Supreme commanding authority of a military
POPULARITY
Categories
Commander in Chief in Arlington, Fetterman on The View, the biggest Bitcoin arrest, and snow across the country. Plus, Bill's Message of the Day, on Trump's $2,000 tariff payment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
This week, we honor veterans of long ago, as well as those who still live and walk among us. Their sacrifice has helped to secure the freedoms that we enjoy today. One of the key features of American democracy is civilian control of the military. We, the people, elect the Congress which controls the military's budget, conducts oversight, and declares war, as well as the the president, who serves as the military's Commander in Chief. President Donald Trump, in his second term in office, has signaled a return to the military's core mission. Here to talk about what that return looks like is Wilson Beaver, an Army Veteran and Senior Policy Advisor, here at the Heritage Foundation.—Follow Wilson Beaver on X: https://x.com/WilsonCBeaverMore about Heritage: www.heritage.org—Have thoughts? Let us know at heritageexplains@heritage.org
Sen. Marsha Blackburn introduced legislation that would bar leftists in the military from removing official portraits of the Commander-in-Chief. Several bases, run by far-leftists, have refused to post portraits of President TrumpSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Welcome to today's “Identity in the Battle” series, where we continue our exploration of the powerful image Paul gives us in Ephesians 6: the Armor of God. Stephanie Rousselle dives into the spiritual realities of our identity in Christ and how we're equipped to stand strong in spiritual warfare. In our previous episode, (episode 415) we looked at the first few pieces of this armor. So, how do we live victoriously through our spiritual battles? Let's see what Paul has to teach us through his letter to the Ephesians. Context and Purpose Paul sets the stage by reminding us that as followers of Christ, we're engaged in a real, everyday spiritual battle. The “Armor of God” is not just a metaphor; it's a God-given resource to ground us in our identity, empower us, and unite us as the body of Christ. The Shield of Faith Paul's words to the Ephesians brings the shield to life. In Greek, the word is literally “door,” emphasizing its large, protective nature—big enough to hide a soldier entirely. Roman soldiers would lock shields together, signifying unity and teamwork. Alone, we may stand vulnerable, but joined with others in faith, we're nearly impenetrable. The shield also features hinges—faith is “active,” meant to be flexible, adapting to every circumstance. The shield extinguishes “all the flaming arrows of the evil one.” These arrows primarily serve as distractions. Satan often uses “fiery darts” not just to harm, but mostly to divert our attention, separating us from our main purpose and leaving us vulnerable to further attacks. Stephanie reminds us to recognize life's distractions and stay focused—don't mistake the fire for the real enemy! We are challenged to take stock of how many times our faith has shielded us from attack, and to recognize each as a testimony to God's faithfulness. The Helmet of Salvation Just as medicine must be applied—not merely owned—salvation transforms us when we “put it on” daily. The helmet protects our minds from the enemy's lies, renewing our thoughts through daily application. Our salvation is both a present reality and a future inheritance; we're called to live now with the confidence, hope, and abundance Christ offers, not a mindset of spiritual scarcity. The Sword of the Spirit The “sword” is the Word of God—both Scripture and Jesus Himself. Scripture is not merely ink on paper, but alive and active, shaping us as we wield its truths. So, memorizing, speaking, and applying Scripture is our offensive weapon, capable of cutting through lies, confusion, and spiritual strongholds. Prayer as Our Ultimate Weapon Finally, Paul underscores prayer as the glue of our spiritual arsenal. Prayer is not a formality; it's the relational heartbeat with our Commander-in-Chief, Jesus. To kneel in prayer is the only way to stand firm against the enemy. Conclusion: Victory and Identity As believers, we're not called to fight alone. Armor is meant to be worn in unity, our eyes fixed on Jesus, our victorious leader. We're warriors today—clothed for battle—but one day, we'll trade our armor for bridal garments, celebrating our eternal victory in Christ. Until then, let's stand firm, united, and equipped with every spiritual blessing, living out our new identity in Him. Reflection: What distractions (flaming arrows) are keeping you from focusing on your true spiritual battle? Where do you need to “lock shields” with others? How can you apply the helmet of salvation and wield the sword of the Spirit more intentionally this week? Enjoying these reflection questions? Consider the accompanying workbook as a resource to go deeper, at https://www.gospelspice.com/identity ----- IDENTITY IN THE BATTLE WORKBOOK ------ You have the option to go beyond listening to this series, and to participate actively. This exclusive Gospel Spice Ministries resource is available at gospelspice.com/identity . You will receive a downloadable, printable workbook containing listening guide for each of the 6 episodes in this series, space for note taking, and discussion questions if you want to do this study with a friend! What better way to enjoy a cup of coffee with a friend this season, than to discuss your identity in the battle together? So, grab a friend or family member, or someone to mentor or be mentored by, and signup together. Every week, Stephanie shares truth from Scripture and invites you to dig deeper in your faith to delight in the glory of God. PLAY IT FORWARD by SHARING the link with friends and family PAY IT FORWARD by supporting us financially PRAY IT FORWARD by praying for us and those you share it with! Find out more at gospelspice.com We invite you to check out the first episode of each of our series, and decide which one you will want to start with. Go to gospelspice.com for more, and go especially to gospelspice.com/podcast to enjoy our guests! Interested in our blog? Click here: gospelspice.com/blog Identity in the battle | Ephesians https://www.podcastics.com/episode/372022/link/ Malachi: Messenger to Messiah https://www.podcastics.com/episode/356130/link/ Wisdom from the Book of Proverbs https://www.podcastics.com/episode/324347/link/ Come to the Table | The Feasts Jesus celebrated https://www.podcastics.com/episode/309956/link/ THERE ARE SEVERAL WAYS TO PARTNER WITH GOSPEL SPICE TODAY! First, PAY Gospel Spice Forward: Give a tax-deductible gift so others can experience our ministry for free, just like you! You can pay it forward with any debit, credit card, or via PayPal. See below for more details about your impact. Go to https://www.gospelspice.com/payitforward to make a one-time gift, or set up a monthly donation. Also, PLAY Gospel Spice Forward: SHARE the podcast and the studies with your friends and family. FOLLOW, RATE & REVIEW on your favorite podcast app (leave a comment + a star rating on Apple Podcast, Spotify, Pandora, IHeart, Google Podcast, etc…). It REALLY is the best way to help others find this content-rich podcast. And, last but not least, PRAY Gospel Spice Forward: We pray for you weekly. We covet your prayers for our ministry, the thousands we reach, and our team! Contact us to let us know you are praying for us! Another way to partner with us is to purchase our workbooks and online Bible studies. We keep them at the lowest possible cost, but they require a lot of work from us! For example, - a complete Bible Study requires an average of 500 man-hours. - a workbook for a series requires almost 100 man-hours. MORE ABOUT PARTNERING WITH US FINANCIALLY: Gospel Spice Ministries is a non-profit organization registered under the tax-exempt 501c3 status. Go to https://www.gospelspice.com/payitforward to make a one-time gift, or set up a monthly donation. Our goal is to provide in-depth, high-quality, free Bible resources for all. They are free, but expensive to create! We need your financial support to keep producing and distributing them. Please pay Gospel Spice forward today! For example, a podcast episode takes close to 10 hours of work (and we release 2 each week). They come to you completely free, but we would truly love your support. We want the money to go to those who really need it. Once our operating costs are paid, 100% of your donation is redistributed to our partners who fight human trafficking. Each year, we aim to give as much as we can. For example, Stephanie works more than full time for Gospel Spice, entirely for free. All board members and volunteers are donating time. We limit our operational expenses to the bare minimum. Your pay-it-forward donations are tax-deductible under IRS Section 170. We want to be the best possible stewards of your financial support. Thank you! Go to https://www.gospelspice.com/payitforward to make a one-time gift, or set up a monthly donation. Support us on Gospel Spice, PayPal and Venmo!
ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl joins The Daily Signal's Rob Bluey to discuss his highly anticipated and bestselling new book, “Retribution: Donald Trump and the Campaign That Changed America.” In this one-on-one interview, Karl reveals behind-the-scenes details from the 2024 campaign trail and his contentious relationship with the commander-in-chief. Karl has covered Donald Trump for over 30 years and spoke regularly to the president during the 2024 campaign. In “Retribution,” he takes readers inside one of the most extraordinary political comebacks in American history—and what it means for the future of American politics. Karl is the author of four New York Times bestsellers: “Retribution,” “Tired of Winning,” “Betrayal,” and “Front Row at the Trump Show.” He is a Pulitzer Prize finalist and has won multiple journalism awards. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Preacher: Sam Powers James 5:1-6 James 5:1-6 | You Rich from CrossPointe Coast on Vimeo. You Rich… (v1) Riches, Garments, and Gold (v2-3a) Five Accusations (v3b-6) The Lord of Hosts (v4) True Treasure - Matt. 13:44 2 Implications: A Sobering Warning about Wealth An Encouragement to the Suffering. John Calvin James… has a regard to the faithful, that they, hearing of the miserable end of the rich, might not envy their fortune, and also that knowing that God would be the avenger of the wrongs they suffered, they might with a calm and resigned mind bear them. Thomas Manton The Lord is a Lord of hosts, commander-in-chief of all the creatures, angels, men, thunders, lightnings, storms, showers, lions, fevers, & they are all at his beck, waiting for his word: ‘He can send lightnings, that they may go; they say unto him, Here we are Special Guest: Sam Powers.
Army's 20–17 victory over Air Force sets the stage for another Commander-in-Chief showdown with Navy. Price Atkinson and Steve Carney recap the Black Knights' last-second win, Jeff Monken's "bold" play-calling, and the defensive standouts who made it happen. The hosts also dive into Navy's upset loss at North Texas, where freshman Caleb Hawkins ran for nearly 200 yards to end the Mids' 10-game streak. With all three academies back in action, the crew previews Army–Temple, Air Force–San José State, and Navy–Notre Dame.This episode is sponsored in part by TicketSmarter:Use promo code LWOS10 to receive $10 off purchases of $100 or moreUse promo code LWOS20 to receive $20 off purchases of $300 or moreThink smarter. TicketSmarter
Oregon-based Federal Judge Karen Immelgut, already ruled against once by her 9th Circuit Court of Appeals superiors, has once again ruled after a three day kangaroo court “trial,” that it is she, an unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior district court judge who has the constitutional authority to determine whether calling out the National Guard to defend federal personnel and property is warranted—rather than the US President, to whom Article II of the Constitution assigns the entirety of the Commander in Chief authority, and the Congress, which has delegated its own Article I Militia Powers to the President for precisely these purposes. Even as these National Guard cases from the 7th Circuit (Chicago) and 9th Circuit (Oregon) are being considered by the US Supreme Court, these insurrectionist unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior district trial court judges afflicted with rabid Trump Derangement Syndrome continue to act in “Bad behavior” in violation of their Article III obligations for employment on the federal bench. In addition, their repeated partisan rulings are more than sufficient grounds for impeachment by the House—which should be happening TODAY—as well as the threat of conviction and removal by the Senate.
The Black Knight Nation crew breaks down Army's Commander in Chief's walkoff win at Air Force.
On this week's episode, Nathan, Gita, and Chris bathe in the afterglow of Aftermath's first-ever in-person party before hinting at big changes to come (the good kind) as a result of the site's upcoming second anniversary. Then we discuss the United States government's sudden gaming fixation, following a week of Halo memes from White House and Department Of Homeland Security accounts, as well as JD Vance's embarrassing reveal that he not only stays abreast of Twitch drama but is fluent in CollarGate, a widespread nontroversy about Hasan Piker turning out to be a secret dog torturer. After that, we move on to Amazon's devastating layoff of 14,000 people, including many of those working on New World, a once-popular MMO that's now being wound down. As it turns out, like many others, Amazon tried to take on Steam, and also like many others, it failed miserably. Finally, in honor of the surprise 3.0 update, we share our Animal Crossing: New Horizon opinions (Nintendo was too inspired by cozy games, a genre it basically invented with… Animal Crossing.)Credits- Hosts: Nathan Grayson, Gita Jackson, & Chris Person- Podcast Production & Ads: Multitude- Subscribe to Aftermath!About The ShowAftermath Hours is the flagship podcast of Aftermath, a worker-owned, subscription-based website covering video games, the internet, and everything that comes after from journalists who previously worked at Kotaku, Vice, and The Washington Post. Each week, games journalism veterans Luke Plunkett, Nathan Grayson, Chris Person, Riley MacLeod, and Gita Jackson – though not always all at once, because that's too many people for a podcast – break down video game news, Remember Some Games, and learn about Chris' frankly incredible number of special interests. Sometimes we even bring on guests from both inside and outside the video game industry! I don't know what else to tell you; it's a great time. Simply by reading this description, you're already wasting time that you could be spending listening to the show. Head to aftermath.site for more info.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Don sits down with political strategist Mike Nellis for a brutally honest breakdown of the state of the nation, and it's not pretty. They dive into Trump's endless stream of lies, the cruelty at the core of MAGA's policies, and how this movement's obsession with power and punishment is tearing the country apart. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In this Halloween edition of Yards and Stripes, Price Atkinson and Steve Carney recap Navy's seventh straight win and preview two huge matchups: Navy at North Texas and Army vs. Air Force for the Commander-in-Chief's Trophy. The hosts hand out game balls, debate predictions, and share laughs over pizza picks. Plus, this week's Travis Manion Foundation Honor Roll segment honors another fallen service member. It's everything Service Academy football fans need to get ready for the biggest weekend yet!This episode is sponsored in part by TicketSmarter:Use promo code LWOS10 to receive $10 off purchases of $100 or moreUse promo code LWOS20 to receive $20 off purchases of $300 or moreThink smarter. TicketSmarter
JOIN US FOR THE MEMBERS-ONLY BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: https://youtube.com/live/8miPfR2c1L8JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~16 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/joinThe great and powerful President Donald J. Trump met for the first time with Japan's newly elected Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, and the meeting can only be described as a huge success.In addition to a YUGE trade deal being signed, the meeting also fostered an obvious deep personal affinity between President Trump and Prime Minster Takaichi.Trump also had a fantastic meeting with the US Navy stationed in Japana, including an ecstatically received speech to the sailors on the American nuclear aircraft carrier the USS George Washington (CVN-73). It is incontestable that American military morale is soaring under President Trump as Commander in Chief and Pete Hegseth as Secretary of WAR!Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!I also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! EVEN BETTER, BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1059
What do presidents really know about UFOs, consciousness, and the deeper architecture of reality?This episode of the Presidential Podcast explores the strange and often contradictory relationship between political power and metaphysical truth. From Truman to Trump, we trace how each administration has approached the phenomenon—sometimes with curiosity, sometimes with silence, and sometimes with a quiet sense of awe.The public has long speculated about what goes on behind closed doors in the Oval Office. Are presidents briefed on crash retrievals? Do they know about non-human entities? Are they told the truth—or just enough to keep them quiet? The answers, as we'll explore, are layered, elusive, and often more philosophical than technological.We begin with Harry Truman, who was president during the Roswell incident in 1947. While the official explanation dismissed the crash as a weather balloon, internal memos and military movements suggest something far more significant. Truman's administration oversaw the birth of MJ-12, the rumored secret group tasked with managing recovered craft and non-human technology. Whether MJ-12 was real or mythologized, its presence in the historical record points to a deep compartmentalization of knowledge—one that may have excluded even the Commander-in-Chief.Eisenhower, with his military background, was reportedly briefed on recovered materials and entities. Some insiders claim he even visited a base to see them firsthand. His farewell address warning of the “military-industrial complex” may have been more than political—it may have been personal.John F. Kennedy pushed for transparency, especially around space and intelligence. But his assassination cut short any deeper inquiry. Jimmy Carter famously reported a UFO sighting and promised disclosure during his campaign. Once in office, however, he was reportedly told that the truth was “too complex” to release. His disappointment was palpable.Bill Clinton took a more active approach. He sent aides to investigate Area 51 and Roswell. His response? “I tried. There's a government inside the government, and I don't control it.” This statement, often dismissed as hyperbole, may reflect a deeper reality: that the phenomenon operates outside traditional political structures.Barack Obama was asked repeatedly about UFOs. His answers were playful, evasive. “I can't tell you,” he joked. “They'd have to kill me.” But behind the humor was a pattern: presidents were aware, but not empowered. They were briefed, but not invited into the deeper rooms.Donald Trump broke the mold. He spoke about UFOs, supported the creation of Space Force, and oversaw the release of Pentagon videos confirming UAPs. But even he admitted: “I've heard some interesting things. I'll tell you one day. Maybe.” Why the silence? Why the deflection? The answer may lie in the nature of the phenomenon itself.Jim Semivan, a former CIA official involved in recent disclosure efforts, described the truth as “indigestible.” He worried about how to explain to children that there's a force that can control the environment, insert thoughts, deceive, and that we're not in control. The fear isn't about technology—it's about existential collapse.James Lakatsky, who ran AAWSAP for the Defense Intelligence Agency, concluded that UAPs are a technology that integrates physical and psychic phenomena—and that they manipulate psychological parameters in the witness. This isn't just about flying objects. It's about reality itself.So where does this leave the presidents?They may be briefed. They may be curious. But the final answer may not be political—it may be personal. It may come through experiencers, researchers, and those willing to question the nature of reality.#PresidentialPodcast #UFOs #Consciousness #Disclosure #DeepDive
