I know not what years my readers served our once great Corps, but I am of the vintage of the writer of the article below. He and I have history that goes back to 1966-67 and carried forward to the late 1980’s.
Our first tour together was in Vietnam in 2/1. I “think” he was a lieutenant, but I could be wrong. As a lowly sergeant in Echo company I know not his assignment; I seem to recall he was a company XO? I attempted to research his assignment in several places, but his all Bio’s aren’t that specific.
The next time was in 9th Marines on Okinawa 1977-78. I was a captain serving as the regimentals Asst OPSO, and he was a major serving as the OPSO with 2/9. That was the start of my feelings concerning this officer. It’s all in the book should you desire more information.
The next time I was a colonel serving as the Training Director at LFTCLant in Norfolk. He was a frocked BG serving as the Asst CG of 2d Marine Division at CLNC. An incident during this tour solidified my opinion of him that still carries on today.
I did see him again a few years ago at a Naples MCL Birthday Ball. I approached him to simply say hello and he did not recognize me. Guess I never made much of an impression on him. He developed the nick name of “Chuckie Cheese Krulak” by some Marines, including me!
To flush out some memory cells, the one accomplishment he enjoys boasting about was he takes credit for establishing the “crucible” in recruit training.
His daddy was Lieutenant General Victor Krulak (aka “The Brute”). In 1964 he was assigned as the Commanding General of all Marine Forces in the Pacific theater (CG FMF Pac), which of course, included the war in Vietnam. Rumor had it he was looking forward to becoming CMC, but in 1967, LBJ choose Leonard F. Chapman instead — a wise choice in my view. The next year Daddy retired.
Now if you think Daddy did not have something to do with the son becoming CMC, you live under a rock. Seriously!
Taken from Project Syndicate, a newsletter purported to provide “a broad range of views by the world’s foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. ” However, I shall let you decide on their statement
The disproportionate share of insurrectionists at the US Capitol with a military background are not representative of the armed forces as a whole. Nonetheless, as the divide between the military and US civilian society grows, even more attention will need to be paid to weeding out extremists.
BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA – Revelations that the insurrection at the US Capitol included many former and current members of America’s armed forces have been met with alarm. And yet, as a 35-year veteran and retired commandant of the US Marine Corps, I saw the events of January 6 as the predictable culmination of a growing disconnect between the US military and civilian society.
Once home, many veterans joined organizations like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion, where they were surrounded by like-minded people who had served, suffered, and sacrificed together. Jobs were plentiful, and Americans took pride in their country and their military.
Similarly, in the Korean War less than a decade later, though America was never “all in,” it nonetheless had clear strategic goals. As in WWII, US servicemen and women did a remarkable job and came home to an appreciative country.
But then came Vietnam, where most Americans never really knew what their country was fighting for. When the conflict finally came to its ignominious end in April 1975, there was no victory to celebrate (and it certainly was not fireworks that flew from the roof of the US embassy in Saigon). Unlike previous generations, those who fought in Vietnam were not honored for their service and sacrifice. Equally important, the public backlash against the war led to the end of military conscription, which fundamentally transformed the relationship between the military and the American people. The rift created by the shift to an all-volunteer military has grown wider ever since.
After Vietnam, America’s next major war was Desert Storm, in 1990. Again, clear strategic goals were met in a dramatic fashion, and US servicemen and women returned to a proud country – on the cusp of becoming the world’s only remaining superpower with the collapse of the Soviet Union the following year.
Yet by the end of the Gulf War, globalization and technological change had already begun to reshape American society. Old-line industries were being upended, and many manufacturing jobs were disappearing. Although immigration had only a minor effect on the big economic picture, it became a hot-button political issue for those who found themselves out of work. At the same time, a new wave of social-justice issues also started gaining momentum during this period. As a microcosm of America, the US military was not immune to these political dynamics.
It was against this political, social, and economic backdrop that America embarked on its “long war.” Much like Vietnam, the “War on Terror” lacks clear strategic goals and has lost public buy-in over time. Many of those who have fought it subscribe to the apocryphal refrain that while the military was at war, America was at Walmart. After serving multiple tours in Iraq or Afghanistan, servicemen and women who sacrificed years of their lives have received little recognition.
