himself intervened and gave an official halt order on the 21st. Granted, from a purely military point of view, this does make some sense; however, this situation was a once in a lifetime opportunity that could change the history of Europe forever. At least that is the way Halder, Guderian, and Rommel saw it. Guderian would have had his gunners dismount and fight as infantry if need be.

When Churchill returned from his final visit to French Headquarters, he immediately conferenced with the War Staff. The Allies were about to be entombed in Belgium and the Royal Navy had to make immediate plans to get as many French and British troops out of Belgium as possible. Orders had to be issued to the ground commanders to conduct an orderly withdrawal as possible back to the Channel coast and await embarkation. This would mean the loss of all of their heavy equipment, supplies, vehicles, and ammunition. Within hours, the army group, corps, and divisional commanders were briefed. Somehow they had to conduct a fighting retreat with 3 German army groups on their tale. To make matters worse, there were reports of German panzers along to coastline south of Dunkirk at Abbeville and Calais.

And there they would stay. Guderian, Hoth, and Rommel watched helplessly as they marked time just 50 miles away. For the next week, the Allies fought a brilliant rear guard action before the port of Dunkirk. The French Army in this sectored didn't panic but fought stubbornly for every inch of ground. Ninety thousand French soldiers would be sacrificed at Lille. The British Navy also accomplished one of the most surprising miracles in naval history. The evacuation of over 350,000 men from one small seaport in the face of constant air harassment and attacks (Goering promised Hitler the Luftwaffe could finish them off) was truly miraculous. Along the way, the Germans captured hundreds of tanks, thousands of artillery pieces, tons of ammunition, and fleets of vehicles. But Churchill knew that Great Britain could replace guns and tanks, but not its small professional army. In four years time, men like General Horricks and Field Marshall Montgomery would return and lead these very same formations back across France, yet again.

No one knows for sure what possessed Hitler to issue his halt orders. It would be the only time that he showed any kind of equanimity to a foe. Diaries and memoirs suggest that Hitler saw the English and its empire as brethren Aryans. If that was the case, he let his racial sentiments get the best of him. Many blame Rundstedt himself. Some saw he was just too haunted by 1914 and could never imagine theat the French Army would fall so easily. Without the soldiers of the BEF, Great Britain was truly defenseless. If Hitler allowed Kleist’s panzers to seize Dunkirk, Hitler could have invaded England at his leisure. Most likely, Great Britain would have been given a fait accompli –either surrender or be occupied. Even with a leader like Churchill, England would have had little choice. In July Colonel Student’s paratroopers could have landed anywhere along the south coast as a vanguard force. The British would have put up a desperate fight, but she had very little to put up against a landing of panzers on her home territory. The Luftwaffe’s strength was still more than sufficient to provide the necessary air cover to support an invasion armada. Without her professional army, England would have only been able to put up a few home guards, police, and the occasional reservist. With no supply dumps, heavy tanks, artillery, or trained infantry , 5 or 6 panzer and infantry divisions could have swept all resistance aside. It would have taken weeks if not months for Britain's scattered colonial troops in India or North Africa to make it back home –by then it would have been too late. In allowing the British and French forces to evacuate Dunkirk Hitler sealed his fate as well as the fate of the Reich.

After Dunkirk, the remainder of the campaign went quickly. OKH ordered Kleist’s armor split up; each panzer corps was attached to an army group. By the end of May, sufficient infantry reserves arrived in such number as to support a quick advance towards Paris and beyond. Guderian was ordered to strike south and east behind the Maginot Line; Manstien’s 39th Corps finished its build up and was attached to the remnant of Kleist’s army group; they attacked north of Paris towards to famous Loire Valley reaching the Atlantic within 10 days. The French government fled Paris and evacuated from Boudreaux. Paris was declared an open city. It was the same through out France. The German 6th, 12th, 2nd, 4th and 9th Armies marched through France with only sporadic fighting. It was exactly as General Fritz Bayerlein described it –maneuvers with live fire. By the end of June a new French government was formed around the elderly Marshall Petain. Petain, and his staff met Hitler at the same train station at Compiegne where Germany surrendered to the Allies in 1918. The campaign was over.

The Germans in 1940 did in 6 weeks what their fathers and grandfathers failed to do in the bloodbath of 1914-1918. Ironically, the most decisive phase of the campaign was virtually bloodless. The Germans didn’t anticipate the total breakdown of the vaunted French Army. Despite having an edge in tank design, in numbers of soldiers deployed, and artillery, the Allies were caught totally off guard and were able to offer only token resistance in the decisive drive of the panzers to the Channel. The world was literally stunned by the fall of France. In July celebrations in Germany culminated with a parade in Berlin and the promotion of 12 general officers to Field Marshall. Hitler began an orgy of generosity which included sizeable sums of cash and estates to his victorious generals. Included in his gluttony of promotions was the award of the Field Marshall batons to Generals Keitel and von Braunstisch. These two generals armed with only desks and inkwells, commanded no troops in battle, nor had any authority outside of their typing pools. Keitel, it must be fair to say,  never wanted the job of OKW Chief, and  cowed in fear of Hitler. He admitted to his friends before the war and to his interrogators after the war that during the 1930s he only wanted to retire to his family’s estate in Brunswick and ride his horses. It must have been very embarrassing for him to receive such an undeserved honor. An hangman’s noose was awaited him after the war.