This Day in Legal History: Nixon Vetoes War Powers ResolutionOn October 24, 1973, President Richard Nixon vetoed the War Powers Resolution (H.J. Res. 542), a landmark piece of legislation passed by Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over decisions to deploy U.S. armed forces abroad. The resolution came in the wake of growing public and congressional frustration over the Vietnam War and secret military actions in Southeast Asia. The law required the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops and prohibited armed forces from remaining in conflict for more than 60 days without congressional authorization. Nixon, in a written veto message, declared the measure “unconstitutional and dangerous,” arguing that it infringed on the President's Article II powers as Commander-in-Chief.Despite Nixon's objections, Congress overrode the veto on November 7, 1973, with bipartisan support, thereby enacting the War Powers Resolution into law. This override marked a rare and forceful assertion of legislative authority over foreign military engagements. The resolution aimed to correct what many in Congress saw as decades of executive overreach in matters of war and peace. However, its constitutional legitimacy has remained contested. Presidents from both parties have often complied only in part—or ignored it altogether—asserting that the resolution unlawfully limits executive authority.While the War Powers Resolution was intended to prevent unilateral military action, it has had limited practical effect in restraining presidents from engaging in hostilities without express congressional approval. Legal scholars continue to debate its enforceability and the constitutional balance it attempts to strike. The 1973 veto and subsequent override encapsulate enduring tensions between the executive and legislative branches over control of U.S. military power.Two federal judges—Julien Neals of New Jersey and Henry Wingate of Mississippi—recently admitted that erroneous rulings issued from their chambers were the result of law clerks or interns improperly using AI tools. The judges revealed in letters to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts that the flawed opinions contained fictitious citations or parties due to unvetted generative AI research. Judge Neals said a law school intern used ChatGPT, which led to nonexistent case quotes in a June 30 order, violating his chambers' unwritten policy against AI use. He has since formalized that policy. Judge Wingate reported that a law clerk used Perplexity AI to help draft a July 20 restraining order, which contained completely inaccurate case details. He acknowledged the draft “should have never been docketed” and is now requiring dual reviews of all drafts and hard-copy verification of cited cases.Legal scholars were critical of the situation, arguing that the use of AI does not relieve judges of their duty to verify citations and legal reasoning. Professors Stephen Gillers and Bruce Green both questioned how such oversights could occur and whether this reflects a broader trend of judges signing off on unverified drafts. Senator Chuck Grassley, who initiated an inquiry into the incidents, urged the judiciary to develop robust AI policies to prevent similar breakdowns in judicial accuracy. Interim guidance from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts now cautions against using AI for core judicial tasks and emphasizes user accountability.Judges Admit to Using AI After Made-Up Rulings Called Out (1)Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.) has filed a lawsuit seeking to compel the House of Representatives to officially swear her in, and the case has been assigned to Judge Trevor N. McFadden, a Trump-appointed federal judge in Washington, D.C. Grijalva, who won a special election on September 23 to succeed her late father, Raúl Grijalva, has not yet been seated, and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has delayed scheduling her swearing-in. Her formal entry into Congress would reduce the Republican majority and enable Democrats to trigger a vote on releasing Jeffrey Epstein-related documents.Judge McFadden is known for conservative rulings, though his record includes some independent decisions, such as restoring the Associated Press' White House access. Grijalva's legal team is examining the implications of his assignment to the case.Grijalva argues that the delay is not just procedural but prevents her from doing the basic work of a representative. Without a formal swearing-in, she lacks an office budget, staff, constituent services, and a working phone line. The number for her late father's office still routes to outdated voicemails. In contrast, Speaker Johnson downplayed the significance of the delay, suggesting Grijalva can still serve constituents informally. The case, Ariz. v. House of Representatives, now centers not only on procedural norms but also on the balance of political power in a narrowly divided House.Grijalva's Lawsuit to Force House Swearing-In Draws Trump JudgeNew York Attorney General Letitia James is expected to plead not guilty today in federal court to charges of bank fraud and making a false statement to a financial institution. The indictment accuses her of misrepresenting a 2020 Norfolk, Virginia property as a second home to secure a lower mortgage interest rate—saving nearly $19,000—when she allegedly used the home as a rental investment. James denies wrongdoing and plans to challenge the charges, calling them baseless.The case marks a dramatic turn for James, a Democrat who last year won a $450 million civil fraud judgment against Donald Trump. Although the monetary penalty was overturned on appeal, the court upheld the underlying fraud finding. James is one of several public figures who have clashed with Trump and are now facing criminal charges under his administration, alongside former FBI Director James Comey and former National Security Adviser John Bolton.Critics, including a third of Republicans according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll, believe Trump is weaponizing federal law enforcement to target perceived enemies. The lead prosecutor in the James case, U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, was appointed by Trump after he replaced a prior prosecutor who raised concerns about the strength of the case. James' team argues Halligan is unlawfully serving in the role and has already moved to dismiss the charges. The case will be heard by U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker, a Biden appointee.NY Attorney General Letitia James, a Trump adversary, to plead not guilty to mortgage charge | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Johann Strauss, Jr.This week's closing theme features Johann Strauss Jr. and a spirited dive into the Wiener Klänge im Walzertakt mit Johann Strauss – I (”Viennese Sounds in Waltz Time with Johann Strauss – I”). Known as the “Waltz King,” Strauss Jr. was born on October 25, 1825, in Vienna and became the most celebrated composer of light dance music in the 19th century. While his father, Johann Strauss Sr., founded the family's musical dynasty, it was Strauss Jr. who elevated the Viennese waltz to international acclaim, transforming what had been a lively but modest ballroom dance into a glittering art form.Strauss Jr. composed over 500 works, including waltzes, polkas, and operettas, many of which captured the charm and social energy of Habsburg Vienna. His most famous pieces—like The Blue Danube, Tales from the Vienna Woods, and Vienna Blood—remain fixtures in concert halls and New Year's galas to this day. The selection in Wiener Klänge im Walzertakt offers a snapshot of this legacy, blending elegance, momentum, and melodic wit with unmistakable Viennese flair.Beyond their musical appeal, these waltzes represent a cultural moment: a fading empire still wrapped in gilded pageantry, danced into memory by the music of Strauss. They also underscore Strauss Jr.'s gift for orchestration—light but never shallow, sentimental yet never saccharine. His music invites listeners not just to hear, but to move, swirl, and feel the rhythm of a society twirling on the edge of modernity.As we close this week, let the shimmering 3/4 time of Johann Strauss Jr. remind us of both the power of beauty and the politics of public joy. In the same way his music bridged popular entertainment and sophisticated art, so too does this moment ask us to consider how culture can move between courts, crowds, and chambers alike.Without further ado, Viennese Sounds in Waltz Time with Johann Strauss, the first movement – enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
JOIN US FOR THE MEMBERS-ONLY BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: INSERT HERE: https://youtube.com/live/u-3U9rNwKeMJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~16 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join Trump is rapidly closing in on his 30TH CONSECUTIVE WIN at the US Supreme Court, with another victory likely coming soon on the heels of yesterday's big win in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals win recognizing Trump's Commander in Chief authority to call out the National Guard even over the objections of Governors and Mayors.American First Legal Foundation, the conservative law advocacy group founded in 2021 by Stephen Miller, Senior Advisory to President Trump, has filed yet another pro-Trump amicus brief with the Supreme Court, this time arguing in defense of Trump's Commander in Chief authority, making many of the same arguments that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has already accepted TWICE in upholding President Trump's authority to call out the Guard. Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break down this AFL amicus brief that I'm confident will ultimately win the day at SCOTUS. I also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! EVEN BETTER, BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1052
Nearly seven million Americans peacefully took to the streets out of their love for this country, and Trump in response acted out like a toddler obsessed with his own poop. Indeed, our commander-in-chief really does have more affinity for the Sharia law dictators in the sand kingdoms than he does for Saturday's true patriots. This may be the moment when the Dems and its allies take the patriotism banner back from Republicans. Plus, the lengths the administration went to imprison immigrants in El Salvador, the Dem base wants a fight over the shutdown, and Trump keeps serving up reasons why the Trump/Russia conspiracy has survived for so long. Bill Kristol joins Tim Miller. show notes Miles Bruner's Bulwark piece on leaving the GOP Jon Cohn on the Americans caught in the shutdown vice The FT on the volatile Trump-Zelensky meeting last week Bill and Sarah on a successful "No Kings" The Post on the El Salvador prison deal Go to https://zbiotics.com/THEBULWARK and use THEBULWARK at checkout for 15% off any first time orders of ZBiotics probiotics.
MEMBERS! JOIN US FOR THE BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: INSERT HERE: https://youtube.com/live/9Wpbw28oIXQJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join Trump is about to score yet ANOTHER WIN at the US Supreme Court, this time defeating the feckless, unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior federal court judges who have insanely ruled that it is THEY, the judges, rather than HE, the Commander in Chief, who decides whether the National Guard may be federalized and deployed to subdue rebellion and ensure that the federal laws are able to be carried out. The great and powerful President Donald J. Trump has once again sent forth his legal warlord, Solicitor General John Sauer, to argue for sanity before the US Supreme Court, and given Sauer's unblemished record of victory in arguing the merits of President Trump before SCOTUS, we have every reason to believe the obstructionist inferior federal judges will be once again be pimp-slapped into the gutter.Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break down Sauer's brief to SCOTUS on Trump's core and plenary authority to call out the National Guard!I also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! EVEN BETTER, BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1049
This week on Face the Nation, tensions build in the Caribbean and President Trump continues to push for peace in Ukraine and the Middle East. The commander in chief raises the pressure on Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro as U.S. forces continue their campaign against alleged drug traffickers on the Latin American nation's coast. We get the latest from around the world from Democratic Senator Mark Kelly. Then, as the government shutdown persists, questions mount on when the end will be in sight. Republican Senator Katie Britt joins us to discuss the path forward to reopening the government and a new White House plan to expand access to fertility treatments. Plus, as Trump's tariffs continue evolving, we get an update on the global economy from the president of the European Central Bank, Christine Lagarde. Finally, a conversation with three college professors on how the Trump administration's demands to align schools with his priorities could change their jobs, their institutions and their students. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Stellantis, which produces Chrysler, Ram, and Jeep vehicles, among others, is making a huge investment in the United States and leaving two Ontario plants in jeopardy. Steve Paikin and John Michael McGrath talk about the fallout of this news and the economic impact of Donald Trump's tariffs. During a public appearance, Ontario Premier Doug Ford told a story about threatening an alleged shoplifter with a beating. Steve and John Michael discuss the reaction - and what experts are saying. The province is buying ad space in the U.S. to promote the removal of trade barriers. Will the ad, which invokes Ronald Reagan, be able to reach the current commander in chief? Steve and JMM discuss the cost of the ad - and how effective they think it will be. Steve's column: https://www.tvo.org/article/analysis-former-mpps-want-in-on-doug-fords-new-pension-plan-will-he-let-them JMM's column: https://www.tvo.org/article/analysis-ontario-is-starting-to-enforce-its-rules-around-empty-beer-cans-now-whatSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
This week on The FratChat Podcast, we're putting the “Commander in Beef” back in Commander-in-Chief with From Fittest to Thickest: The Top 5 Fittest and Least Fit U.S. Presidents! From Teddy Roosevelt punching his way through history to William Howard Taft turning bathtubs into national monuments, we're ranking which presidents could actually survive a workout and which ones would tap out after the warm-up. We're talking steak-for-breakfast diets, McDonald's diplomacy, and the presidents who made the White House scale cry for mercy. It's America's ultimate fitness test, and let's just say... some of these guys failed the mile run hard. But that's not all! In Emails from the Listeners, a listener's roommate takes Halloween enthusiasm to a full-blown horror movie possession, while Cindy from Atlanta wants our take on Bravo star Wendy Osefo's fraud arrest. PLUS, this week the news brings us the latest on a high school teacher who weaponized “liquid ass.” Plus, in Not the Drag Queens, a Texas man with a mile-long rap sheet proves once again that the creeps are coming from inside the Bible Belt. Buckle up! This episode's got more twists than Taft's diet plan. Got a question, comment or topic for us to cover? Let us know! Send us an email at fratchatpodcast@gmail.com or follow us on all social media: Instagram: http://Instagram.com/FratChatPodcast Facebook: http://Facebook.com/FratChatPodcast Twitter: http://Twitter.com/FratChatPodcast YouTube: http://YouTube.com/@fratchatpodcast Follow Carlos and CMO on social media! Carlos: IG: http://Instagram.com/CarlosDoesTheWorld YouTube: http://YouTube.com/@carlosdoestheworld TikTok: http://TikTok.com/@carlosdoestheworld Twitter: http://Twitter.com/CarlosDoesWorld Threads: http://threads.net/carlosdoestheworld Website: http://carlosgarciacomedy.com Chris ‘CMO' Moore: IG: http://Instagram.com/Chris.Moore.Comedy TikTok: http://TikTok.com/@chris.moore.comedy Twitter: http://Twitter.com/cmoorecomedy Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Hey before I begin the podcast, I just want to thank all of you who joined the patreon, you guys are simply awesome. Please take the time to vote and comment on the patreon polls so I can best tackle the specific subjects you want to hear more about and hell it does not have to be about the Pacific War, I like ancient Rome, WW1, WW2, just toss some ideas and I will try to make it happen. This Podcast is going to be a very remarkable story about a Korean man who fought for the IJA, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany during the second world war. He is also a man whom most than likely never existed. Did that catch you off guard haha? If you have a chance you can pull up wikipedia and search Yang Kyoungjong. The first thing you will notice is a disclaimer that states numerous historians who claim Yang Kyoungjong does not exist. Yet this man exists in some history books, there is a iconic photo of him, there is a documentary looking into him, countless Korean stories are writing loosely about him, there is a pretty decent war film and multiple youtubers have covered his so-called story. So how does this guy not exist if his story is so popular? His story is claimed to be real by military historian Stephen Ambrose who wrote about him in his book in 1994 titled “D-day, june 6th, 1944: the Climactic battle of World War II. There is also references to him in Antony Beevor's book “the second world war” and that of defense consultant and author Steven Zaloga's book“the devil's garden: Rommel's desperate Defense of Omaha Beach on D-Day”. In 2005 a Korean SBS documentary investigated his existence and concluded there was no convincing evidence of his existence. For those of you who have ever heard of this man, I guarantee it's because of the 2011 south korean film “My Way”. That's where I found out about it by the way. Many of you probably saw the iconic photo of him, again if you pull up the wikipedia page on Yang Kyoungjong its front and center. The photo shows a asiatic man wearing a wehrmacht uniform and he has just been captured by american forces on the d-day landings. Now I don't want to jump into the is he real or not busy just yet. So this is how the podcast will go down, very reminiscent of “Our fake History's Podcast” might I add, I am a huge fan of that guys work. I am going to tell you the story of Yang Kyoungjong, then afterwords disclose my little investigation into whether he is real or not. So without further adieu this is the story of a man who fought for three nations during WW2. The Story It was June 1944, the allies had just unleashed Operation Overlord, the D-Day landings at Normandy. Lt Robert Brewer of the 506th parachute infantry regiment, 101st airborne division was overlooking the capture of Axis forces and reported to his regiment finding four Asians in Wehrmacht uniform around the Utah beach landings. Brewer nor any of his colleagues spoke the language the Asian men spoke, they assumed them to be Japanese. The four asians were processed as POW's, listed as young Japanese and sent to a British POW camp, before he would be sent to another POW camp in the US. At some point between his capture and the POW camps, he gave his name as Yang Kyoungjong, stated he was Korean and gave an extremely incredible story. To who did he say these things, no one knows. Yang Kyoungjong was born in 1920, in Shin Eu Joo, part of modern day North Korea. At the age of 18, Yang was forcibly conscripted into the Imperial Japanese army. Korea was one of the bread baskets of Asia and the Empire of Japan had annexed her in 1910. Japan held sovereignty over Korea, making Koreans subjects. In 1939 the Empire of Japan faced major labor shortages and as a result began conscription of Japanese men for the military, while importing vast amounts of Korean laborers to work in mainland Japan. For the Imperial Japanese Army, Koreans were not drafted until 1944 when things were dire for Japan. Until 1944, the IJA allowed Koreans to volunteer in the army. In 1938 there was a 14% acceptance rate, by 1943 this dropped dramatically to 2%, but the number of applicants increased exponentially from 3000 per annum in 1939 to 300,000 by the end of the war. On paper it looked like Koreans were registering en masse on their on violation, but this is quite the contrary, the Japanese policy was to use force. Japanese officials began press gang efforts against Korean peasants, forcing them to sign applications, it is believed over half of the applications were done in such a manner. Other applicants registered for a variety of reasons, typically because of economic turmoil. Korea would produce 7 generals and many field grade officers. One of the most well known was Lt General Crown Prince Yi Un who would command Japanese forces in the China War. Thus Yang Kyoungjong was forced into the IJA and would find himself stationed with the Kwantung Army. Quite unfortunately for him, he was enlisted into their service at a time where two major border skirmishes occurred with the Soviet Union. The USSR was seen as Japan's number one rival going all the way back to the Triple Intervention of 1895 when the Russians thwarted Japan's seizure of the Liaodong peninsula after they had won the first sino japanese war. This led to the Russo-Japanese war, where Japan shocked the world being victorious over the Russian Empire. When the Russian Empire fell and the Russian civil war kicked off, Japan sent the lionshare of men to fight the Red Army during the Siberian Intervention of 1918-1922. Communism was seen as the greatest if not one of the greatest threats to the Kokutai and thus Japan as a whole. As such Japan placed the Kwantung Army along the Manchurian borderlands to thwart any possible soviet invasion. There had numerous border skirmishes, but in 1938 and 1939 two large battles occurred. In 1938 the Kwantung army intercepted a Soviet message indicating the Far East forces would be securing some unoccupied heights west of Lake Khasan that overlooked the Korean port city of Rajin. Soviet border troops did indeed move into the area and began fortifying it. The Kwantung army sent forces to dislodge them and this soon led to a full on battle. The battle was quite shocking for both sides, the Soviets lost nearly 800 men dead with 3279 wounded, the Japanese claimed they had 526 dead with 913 wounded. The Soviet lost significant armor and despite both sides agreeing to a ceasefire, the Kwantung army considered it a significant victory and proof the Soviets were not capable of thwarting them. In theory Yang Kyoungjong would be in training and would eventually reach the Manchuria borders by 1939. Another man sent over would be Georgy Zhukov who was given the task of taking command of the 57th special corps and to eliminate Japanese provocations. What was expected of Zhukov was if the Japanese pressed again for battle, to deliver them a crushing and decisive blow. On May 11th, 1939 some Mongolian cavalry units were grazing their horses in a disputed area. On that very same day, Manchu cavalry attacked the Mongols to drive them past the river of Khalkhin Gol. Two days later the Mongols returned in greater numbers and this time the Manchu were unable to dislodge them. What was rather funny to say, a conflict of some horses grazing on disputed land, led to a fully mechanized battle. On May 14th, Lt Colonel Yaozo Azuma led some regiments to dislodge the Mongols, but they were being supported by the Red Army. Azuma force suffered 