In his 1973 book, The American Way of War, the historian Russell F. Weigley quoted US General George C. Marshall as saying, “a democracy cannot fight a Seven Years’ War,” because any protracted conflict eventually will lose the support of the electorate. The longer a war runs – particularly when it becomes cross-generational – the greater the disconnect between the typical citizen and the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who serve.
he War on Terror is an abiding case in point, helping to shed light on the unrest and extremism that burst into public view at the Capitol. A small minority of alienated former and active service members have concluded that something is wrong in the America for which they fought and sacrificed. The past two presidential elections have fueled this discontent and convinced some that they have a duty to confront perceived domestic “enemies.” Political leaders, meanwhile, have exploited these sentiments for their own advantage.
The COVID-19 pandemic also contributed to a perfect storm. As the economy shed jobs – particularly at the lower end of the income distribution – face-to-face interactions were no longer possible. With deepening social atomization, it has become more difficult to experience solidarity. Angst or boredom have afflicted many, and some have found refuge in online communities espousing extremist ideologies. The 2020 presidential election brought the situation to a boiling point. A sitting commander-in-chief openly sought to overturn a free and fair election with lies and intimidation, and a small minority of his acolytes answered his call to action. Really?
But Americans should have faith. Notwithstanding a few outliers, the US military is unwavering in its support of, and dedication to, the US Constitution. Those in its ranks who harbor extremist views will be discovered and dealt with appropriately. Looking ahead, recruitment methods will be strengthened to weed out extremists. Recruiters will have to look not only at candidates’ social-media activity but also at their “body paint” (tattoos) and other potential indicators of extremist or racist sympathies. Interviews will need to be more pointed, and education for active members improved.
While the troubling trajectory of US military-civil relations has created fertile ground for some members to be radicalized, it is important to remember that the insurrectionists represent an exception. The US military has defended American democracy for centuries and will continue to do so, in keeping with our noblest traditions. Yes, I agree general, you can bet on it!
In sum, I categorize this fellow in the same company as Mattis, Allen, and all the other Kool Aid drinking generals viewing the military through their woke eyes and ears. Krulak says the recruiters will take care of this supposed problem. LOL What does he know about recruiting — Nothing!
The unlearned lessons of history condemn present and future generations.
Good afternoon my fellow patriots and welcome to 2021. I did not stay awake to watch the ball drop as I fear this year will be worse than the last. Will our once great nation be able to survive 2021 is the pressing question. I would encourage everyone to click on the link below and read my fellow Marine’s post on his blog. In addition to be a friend and Marine brother, he is an historian, and a damn good one at that.
So many Americans do not and will not understand what this great American military leader said in his farewell speech. Why? Because they never served, they never smelled cordite, or never carried a wounded soldier or Marine to safety
Reading the post seemed to awaken a spirit within me and the realization of one of the reasons I am so upset and distraught with what is happening to us. I would also encourage you to read the two comments left to his post as they add much to what Mustang has written. Lord, please help us, Amen.
Did you Marines? Sorry, but must admit I failed to do so; too much going in our country right now.I joined the Corps in 1958, so there were tons of the “The Chosin Few” in the Corps, mostly SNCO’s. Don’t know about officers since back in those days us “Snuffies” never saw much of them; we didn’t know where they were, we assumed the golf course. My 1stSgt in 1965 (O’Grady) was one of them. He wore three Purple Hearts on his chest, and was one helluva leader and mentor for a young sergeant. Never talked about the Reservoir, his chest full of ribbons said it allGeorge Will does them justice!
Seventy Thanksgivings ago, Pfc. Warren Wiedhahn was 21, far from home and freezing. During a winter of record cold, nighttime temperatures were more than 30 degrees below zero in the North Korean mountains. The day after Thanksgiving, as Wiedhahn peered at the ridge across the valley from his listening post, suddenly “whistles and bells and bugles” — modes of communication for a People’s Liberation Army that also used Mongolian ponies and camels — revealed that hordes of Chinese soldiers wanted to kill him.