As July waned into August and life returned to normal in much of occupied France, it became apparent that England refused to lie down. With 300,000 professional soldiers to protect his island and American supplies coming across the Atlantic, Churchill began to refit  his army and air forces. Hitler sent peace feelers out in late summer to Churchill which he totally rebuffed. Within a month Goering would begin his terror campaign from the air, and by early autumn Stalin would begin making new demands on his German partner in crime. With the air war over Great Britain going poorly (it would bleed the Luftwaffe white), Hitler began to turn his gaze east.

If one were to ask the average German if the war was over, they would have said yes. There were even rumors that OKH would order the decommissioning of several infantry formations in the autumn in order to restock the labor pool. The humiliations of Versailles were avenged, and German honor had been restored. The army never stood more proud. Little did they know, but May 1940 were halcyon times for the Wehrmacht. Never again would the panzers enjoy such concentrated firepower (In preparations for Barbarossa OKH ordered that the allotment of panzers per divisions be halved in order to double the number of panzer divisions slated for Russia). Never again would the Wehrmacht fight a campaign in which its supply chain extended only a day's drive; never again would the ground forces enjoy such close air support. By winter Mussolini created 2 messes for Hitler that were to have far reaching implications. Italy’s Albanian adventure turned nightmare demanded some immediate attention -eventually Churchhill would send soldiers into Greece , but his North African operation promised nothing but trouble. By January Hitler dispatched Rommel and 2 divisions to clean it up.

There was never to be a peace dividend for the Germans. By Christmas, select officers were working on an operations plan to invade Russia. England remained defiant, and with the resources of its vast Empire was able to give Rommel all he could bargain for. The beginning of the end of the Thousand Year Reich had begun.

 

Tags: History  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Et tu, William?


Another conservative icon gave up the fight this week. William Buckley’s column (http://tinyurl.com/2rhpba ) details the Waning of the GOP. His column opens up clear enough:

The political problem of the Bush administration is grave, possibly beyond the point of rescue. The opinion polls are savagely decisive on the Iraq question. About 60 percent of Americans wish the war ended -- wish at least a timetable for orderly withdrawal.

Buckley then goes on and paraphrases the bulk of retired DCI George Tenet’s memoir, in which Tenet accuses the President and Vice President of not heeding his advice:

It isn't that Tenet now doubts the lethality of the terrorists. What he disputed was an organizational connection, which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al-Qaida.

For Buckley, unlike Bruce Bartlett, there is no questioning the right of the US in conducting the war, but he does conclude that the White House didn’t do the proper due-diligence, and as a consequence did not anticipate the true nature of the enemy. Like Senator Reid, Buckley believes we are in a war cannot possibly win

But beyond affirming executive supremacy in matters of war, what is George Bush going to do? It is simply untrue that we are making decisive progress in Iraq…It was four years ago that Mr. Cheney first observed that there was a real fear that each fallen terrorist leads to the materialization of another terrorist. What can a "surge" of the kind we are now relying upon, do to cope with endemic disease?

Well, there is plenty. It has taken the President 4 years to realize what is at stake, and demand results from his field commanders. The elevation of General Petraeus to top commander in Iraq was vital. General Petraeus is one of the few senior officers in the Army that actually studied insurgency from both a historical perspective and operational one. The French fought against an eerily similar kind of insurgency in Algeria 50 years ago. Their success in defeating the insurgency was due to the techniques and tactics of a Lieutenant Colonel Gaula. General Jacques Massu applied Gaula’s strategy through out Algeria in general and Algiers in particular. Within 2 years, the insurgency was defeated. General Petraeus is duplicating Gaula and Massu’s efforts now. Some have dubbed this tactic as strike and hold. Thus far, Petraeus has been able to pacify the Anbar province and break up Al Sadr’s militia.

Buckley appears to be have been as shaken as anyone over the political losses the GOP suffered last year. I imagine his frustration over the President’s performance concerning all things conservative has reached some limit. I will grant him that. At this juncture, politics need to be avoided. In the winter of 1945 through June 1945, the US suffered almost half of it’s loses in World War Two. Iwo Jima, the aftermath of the Battle of the Bulge, and Okinawa extracted over 350,000 killed, wounded, and missing. Yet, I don’t remember the GOP Senate Majority Leader demanding FDR’s scalp. Victory overshadowed the great loses of 1945. The problem for the President is that the Democrats want defeat in Iraq as much as the Mullah’s in Tehran. The problem for the President is that he is fighting a proxy war in Iraq against both Iran and the DNC.

The stakes are high. Not only the future of Iraq, but the future of the entire Gulf region is hanging in balance. Wars are not usually won –they are lost. The political future of the GOP will be the least of our worries if we fail in Iraq. Buckley, a man in his 80s should realize that.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12Next »