63% casualties, devastating. June saw the battle expand enormously, Japan was tossing 30,000 men in the region, the Soviets tossed Zhukov at them alongside motorized and armored forces. The IJA lacking good armored units, tossed air forces to smash the nearby Soviet airbase at Tamsakbulak. In July the IJA engaged the Red Army with nearly 100 tanks and tankettes, too which Zhukov unleashed 450 tanks and armored cars. The Japanese had more infantry support, but the Soviet armor encircled and crushed them. The two armies spared with another for weeks, the Japanese assumed the Soviets would suffer logistical problems but Zhukoev assembled a fleet of 2600 trucks to supply his forces, simply incredible. Both sides were suffering tremendous casualties, then in August global politics shifted. It was apparent a war in Europe was going to break out, Zhukov was ordered to be decisive, the Soviets could not deal with a two front war. So Zhukov now using a fleet of 4000 trucks began transported supplies from Chita to the front next to a armada of tanks and mechanized brigades. The Soviets tossed 3 rifle divisions, two tank divisions and 2 tank brigades, nearly 500 tanks in all, with two motorized infantry divisions and 550 fighters and bombers. The stalemate was shattered when Zhukov unleashed is armada, some 50,000 Soviets and Mongols hit the east bank of Khalkhin Gol. The Japanese were immediately pinned down, while the Soviets were employing a double envelopment. The Japanese tried to counter attack and it failed horribly. The Japanese then scrambled to break out of the encirclement and failed. The surrounded Japanese forces refused to surrender as the Soviets smashed them with artillery and aerial bombardment. By the end of August the Japanese forces on the Mongolian side of the border were annihilated. On September 15th the USSR and Japan signed a ceasefire. The battle of Khalkhin Gol was devastating for both sides. The Japanese claim they had 8440 deaths, 8766 wounded, lost 162 aircraft and 42 tanks. Its estimated 500-600 Japanese forces were taken prisoner. Because of IJA doctrine these men were considered killed in action. Some sources will claim the real numbers for Japanese casualties could have been as high as 30,000. The Soviets claim 9703 deaths, 15,251 wounded, the destruction of 253 tanks, 250 aircraft, 96 artillery pieces and 133 armored cars. Of those tank losses, its estimated 75-80% were destroyed by anti-tank guns, 15-20% field artillery, 5-10% infantry thrown incendiary bombs, 3% mines and another 3% for aircraft bombing. Back to Yang Kyoungjong, he alongside the other Japanese, Manchu and Korean POW's were sent to Gulags in Siberia. As the war on the Eastern Front kicked off between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, facing annihilation the Soviets did anything possible to survive. One of these actions was to create the Shtrafbats, “Penal battalions”. Stalins order No 227 created the first penal battalions, who were supposed to be around 800 men strong. The first Shtrafbat battalion was deployed to the Stalingrad Front on August 22nd of 1942. On order was issued on November 26, 1942 “status of Penal units of the army”, it was issued by Georgy Zhukov, now deputy commander in chief who was the man who formally standardized soviet penal units. The Shtrafbats were around 360 men per battalion commanded by mid range Red Army officers and politruks. The men forced into these were permanents or temporaries. Permanents were officers, commanders, the higher ranks guys. Temporary known as shtrafniki “punishees” were the grunts, typically prisoners and those convicted of crimes. From september 1942 to May of 1945 422,700 men would be forced into penal battalions. Typically those forced into penal military units were one of two things: 1) those convicted of dissertation or cowardice, 2) Soviet Gulag labor camp inmates. It seems Yang Kyoungjong found himself in a very awkward situation as he would be forced into one of these penal battalions and sent to fight on the eastern front. As pertaining to Order No. 227, each Army was to have 3–5 barrier squads of up to 200 persons each, these units would be made up of penal units. So back toYang Kyoungjong, he would find himself deployed at the third battle of Kharkov. This battle was part of a series of battles fought on the eastern front. As the German 6th army was encircling Stalingrad, the Soviets launched a series of wide counter attacks, as pertaining to “operation star”. Operation star saw massive offensives against Kharkov, Belgorod, Kursk, Voroshilovgrad and Izium. The Soviets earned great victories, but they also overextended themselves. Field Marshal Erich von Manstein seeing the opening, performed a counter-strike against Kharkov on February 19th of 1943, using fresh troops of the 2nd SS Panzer Corps alongside two other panzer armies. Manstein also had massive air support from field Marshal Wolfram von Richthofens Luftflotte 4, 1214 aircraft tossed 1000 sorties per day from February 20th to march 15th. The Red army had approximately 210,000 troops who fought in the Voronezh-Kharkov offensive, the Germans would have roughly 160,000 men, but their tanks outnumbered the Soviets 7-1, they had roughly 350 of them. The Germans quickly outflanked the Soviets, managing to encircle and annihilate many units. Whenever soviets units made attempts to escape encirclements, the German air forces placed pressure upon them. The German air forces had the dual job of airlifting supplies to the front lines giving the Soviets no breathing space. Gradually the fight focused around the city of Kharkov seeing the Soviets dislodged. The Germans caused severe casualties, perhaps 45,000 dead or missing with another 41,000 wounded. The Germans suffered 4500 deaths, 7000 wounded. The Germans took a large number of prisoners, and Yang Kyoungjong was one of them. Yet again a prisoner Yang Kyoungjong was coerced into serving another nation, this time for Die Ost-Bataillone. The Eastern Front had absolutely crippled Germany and as a result Germany began to enlist units from just about any nation possible and this included former Soviet citizens. There were countless different units, like the Russian liberation Army, die Hilfswillige, Ukrainian collaborationists, and there were also non-Russians from the USSR who formed the Ost-Bataillone. These eastern battalions would comprise a rough total of 175,000 men. Many of the Ost-Bataillone were conscripted or coerced into serving, though plenty also volunteered. Countless were recruited from POW camps, choosing to serve instead of labor in camps. The Osttruppen were to typically deployed for coastal defense, rear area activities, security stuff, all the less important roles to free up the German units to perform front line service. There were two different groups, the Ost-Legionen “eastern legions” and Ost-Bataillone “eastern battalions”. The Ostlegionen were large foreign legion type units raised amongst members of specific ethnic or racial groups. The Ost-Bataillone were composed of numerous nationalities, usually plucked from POW camps in eastern europe. They were tossed together into battalion sized units and integrated individually into German combat formations. Obviously the Germans did not get their hands on large numbers of Koreans, so Yang Kyoungjong found himself in a Ost-Bataillone. In 1944, due to massive losses in the Eastern Front, and in preparation for the allies about to open a second front, the Germans began deploying a lot of Ost-Bataillone along the coastal defense line at Cherbourg. Yang Kyoungjong was enlisted in the 709th static infantry division, a coastal defense unit assigned to defend the eastern and northern coasts of the Cotentin Peninsula. This would include the Utah beach landing site and numerous US airborne landing zones. The sector was roughly 250 km running northeast of Carentan, via Barfleur-Cherbourg-Cap de la Hague to the western point of Barneville. This also included the 65 km of land just in font of Cherbourg harbor. A significant portion of the 709th were Ost-bataillon, countless were from eastern europe, many were former Soviet POW'S. There were also two battalions of the 739th Grenadier regiment whom were Georgian battalions. A significant amount of the 709th had no combat experience, but had trained extensively in the area. The 709th would be heavily engaged on D-day meeting US airborne units and the 4th infantry division who landed at Utah beach. In the early hours of June 6th, the US 82nd and 101st airborne divisions landed at the base of the Cotentin peninsula and managed to secure a general area for the US 4th infantry division to land at Utah beach, with very few casualties compared to other beach landings. After the landings the forces tried to link up with other forces further east. By June 9th they had crossed the Douve river valley and captured Carentan. House to house fighting was seen in the battle for Carentan, the Germans tossed a few counterattacks, but the Americans held on with the help of armor units of the 13th. The Americans then advanced to cut off the Cotentin Peninsula, now supported by 3 other infantry divisions. The Germans had few armored or mobilized infantry in the area. By June 16th the German command was tossed into chaos as Erwin Rommel wanted them to pull out and man the Atlantic Wall at Cherbourg, but Hitler demanded they hold their present lines of defense. By the 17th Hitler agreed to the withdrawal, under some provisions the men still took up limited defenses spanning the entire peninsula. On the 18th the US 9th infantry division reached the west coast of the peninsula thus isolating the Cherbourg garrison. A battle was unleashed for 24 hours with the 4th, 9th and 79th US infantry divisions driving north on a broad front. They faced little opposition on the western side and the eastern, the center held much stronger resistance. The Americans would find several caches of V-1 flying bombs and V-2 rocket installations at Brix. After two days the Americans were in striking distance of Cherbourg. The garrison commander Lt General Karl-Wilhelm von Schlieben had 21,000 men, but many were naval personnel and labor units. Schliebens 709th had performed a fighting withdrawal to Cherbourg and were completely exhausted. The trapped forces were low in provisions, fuel and ammunition. The luftwaffe tried dropping supplies on their positions but it was inadequate. A general assault began on the 22nd and the German forces put up stiff resistance within their concrete pillboxes. Allied warships bombarded the city on the 25th of june and on the 26th a British elite force, No. 30 Commando launched an assault against Octeville, a suburb of southwestern Cherbourg. The commandos quickly captured 20 officers and 500 men of the Kriegmarine naval intelligence HQ at Villa Meurice. As the Germans were ground down, Schlieben was captured and with that a surrender was made on the 29th. The Americans suffered nearly 3000 deaths with 13,500 wounded during the operation. The Germans suffered 8000 deaths with 30,000 captured. For the 709th who took a lionshare of the fighting they reported sustaining 4000 casualties. Amongst the captured was Yang Kyoungjong. As I said in the beginning Lt Robert Brewer of the 506th parachute infantry regiment, 101st airborne division was overlooking the capture of Axis forces and reported to his regiment finding four Asians in Wehrmacht uniform around the Utah beach landings. Brewer nor any of his colleagues spoke the language the Asian men spoke, they assumed them to be Japanese. The four asians were processed as POW's, listed as young Japanese and sent to a British POW camp, before he would be sent to another POW camp in the US. At some point between his capture and the POW camps, he gave his name as Yang Kyoungjong, stated he was Korean and gave the story. Apparently Yang Kyoungjob was granted US citizenship and would spend the rest of his life in Illinois until his death in 1992. So that is the story of Yang Kyoungjong. The truth Did Yang Kyoungjong exist? Where does his story originate? For those of you who have not guessed it yet, the story I told you was full of details, I simply added based on historical events, with zero evidence at all any man named Yang Kyoungjong was involved in them. I did this specifically to highlight, thats exactly what others have done over the course of many years, creating a sort of mythos. If you know the game broken telephone, thats what I would theorize makes up most of this mans story. But lets go through some actual evidence why don't we? From the digging I have done, the story seemed to originate with historian Stephen Ambrose book in 1994 titled “D-day, june 6th, 1944: the Climactic battle of World War II”. While writing this book, Ambrose interviewed Robert Burnham Brewer, who served E Company, 2nd battalion, 506th parachute infantry regiment of the 101st airborne division. This same man was portrayed in Band of Brothers by the way. Brewer gave one rather ambiguous account where he spoke about capturing 4 asian men in Wehrmacht uniforms. Here is patient zero as told to us by Ambrose's book (Page 34, no footnote on the page) The so-called Ost battalions became increasingly unreliable after the German defeat at Kursk; they were, therefore, sent to france in exchange for German troops. At the beach called Utah on the day on the invasion, Lt Robert Brewer of the 506th Parachute infantry regiment, 101st airborne division, US Army, captured four asians in Wehrmacht uniforms. No one could speak their language; eventually it was learned that they were Koreans. How on earth did Koreans end up fighting for Hitler to defend france against Americans? It seems they had been conscripted into the Japanese army in 1938-Korea was then a Japanese colony-captured by the Red Army in the border battles with Japan in 1939, forced into the Red Army, captured by the Wehrmacht in December 1941 outside Moscow, forced into the German army, and sent to France”. What happened to them, Lt Brewer never found out, but presumably they were sent back to Korea. If so, they would almost certainly have been conscripted again, either into the south or north korean army. It is possible than in 1950 they ended up fighting once again, either against the US army or with it, depending on what part of Korea they came from. Such are the vagaries of politics in the 20th century. By June 1944, one in six German rifleman in France was from an Ost battalion. Now digging further since there are no footnotes, it seems Ambrose took an oral account from Lt Brewer, but did not directly quote him and instead abstractly expanded upon his story. Ambrose was guilty of doing this often. As multiple historians have pointed out, Brewer was living in the 1940s and was by no means an ethnographer, he was not a person who could have accurately known the nationality of the four asian men he captured. It is plausible he or other US units around him, just came up with Korean for the four asians who could have been from nearly anywhere in central to east asia. For all we know the men found could have been from Turkestan. What was “asian” to westerners of the 1940's is extremely broad. If you look up the Ost-Bataillone or Ostlegionen you will see they consisted of captured former soviet soldiers. During the d-day landings, 1/6th of the German forces defending the atlantic coast were made up of the Ost-battailones. They came from numerous places, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, India, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkestan, Mongolia and numerous parts of the USSR. Needless to say, there were a ton of people whom would be considered asian and could be mistaken to be from Korea, Japan, Burma, etc. It seems Brewer's vague account was transformed by Amrose, but this only covers one part of all of this, the story, what about the photo? The iconic photograph is another matter entirely. The photograph has nothing to do with Brewer's account, it is simply a random photograph taken at Utah beach of a captured asian soldier wearing a Wehrmacht uniform. The official description of the photo states “Capture Jap in Nazi uniform. France, fearful of his future, this young Jap wearing a nazi uniform, is checked off in a roundup of German prisoners on the beaches of france. An american army captain takes the Jap's name and serial number” Author Martin Morgan believes the man in the photograph is not Yang Kyoungjong, but instead an ethnic Georgian from the 795th Georgian Battalion, which was composed of Georgian Osttruppen troops or someone who was Turkistani. In 2002 word of the story became more popularized online and in 2004 the iconic photo also began to circulate heavily on the internet. The Korean media became aware of the story in 2002 and when they saw the picture the Korean news site DKBNews investigated the matter. Apparently a reader of the DKBNews submitted biographical details about the soldier in the photo, including his name, date of birth, the general story we now know, his release, life in Illinois and death. The DKBNews journalist requested sources and none were provided, typical. So some random unknown reader of the DKBNews gave a name, place and time of birth and even where he ended up and died. In 2005 the Seoul broadcasting system aired a documentary specifically investigating the existence of the asian soldiers who fought for Germany on d-day. In the SBS special “The Korean in Normandy,” produced and broadcast in 2005 based on rumors of Yang kyoungjog, they searched for records of Korean prisoners of war during the Battle of khalkhin gol and records of Korean people who participated in the German-Japanese War, and records related to the German Army's eastern unit, but could not find traces of such a person. In addition, the soldiers who served in the Soviet army, who were captured, and then transferred to the German army's eastern units were considered by the Soviet Union to be serious traitors. Accordingly, under a secret agreement between the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union, they were forcibly repatriated to the Soviet Union after the war and held in Gulags.. The SBS production team stated that the rumors that a 'Korean from Normandy' had gone to the United States and that he died in seclusion near Northwestern University under the name of 'Yang Kyoungjong', which they were unaware of, were false. The investigative team looked for any traces of a Yang Kyoungjong and found none, so they concluded although there were accounts of asian soldiers in the German army during WW2, there was zero evidence of the existence of Yang Kyoungjong or any Koreans fighting on D-day for that matter. The 2005 SBS Special documentary sprang forth a bunch of stories by Korean authors, expanding the mythos of Yang Kyoungjong. In 2007 author Jo Jeong-rae published a novel titled “human mask” which told the story of SHin Gilman, The story ends with Shin Gil-man, who was conscripted into the Japanese army at the age of 20, as a prisoner of war in Normandy, then transported back to the Soviet Union and eventually executed by firing squad. Another novel called “D-day” by author Kim Byeong-in was release in 2011, just prior to the film My War, the plot is extremely similar to the movie. The main characters are Han Dae-sik and Yoichi, who met as children as the sons of a Japanese landowner and the house's housekeeper, harboring animosity toward each other, and grew up to become marathon runners representing Joseon and Japan. As they experience the war together, they feel a strange sense of kinship and develop reconciliation and friendship. And of course the most famous story would find its way to the big screen. In 2011 the film My Way came out, back then the most expensive south korean film ever made at around 23$ million. Then in 2012 a unknown person created a wikipedia page piecing together the Ambrose story, the photo and the unknown DBK readers information. With all of this information becoming more viral suddenly in 2013, two history books hit the scene and would you know it, both have “Yang Kyoungjong” in them. These are Antony Beevor's book “the second world war” and that of defense consultant and author Steven Zaloga in his book “the devil's garden: Rommel's desperate Defense of Omaha Beach on D-Day”. Both authors took the story, name and iconic photo and expanded on the mythos by adding further details as to how the Korean man would have gone from Korea to Cherbourg france. So Ambrose's story spreads across the internet alongside this photo. Both spark interest in Korea and an investigation receives some random guys testimony, which quite honestly was groundless. Despite the korean documentary stating there was no evidence of a Yang Kyoungjong, it sparks further interest, more stories and a famous film in 2011. 2012 sees a wikipage, it becomes more viral and now seeps into other historians work. And I would be remiss not to mention the bizarre controversy that broke out in my nation of Canada. A nation so full of controversies today, dear god. Debbie Hanlon a city councilor in St John Newfoundland was absolutely wrecked online in 2018 for an advertisement promoting her real estate business stating “Korean Yang kyoungjong fought with Japan against the USSR. He then fought with the USSR against Germany. Then with Germany against the US! Want an agent who fights for you, call me!” Really weird ad by the way. So it seems her ad was to point out how far she was willing to go for her real estate clients. It was considered extremely offensive, and not the first time she pulled this off, her husband Oral Mews had recently come under fire for another ad he made using a photo of the Puerto Rican cab driver Victor Perez Cardona, where the vehicle turned into a casket. That ad said “He can't give you a lift because he's dead. He's propped up in his cab at his wake! Need a lift to great service, call me!” Hanlon was surprised at the amount of backlash she received since the ads had been running for over 4 years online. She claimed to be the victim of cyberbullying and trolls. So yeah, that happened. Did Yang Kyoungjong exist, more than likely not, was it possible some Koreans found themselves in a position his story pertains to, you know what it's quite possible. During War a lot of weird things happen. I hope you liked this episode, please let me know in the comments on the Patreon what you think, how I can improve things and of course what you want to hear about next!
