Tag Archives: British

The Dawn’s Early Light

Ok, it’s time to take a break from what the insane liberal thugs are doing. I’ll give them time for their heads to stop exploding. They now have a new thing to rant about with Ruth Ginsberg expiring. Let the battle lines be drawn on this one.

Have you heard the press conference from our Governor here in Florida? LOVED it. I seriously doubt you’ll see any November riots and destruction here; if only your governor has the set he has!

For those of you who have read my book, you may or may not recall in Chapter 41—Lemoore— I was absolutely bored to tears during my last year there. Sergeants were running the command, we did away with the Commander of the Guard. SNCO’s and officers stood Officer of the Day (OOD)—at home. The only time they got involved was when some airwing Command Duty Officer of the base (Navy Lt Cmdr) found it below him to have to speak to a lowly E-5, our Sgt of the Guard, and demanded to speak to me. Of course, that never happened, the OOD took care of him.

Bored beyond belief I began reading a lot and filled my library with books—mostly of military genre; one of books was the one titled here. Once the tour ended, it was back to the Corps and the reality of the hectic schedule of a field grade office—reading ceased.

After retirement came my book. Five and one-half years of constant 24/7 my editor and I beating ourselves to death. He was 2,500 miles away and we burned up the internet and telephone lines daily over grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, etc. More often than not he was correct—without him the book would never have happened. Bless you Denny! When the book finally came to fruition in December 2012, the last thing I wanted to do in my life was read a damn book.

During the ensuing four more moves and garage sales I pretty much emptied my library. For some reason I saved the title book. I believe the reason was I grew up there—Baltimore. Now in my forever home and not much to do, I plucked this book off the shelf and read it. My first read since 2012, and it was great.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I leaned much from the book. One thing was I finally found someone who agreed with me—Baltimore and Fort McHenry are not on the Chesapeake Bay as everyone seems to believe. In fact, I’ve gotten into some heated discussion with folks, even some from Baltimore, who were convinced they were both on the Bay, some said they never heard of Patapsco River—really? They are on the Patapsco River. I grew up on Bear Creek which empties into the confluence of the River and the Bay at Sparrows Point. I spent my childhood camping, hunting, fishing, and crabbing the two with Dad and my friends. I know the area like the back of my hand.

As a retired military officer, I was amazed at the incompetence, sheer ineptness expressed by both Americans and British during this war. For those of us who have spent our time in hell—combat—we all know too well the best laid plans go to hell as soon as the first shot is fired, and adjustments are made in the heat of battle. However, during this war, there were no “best laid plans.” It amazes me we even came out of the war as survivors.

Not far into the book I got the shock of my life! Who on the British side orchestrated, planned, provide forces and orders for the conduct of the War of 1812? It was the Secretary of War and the Colonies—none other than Lord Earl Bathurst. Yes, he is one of my ancestors. I have a loose-leaf binder given to me by a Canadian named Bathurst who was for many years a diplomat in Washington, D.C. I befriended him through a strange set of circumstances while on active duty. He compiled an amazing history of the Bathursts all the way back to the 15th Century. I dug out his binder and sure enough there is Lord Bathurst. Sorry about that folks! LOL

If you are a reader I highly recommend the title book. It was printed in 1972 and is still available. I’m not making this recommendation because of the Lord. LOL I recommend it for its detailed study of the battles of Bladensburg, Baltimore, and Washington. There are amazing examples of the “Fog of War” often fraught with confusion, incompetence, and sheer luck—both good and bad. If you are a military person and a reader I believe you will enjoy it.

Footnote: As a young Marine I remember being told the reason the Brits didn’t burn Marine Barracks and the Commandant’s house was their respect for the bravery and soldierly virtues of the Marines at Bladensburg. Not true Marines. Sorry. LOL

Originally posted 2020-09-23 10:48:20.