He says he and his fellow Marines burned out the barrels of their machine guns and ran out of ammunition that day, and that much worse was to come. He had craved adventure, and found it.
Born in Upstate New York, too late for World War II, he, like many teenagers then, thought he had missed an adventure. And he thought his brother-in-law, who had been wounded at Guadalcanal, “looked good in his [Marine dress] blues.” So, Wiedhahn enlisted in the Marine Corps after his Methodist mother made him swear on her Bible that, after his three-year commitment, he would go to college.
After a deployment in China, he was stationed at Camp Pendleton north of San Diego, where on June 24, 1950, a bartender asked him and a friend, “Are you Marines? Better get up to Pendleton because you’re going to war.” Told that North Korea had invaded South Korea, Wiedhahn’ s friend wondered where Korea was. God, Mark Twain supposedly said, created war so that Americans would learn geography.
His unit of the 1st Marine Division immediately plunged into combat at Pusan on the peninsula’s southern tip, where South Korean and U.S. forces were besieged. On Sept. 15, his regiment participated in the most daring operation of Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s 44-year career, the amphibious landing at Inchon, some 200 miles north of Pusan, near Seoul. And near North Korea, where MacArthur soon made the worst blunder of his career — dividing his forces while ignoring evidence that China would intervene in force.
MacArthur had told President Harry S. Truman at Wake Island on Oct. 15 that “organized resistance will be terminated by Thanksgiving.” Eager to reach the Yalu River along the North Korea-China border, MacArthur ordered the 1st Marine Division to make an amphibious landing on North Korea’s eastern shore and march north to the Chosin Reservoir.
There it became cut off, surrounded by 100,000 of the eventually 300,000 Chinese troops on the peninsula. The 1st Division’s commander, Gen. Oliver P. Smith, said, “We’re going to come out like Marines, fighting!” Intrepid airmen, pushing their aircraft to their limits in the thin air of the mountains, parachuted in enormous components for rebuilding a blown bridge, a harrowing tale told in Hampton Sides’ magnificent history of the Chosin campaign, “On Desperate Ground.”
Wiedhahn says “what saved us” in the fighting withdrawal from Chosin was “the World War II leadership,” the noncommissioned Marine officers who had fought from Guadalcanal to Peleliu to Okinawa. And Navy and Marine aircraft flying off carriers. In retirement, Wiedhahn still runs a tour business, taking veterans to battle sites from Belleau Wood in France to, next summer, Iwo Jima. On a trip to Beijing, he met four People’s Liberation Army veterans who had fought at Chosin. When he asked them what they had feared most, they instantly replied, “Your aircraft.”
Wiedhahn recalls that during two weeks of nonstop fighting, some of it hand to hand, during the march to safety, medics, overwhelmed by severely wounded Marines, had to practice triage medicine: Dying Marines, “put outside the tent, froze to death.”
After the Marines — including the father of Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 2015 to 2019 — reached the North Korean city of Hungnam and ships that took them to safety, the ships returned for the “Christmas miracle.” Between Dec. 15 and 24, more than 86,000 refugees were evacuated to South Korea, including the parents of Moon Jae-in, the current president of South Korea.
Since ending a 32-year Marine career (mom was content when he became an officer) that included 1968-1969 near Vietnam’s demilitarized zone, Wiedhahn has lived in Northern Virginia, in a community with many immigrants from Korea — “all good friends and all good neighbors.” He is president of the dwindling ranks of “The Chosin Few,” the organization of that battle’s veterans.
Trim and energetic at 91, Wiedhahn had little to be thankful for 70 years ago. Today, his nation should give thanks for him and others like him, including hundreds who are still in North Korea’s mountain.
George F. Will writes a twice-weekly column on politics and domestic and foreign affairs. He began his column with The Post in 1974, and he received the Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 1977. His latest book, “The Conservative Sensibility,” was released in June 2019.
BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA – Revelations that the insurrection at the US Capitol included many former and current members of America’s armed forces have been met with alarm. And yet, as a 35-year veteran and retired commandant of the US Marine Corps, I saw the events of January 6 as the predictable culmination of a growing disconnect between the US military and civilian society.