Last time we spoke about the Battle of Taierzhuang. Following the fall of Nanjing in December 1937, the Second Sino-Japanese War entered a brutal phase of attrition as Japan sought to consolidate control and press toward central China. Chinese defense prioritized key rail corridors and urban strongholds, with Xuzhou, the JinPu and Longhai lines, and the Huai River system forming crucial lifelines. By early 1938, Japanese offensives aimed to link with forces around Beijing and Nanjing and encircle Chinese positions in the Central Yangtze region, threatening Wuhan. In response, Chiang Kai-shek fortified Xuzhou and expanded defenses to deter a pincer move, eventually amassing roughly 300,000 troops along strategic lines. Taierzhuang became a focal point when Japanese divisions attempted to press south and link with northern elements. Chinese commanders Li Zongren, Bai Chongxi, Tang Enbo, and Sun Lianzhong coordinated to complicate Japanese plans through offensive-defensive actions, counterattacks, and encirclement efforts. The victory, though numerically costly, thwarted immediate Japanese objectives and foreshadowed further attritional struggles ahead. #171 The Flooding of the Yellow River Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. We last left off with a significant event during the Xuzhou campaign. Three Japanese divisions under General Itagaki Seishiro moved south to attack Taierzhuang and were met by forces commanded by Li Zongren, Sun Lianzhong, and Tang Enbo, whose units possessed a decent amount of artillery. In a two-week engagement from March 22 to April 7, the battle devolved into a costly urban warfare. Fighting was vicious, often conducted in close quarters and at night. The urban environment negated Japanese advantages in armor and artillery, allowing Chinese forces to contend on equal terms. The Chinese also disrupted Japanese logistics by resupplying their own troops and severing rear supply lines, draining Japanese ammunition, supplies, and reinforcements. By April 7, the Japanese were compelled to retreat, marking the first Chinese victory of the war. However both sides suffered heavy losses, with around 20,000 casualties on each side. In the aftermath of this rare victory, Chiang Kai-Shek pushed Tang Enbo and Li Zongren to capitalize on their success and increased deployments in the Taierzhuang theater to about 450,000 troops. Yet the Chinese Army remained hampered by fundamental problems. The parochialism that had crippled Chiang's forces over the preceding months resurfaced. Although the generals had agreed to coordinate in a war of resistance, each still prioritized the safety of his own troops, wary of Chiang's bid to consolidate power. Li Zongren, for example, did not deploy his top Guangxi provincial troops at Taierzhuang and sought to shift most of the fighting onto Tang Enbo's forces. Chiang's colleagues were mindful of the fates of Han Fuju of Shandong and Zhang Xueliang of Manchuria: Han was executed for refusing to fight, while Zhang, after allowing Chiang to reduce the size of his northeastern army, ended up under house arrest. They were right to distrust Chiang. He believed, after all, that provincial armies should come under a unified national command, which he would lead. From a national-unity perspective, his aspiration was not unreasonable. But it fed suspicion among other military leaders that participation in the anti-Japanese war would dilute their power. The divided nature of the command also hindered logistics, making ammunition and food supplies to the front unreliable and easy to cut off. By late April the Chinese had reinforced the Xuzhou area to between 450,000-600,000 to capitalize on their victory. However these armies were plagued with command and control issues. Likewise the Japanese licked their wounds and reinforced the area to roughly 400,000, with fresh troops and supplies flowing in from Tianjin and Nanjing. The Japanese continued with their objective of encircling Chinese forces. The North China Area Army comprised four divisions and two infantry brigades drawn from the Kwantung Army, while the Central China Expeditionary Army consisted of three divisions and the 1st and 2nd Tank Battalions along with motorized support units. The 5th Tank Battalion supported the 3rd Infantry Division as it advanced north along the railway toward Xuzhou. Fighting to the west, east, and north of Xuzhou was intense, resulting in heavy casualties on both sides. On 18 April, the Japanese advanced southward toward Pizhou. Tang Enbo's 20th Army Corps, together with the 2nd, 22nd, 46th, and 59th corps, resisted fiercely, culminating in a stalemate by the end of April. The 60th Corps of the Yunnan Army engaged the Japanese 10th Division at Yuwang Mountain for nearly a month, repelling multiple assaults. By the time it ceded its position to the Guizhou 140th Division and withdrew on 15 May, the corps had sustained losses exceeding half of its forces. Simultaneously, the Japanese conducted offensives along both banks of the Huai River, where Chinese defenders held out for several weeks. Nevertheless, Japanese artillery and aerial bombardment gradually tilted the balance, allowing the attackers to seize Mengcheng on 9 May and Hefei on 14 May. From there, the southern flank split into two parts: one force moved west and then north to cut off the Longhai Railway escape route from Xuzhou, while another division moved directly north along the railway toward Suxian, just outside Xuzhou. Simultaneously, to the north, Japanese units from north China massed at Jining and began moving south beyond Tengxian. Along the coast, an amphibious landing was made at Lianyungang to reinforce troops attacking from the east. The remaining portions of Taierzhuang were captured in May, a development symbolically significant to Tokyo. On 17 May, Japanese artillery further tightened the noose around Xuzhou, striking targets inside the city. To preserve its strength, the Nationalist government ordered the abandonment of Xuzhou and directed its main forces to break out toward northern Jiangsu, northern Anhui, and eastern Henan. To deter the Japanese army's rapid westward advance and penetration into northern Henan and western Shandong, many leading military and political figures within the Nationalist government proposed breaching dams over the Yellow River to delay the offensive, a strategy that would have been highly advantageous to the Nationalist forces at the time. Chiang Kai-shek vetoed the proposal outright, insisting that the Nationalist army could still resist. He understood that with tens of millions of Chinese lives at stake and a sliver of hope remaining, the levee plan must not be undertaken. Then a significant battle broke out at Lanfeng. Chiang also recognized that defeat could allow the elite Japanese mechanized divisions, the 14th, 16th, and 10th, to advance directly toward Zhengzhou. If Zhengzhou fell, the Japanese mechanized forces on the plains could advance unimpeded toward Tongguan. Their southward push would threaten Xi'an, Xiangfan, and Nanyang, directly jeopardizing the southwest's rear defenses. Concurrently, the Japanese would advance along the Huai River north of the Dabie Mountains toward Wuhan, creating a pincer with operations along the Yangtze River. Now what followed was arguably the most important and skillful Chinese maneuver of the Xuzhou campaign: a brilliantly executed strategic retreat to the south and west across the Jinpu railway line. On May 15, Li Zongren, in consultation with Chiang Kai-shek, decided to withdraw from Xuzhou and focus on an escape plan. The evacuation of civilians and military personnel began that day. Li ordered troops to melt into the countryside and move south and west at night, crossing the Jinpu Railway and splitting into four groups that would head west. The plan was to regroup in the rugged Dabie Mountains region to the south and prepare for the defense of Wuhan. Li's generals departed reluctantly, having held out for so long; Tang Enbo was said to have wept. Under cover of night, about forty divisions, over 200,000 men, marched out of Japanese reach in less than a week. A critical moment occurred on May 18, when fog and a sandstorm obscured the retreating troops as they crossed the Jinpu Railway. By May 21, Li wired Chiang Kai-shek to report that the withdrawal was complete. He mobilized nearly all of the Kuomintang Central Army's elite units, such as the 74th Army, withdrawn from Xuzhou and transferred directly to Lanfeng, with a resolute intent to “burn their boats.” The force engaged the Japanese in a decisive battle at Lanfeng, aiming to secure the last line of defense for the Yellow River, a position carrying the lives of millions of Chinese civilians. Yet Chiang Kai-shek's strategy was not universally understood by all participating generals, who regarded it as akin to striking a rock with an egg. For the battle of Lanfeng the Chinese mobilized nearly all of the Kuomintang Central Army's elite forces, comprising 14 divisions totaling over 150,000 men. Among these, the 46th Division of the 27th Army, formerly the Central Training Brigade and the 36th, 88th, and 87th Divisions of the 71st Army were German-equipped. Additionally, the 8th Army, the Tax Police Corps having been reorganized into the Ministry of Finance's Anti-Smuggling Corps, the 74th Army, and Hu Zongnan's 17th Corps, the new 1st Army, equipped with the 8th Division were elite Nationalist troops that had demonstrated strong performance in the battle of Shanghai and the battle of Nanjing, and were outfitted with advanced matériel. However, these so-called “elite” forces were heavily degraded during the campaigns in Shanghai and Nanjing. The 46th Division and Hu Zongnan's 17th Corps sustained casualties above 85% in Nanjing, while the 88th and 87th Divisions suffered losses of up to 90%. The 74th Army and the 36th Division also endured losses exceeding 75%. Their German-made equipment incurred substantial losses; although replenishment occurred, inventories resembled roughly a half-German and half-Chinese mix. With very limited heavy weapons and a severe shortage of anti-tank artillery, they could not effectively match the elite Japanese regiments. Hu Zongnan's 17th Corps maintained its national equipment via a close relationship with Chiang Kai-shek. In contrast, the 74th Army, after fighting in Shanghai, Nanjing, and Xuzhou, suffered heavy casualties, and the few German weapons it had were largely destroyed at Nanjing, leaving it to rely on a mix of domestically produced and Hanyang-made armaments. The new recruits added to each unit largely lacked combat experience, with nearly half of the intake having received basic training. The hardest hit was Li Hanhun's 64th Army, established less than a year prior and already unpopular within the Guangdong Army. Although classified as one of the three Type A divisions, the 155th, 156th, and 187th Divisions, it was equipped entirely with Hanyang-made firearms. Its direct artillery battalion possessed only about 20 older mortars and three Type 92 infantry guns, limiting its heavy firepower to roughly that of a Japanese battalion. The 195th Division and several miscellaneous units were even less prominent, reorganized from local militias and lacking Hanyang rifles. Additionally, three batches of artillery purchased from the Soviet Union arrived in Lanzhou via Xinjiang between March and June 1938. Except for the 52nd Artillery Regiment assigned to the 200th Division, the other artillery regiments had recently received their weapons and were still undergoing training. The 200th Division, had been fighting awhile for in the Xuzhou area and incurred heavy casualties, was still in training and could only deploy its remaining tank battalion and armored vehicle company. The tank battalion was equipped with T-26 light tanks and a small number of remaining British Vickers tanks, while the armored vehicle company consisted entirely of Italian Fiat CV33 armored cars. The disparity in numbers was substantial, and this tank unit did not participate in the battle. As for the Japanese, the 14th Division was an elite Type A formation. Originally organized with four regiments totaling over 30,000 men, the division's strength was later augmented. Doihara's 14th Division received supplements, a full infantry regiment and three artillery regiments, to prevent it from being surrounded and annihilated, effectively transforming the unit into a mobile reinforced division. Consequently, the division's mounted strength expanded to more than 40,000 personnel, comprising five infantry regiments and four artillery regiments. The four artillery regiments, the 24th Artillery Regiment, the 3rd Independence Mountain Artillery Regiment, the 5th Field Heavy Artillery Regiment, and the 6th Field Heavy Artillery Regiment, possessed substantial heavy firepower, including 150mm heavy howitzers and 105mm long-range field cannons, placing them far in excess of the Nationalist forces at Lanfeng. In addition, both the 14th and later the 16th Divisions commanded tank regiments with nearly 200 light and medium tanks each, while Nationalist forces were markedly short of anti-tank artillery. At the same time, the Nationalist Air Force, though it had procured more than 200 aircraft of various types from the Soviet Union, remained heavily reliant on Soviet aid-to-China aircraft, amounting to over 100 machines, and could defend only a few cities such as Wuhan, Nanchang, and Chongqing. In this context, Japanese forces effectively dominated the Battle of Lanfeng. Moreover, reports indicate that the Japanese employed poison gas on the battlefield, while elite Nationalist troops possessed only a limited number of gas masks, creating a stark disparity in chemical warfare preparedness. Despite these disparities, Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist government were initially unaware of the updated strength and composition of the Doihara Division. Faced with constrained options, Chiang chose to press ahead with combat operations. On May 12, 1939, after crossing the Yellow River, the IJA 14th Division continued its southward advance toward Lanfeng. The division's objective was to sever the Longhai Railway, disrupt the main Nationalist retreat toward Zhengzhou, and seize Zhengzhou itself. By May 15, the division split into two columns at Caoxian and moved toward key nodes on the Longhai Line. Major General Toyotomi Fusatarou led two infantry regiments, one cavalry regiment, and one artillery regiment in the main assault toward Kaocheng with the aim of directly capturing Lanfeng. Doihara led three infantry regiments and three artillery regiments toward Neihuang and Minquan, threatening Guide. In response, the Nationalist forces concentrated along the railway from Lanfeng to Guide, uniting Song Xilian's 71st Army, Gui Yongqing's 27th Army, Yu Jishi's 74th Army, Li Hanhun's 64th Army, and Huang Jie's 8th Army. From May 15 to 17, the Fengjiu Brigade, advancing toward Lanfeng, met stubborn resistance near Kaocheng from roughly five divisions under Song Xilian and was forced to shift its effort toward Yejigang and Neihuang. The defense near Neihuang, including Shen Ke's 106th Division and Liang Kai's 195th Division, ultimately faltered, allowing Doihara's division to seize Neihuang, Yejigang, Mazhuangzhai, and Renheji. Nevertheless, the Nationalist forces managed to contain the Japanese advance east and west of the area, preventing a complete encirclement. Chiang Kai-shek ordered Cheng Qian, commander-in-chief of the 1st War Zone, to encircle and annihilate the Japanese 14th Division. The deployment plan mapped three routes: the Eastern Route Army, under Li Hanhun, would include the 74th Army, the 155th Division of the 64th Army, a brigade of the 88th Division, and a regiment of the 87th Division, advancing westward from Guide); the Western Route Army, commanded by Gui Yongqing, would comprise the 27th Army, the 71st Army, the 61st Division, and the 78th Division, advancing eastward from Lanfeng; and the Northern Route Army, formed by Sun Tongxuan's 3rd Army and Shang Zhen's 20th Army, was to cut off the enemy's retreat to the north bank of the Yellow River near Dingtao, Heze, Dongming, and Kaocheng, while attacking the Doihara Division from the east, west, and north to annihilate it in a single decisive operation. On May 21, the Nationalist Army mounted a full-scale offensive. Yu Jishi's 74th Army, commanded by Wang Yaowu's 51st Division, joined a brigade of Song Xilian's 71st Army, led by the 88th Division, and drove the Japanese forces at Mazhuangzhai into retreat, capturing Neihuang and Renheji. The main Japanese force, more than 6,000 strong, withdrew southwest to Yangjiji and Shuangtaji. Song Xilian, commanding Shen Fazao's 87th Division, launched a sharp assault on Yejigang (Yifeng). The Japanese abandoned the stronghold, but their main body continued advancing toward Yangjiji, with some units retreating to Donggangtou and Maoguzhai. On May 23, Song Xilian's 71st Army and Yu Jishi's 74th Army enveloped and annihilated enemy forces at Donggangtou and Maoguzhai. That evening they seized Ximaoguzhai, Yangzhuang, and Helou, eliminating more than a thousand Japanese troops. The Japanese troops at Donggangtou fled toward Lanfeng. Meanwhile, Gui Yongqing's forces were retreating through Lanfeng. His superior strength, Jiang Fusheng's 36th Division, Li Liangrong's 46th Division, Zhong Song's 61st Division, Li Wen's 78th Division, Long Muhan's 88th Division, and Shen Ke's 106th Division—had held defensive positions along the Lanfeng–Yangji line. Equipped with a tank battalion and armored vehicle company commanded by Qiu Qingquan, they blocked the enemy's westward advance and awaited Japanese exhaustion. However, under the Japanese offensive, Gui Yongqing's poor command led to the loss of Maji and Mengjiaoji, forcing the 27th Army to retreat across its entire front. Its main force fled toward Qixian and Kaifeng. The Japanese seized the opportunity to capture Quxingji, Luowangzhai, and Luowang Railway Station west of Lanfeng. Before retreating, Gui Yongqing ordered Long Muhan to dispatch a brigade to replace the 106th Division in defending Lanfeng, while he directed the 106th Division to fall back to Shiyuan. Frightened by the enemy, Long Muhan unilaterally withdrew his troops on the night of the 23rd, leaving Lanfeng undefended. On the 24th, Japanese troops advancing westward from Donggangtou entered Lanfeng unopposed and, relying on well-fortified fortifications, held their ground until reinforcements arrived. In the initial four days, the Nationalist offensive failed to overwhelm the Japanese, who escaped encirclement and annihilation. The four infantry and artillery regiments and one cavalry regiment on the Japanese side managed to hold the line along Lanfeng, Luowangzhai, Sanyizhai, Lanfengkou, Quxingji, Yang'erzhai, and Chenliukou on the south bank of the Yellow River, offering stubborn resistance. The Longhai Railway was completely cut off. Chiang Kai-shek, furious upon hearing the news while stationed in Zhengzhou, ordered the execution of Long Muhan, commander of the 88th Division, to restore military morale. He also decided to consolidate Hu Zongnan's, Li Hanhun's, Yu Jishi's, Song Xilian's, and Gui Yongqing's troops into the 1st Corps, with Xue Yue as commander-in-chief. On the morning of May 25, they launched a determined counterattack on Doihara's 14th Division. Song Xilian personally led the front lines on May 24 to rally the defeated 88th Division. Starting on May 25, after three days of intense combat, Li Hanhun's 64th Army advanced to seize Luowang Station and Luowangzhai, while Song Xilian's 71st Army retook Lanfeng City, temporarily reopening the Longhai Line to traffic. At Sanyi Village, Gui Yongqing's 27th Army and Yu Jishi's 74th Army captured a series of outlying positions, including Yang'eyao, Chailou, Cailou, Hezhai, Xuelou, and Baowangsi. Despite these gains, more than 6,000 Japanese troops offered stubborn resistance. During the fighting, Ji Hongru, commander of the 302nd Regiment, was seriously wounded but continued to fight, shouting, “Don't worry about my death! Brothers, fight on!” He ultimately died a heroic death from his wounds. By May 27, Chiang Kai-shek, concerned that the forces had not yet delivered a decisive victory at Lanfeng, personally reprimanded the participating generals and ordered them to completely encircle and annihilate the enemy west of Lanfeng by the following day. He warned that if the opportunity was missed and Japanese reinforcements arrived, the position could be endangered. The next day, Chiang Kai-shek issued another telegram, urging Cheng Qian's First War Zone and all participating units to press the offensive. The telegram allegedly had this in it “It will forever be a laughingstock in the history of warfare.” Meanwhile on the other side, to prevent the annihilation of Doihara's 14th Division, the elite Japanese 16th Division and the 3rd Mixed Brigade, totaling over 40,000 men, launched a westward assault from Dangshan, capturing Yucheng on May 26. They then began probing the outskirts of Guide. Huang Jie's Eighth Army, responsible for the defense, withdrew to the outskirts of Guide that evening. On May 28, Huang Jie again led his troops on his own initiative, retreating to Liuhe and Kaifeng, leaving only the 187th Division to defend Zhuji Station and Guide City. At dawn on May 29, Peng Linsheng, commander of the 187th Division, also withdrew his troops, leaving Guide a deserted city. The Japanese occupied Guide without a fight. The loss of Guide dramatically shifted the tide of the war. Threatened on the flanks by the Japanese 16th Division, the Nationalist forces were forced onto the defensive. On May 28, the Japanese 14th Division concentrated its forces to counterattack Gui Yongqing's troops, but they were defeated again, allowing the Japanese to stabilize their position. At the same time, the fall of Shangqiu compelled Xue Yue's corps to withdraw five divisions to block the enemy in Shangqiu, and the Nationalist Army shifted to a defensive posture with the 14th Division holding Sanyizhai and Quxingji. To the north of the battlefield, the Japanese 4th Mixed Brigade, numbering over 10,000 men, was preparing to force a crossing of the Yellow River in order to join with the nearby 14th Division. More seriously, the 10th Division, together with its 13th Mixed Brigade and totaling more than 40,000 men, had captured Woyang and Bozhou on the Henan-Anhui border and was rapidly encircling eastern Henan. By the time of the Battle of Lanfeng, Japanese forces had deployed more than 100,000 troops, effectively surrounding the Nationalist army. On May 31, the First War Zone decided to withdraw completely, and the Battle of Lanfeng ended in defeat for the Nationalists, forcing Chiang Kai-shek to authorize diverting the Yellow River embankment to relieve pressure. The consequence was a deteriorating strategic situation, as encirclement tightened and reinforcement options dwindled, driving a retreat from the Lanfeng front. The National Army suffered more than 67,000 casualties, killed and wounded more than 10,000 Japanese soldiers, Lanfeng was lost, and Zhengzhou was in danger. As in Nanjing, this Chinese army might have lived to fight another day, but the effect on Xuzhou itself was horrific. The city had endured Japanese bombardment since August 