THE LITTLE CAN THAT COULD

I read this piece of Trivia several years ago, and found it very interesting. I received this copy from one of my fellow Marines, who, BTW was one of my recruits back in the early 60’s. And I thought I’d share it with those who perhaps never heard the story. IT IS TRUE!! What I found interesting though was those same ignorant, highly educated, useless bureaucrats who existed back in that day, are still here! LOL That damn can is still in existence today. . . . . Amazing .

 

 

 

During World War II the United States exported more tons of petroleum products than of all other war material combined. The mainstay of the enormous oil-and gasoline transportation network that fed the war was the oceangoing tanker, supplemented on land by pipelines, railroad tank cars, and trucks. But for combat vehicles on the move, another link was crucial—smaller containers that could be carried and poured by hand and moved around a battle zone by trucks.

Hitler knew this. He perceived early on that the weakest link in his plans for blitzkrieg using his panzer divisions was fuel supply. He ordered his staff to design a fuel container that would minimize gasoline losses under combat conditions. As a result the German army had thousands of jerrycans, as they came to be called, stored and ready when hostilities began in 1939.

The jerrycan had been developed under the strictest secrecy, and its unique features were many. It was flat-sided and rectangular in shape, consisting of two halves welded together as in a typical automobile gasoline tank. It had three handles, enabling one man to carry two cans and pass one to another man in bucket-brigade fashion. Its capacity was approximately five U.S. gallons; its weight filled, forty-five pounds. Thanks to an air chamber at the top, it would float on water if dropped overboard or from a plane. Its short spout was secured with a snap closure that could be propped open for pouring, making unnecessary any funnel or opener. A gasket made the mouth leak proof. An air-breathing tube from the spout to the air space kept the pouring smooth. And most important, the can’s inside was lined with an impervious plastic material developed for the insides of steel beer barrels. This enabled the jerrycan to be used alternately for gasoline and water.

Early in the summer of 1939, this secret weapon began a roundabout odyssey into American hands. An American engineer named Paul Pleiss, finishing up a manufacturing job in Berlin, persuaded a German colleague to join him on a vacation trip overland to India. The two bought an automobile chassis and built a body for it. As they prepared to leave on their journey, they realized that they had no provision for emergency water. The German engineer knew of and had access to thousands of jerrycans stored at Tempelhof Airport. He simply took three and mounted them on the underside of the car.

The two drove across eleven national borders without incident and were halfway across India when Field Marshal Goering sent a plane to take the German engineer back home. Before departing, the engineer compounded his treason by giving Pleiss complete specifications for the jerrycan’s manufacture. Pleiss continued on alone to Calcutta. Then he put the car in storage and returned to Philadelphia.

Back in the United States, Pleiss told military officials about the container, but without a sample can he could stir no interest, even though the war was now well under way. The risk involved in having the cans removed from the car and shipped from Calcutta seemed too great, so he eventually had the complete vehicle sent to him, via Turkey and the Cape of Good Hope. It arrived in New York in the summer of 1940 with the three jerrycans intact. Pleiss immediately sent one of the cans to Washington. The War Department looked at it but unwisely decided that an updated version of their World War I container would be good enough. That was a cylindrical ten-gallon can with two screw closures. It required a wrench and a funnel for pouring.

That one jerrycan in the Army’s possession was later sent to Camp Holabird, in Maryland. There it was poorly redesigned; the only features retained were the size, shape, and handles. The welded circumferential joint was replaced with rolled seams around the bottom and one side. Both a wrench and a funnel were required for its use. And it now had no lining. As any petroleum engineer knows, it is unsafe to store gasoline in a container with rolled seams. This ersatz can did not win wide acceptance.

The British first encountered the jerrycan during the German invasion of Norway, in 1940, and gave it its English name (the Germans were, of course, the “Jerries”). Later that year Pleiss was in London and was asked by British officers if he knew anything about the can’s design and manufacture. He ordered the second of his three jerrycans flown to London. Steps were taken to manufacture exact duplicates of it.