Once home, many veterans joined organizations like the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion, where they were surrounded by like-minded people who had served, suffered, and sacrificed together. Jobs were plentiful, and Americans took pride in their country and their military.
Similarly, in the Korean War less than a decade later, though America was never “all in,” it nonetheless had clear strategic goals. As in WWII, US servicemen and women did a remarkable job and came home to an appreciative country.
But then came Vietnam, where most Americans never really knew what their country was fighting for. When the conflict finally came to its ignominious end in April 1975, there was no victory to celebrate (and it certainly was not fireworks that flew from the roof of the US embassy in Saigon). Unlike previous generations, those who fought in Vietnam were not honored for their service and sacrifice. Equally important, the public backlash against the war led to the end of military conscription, which fundamentally transformed the relationship between the military and the American people. The rift created by the shift to an all-volunteer military has grown wider ever since.
After Vietnam, America’s next major war was Desert Storm, in 1990. Again, clear strategic goals were met in a dramatic fashion, and US servicemen and women returned to a proud country – on the cusp of becoming the world’s only remaining superpower with the collapse of the Soviet Union the following year.
Yet by the end of the Gulf War, globalization and technological change had already begun to reshape American society. Old-line industries were being upended, and many manufacturing jobs were disappearing. Although immigration had only a minor effect on the big economic picture, it became a hot-button political issue for those who found themselves out of work. At the same time, a new wave of social-justice issues also started gaining momentum during this period. As a microcosm of America, the US military was not immune to these political dynamics.
It was against this political, social, and economic backdrop that America embarked on its “long war.” Much like Vietnam, the “War on Terror” lacks clear strategic goals and has lost public buy-in over time. Many of those who have fought it subscribe to the apocryphal refrain that while the military was at war, America was at Walmart. After serving multiple tours in Iraq or Afghanistan, servicemen and women who sacrificed years of their lives have received little recognition.
In his 1973 book, The American Way of War, the historian Russell F. Weigley quoted US General George C. Marshall as saying, “a democracy cannot fight a Seven Years’ War,” because any protracted conflict eventually will lose the support of the electorate. The longer a war runs – particularly when it becomes cross-generational – the greater the disconnect between the typical citizen and the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who serve.
he War on Terror is an abiding case in point, helping to shed light on the unrest and extremism that burst into public view at the Capitol. A small minority of alienated former and active service members have concluded that something is wrong in the America for which they fought and sacrificed. The past two presidential elections have fueled this discontent and convinced some that they have a duty to confront perceived domestic “enemies.” Political leaders, meanwhile, have exploited these sentiments for their own advantage.
The COVID-19 pandemic also contributed to a perfect storm. As the economy shed jobs – particularly at the lower end of the income distribution – face-to-face interactions were no longer possible. With deepening social atomization, it has become more difficult to experience solidarity. Angst or boredom have afflicted many, and some have found refuge in online communities espousing extremist ideologies. The 2020 presidential election brought the situation to a boiling point. A sitting commander-in-chief openly sought to overturn a free and fair election with lies and intimidation, and a small minority of his acolytes answered his call to action. Really?
But Americans should have faith. Notwithstanding a few outliers, the US military is unwavering in its support of, and dedication to, the US Constitution. Those in its ranks who harbor extremist views will be discovered and dealt with appropriately. Looking ahead, recruitment methods will be strengthened to weed out extremists. Recruiters will have to look not only at candidates’ social-media activity but also at their “body paint” (tattoos) and other potential indicators of extremist or racist sympathies. Interviews will need to be more pointed, and education for active members improved.
While the troubling trajectory of US military-civil relations has created fertile ground for some members to be radicalized, it is important to remember that the insurrectionists represent an exception. The US military has defended American democracy for centuries and will continue to do so, in keeping with our noblest traditions. Yes, I agree general, you can bet on it!
CHARLES C. KRULAK
Writing for PS since 2020
4 Commentaries
In sum, I categorize this fellow in the same company as Mattis, Allen, and all the other Kool Aid drinking generals viewing the military through their woke eyes and ears. Krulak says the recruiters will take care of this supposed problem. LOL What does he know about recruiting — Nothing!