1937, and the population's mood swung between cautious hope and utter despair. In March, Du Zhongyuan visited Xuzhou. Before he left Wuhan, friends told him that “the city was desolate and the people were terrified, all the inhabitants of Xuzhou were quietly getting on with their business … sometimes it was even calmer than Wuhan.” The Australian journalist Rhodes Farmer recalled a similar image in a book published at war's end, noting the “ordinary townsfolk who became wardens, fire-fighters and first-aid workers during the raid and then went back to their civil jobs.” Yet the mid-May departure of Nationalist troops left the city and its outskirts at the mercy of an angry Imperial Army. Bombing continued through the final days of battle, and a single raid on May 14, 1938 killed 700 people. Around Xuzhou, buildings and bridges were destroyed—some by retreating Chinese forces, some by advancing Japanese troops. Taierzhuang, the scene of the earlier iconic defense, was utterly destroyed. Canadian Jesuits who remained in Xuzhou after its fall recorded that more than a third of the houses were razed, and most of the local population had fled in terror. In rural areas around the city, massacres were repeatedly reported, many witnessed by missionaries. Beyond the atrocities of the Japanese, locals faced banditry in the absence of law enforcement, and vital agricultural work such as planting seed ground to a halt. The loss of Xuzhou was both strategic and symbolic. It dealt a severe blow to Chiang's attempt to hold central China and to control regional troop movements. Morale, which Taierzhuang had briefly boosted, was battered again though not extinguished. The fall signaled that the war would be long, and that swift victory against Japan was no longer likely. Mao Zedong's Yan'an base, far to the northwest, grasped the meaning of defeat there. In May 1938 he delivered one of his most celebrated lectures, “On Protracted War,” chiding those who had over-optimistically claimed the Xuzhou campaign could be a quasi-decisive victory and arguing that, after Taierzhuang, some had become “giddy.” Mao insisted that China would ultimately prevail, yet he warned that it could not be won quickly, and that the War of Resistance would be protracted. In the meantime, the development of guerrilla warfare remained an essential piece of the long-term strategy that the Communist armies would pursue in north China. Yet the loss of Xuzhou did not necessarily portend a long war; it could, instead, presage a war that would be terrifyingly short. By spring 1938 the Chinese defenders were desperate. There was a real danger that the entire war effort could collapse, and the Nationalist governments' notable success as protectors of a shrinking “Free China” lay in avoiding total disaster. Government propaganda had successfully portrayed a plan beyond retreat to foreign observers, yet had Tokyo captured Wuhan in the spring, the Chinese Army would have had to withdraw at speed, reinforcing perceptions of disintegration. Western governments were unlikely to intervene unless convinced it was in their interests. Within the Nationalist leadership, competing instincts persisted. The government pursued welfare measures for the people in the midst of a massive refugee relief effort, the state and local organizations, aided by the International Red Cross, housed large numbers of refugees in 1937–1938. Yet there was a harsher strain within policy circles, with some officials willing to sacrifice individual lives for strategic or political ends as the Japanese threat intensified. Throughout central China, the Yellow River, China's “Sorrow”, loomed as the dominant geographic force shaping history. The loess-laden river, notorious for floods and shifting channels, was banked by massive dikes near Zhengzhou, exactly along the line the Japanese would traverse toward Wuhan. Using the river as a military instrument was discussed as a drastic option: Chiang and Cheng Qian's First War Zone contemplated diverting or breaching the dikes to halt or slow the Japanese advance, a measure that could buy time but would unleash enormous civilian suffering. The idea dated back to 1887 floods that cost hundreds of thousands of lives, and even in 1935 Alexander von Falkenhausen had warned that the Yellow River could become the final line of defense. In 1938 Chiang, recognizing the futility of defeating the Japanese by conventional means at Zhengzhou, considered unleashing the river's force if necessary to impede the invaders. The political and strategic calculus was stark: protect central China and Wuhan, even if it required drastic and morally fraught measures. A more humane leader might have hesitated to break the dikes and spare the dams, allowing the Japanese to take Wuhan. But Chiang Kai-shek believed that if the dikes were not breached and Wuhan fell within days, the Nationalist government might be unable to relocate to Chongqing in time and would likely surrender, leaving Japan in control of almost all of China. Some have compared the choice to France's surrender in June 1940, underscoring that Chiang's decision came during the country's most terrifying assault, with Chinese forces much weaker and less trained than their European counterparts. The dilemma over whether to break the Yellow River dikes grew out of desperation. Chiang ultimately ordered General Wei Rulin to blow the dike that held the Yellow River in central Henan. There was no doubt about the consequences: floods would inundate vast areas of central China, creating a waterlogged barrier that would halt the Japanese advance. Yet for the plan to succeed, it had to be carried out quickly, and the government could offer no public warning in case the Japanese detected it and accelerated their movement. Xiong Xianyu, chief of staff in the 8th Division at the time, recorded the urgency of those hours in his diary. The Japanese were already on the north bank of the Yellow River, briefly delayed when the Chinese army blew up the railway bridge across the river. The destruction of the dikes was the next step: if the area became a sea of mud, there would be no way the Japanese could even attempt to reconstruct the bridge. Blasting the dikes proved easier in theory than in practice. Holding back such a massive body of water required substantial engineering, dams thick and well fortified. The army made its first attempts to blow the dike at the small town of Zhaokou between June 4 and 6, 1938, but the structure proved too durable; another nearby attempt failed as well. Hour by hour, the Japanese moved closer. Division commander Jiang Zaizhen asked Xiong Xianyu for his opinion on where they might breach the dams. Xiong wrote “I discussed the topography, and said that two places, Madukou and Huayuankou, were both possible.” But Madukou was too close to Zhaokou, where the breach had already failed, presenting a danger that the Japanese might reach it very soon. The village of Huayuankou, however, lay farther away and on a bend in the river: “To give ourselves enough time, Huayuankou would be best.” At first, the soldiers treated the task as a military engineering assignment, an “exciting” one in Xiong's words. Xiong and Wei Rulin conducted their first site inspection after dark, late on June 6. The surroundings offered a deceptive calm: Xiong recounted “The wind blew softly, and the river water trickled pleasantly.” Yet gauging the water level proved difficult, hampered by murky moonlight and burned-out flashlights. They spent the night in their car to determine precisely where to break the dike as soon as day broke. But daylight seemed to bring home the consequences of what they planned to do, and the soldiers grew increasingly anxious. Wang Songmei, commander of the 2nd Regiment, addressed the workers about to breach the dike: “My brothers, this plan will be of benefit to our country and our nation, and will lessen the harm that is being done to the people.In the future, you'll find good wives and have plenty of children.” Wang's words were meant to reassure the men of the political necessity of their actions and that fate would not, in the traditional Chinese sense, deny them a family because of the enormity of their deeds. General Wei confirmed that Huayuankou was the right spot, and on June 8 the work began, with about 2,000 men taking part. The Nationalist government was eager to ensure rapid progress. Xiong recorded that the “highest authorities”,, kept making telephone calls from Wuhan to check on progress. In addition, the party sent performers to sing and play music to bolster the workers' spirits. Senior General Shang Zhen announced to the laborers that if they breached the dam by midnight on June 8, each would receive 2,000 yuan; if they achieved it by six the next morning, they would still be paid 1,000 yuan. They needed encouragement, for the diggers had no artificial assistance. After the initial failures at Zhaokou, Wei's troops relied entirely on manual labor, with no explosives used. Yet the workers earned their payments, and the dike was breached in just a few hours. On the morning of June 9, Xiong recorded a rapid shift in mood: the atmosphere became tense and solemn. Initially, the river flow was modest, but by about 1:00 p.m. the water surged “fiercely,” flowing “like 10,000 horses.” Looking toward the distance, Xiong felt as though a sea had appeared before him. “My heart ached,” he wrote. The force of the water widened the breach, and a deadly stream hundreds of feet wide comprising about three-quarters of the river's volume—rushed southeast across the central Chinese plains. “We did this to stop the enemy,” Xiong reflected, “so we didn't regret the huge sacrifice, as it was for a greater victory.” Yet he and the other soldiers also saw a grim reality: the troops who had taken on the task of destroying the railway bridge and the dikes could not bear the flood's consequences alone. It would be up to the government and the people of the nation to provide relief for the countless households uprooted by the flood. In fact, the previous evening Commander Jiang had telephoned to request assistance for those flooded out of their homes. Wei, Xiong, and their troops managed to escape by wooden boats. Hundreds of thousands of farmers trapped in the floods were far less fortunate. Time magazine's correspondent Theodore White reported on the devastation a few days later “Last week “The Ungovernable” [i.e. the Yellow River] lashed out with a flood which promised to change not only its own course but also the course of the whole Sino-Japanese War. Severe breaks in the dikes near Kaifeng sent a five-foot wall of water fanning out over a 500-squaremile area, spreading death. Toll from Yellow River floods is not so much from quick drowning as from gradual disease and starvation. The river's filth settles ankle-deep on the fields, mothering germs, smothering crops. Last week, about 500,000 peasants were driven from 2,000 communities to await rescue or death on whatever dry ground they could find”. Chiang's government had committed one of the grossest acts of violence against its own people, and he knew that the publicity could be a damaging blow to its reputation. He decided to divert blame by announcing that the dike had been broken, but blaming the breach on Japanese aerial bombing. The Japanese, in turn, fiercely denied having bombed the dikes. White's reporting reflected the immediate response of most foreigners; having heard about the atrocities at Nanjing and Xuzhou, he was disinclined to give the Japanese the benefit of the doubt. Furthermore, at the very time that the Yellow River was flooding central China, the Japanese were heavily bombing Guangzhou, causing thousands of casualties. To White, the Japanese counterargument—that the Chinese themselves were responsible, seemed unthinkable: “These accusations, foreign observers thought, were absurd. For the Chinese to check the Japanese advance at possible sacrifice of half a million lives would be a monstrous pyrrhic victory. Besides, dike-cutting is the blackest of Chinese crimes, and the Chinese Army would hardly risk universal censure for slight tactical gains.” But, of course, that is exactly what they had done. During the war the Nationalists never admitted that they, not the Japanese, had breached the dikes. But the truth quickly became widely known. Just a month later, on July 19, US Ambassador Johnson noted, in private communication, that the “Chinese blocked the advance on Chengchow [Zhengzhou] by breaching the Yellow River dikes.” Eventually some 54,000 square kilometers of central China were inundated by the floods. If the Japanese had committed such an act, it would have been remembered as the prime atrocity of the war, dwarfing even the Nanjing Massacre or the Chongqing air raids in terms of the number of people who suffered. Accurate statistics were impossible to obtain in the midst of wartime chaos and disaster, but in 1948 figures issued by the Nationalists themselves suggested enormous casualties: for the three affected provinces of Henan, Anhui, and Jiangsu, the number of dead was put at 844,489, with some 4.8 million becoming refugees. More recent studies place the numbers lower, but still estimate the dead at around 500,000, and 3–5 million refugees. In contrast, the devastating May 1939 air raids on Chongqing killed some thousands. Xiong reflected in his diary that the breaching of the Yellow River dikes was a sacrifice for a greater victory. Even to some Japanese it seemed that the tactic had been successful in the short term: the first secretary at the US Embassy in Wuhan reported that the flood had “completely checked the Japanese advance on Chengchow” and had prevented them taking Wuhan by rail. Instead, he predicted, the attack was likely to come by water and along the north shore of the Yangtze. Supporters of the dike breaches could argue that these acts saved central China and Chiang's headquarters in Wuhan for another five months. The Japanese were indeed prevented from advancing along the Long–Hai railway toward Wuhan. In the short term the floods did what the Nationalists wanted. But the flooding was a tactic, a breathing space, and did not solve the fundamental problem: China's armies needed strong leadership and rapid reform. Some historians suggest that Chiang's decision was pointless anyway, since it merely delayed the inevitable. Theodore White was right: no strategic advantage could make the deaths of 500,000 of China's own people a worthwhile price to pay. However, Chiang Kai-shek's decision can be partly explained, though not excused, by the context. We can now look back at the actions of the Nationalists and argue that they should not have held on to Wuhan, or that their actions in breaching the dam were unjustifiable in the extreme. But for Chiang, in the hot summer of 1938, it seemed his only hope was to deny Japan as much of China for as long as possible and create the best possible circumstances for a long war from China's interior, while keeping the world's attention on what Japan was doing. The short delay won by the flooding was itself part of the strategy. In the struggle raging within the soul of the Nationalist Party, the callous, calculating streak had won, for the time being. The breaking of the dikes marked a turning point as the Nationalists committed an act whose terrible consequences they would eventually have to expiate. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. In late 1937, China's frontline trembled as Japanese forces closed in on Wuhan. Chiang Kai-shek faced a brutal choice: endure costly defenses or unleash a desperate gamble. Chiangs' radical plan emerged: breach the Yellow River dikes at Huayuankou to flood central China, buying time. The flood roared, washing villages and futures away, yet slowing the enemy. The battlefield paused, while a nation weighed courage against civilian suffering, victory against devastating costs.
It's Monday, October 13th, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Adam McManus Islamic terrorists in Congo killed 5 gold miners The Islamic Allied Democratic Forces continue to cause death and destruction in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo, reports International Christian Concern. Last Tuesday morning, October 7th, they launched the deadly attack on Rizerie village, located in the predominantly Christian Lubero territory in North Kivu Province. The Muslim attackers arrived while people were working in a gold mining site. They killed five civilians who were actively mining gold at the time. A witness said, “The people who were killed were just trying to work so they could earn a living. They woke up early that morning, hoping to provide for their families. Then the rebels came out of nowhere and brutally ended their lives. It was horrifying — gunshots, screaming, and people running in every direction. Those men did not deserve to die like that.” According to Open Doors, Congo is the 35th most dangerous country worldwide for Christians. Please pray for the safety of our brothers and sisters in Christ in Congo, Africa. Trump insists on paying soldiers in midst of gov't shutdown President Donald Trump is implementing a temporary solution to minimize the pain inflicted on American servicemen during the Democrat-induced government shutdown, reports TheBlaze. On Truth Social, the President wrote, "I am using my authority, as Commander-in-Chief, to direct our Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to use all available funds to get our Troops PAID on October 15th. We have identified funds to do this.” Democrats allowed government funding to lapse past the September 30 deadline, refusing to pass the Republican-led continuing resolution. Although spending fights have turned partisan in the past, Republicans simply proposed a clean 90-page Continuing Resolution that kept funding levels at the same rates that Democrats voted for in the past. Their bill had no partisan line items, with the only anomaly being a bipartisan boost in security funding for politicians following Charlie Kirk's assassination. On the other hand, Democrats proposed a $1.5 trillion funding bill that is chock-full of ideological provisions aimed at reversing the legislative accomplishments Republicans secured with the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Democrats have also attempted to make the spending fight about re-negotiating Obama-era health care subsidies, although they do not expire until the end of the year. 16 killed in explosion at TN military explosives manufacturer A "devastating" blast at a Tennessee military explosives manufacturing plant at 7:48am on Friday is believed to have killed 16 people, reports ABC News. Humphreys County Sheriff Chris Davis spoke at a press conference on Saturday. DAVIS: “We have notified all 16 families of those people that we feel were involved in this tragedy.” The explosion occurred at Accurate Energetic Systems in McEwen, located about 50 miles west of Nashville. DAVIS: “This is probably one of the most devastating sites I think I've been on in my career.” Help Voddie Baucham's widow and 9 children The Christian community continues to mourn the unexpected death on September 25th of Dr. Voddie Baucham, a towering figure in Evangelical circles. Known for his defense of Biblical truth, Baucham, a pastor, author, and theologian, left a legacy of family, faith, and opposing "woke" ideologies in the church. He wrote the book Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism's Looming Catastrophe. Listen to this sermon excerpt about the power of the Gospel. BAUCHAM: “We're justified, and we're adopted into the family of God. And we're sanctified, and as His children, we begin to bear the family resemblance. And we're further sanctified throughout this life by the very same Gospel that saves us, until one day when it's all said and done, we're not just saved from the penalty of sin. We're not just saved from the power of sin, but one day, we're glorified and saved from the very presence of sin. That's the Gospel that we preach. That's the Gospel that we need!” Romans 8:2 says, “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death.” And here's a soundbite where the late Voddie Baucham shared his last two wishes. BAUCHAM: “I've come to a place in my life where there's just a few things that I asked God for, and one of them that I pray for regularly is that God would allow me to spend my last day on this Earth with my wife, so that I can look her in the face and tell her that I was faithful to her to the day they put me in the ground. “And another thing that I asked for is that I have raised my children in such a way that, after I'm done scratching and clawing and fighting for the cause of the Kingdom [of God], and after I have reached out as far as I could possibly go for the sake of Christ, that I will have raised my children in such a way that rather than pursue the things of this world, they would climb over me and pick up where I left off and go further and further and further than I could ever imagine, or that I could ever have gone in and of myself. “That's what I want. More than anything else in this world. That's what I want.” If you would like to help contribute toward the $2,000,000 goal to provide for his widow, Bridget, and their 9 children, 7 of whom are still under her roof, click on the special GiveSendGo link in our transcript today at www.TheWorldview.com. So far, as of Saturday night, 5,349 people have contributed $824,650. Skeleton-wearing amulet may change history of Christianity And finally, an 1,800-year-old silver amulet discovered buried in a Frankfurt, Germany grave, still next to the chin of the man who wore it, has 18 lines of text written in Latin on just 1.37 inches of silver foil. That could be enough to rewrite the known history of Christianity in the Roman Empire, reports PopularMechanics.com. The amulet—and the inscription—are the oldest evidence of Christianity found north of the Alps. Every other link to reliable evidence of Christian life in the northern Alpine area of the Roman Empire is at least 50 years younger, all coming from the fourth century A.D. The amulet, found in a grave dating between 230 and 270 A.D., is now known as “The Frankfurt Inscription.” In a translated statement, Ina Hartwig, Frankfurt's head of culture and science, said, “This extraordinary find affects many areas of research and will keep science busy for a long time. This applies to archaeology as well as to religious studies, philology, and anthropology. Such a significant find here in Frankfurt is truly something extraordinary.” The mostly translated amulet says, “Holy, holy, holy! In the name of Jesus Christ, Son of God! The Lord of the World resists with [strength] This rescue device(?) protects the person who surrenders to the will of the Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son, since before Jesus Christ all knees bow: the heavenly ones, the earthly and the underground, and every tongue confess to Jesus Christ.” In Philippians 2:10-11, the Apostle Paul wrote, “At the name of Jesus, every knee should bow, in Heaven and on Earth and under the Earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Monday, October 13th, in the year of our Lord 2025. Follow us on X or subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music, or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.