Two years later the United States was still oblivious of the can. Then, in September 1942, two quality-control officers posted to American refineries in the Mideast ran smack into the problems being created by ignoring the jerrycan. I was one of those two. Passing through Cairo two weeks before the start of the Battle of El Alamein, we learned that the British wanted no part of a planned U.S. Navy can; as far as they were concerned, the only container worth having was the Jerrycan, even though their only supply was those captured in battle. The British were bitter; two years after the invasion of Norway there was still no evidence that their government had done anything about the jerrycan.

My colleague and I learned quickly about the jerrycan’s advantages and the Allied can’s costly disadvantages, and we sent a cable to naval officials in Washington stating that 40 percent of all the gasoline sent to Egypt was being lost through spillage and evaporation. We added that a detailed report would follow. The 40 percent figure was actually a guess intended to provoke alarm, but it worked. A cable came back immediately requesting confirmation.

We then arranged a visit to several fuel-handling depots at the rear of Montgomery’s army and found there that conditions were indeed appalling. Fuel arrived by rail from the sea in fifty-five-gallon steel drums with rolled seams and friction-sealed metallic mouths. The drums were handled violently by local laborers. Many leaked. The next link in the chain was the infamous five-gallon “petrol tin.” This was a square can of tin plate that had been used for decades to supply lamp kerosene. It was hardly useful for gasoline. In the hot desert sun, it tended to swell up, burst at the seams, and leak. Since a funnel was needed for pouring, spillage was also a problem.

Allied soldiers in Africa knew that the only gasoline container worth having was German. Similar tins were carried on Liberator bombers in flight. They leaked out perhaps a third of the fuel they carried. Because of this, General Wavell’s defeat of the Italians in North Africa in 1940 had come to naught. His planes and combat vehicles had literally run out of gas. Likewise in 1941, General Auchinleck’s victory over Rommel had withered away. In 1942 General Montgomery saw to it that he had enough supplies, including gasoline, to whip Rommel in spite of terrific wastage. And he was helped by captured jerrycans.

The British historian Desmond Young later confirmed the great importance of oil cans in the early African part of the war. “No one who did not serve in the desert,” he wrote, “can realize to what extent the difference between complete and partial success rested on the simplest item of our equipment—and the worst. Whoever sent our troops into desert warfare with the [five-gallon] petrol tin has much to answer for. General Auchinleck estimates that this ‘flimsy and ill constructed container’ led to the loss of thirty per cent of petrol between base and consumer. … The overall loss was almost incalculable. To calculate the tanks destroyed, the number of men who were killed or went into captivity because of shortage of petrol at some crucial moment, the ships and merchant seamen lost in carrying it, would be quite impossible.”

After my colleague and I made our report, a new five-gallon container under consideration in Washington was canceled. Meanwhile the British were finally gearing up for mass production. Two million British jerrycans were sent to North Africa in early 1943, and by early 1944 they were being manufactured in the Middle East. Since the British had such a head start, the Allies agreed to let them produce all the cans needed for the invasion of Europe. Millions were ready by D-day. By V-E day some twenty-one million Allied jerrycans had been scattered all over Europe. President Roosevelt observed in November 1944, “Without these cans it would have been impossible for our armies to cut their way across France at a lightning pace which exceeded the German Blitz of 1940.”

In Washington little about the jerrycan appears in the official record. A military report says simply, “A sample of the jerry can was brought to the office of the Quartermaster General in the summer of 1940.”

Richard M. Daniel is a retired commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve and a chemical engineer.

Originally posted 2019-10-02 10:39:45.

Immigration – AGAIN!

Oaky, here we go again with the immigration issue. What’s the issue? Well, to begin, we don’t have an immigration policy in this country. Oh, forgive me, yes we do have a system, but can anyone tell me exactly what that system is? I am sure we all know immigrants who applied through the “system”  and took them years to be vetted and eventually allowed to become an American citizen. 