MEMBERS! JOIN US FOR THE BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: INSERT HERE: https://youtube.com/live/5O8bjulfflUJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join This week the unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior district trial courts issued yet another feckless, sure-to-be-reserved, obstructionist Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs) against our great and powerful elected Article II Executive Branch President Donald J. Trump in the exercise of his core and plenary powers as Commander in Chief of US military forces.This time the feckless and obstructionist order was issued by Federal Judge April Perry, class of Biden 2024, and raised to the federal bench on November 22, 2024, after Trump's election as President on a 51-44 Senate vote. As is common to Biden federal bench nominees, Perry has zero prior judicial experience, and her background consists mostly of working for various left-wing organizations.Perry is obliged to simultaneously apply a tortured reading to the relevant statute that authorizes Trump's activation and deployment of the national guard, as well as simply override the Commander in Chief's judgment on whether the circumstances warrant calling out the guard—the combination resulting in a grotesque overreach far beyond the legitimate Article III authority of a federal court judge as well as being an obvious violation of the Constitution's separation of powers and infringement of the core and plenary Commander in Chief powers of the Article II. Executive Branch president. Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!I also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! EVEN BETTER, BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1043
On this week's episode, Price Atkinson and Steve Carney break down the first leg of the Commander-in-Chief's Trophy series, as Navy stayed unbeaten on the season with a 34-31 win over Air Force, and discuss Army's rebound in conference beating up UAB. The pair hand out game balls to a duo of Midshipmen who set personal and program high-water marks. They then get into the upcoming week of games, detailing how Black Knights' run game should get the best of Charlotte, the Falcons difficult challenge going on the road to UNLV, and if Navy has an advantage playing in Philadelphia against Temple. A fallen service member is highlighted in the Travis Manion Foundation Honor Roll, and the guys finish out by picking winners of this week's three contests.This episode is sponsored in part by TicketSmarter:Use promo code LWOS10 to receive $10 off purchases of $100 or moreUse promo code LWOS20 to receive $20 off purchases of $300 or moreThink smarter. TicketSmarter
Navy enjoyed success on two fronts in Commander-in-Chief's competition. Navy football beat Air Force, 34-31, in the first leg of the Commander-in-Chief's Trophy series. Mike James of The Mid Report breaks down the big win. Meanwhile, Navy men's golf beat service academy rivals Army and Air Force in the Commander-in-Chief's Cup. We talk to coach Jimmy Stobs and senior captain Jack Tarzy about the team's performance.
4. Washington's Ad Hoc Navy and the Formation of the Commander-in-Chief's Guard Author: Patrick O'Donnell Book Title: The Indispensables: The Diverse Soldier Mariners Who Shaped the Country, Formed the Navy, and Rowed Washington across the Delaware Upon George Washington's arrival in July 1775, the Continental Army suffered a critical shortage of black powder, forcing Washington to seek urgent supply solutions. He developed a unique trust with the Marbleheaders, whose nautical expertise he relied upon. Washington bypassed Congress to create his own Navy—a fleet of "cruisers" (including the Leeand the Warren) manned by Marblehead sailors, essentially perfect marines. Their primary goal was to intercept British transports laden with ordnance and powder. Captain John Manley, a Marbleheader, achieved a critical success, capturing one of the war's richest prizes—a ship filled with supplies that included a massive mortar used later at Dorchester Heights. Washington's Navy operated primarily out of Beverly, Massachusetts, a heavily defended, difficult-to-navigate, protected port. Additionally, Washington formed the Commander-in-Chief's Guard, or Lifeguard, which was an early precursor to the Secret Service, tasked with protecting the general and his papers. This handpicked volunteer unit was placed under the command of Marbleheader Caleb Gibbs.
Last time we spoke about the Nanjing Massacre. Japanese forces breached Nanjing as Chinese defenders retreated under heavy bombardment, and the city fell on December 13. In the following weeks, civilians and disarmed soldiers endured systematic slaughter, mass executions, rapes, looting, and arson, with casualties mounting rapidly. Among the most brutal episodes were hundreds of executions near the Safety Zone, mass shootings along the Yangtze River, and killings at improvised sites and “killing fields.” The massacre involved tens of thousands of prisoners, with estimates up to 300,000 victims. Women and children were subjected to widespread rape, mutilation, and terror intended to crush morale and resistance. Although the Safety Zone saved many lives, it could not shield all refugees from harm, and looting and arson devastated large parts of the city. Foreign witnesses, missionaries, and diary entries documented the extensive brutality and the apparent premeditated nature of many acts, noting the collapse of discipline among troops and orders that shaped the violence. #169 Nanjing has Fallen, the War is not Over Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. Directly after the fall of Nanjing, rumors circulated among the city's foreigners that Tang Shengzhi had been executed for his inability to hold the city against the Japanese onslaught. In fact, unlike many of his subordinates who fought in the defense, he survived. On December 12, he slipped through Yijiang Gate, where bullets from the 36th Division had claimed numerous victims, and sailed across the Yangtze to safety. Chiang Kai-shek protected him from bearing direct consequences for Nanjing's collapse. Tang was not unscathed, however. After the conquest of Nanjing, a dejected Tang met General Li Zongren at Xuzhou Railway Station. In a brief 20-minute conversation, Tang lamented, “Sir, Nanjing's fall has been unexpectedly rapid. How can I face the world?” Li, who had previously taunted Tang for over-eagerness, offered sympathy. “Don't be discouraged. Victory or defeat comes every day for the soldier. Our war of resistance is a long-term proposition. The loss of one city is not decisive.” By December 1937, the outlook for Chiang Kai-shek's regime remained bleak. Despite his public pledges, he had failed to defend the capital. Its sturdy walls, which had withstood earlier sieges, were breached in less than 100 hours. Foreign observers remained pessimistic about the prospects of continuing the fight against Japan. The New York Times wrote “The capture of Nanking was the most overwhelming defeat suffered by the Chinese and one of the most tragic military debacles in modern warfare. In defending Nanking, the Chinese allowed themselves to be surrounded and then slaughtered… The graveyard of tens of thousands of Chinese soldiers may also be the graveyard of all Chinese hopes of resisting conquest by Japan.” Foreign diplomats doubted Chiang's ability to sustain the war, shrinking the question to whether he would stubbornly continue a losing fight or seek peace. US Ambassador Nelson Johnson wrote in a letter to Admiral Yarnell, then commander of the US Asicatic Fleet “There is little left now for the Chinese to do except to carry on a desultory warfare in the country, or to negotiate for the best terms they can get”. The Japanese, too, acted as if Chiang Kai-shek had already lost the war. They assumed the generalissimo was a spent force in Chinese politics as well, and that a gentle push would suffice to topple his regime like a house of cards. On December 14, Prime Minister Konoe announced that Chiang's losses of Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and now Nanjing, had created a new situation. “The National Government has become but a shadow of its former self. If a new Chinese regime emerged to replace Chiang's government, Japan would deal with it, provided it is a regime headed in the right direction.” Konoe spoke the same day as a Liaison Conference in Tokyo, where civilian and military leaders debated how to treat China now that it had been thoroughly beaten on the battlefield. Japanese demands had grown significantly: beyond recognizing Manchukuo, Japan pressed for the creation of pro-Japanese regimes in Inner Mongolia and the north China area. The same day, a puppet government was established in Japanese-occupied Beijing. While these demands aimed to end China as a unitary state, Japanese policy was moving toward the same goal. The transmissions of these demands via German diplomatic channels caused shock and consternation in Chinese government circles, and the Chinese engaged in what many regarded as stalling tactics. Even at this late stage, there was division among Japan's top decision makers. Tada, deputy chief of the Army General Staff, feared a protracted war in China and urged keeping negotiations alive. He faced strong opposition from the cabinet, including the foreign minister and the ministers of the army and navy, and ultimately he relented. Tada stated “In this state of emergency, it is necessary to avoid any political upheaval that might arise from a struggle between the Cabinet and the Army General Staff.” Although he disagreed, he no longer challenged the uncompromising stance toward China. On January 16, 1938, Japan publicly stated that it would “cease henceforth to deal with” Chiang Kai-shek. This was a line that could not be uncrossed. War was the only option. Germany, the mediator between China and Japan, also considered Chiang a losing bet. In late January 1938, von Dirksen, the German ambassador in Tokyo, urged a fundamental shift in German diplomacy and advocated abandoning China in favor of Japan. He warned that this was a matter of urgency, since Japan harbored grudges against Germany for its half-hearted peace efforts. In a report, von Dirksen wrote that Japan, “in her deep ill humor, will confront us with unpleasant decisions at an inopportune moment.” Von Dirksen's view carried the day in Berlin. Nazi Germany and Hirohito's Japan were on a trajectory that, within three years, would forge the Axis and place Berlin and Tokyo in the same camp in a conflict that would eventually span the globe. Rabe, who returned to Germany in 1938, found that his account of Japanese atrocities in Nanjing largely fell on deaf ears. He was even visited by the Gestapo, which apparently pressed him to keep quiet about what he had seen. Ambassador von Dirksen also argued in his January 1938 report that China should be abandoned because of its increasingly friendly ties with the Soviet Union. There was some merit to this claim. Soviet aid to China was substantial: by the end of 1937, 450 Soviet aviators were serving in China. Without them, Japan likely would have enjoyed air superiority. Chiang Kai-shek, it seemed, did not fully understand the Russians' motives. They were supplying aircraft and pilots to keep China in the war while keeping themselves out. After Nanjing's fall, Chiang nevertheless reached out to Joseph Stalin, inviting direct Soviet participation in the war. Stalin politely declined, noting that if the Soviet Union joined the conflict, “the world would say the Soviet Union was an aggressor, and sympathy for Japan around the world would immediately increase.” In a rare moment of candor a few months later, the Soviet deputy commissar for foreign affairs spoke with the French ambassador, describing the situation in China as “splendid.” He expected China to continue fighting for several more years, after which Japan would be too weakened to undertake major operations against the Soviet Union. It was clear that China was being used. Whatever the motive, China was receiving vital help from Stalin's Russia while the rest of the world stood on the sidelines, reluctant to upset Japan. Until Operation Barbarossa, when the Soviet Union was forced to the brink by the German Army and could no longer sustain extensive overseas aid, it supplied China with 904 planes, 1,516 trucks, 1,140 artillery pieces, 9,720 machine guns, 50,000 rifles, 31,600 bombs, and more. Despite all of this, all in all, China's position proved less disastrous than many observers had feared. Chinese officials later argued that the battle of Nanjing was not the unmitigated fiasco it appeared to be. Tang Shengzhi had this to say in his memoirs“I think the main purpose of defending Nanjing was to buy time, to allow troops that had just been pulled out of battle to rest and regroup. It wasn't simply because it was the capital or the site of Sun Yat-sen's mausoleum.” Tan Daoping, an officer in Nanjing, described the battle “as a moderate success because it drew the Japanese in land”. This of course was a strategy anticipated by interwar military thinker Jiang Baili. It also allowed dozens of Chinese divisions to escape Shanghai, since the Japanese forces that could have pursued them were tied down with the task of taking Nanjing. Tan Daoping wrote after the war “They erred in believing they could wage a quick war and decide victory immediately. Instead, their dream was shattered; parts of their forces were worn out, and they were hindered from achieving a swift end”. Even so, it was a steep price was paid in Chinese lives. As in Shanghai, the commanders in Nanjing thought they could fight on the basis of sheer willpower. Chinese officer Qin Guo Qi wrote in his memoirs “In modern war, you can't just rely on the spirit of the troops. You can't merely rely on physical courage and stamina. The battle of Nanjing explains that better than anything”. As for the Brigade commander of the 87th division, Chen Yiding, who emerged from Nanjing with only a few hundred survivors, was enraged. “During the five days of the battle for Nanjing, my superiors didn't see me even once. They didn't do their duty. They also did not explain the overall deployments in the Nanjing area. What's worse, they didn't give us any order to retreat. And afterwards I didn't hear of any commander being disciplined for failing to do his job.” Now back in November of 1937, Chiang Kai-shek had moved his command to the great trinity of Wuhan. For the Nationalists, Wuhan was a symbolically potent stronghold: three municipalities in one, Hankou, Wuchang, and Hanyang. They had all grown prosperous as gateways between coastal China and the interior. But the autumn disasters of 1937 thrust Wuhan into new prominence, and, a decade after it had ceased to be the temporary capital, it again became the seat of military command and resistance. Leading Nationalist politicians had been seen in the city in the months before the war, fueling suspicions that Wuhan would play a major role in any imminent conflict. By the end of the year, the generals and their staffs, along with most of the foreign embassies, had moved upriver. Yet as 1937 slipped into 1938, the Japanese advance seemed practically unstoppable. From the destruction of Shanghai, to the massacre in Nanjing, to the growing vulnerability of Wuhan, the NRA government appeared powerless against the onslaught. Now the Japanese government faced several options: expanding the scope of the war to force China into submission, which would risk further depletion of Japan's military and economic resources; establishing an alternative regime in China as a bridge for reconciliation, thereby bypassing the Nationalist government for negotiations; and engaging in indirect or direct peace negotiations with the Nationalist Government, despite the failure of previous attempts, while still seeking new opportunities for negotiation. However, the Nanjing massacre did not compel the Chinese government and its people to submit. On January 2, Chiang Kai-shek wrote in his diary, “The conditions proposed by Japan are equivalent to the conquest and extinction of our country. Rather than submitting and perishing, it is better to perish in defeat,” choosing to refuse negotiations and continue resistance. In January 1938 there was a new escalation of hostilities. Up to that point, Japan had not officially declared war, even during the Shanghai campaign and the Nanjing massacre. However on January 11, an Imperial Conference was held in Tokyo in the presence of Emperor Hirohito. Prime Minister Konoe outlined a “Fundamental Policy to deal with the China Incident.”The Imperial Conference was attended by Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe, Army Chief of Staff Prince Kan'in, Navy Minister Admiral Fushimi, and others to reassess its policy toward China. Citing the Nationalist Government's delay and lack of sincerity, the Japanese leadership decided to terminate Trautmann's mediation. At the conference, Japan articulated a dual strategy: if the Nationalist Government did not seek peace, Japan would no longer regard it as a viable negotiating partner, instead supporting emerging regimes, seeking to resolve issues through incidents, and aiming either to eliminate or incorporate the existing central government; if the Nationalist Government sought reconciliation, it would be required to cease resistance, cooperate with Japan against communism, and pursue economic cooperation, including officially recognizing Manchukuo and allowing Japanese troops in Inner Mongolia, North China, Central China, and co-governance of Shanghai. The Konoe cabinet relayed this proposal to the German ambassador in Japan on December 22, 1937: It called for: diplomatic recognition of Manchukuo; autonomy for Inner Mongolia; cessation of all anti-Japanese and anti-Manchukuo policies; cooperation between Japan, Manchukuo, and China against communism; war reparations; demilitarized zones in North China and Inner Mongolia; and a trade agreement among Japan, Manchukuo, and China. Its terms were too severe, including reparations payable to Japan and new political arrangements that would formalize the separation of north China under Japanese control. Chiang's government would have seventy-two hours to accept; if they refused, Tokyo would no longer recognize the Nationalist government and would seek to destroy it. On January 13, 1938, the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Chonghui informed Germany that China needed a fuller understanding of the additional conditions for peace talks to make a decision. The January 15 deadline for accepting Japan's terms elapsed without Chinese acceptance. Six days after the deadline for a Chinese government reply, an Imperial Conference “Gozen Kaigi” was convened in Tokyo to consider how to handle Trautmann's mediation. The navy, seeing the war as essentially an army matter, offered no strong position; the army pressed for ending the war through diplomatic means, arguing that they faced a far more formidable Far Eastern Soviet threat at the northern Manchukuo border and wished to avoid protracted attrition warfare. Foreign Minister Kōki Hirota, however, strongly disagreed with the army, insisting there was no viable path to Trautmann's mediation given the vast gap between Chinese and Japanese positions. A second conference followed on January 15, 1938, attended by the empire's principal cabinet members and military leaders, but without the emperor's presence. The debate grew heated over whether to continue Trautmann's mediation. Hayao Tada, Deputy Chief of Army General Staff, argued for continuation, while Konoe, Hirota, Navy Minister Mitsumasa Yonai, and War Minister Hajime Sugiyama opposed him. Ultimately, Tada acceded to the position of Konoe and Hirota. On the same day, Konoe conveyed the cabinet's conclusion, termination of Trautmann's mediation, to the emperor. The Japanese government then issued a statement on January 16 declaring that it would no longer treat the Nationalist Government as a bargaining partner, signaling the establishment of a new Chinese regime that would cooperate with Japan and a realignment of bilateral relations. This became known as the first Konoe statement, through which Tokyo formally ended Trautmann's mediation attempt. The Chinese government was still weighing its response when, at noon on January 16, Konoe publicly declared, “Hereafter, the Imperial Government will not deal with the National Government.” In Japanese, this became the infamous aite ni sezu (“absolutely no dealing”). Over the following days, the Japanese government made it clear that this was a formal breach of relations, “stronger even than a declaration of war,” in the words of Foreign Minister Hirota Kōki. The Chinese ambassador to Japan, who had been in Tokyo for six months since hostilities began, was finally recalled. At the end of January, Chiang summoned a military conference and declared that the top strategic priority would be to defend the east-central Chinese city of Xuzhou, about 500 kilometers north of Wuhan. This decision, like the mobilization near Lugouqiao, was heavily influenced by the railway: Xuzhou sat at the midpoint of the Tianjin–Pukou Jinpu line, and its seizure would grant the Japanese mastery over north–south travel in central China. The Jinpu line also crossed the Longhai line, China's main cross-country artery from Lanzhou to the port of Lianyungang, north of Shanghai. The Japanese military command marked the Jinpu line as a target in spring 1938. Control over Xuzhou and the rail lines threading through it were thus seen as vital to the defense of Wuhan, which lay to the city's south. Chiang's defense strategy fit into a larger plan evolving since the 1920s, when the military thinker Jiang Baili had first proposed a long war against Japan; Jiang's foresight earned him a position as an adviser to Chiang in 1938. Jiang had previously run the Baoding military academy, a predecessor of the Whampoa academy, which had trained many of China's finest young officers in the early republic 1912–1922. Now, many of the generals who had trained under Jiang gathered in Wuhan and would play crucial roles in defending the city: Chen Cheng, Bai Chongxi, Tang Shengzhi, and Xue Yue. They remained loyal to Chiang but sought to avoid his tendency to micromanage every aspect of strategy. Nobody could say with certainty whether Wuhan would endure the Japanese onslaught, and outsiders' predictions were gloomy. As Wuhan's inhabitants tasted their unexpected new freedoms, the Japanese pressed on with their conquest of central China. After taking Nanjing, the IJA 13th Division crossed the Yangtze River to the north and advanced to the Outang and Mingguang lines on the east bank of the Chihe River in Anhui Province, while the 2nd Army of the North China Front crossed the Yellow River to the south between Qingcheng and Jiyang in Shandong, occupied Jinan, and pressed toward Jining, Mengyin, and Qingdao. To open the Jinpu Railway and connect the northern and southern battlefields, the Japanese headquarters mobilized eight divisions, three brigades, and two detachments , totaling about 240,000 men. They were commanded by General Hata Shunroku, commander of the Central China Expeditionary Army, and Terauchi Hisaichi, commander of the North China Front Army. Their plan was a north–south advance: first seize Xuzhou, a strategic city in east China; then take Zhengzhou in the west along the Longhai Railway connecting Lanzhou and Lianyungang; and finally push toward Wuhan in the south along the Pinghan Railway connecting Beijing and Hankou. At the beginning of 1938, Japan's domestic mobilization and military reorganization had not yet been completed, and there was a shortage of troops to expand the front. At the Emperor's Imperial Conference on February 16, 1938, the General Staff Headquarters argued against launching operations before the summer of 1938, preferring to consolidate the front in 1938 and undertake a large-scale battle in 1939. Although the Northern China Expeditionary Force and the Central China Expeditionary Force proposed a plan to open the Jinpu Line to connect the northern and southern battlefields, the proposal was not approved by the domestic General Staff Headquarters. The Chinese army, commanded by Li Zongren, commander-in-chief of the Fifth War Zone, mobilized about 64 divisions and three brigades, totaling roughly 600,000 men. The main force was positioned north of Xuzhou to resist the southern Japanese advance, with a portion deployed along the southern Jinpu Railway to block the southern push and secure Xuzhou. Early in the campaign, Chiang Kai-shek redeployed the heavy artillery brigade originally promised to Han Fuju to Tang Enbo's forces. To preserve his strength, Shandong Provincial Governor Han Fuju abandoned the longstanding Yellow River defenses in Shandong, allowing the Japanese to capture the Shandong capital of Jinan in early March 1938. This defection opened the Jinpu Railway to attack. The Japanese 10th Division, under Rensuke Isogai, seized Tai'an, Jining, and Dawenkou, ultimately placing northern Shandong under Japanese control. The aim was to crush the Chinese between the two halves of a pincer movement. At Yixian and Huaiyuan, north of Xuzhou, both sides fought to the death: the Chinese could not drive back the Japanese, but the Japanese could not scatter the defenders either. At Linyi, about 50 kilometers northeast of Xuzhou, Zhang Zizhong, who had previously disgraced himself by abandoning an earlier battlefield—became a national hero for his determined efforts to stop the Japanese troops led by Itagaki Seishirō, the conqueror of Manchuria. The Japanese hoped that they could pour in as many as 400,000 troops to destroy the Chinese forces holding eastern and central China. Chiang Kai-shek was determined that this should not happen, recognizing that the fall of Xuzhou would place Wuhan in extreme danger. On April 1, 1938, he addressed Nationalist Party delegates, linking the defense of Wuhan to the fate of the party itself. He noted that although the Japanese had invaded seven provinces, they had only captured provincial capitals and main transport routes, while villages and towns off those routes remained unconquered. The Japanese, he argued, might muster more than half a million soldiers, but after eight or nine months of hard fighting they had become bogged down. Chiang asserted that as long as Guangzhou (Canton) remained in Chinese hands, it would be of little significance if the Japanese invaded Wuhan, since Guangzhou would keep China's sea links open and Guangdong, Sun Yat-sen's homeland, would serve as a revolutionary base area. If the “woren” Japanese “dwarfs” attacked Wuhan and Guangzhou, it would cost them dearly and threaten their control over the occupied zones. He reiterated his plan: “the base area for our war will not be in the zones east of the Beiping–Wuhan or Wuhan–Guangdong railway lines, but to their west.” For this reason he authorized withdrawing Chinese troops behind the railway lines. Chiang's speech mixed defiance with an explanation of why regrouping was necessary; it was a bold public posture in the face of a developing military disaster, yet it reflected the impossible balance he faced between signaling resolve and avoiding overcommitment of a city that might still fall. Holding Xuzhou as the first priority required Chiang Kai-shek to place a great deal of trust in one of his rivals: the southwestern general Li Zongren. The relationship between Chiang and Li would become one of the most ambivalent in wartime China. Li hailed from Guangxi, a province in southwestern China long regarded by the eastern heartland as half civilized. Its people had rarely felt fully part of the empire ruled from Beijing or even Nanjing, and early in the republic there was a strong push for regional autonomy. Li was part of a cohort of young officers trained in regional academies who sought to bring Guangxi under national control; he joined the Nationalist Party in 1923, the year Sun Yat-sen announced his alliance with the Soviets. Li was not a Baoding Academy graduate but had trained at Yunnan's equivalent institution, which shared similar views on military professionalism. He enthusiastically took part in the Northern Expedition (1926–1928) and played a crucial role in the National Revolutionary Army's ascent to control over much of north China. Yet after the Nanjing government took power, Li grew wary of Chiang's bid to centralize authority in his own person. In 1930 Li's so‑called “Guangxi clique” participated in the Central Plains War, the failed effort by militarist leaders to topple Chiang; although the plot failed, Li retreated to his southwest base, ready to challenge Chiang again. The occupation of Manchuria in 1931 reinforced Li's belief that a Japanese threat posed a greater danger than Chiang's centralization. The tension between the two men was evident from the outset of the war. On October 10, 1937, Chiang appointed Li commander of the Fifth War Zone; Li agreed on the condition that Chiang refrain from issuing shouling—personal commands—to Li's subordinates. Chiang complied, a sign of the value he placed on Li's leadership and the caution with which he treated Li and his Guangxi ally Bai Chongxi. As Chiang sought any possible victory amid retreat and destruction, he needed Li to deliver results. As part of the public-relations front, journalists were given access to commanders on the Xuzhou front. Li and his circle sought to shape their image as capable leaders to visiting reporters, with Du Zhongyuan among the most active observers. Du praised the “formidable southwestern general, Li Zongren,” calling him “elegant and refined” and “vastly magnanimous.” In language echoing the era's soldiers' public presentation, Du suggested that Li's forces operated under strict, even disciplined, orders “The most important point in the people's war is that . . . troops do not harass the people of the country. If the people are the water, the soldiers are the fish, and if you have fish with no water, inevitably they're going to choke; worse still is to use our water to nurture the enemy's fish — that really is incomparably stupid”. Within the southern front, on January 26, 1938, the Japanese 13th Division attacked Fengyang and Bengbu in Anhui Province, while Li Pinxian, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the 5th War Zone, directed operations south of Xuzhou. The defending 31st Corps of the 11th Group Army, after resisting on the west bank of the Chi River, retreated to the west of Dingyuan and Fengyang. By February 3, the Japanese had captured Linhuai Pass and Bengbu. From the 9th to the 10th, the main force of the 13th Division forced a crossing of the Huai River at Bengbu and Linhuai Pass respectively, and began an offensive against the north bank. The 51st Corps, reorganized from the Central Plains Northeast Army and led by Commander Yu Xuezhong, engaged in fierce combat with the Japanese. Positions on both sides of the Huai shifted repeatedly, producing a riverine bloodbath through intense hand-to-hand fighting. After ten days of engagement, the Fifth War Zone, under Zhang Zizhong, commander of the 59th Army, rushed to the Guzhen area to reinforce the 51st Army, and the two forces stubbornly resisted the Japanese on the north bank of the Huai River. Meanwhile, on the south bank, the 48th Army of the 21st Group Army held the Luqiao area, while the 7th Army, in coordination with the 31st Army, executed a flanking attack on the flanks and rear of the Japanese forces in Dingyuan, compelling the main body of the 13th Division to redeploy to the north bank for support. Seizing the initiative, the 59th and 51st Armies launched a counteroffensive, reclaiming all positions north of the Huai River by early March. The 31st Army then moved from the south bank to the north, and the two sides faced across the river. Subsequently, the 51st and 59th Armies were ordered to reinforce the northern front, while the 31st Army continued to hold the Huai River to ensure that all Chinese forces covering the Battle of Xuzhou were safely withdrawn. Within the northern front, in late February, the Japanese Second Army began its southward push along multiple routes. The eastern axis saw the 5th Division moving south from Weixian present-day Weifang, in Shandong, capturing Yishui, Juxian, and Rizhao before pressing directly toward Linyi, as units of the Nationalist Third Corps' 40th Army and others mounted strenuous resistance. The 59th Army was ordered to reinforce and arrived on March 12 at the west bank of the Yi River in the northern suburbs of Linyi, joining the 40th Army in a counterattack that, after five days and nights of ferocious fighting, inflicted heavy losses on the Japanese and forced them to retreat toward Juxian. On the western route, the Seya Detachment (roughly a brigade) of the Japanese 10th Division crossed the Grand Canal from Jining and attacked Jiaxiang, meeting stiff resistance from the Third Army and being thwarted, while continuing to advance south along the Jinpu Railway. The Isogai Division, advancing on the northern route without awaiting help from the southeast and east, moved southward from Liangxiadian, south of Zouxian, on March 14, with the plan to strike Tengxian, present-day Tengzhou on March 15 and push south toward Xuzhou. The defending 22nd Army and the 41st Corps fought bravely and suffered heavy casualties in a hard battle that lasted until March 17, during which Wang Mingzhang, commander of the 122nd Division defending Teng County, was killed in action. Meanwhile, a separate Japanese thrust under Itagaki Seishirō landed on the Jiaodong Peninsula and occupied Qingdao, advancing along the Jiaoji Line to strike Linyi, a key military town in southern Shandong. Pang Bingxun's 40th Army engaged the invaders in fierce combat, and later, elements of Zhang Zizhong's 333rd Brigade of the 111th Division, reinforced by the 57th Army, joined Pang Bingxun's forces to launch a double-sided pincer that temporarily repelled the Japanese attack on Linyi. By late March 1938 a frightening reality loomed: the Japanese were close to prevailing on the Xuzhou front. The North China Area Army, commanded by Itagaki Seishirō, Nishio Toshizō, and Isogai Rensuke, was poised to link up with the Central China Expeditionary Force under Hata Shunroku in a united drive toward central China. Li Zongren, together with his senior lieutenants Bai Chongxi and Tang Enbo, decided to confront the invaders at Taierzhuang, the traditional stone-walled city that would become a focal point of their defense. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Nanjing falls after one of humanities worst atrocities. Chiang Kai-Shek's war command has been pushed to Wuhan, but the Japanese are not stopping their advance. Trautmann's mediation is over and now Japan has its sights on Xuzhou and its critical railway junctions. Japan does not realize it yet, but she is now entering a long war of attrition.
MEMBERS! JOIN US FOR THE BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: https://youtube.com/live/ixCDv6uuzX0JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join Once again our Constitutional order is threatened by yet another feckless, unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior federal district trial court lawlessly laying claim to legal authority denied her by our nation's very constitutional order.The unelected Judge Karin Immelgut—I'm not kidding, she's literally a “Karin”—has decided that she possesses the authority to order about the elected Article II Executive Branch president and Commander in Chief on matters related to the deployment of federal military forces and the protection of federal property. If Trump seeks to do either of these actions in a manner not to the liking of Judge Immelgut, she believes she has the legal authority to veto his actions.This is constitutionally no less lawless than if Judge Immelgut had ordered Trump who to pardon or not pardon, what bills to veto or not veto, or ordered Congress what bills to pass or reject or what nominated officials to confirm or reject. This isn't even a vague area of constitutional law—the US Constitution is explicit that 100% of the Commander in Chief authority is placed in the single Article II Executive Branch president, and 0% is placed in any unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior district trial court judge, but once again the federal judiciary cannot restrain itself from tyranny. Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join I'm Andrew Branca, a 34-year attorney and member of the Supreme Court bar. My personal mission is to deliver to all of you political and legal analysis that is exuberantly pro-America as envisioned by our Founders, pro-Constitutional order, pro-WESTERN civilization, pro-meritocracy, pro-AMERICAN family, and adamantly opposed to everyone and everything degenerate and barbaric that undermines those great American values. America, and all of western civilization, is currently in a desperate and existential war against enemies foreign and domestic. All of us are called upon to save our great nation and western cultural tradition from a destruction that would cast ourselves, our posterity, and indeed the world into a dark ages for centuries to come. And I invite each of YOU to join me in this desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1037
Hear the full Weekender every Friday, plus Live Shows and our community Discord. Support us at http://patreon.com/muckrakepodcast. Co-hosts Jared Yates Sexton and Nick Hauselman break down the bizarre Trump–Hegseth meeting with America's top generals. Instead of commanding respect, Trump rambled through grievances and half-baked ideas while Hegseth postured and pandered, leaving serious military leaders unimpressed. We explore the dangerous implications of a president alienating his own brass, how authoritarian rhetoric collides with sheer incompetence, and why this moment opens up a host of unsettling outcomes. Along the way we look at the government shutdown, a self-defeating Argentina bailout, and the larger picture of American decline before closing with some culture picks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Retired Lieutenant General Mark Hertling joins the Beast's Hugh Dougherty to unpack the jaw-dropping spectacle at Quantico, where Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth addressed 800 top military leaders. Hertling breaks down how Military brass in the room really reacted when Trump rambled on about “dangerous cities” as training grounds, mocked rules of engagement, and praised a random World War II documentary made in the 50s. Hertling pulls no punches, calling the speeches “berating,” “embarrassing,” and dangerously out of touch with modern military standards. He explains why generals were silent, what U.S. allies and adversaries are thinking, and the legal and constitutional risks of Trump's orders. From the impact on troop morale to how Russia is exploiting the chaos, Hertling offers an inside look at a Commander-in-Chief unlike any before, and what it means for the military and the nation. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In a deranged, demeaning, and dangerous speech to our nation's military leadership - officer and enlisted alike - Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump may have thought they could inspire the men and women of the military to switch their loyalties from the Constitution to a tyrant. They were dead wrong.The danger and dementia of Donald Trump was on full display as he addressed the leadership of America's armed forces. Trump tried to pit the military against the citizenry by saying the military should focus on "the enemy within." And he told them that they should use American cities as military "training grounds."If there was any lingering question about Trump unfitness to be commander in chief of the armed forces, he cleared that up with a speech that was as un-American as it was dangerous.For nightly live Law Talks, please join Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comIf you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Rudyard and Andrew unpack the speeches made this week by U.S. Secretary of Defense Hegseth and President Trump to over 800 military generals. Trump indicated he wants to use American cities as training grounds to fight the enemy within. In plain terms, he wants to stick the military on dissenters in the United States. How much more alarming could this get? What purer definition of fascism is there? There has already been a purge in the senior ranks of the military, and it seems we are about to witness more. Do these generals carry out the orders of their commander-in-chief, or disobey unlawful commands? And what are the consequences of disobeying? Rudyard and Andrew then turn to Trump's suggestion - once again - of Canada becoming the 51st American state. Rudyard believes this is part of an attempt to get Canada to contribute financially to the Golden Dome defense shield. Is Trump making this a condition of a new trade agreement? Do Canadians still see Mark Carney as the leader best qualified to stand up to Trump and negotiate a good trade deal? And finally, how do we make Canada an attractive location for investment to withstand uncertainty from the U.S.?