But the “system” we have today is based solely on political leanings. Mexicans at our southern border will eventually become democrats,. Come on, you know it, everybody knows it, especially since the creatures in the swamp will kowtow to their every needs, provide them with all sorts of benefits paid for by you and me. So why would they not vote for those who accepted them? They surely would not vote for those of us who try our best to keep the interlopers out! Agreed?

Okay, so know what about Cuban immigrants. Which way would they lean? Ahh, now we see a different set of immigrants and a different “system.” So, does it not surprise anyone that the douchebag in charge, who by the way, happens to be a Cuban immigrant himself said they will not be allowed ashore in America. 

This whole immigration thing is laughable and very simple. If you lean left come on in, if you lean right. get the hell out of here.

About this thing called immigration

by bunkerville

US immigration is unnecessarily complex. It has evolved into a patently unfair system to everyone who enters the system honestly and with good intent — who seeks lawful admission.  It favors those who skip ahead of everyone else and go to the head of the line.  US officials created this problem; illegal invaders only take advantage of an opportunity handed to them by political leaders who are either nefarious in their intent or incompetent.  You know, people like Biden/Harris whom the American people overwhelmingly elected. If our immigration system is broken, then we broke it.

This must change.  No one has a right to come here, but if immigrants knock on our door, it must be in accordance with our laws and procedures.  Yes, we need a border wall, but we also need a commitment to our immigration system.  No one must come here by cutting in front of the line.  No one must come here who cannot contribute to the American economy, who will not embrace American values, and who will not assimilate American society.  No “child” must come here without their mother or father.

There is no question that the United States of America is the best place on the planet to live, but does that mean that everyone who lives in a nation less vibrant than our own has a case for political asylum?  If everyone who lives in a country ruled by petty dictators or religious despots has an asylum claim, then literally two-thirds of the world’s population will soon show up at our door.  There ARE limits, after all, to the number of immigrants our economy can support.  People who do not/will not speak our language, who are not educationally prepared for the challenges of our economy, and who know less about our values than they do about speaking in English simply do not have a realistic expectation of success.  Note: most Latin Americans are illiterate in their own language. At some point, we must acknowledge that there are (pragmatically) limited opportunities for goat-herders-turned taxi drivers in Newark.

Although with that said, from a historical point of view, the cultural differences between Spanish and Anglo immigrants could not be more unambiguous.  I can readily see why Democrats are anxious to accept tens of thousands of Latinos as potential citizens: they are far more inclined to do whatever the government tells them than people of British stock. It also occurs to me that for every individual who runs away from their own country, whatever those conditions are, there is one less person available to fight for meaningful change in the land of their birth and cultural heritage.

Secretary Mallorcus told us that Cubans must not be allowed to come to the United States.  Shouldn’t this standard apply to every immigrant who is trying to jump ahead in line or who files a frivolous petition for asylum?  Should we return all such people to their home country (or, as he suggested, a third country) until US officials process their claim in an orderly fashion?  Note: I’m not sure how French-speaking Haiti would be a good fit for immigrants from Guatemala, but that was his idea, not mine.  I suspect there are few Spanish-speaking countries in the Americas willing to accept Guatemala’s problems.  Nor should we.  What we observe unfolding along our southern borders is only a “humanitarian crisis” because we’ve made it into one.

Sending people back to their home country for processing reinforces the traditional process of putting the names of people hoping to immigrate to the US on a waiting list, which is the only way we have of properly vetting applicants for admission to the United States.  There is an exception to every rule, of course, but exception must not become the rule.  We must maintain an orderly process of immigration.

Notice that tens of thousands of people, having spent their entire lives living in a communist/socialist country, suddenly appear on our southern border demanding entry to a country in which half of the population can support a communist/socialist administration.  Is this not an example of politically compliant people trying to leap from a frying pan into a fire?  I find the whole situation very odd, and I wonder why we Americans think we need more communists in our country rather than fewer.

Mustang also blogs at Fix Bayonets and Thoughts From Afar