In a deranged, demeaning, and dangerous speech to our nation's military leadership - officer and enlisted alike - Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump may have thought they could inspire the men and women of the military to switch their loyalties from the Constitution to a tyrant. They were dead wrong.The danger and dementia of Donald Trump was on full display as he addressed the leadership of America's armed forces. Trump tried to pit the military against the citizenry by saying the military should focus on "the enemy within." And he told them that they should use American cities as military "training grounds."If there was any lingering question about Trump unfitness to be commander in chief of the armed forces, he cleared that up with a speech that was as un-American as it was dangerous.For nightly live Law Talks, please join Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comIf you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In August 1861, General John C. Fremont—once America's most famous explorer and the Republican Party's first presidential nominee—issued an unauthorized order freeing all slaves in Missouri. President Lincoln swiftly revoked it, fearing the decision would drive crucial border states into Confederate hands. The clash between these two men revealed a fundamental tension: Fremont operated on moral urgency and personal instinct, while Lincoln worked within constitutional constraints and political reality. Fremont's military career never recovered from the confrontation.Yet sixteen months later, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation employed the exact legal framework Fremont had pioneered: military necessity as commander-in-chief during wartime. Historian and journalist John Bicknell joins us to explore how this forgotten general's bold gambit forced critical conversations about slavery's role in the war effort and ultimately shaped the constitutional pathway to emancipation. The story reveals why we remember one man as the Great Emancipator while the other faded into historical obscurity—and why both were essential to America's path toward freedom.Host: Jeff SikkengaExecutive Producer: Jeremy GyptonSubscribe: https://linktr.ee/theamericanidea
MEMBERS! JOIN US FOR THE BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: INSERT HERE: https://youtube.com/live/HBxULPRK5NgJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join President Donald J. Trump, America's Commander in Chief of all US military forces, has ordered hundreds of our field grade officers to appear before him at the Marine Corps base in Quantico VA for what I expect will be a “come to Jesus” talk. By that I mean that Trump is going to strenuously assert his authority as commander in chief, remind these generals and admirals that they work for HIM as the elected Article II Executive Branch president and commander-in-chief of the United States, and for them to straighten out their acts – or they'll be summarily fired. Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as we watch this morning's slightly time-delayed speech of Trump to the American military officers that he and he alone commands.JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join I'm Andrew Branca, a 34-year attorney and member of the Supreme Court bar. My personal mission is to deliver to all of you political and legal analysis that is exuberantly pro-America as envisioned by our Founders, pro-Constitutional order, pro-WESTERN civilization, pro-meritocracy, pro-AMERICAN family, and adamantly opposed to everyone and everything degenerate and barbaric that undermines those great American values. America, and all of western civilization, is currently in a desperate and existential war against enemies foreign and domestic. All of us are called upon to save our great nation and western cultural tradition from a destruction that would cast ourselves, our posterity, and indeed the world into a dark ages for centuries to come. And I invite each of YOU to join me in this desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Intro song: "Back in the Saddle," Tone Seeker & Dan "Lebo" Lebowitz And even better, Episode 1028
In this explosive discussion, Tom Nichols, Atlantic staff writer, joins Matt to break down Pete Hegseth's controversial speech to over 800 generals and admirals at Quantico, Virginia. From calling out "woke" policies and toxic leadership to fat-shaming officers and banning anonymous complaints, Hegseth's address is dissected as performative nonsense dripping with grievance. Nichols pulls no punches, comparing it to a Fox News clip reel and warning of real dangers to military readiness. We dive deep into Hegseth's warrior ethos rant and why it's "idiotic" -- Fitness standards, fat generals, and excluding the Commander-in-Chief? -- Scrapping anti-bullying policies – A Few Good Men vibes gone wrong (-- No more complaints: Silencing women, racism issues, and beard exceptions -- Is the military too soft? Nichols says NO – Evidence from Russia-Ukraine -- Trump's Ukraine flip-flop: From quick win to "wish both countries well" -- Government shutdown showdown: Trump owns it, Democrats' messaging fail? Nichols also touches on Trump's retribution obsession, Putin's humiliations, and why Hegseth is the least qualified Defense Secretary ever. Is this just theater, or a threat to national security?Subscribe for more hard-hitting political analysis! Like if you agree Hegseth's speech was cringeworthy, comment your thoughts on the "woke" military debate, and hit the bell for notifications.Follow Tom Nichols on X: @RadioFreeTomRead his work at The Atlantic: theatlantic.com/author/tom-nicholsSupport "Matt Lewis & The News" at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mattlewisFollow Matt Lewis & Cut Through the Noise:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MattLewisDCTwitter: https://twitter.com/mattklewisInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/mattklewis/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVhSMpjOzydlnxm5TDcYn0A– Who is Matt Lewis? –Matt K. Lewis is a political commentator and the author of Filthy Rich Politicians.Buy Matt's book: https://www.amazon.com/Filthy-Rich-Politicians-Creatures-Ruling-Class/dp/1546004416Copyright © 2025, BBL & BWL, LLC
Price Atkinson and Steve Carney break down what was a jam-packed weekend. Army struggled to find rhythm in a 28–6 loss at East Carolina, while Navy leaned on defense and quarterback Blake Horvath to outlast Rice 21–13 in rainy Annapolis. Out west, Air Force lost a wild shootout to Hawaii 44–35 despite an efficient day from QB Liam Szarka. The guys hand out game balls and look ahead to Army at UAB as well as the first leg of this season's Commander-in-Chief's Trophy — Air Force at Navy on CBS. This episode is sponsored in part by TicketSmarter:Use promo code LWOS10 to receive $10 off purchases of $100 or moreUse promo code LWOS20 to receive $20 off purchases of $300 or moreThink smarter. TicketSmarter
Hey guys, what you are about to listen to is an extremely graphic episode that will contain many scenes of gore, rape, human experimentation, honestly it will run the gambit. If you got a weak stomach, this episode might not be for you. You have been warned. I just want to take a chance to say a big thanks to all of you guys who decided to join the patreon, you guys are awesome! Please leave a comment on this episode to let me know what more you want to hear about in the future. With all of that said and done lets jump right into it. Where to begin with this one? Let start off with one of the major figures of Unit 731, Shiro Ishii. Born June 25th, 1892 in the village of Chiyoda Mura in Kamo District of Chiba Prefecture, Ishii was the product of his era. He came from a landowning class, had a very privileged childhood. His primary and secondary schoolmates described him to be brash, abrasive and arrogant. He was a teacher's pet, extremely intelligent, known to have excellent memory. He grew up during Japans ultra militarism/nationalism age, thus like any of his schoolmates was drawn towards the military. Less than a month after graduating from the Medical department of Kyoto Imperial University at the age of 28, he began military training as a probation officer in the 3rd regiment of the Imperial Guards division. Within 6 months he became a surgeon 1st Lt. During his postgraduate studies at Kyoto Imperial university he networked successfully to climb the career ladder. As a researcher he was sent out to help cure an epidemic that broke out in Japan. It was then he invented a water filter that could be carried alongside the troops. He eventually came across a report of the Geneva Protocol and conference reports of Harada Toyoji as well as other military doctors. He became impressed with the potential of chemical and biological warfare. During WW1 chemical warfare had been highly explored, leading 44 nations to pass the Geneva Protocol or more specifically “Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare”. Representatives from Japan were present at this conference and were involving in the drafting and signing of the Geneva Protocol, but it was not ratified in Japan at the time. Ishii's university mentor, Kiyano Kenji suggested he travel western countries and he did so for 2 years. Many nations were secretive about their research, but some places such as MIT were quite open. After his visit Ishii came to believe Japan was far behind everyone else in biological warfare research. After returning to Japan Ishii became an instructor at the Imperial Japanese Army Medical School. Japan of course lacked significant natural resources, thus it was a perfect nation to pursue biological weapons research. Ishii began lobbying the IJA, proposing to establish a military agency to develop biological weapons. One of his most compelling arguments was “that biological warfare must possess distinct possibilities, otherwise, it would not have been outlawed by the League of Nations.” Ishii networked his way into good favor with the Minister of Health, Koizumi Chikahiko who lended his support in August of 1932 to allow Ishii to head an Epidemic Prevention Laboratory. Ishii secured a 1795 square meter complex at the Army Medical College. Yet this did not satisfy Ishii, it simply was not the type of work he wanted to do. The location of Tokyo allowed too many eyes on his work, he could not perform human experimentation. For what he wanted to do, he had to leave Japan, and in the 1930's Japan had a few colonies or sphere's of influence, the most appetizing one being Manchuria. In 1932 alongside his childhood friend Masuda Tomosada, Ishii took a tour of Harbin and he fell in love with the location. During the 1930's Harbin was quite a cosmopolitan city, it was a major trading port and diverse in ethnicities and religions. Here there were Mongols, Russians, Chinese, Japanese, various other western groups in lesser numbers. Just about every religion was represented, it was a researcher's paradise for subjects. Ishii sought human experimentation and needed to find somewhere covert with maximum secrecy. He chose a place in the Nan Gang District of Beiyinhe village, roughly 70 kms southeast of Harbin. It was here and then he began human experimentation. One day in 1932, Ishii and the IJA entered the village and evacuated an entire block where Xuan Hua and Wu Miao intersected. They began occupying a multi-use structure that had been supporting 100 Chinese vendors who sold clothes and food to the locals. They then began drafting Chinese laborers to construct the Zhong Ma complex to house the “Togo Unit” named after the legendary admiral, Togo Heihachiro. The Chinese laborers were underpaid and under constant watch from Japanese guards, limiting their movement and preventing them from understanding what they were building, or what was occurring within the complex. The complex was built in under a year, it held 100 rooms, 3 meter high brick walls and had an electric fence surrounding the perimeter. One thousand captives at any given time could be imprisoned within the complex. To ensure absolute secrecy, security guards patrolled the complex 24/7. Saburo Endo, director of Operations for the Kwantung Army once inspected the Togo Unit and described it in his book “The Fifteen Years' Sino-Japanese War and Me”, as such: [It was] converted from a rather large soy sauce workshop, surrounded by high rammed earth wall. All the attending military doctors had pseudonyms, and they were strictly regulated and were not allowed to communicate with the outsiders. The name of the unit was “Tōgō Unit.” One by one, the subjects of the experiments were imprisoned in a sturdy iron lattice and inoculated with various pathogenic bacteria to observe changes in their conditions. They used prisoners on death row in the prisons of Harbin for these experiments. It was said that it was for national defense purposes, but the experiments were performed with appalling brutality.The dead were burned in high-voltage electric furnaces, leaving no trace. A local from the region added this about the complex “We heard rumors of people having blood drawn in there but we never went near the place. We were too afraid. When the construction started, there were about forty houses in our village, and a lot of people were driven out. About one person from each home was taken to work on the construction. People were gathered from villages from all around here, maybe about a thousand people in all. The only things we worked on were the surrounding wall and the earthen walls. The Chinese that worked on the buildings were brought in from somewhere, but we didn't know where. After everything was finished, those people were killed.” Despite all the secrecy, it was soon discovered prisoners were being taken, primarily from the CCP and bandits who were being subjected to tests. One such test was to gradually drain a victim of blood to see at what point they would die. The unit drew 500 cc of blood from each prisoner every 3-5 days. As their bodies drew weaker, they were dissected for further research, the average prisoner lasted a maximum of a month. Due to the climate of Manchuria, it was soon established that finding methods to treat frostbite would benefit the Kwantung army. Ishii's team gathered human subjects and began freezing and unfreezing them. Sometimes these experiments included observing test subjects whose limbs had been frozen and severed. The Togo team reported to General Okamura Yasuji, the deputy commander in chief of the Kwantung army from 1933-1934 that the best way to treat frostbite was to soak a limb in 37 degree water. According to the testimony of a witness named Furuichi at trial done in Khabarovsk , “Experiments in freezing human beings were performed every year in the detachment, in the coldest months of the year—November, December, January and February. The experimental technique was as follows: the test subjects were taken out into the frost at about 11 o'clock at night, compelled to dip their hands into a barrel of cold water and forced to stand with wet hands in the frost for a long time. Alternatively, some were taken out dressed, but with bare feet and compelled to stand at night in the frost during the coldest period of the year. When frostbite had developed, the subjects were taken to a room and forced to put their feet in water of 5 degrees Celsius, after which the temperature was gradually increased.” Sergeant Major Kurakazu who was with Unit 731 later on in 1940 and taken prisoner by the Soviets in 1945 stated during the Khabarovsk trial , “I saw experiments performed on living people for the first time in December 1940. I was shown these experiments by researcher Yoshimura, a member of the 1st Division. These experiments were performed in the prison laboratory. When I walked into the prison laboratory, ve Chinese experimentees were sitting there; two of these Chinese had no fingers at all, their hands were black; in those of three others the bones were visible. They had fingers, but they were only bones. Yoshimura told me that this was the result of freezing experiments.” According to Major Karasawa during the same trial Ishii became curious about using plague as a weapon of war and captured plague infected mice to test on subjects in the Zhong Ma Complex “Ishii told me that he had experimented with cholera and plague on the mounted bandits of Manchuria during 1933-1934 and discovered that the plague was effective.” According to Lt General Endo Saburo's diary entry on November 16th of 1933, at the Zhong Ma complex “The second squad which was responsible for poison gas, liquid poison; and the First Squad which was responsible for electrical experiments. Two bandits were used by each squad for the experiments. Phosgene gas—5-minute injection of gas into a brick-lined room; the subject was still alive one day aer inhalation of gas; critically ill with pneumonia. Potassium cyanide—the subject was injected with 15 mg.; subject lost consciousness approximately 20 minutes later. 20,000 volts—several jolts were not enough to kill the subject; injection of poison required to kill the subject. 5000 volts—several jolts were not enough; aer several minutes of continuous current, subject was burned to death.” The Togo Unit established a strict security system to keep its research highly confidential. Yet in 1934, 16 Chinese prisoners escaped, compromising the Zhong Ma location. One of the guards had gotten drunk and a prisoner named Li smashed a bottle over his head and stole his keys. He freed 15 other prisoners and of them 4 died of cold, hunger and other ailments incurred by the Togo unit. 12 managed to flee to the 3rd route army of the Northeast Anti Japanese united Army. Upon hearing the horrifying report, the 3rd route army attacked the Togo unit at Beiyinhe and within a year, the Zhong Ma complex was exploded. After the destruction of the Zhong Ma complex, Ishii needed a better structure. The Togo unit had impressed their superior and received a large budget. Then on May 30th of 1936 Emperor Hirohito authorized the creation of Unit 731. Thus Ishii and his colleagues were no longer part of the Epidemic Prevention Institute of the Army Medical School, now they were officially under the Kwantung Army as the Central Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department. Their new HQ was located in Pingfan, closer to Harbin. Their initial budget was 3 million yen for the personnel, 200-300 thousand yen per autonomous unit and 6 million yen for experimentation and research. Thus their new annual budget was over 10 million yen. Pingfan was evacuated by the Kwantung army. Hundreds of families were forced to move out and sell their land at cheap prices. To increase security this time, people required a special pass to enter Pingfan. Then the airspace over the area became off-limits, excluding IJA aircraft, all violators would be shot down. The new Pingfan complex was within a walled city with more than 70 buildings over a 6 km tract of land. The complex's huge size drew some international attention, and when asked what the structure was, the scientists replied it was a lumber mill. Rather grotesquely, prisoners would be referred to as “maruta” or “logs” to keep up the charade. Suzuki, a Japanese construction company back then, worked day and night to construct the complex. Now many of you probably know a bit about Unit 731, but did you know it's one of countless units? The Army's Noborito Laboratory was established (1937) The Central Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of the North China Army/ Unit 1855 was established (1938) The Central Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of Central China/ Unit 1644 (1939) Thee Guangzhou Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of South China Army/ Unit 8604 (1942) The Central Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of the Southern Expeditionary Army/ Unit 9620 (1942). There were countless others, detachments included Unit 1855 in Beijing, Unit Ei 1644 in Nanjing, Unit 8604 in Guangzhou, and later Unit 9420 in Singapore. All of these units comprised Ishii's network, which, at its height in 1939, oversaw over 10,000 personnel. Victims were normally brought to Pingfan during the dead of night within crammed freight cars with number logs on top. They were brought into the building via a secret tunnel. According to a witness named Fang Shen Yu, technicians in white lab coats handled the victims who were tied in bags. The victims included anyone charge with a crime, could be anti-japanese activity, opium smoking, espionage, being a communist, homelessness, being mentally handicap, etc. Victims included chinese, Mongolians, Koreans, White Russians, Harbin's jewish population and any Europeans accused of espionage. During the Khabarovsk trial, Major Iijima Yoshia admitted to personally subjecting 40 Soviet citizens to human experimentation. Harbin's diversity provided great research data. Each prisoner was assigned a number starting with 101 and ending at 1500. Onec 1500 was reached, they began again at 101, making it nearly impossible to estimate the total number of victims. Since the complex had been labeled a lumber mill to the locals, most did not worry about it or were too afraid to do so. The prison's warden was Ishii's brother Mitsuo who made sure to keep it all a secret. Ethics did not exist within Ishii's network of horrors. Everything was done efficiently in the name of science. Pingfang was equipped for disposing the evidence of their work in 3 large incinerators. As a former member who worked with the incinerators recalled “the bodies always burned up fast because all the organ were gone; the bodies were empty”. Human experimentation allowed the researchers their first chance to actually examine the organs of a living person at will to see the progress of a disease. Yeah you heard me right, living person, a lot of the vivisections were done on live people. As one former researcher explained "the results of the effects of infection cannot be obtained accurately once the person dies because putrefactive bacteria set in. Putrefactive bacteria are stronger than plague germs. So, for obtaining accurate results, it is important whether the subject is alive or not." Another former researcher said this “"As soon as the symptoms were observed, the prisoner was taken from his cell and into the dissection room. He was stripped and placed on the table, screaming, trying to fight back. He was strapped down, still screaming frightfully. One of the doctors stuffed a towel into his mouth, then with one quick slice of the scalpel he was opened up." Witnesses of some of these vivisections reported that victims usually let out a horrible scream when the initial cuts were made, but that the voice stops soon after. The researchers often removed the organ of interest, leaving others in the body and the victims usually died of blood loss or because of the removed organ. There are accounts of experiments benign carried out on mothers and children, because yes children were in fact born in the facilities. Many human specimens were placed in jars to be viewed by Tokyo's army medical college. Sometimes these jars were filled with limbs or organs but some giant ones had entire bodies. Vivisection was conducted on human beings to observe how disease affected each organ once a human dies. According to testimony given by a technician named Ogawa Fukumatsu “I participated in vivisections. I did them every day. I cannot remember the amount of people dissected. At first, I refused to do it. But then, they would not allow me to eat because it was an order; gradually I changed.” Another technician Masakuni Kuri testified “I did vivisection at the time. Experiments were conducted on a Chinese woman with syphilis. Because she was alive, the blood poured out like water from a tap.” A report done by Shozo Kondo studied the effects of bubonic plague on humans. The number of subjects was 57 with age ranging from toddlers to 80 years old with mixed gender. The study used fleas carrying plague that were dispersed upon the local population in June of 1940 at Changchun. 7 plague victims were Japanese residents. The report stated the plague spread because of lack of immunity by the townspeople. Subjects' survival time ranged from 2-5 days, with only 3 surviving 12, 18 and 21 days. The subjects were infected with Glandular, Cutaneous or Septicemic plague, but most had the Glandular variety. In addition to the central units of Pingfang were others set up in Beijing, Nanjing, Guangzhou and Singapore. The total number of personnel was 20,000. These satellite facilities all had their own unique horror stories. One was located in Anda, 100km from Pingfang where outdoor tests for plague, cholera and other pathogens were down. They would expose human subjects to biological bombs, typically by putting 10-40 people in the path of a biological bomb. A lot of the research was done to see the effective radius of the bombs, so victims were placed at different distances. At Xinjing was Unit 100 and its research was done against domesticated animals, horses particularly. Unit 100 was a bacteria factory producing glanders, anthrax and other pathogens. They often ran tests by mixing poisons with food and studied its effects on animals, but they also researched chemical warfare against crops. At Guangzhou was unit 8604 with its HQ at Zhongshan medical university. It is believed starvation tests ran there, such as the water test I mentioned. They also performed typhoid tests and bred rats to spread plague. Witness testimony from a Chinese volunteer states they often dissolved the bodies of victims in acid. In Beijing was Unit 1855 which was a combination of a prison and experiment center. They ran plague, cholera and typhus tests. Prisoners were forced to ingest mixtures of germs and some were vaccinated against the ailments. In Singapore after its capture in February of 1942 there was a secret laboratory. One Mr. Othman Wok gave testimony in the 1990s that when he was 17 years old he was employed to work at this secret lab. He states 7 Chinese, Indian and Malay boys worked in the lab, picking fleas from rats and placing them in containers. Some 40 rat catchers, would haul rats to the lab for the boys to do their work. The containers with fleas went to Japanese researchers and Othman says he saw rats being injected with plague pathogens. The fleas were transferred to kerosene cans which contained dried horse blood and an unidentified chemical left to breed for weeks. Once they had plague infected fleas in large quantity Othman said "A driver who drove the trucks which transported the fleas to the railway station said that these bottles of fleas were sent off to Thailand." If this is true, it gives evidence to claims Unit 731 had a branch in Thailand as well. Othman stated he never understood or knew what was really going on at the lab, but when he read in 1944 about biological attacks on Chongqing using fleas, he decided to leave the lab. Othman states the unit was called Unit 9240. As you can imagine rats and insects played a large role in all of this. They harvested Manchuria rat population and enlisted schoolchildren to raise them. In the 1990s the Asahi Broadcasting company made a documentary titled “the mystery of the rats that went to the continent”. It involved a small group of high school children in Saitama prefecture asked local farmers if they knew anything about rat farming during the war years. Many stated everybody back then was raising rats, it was a major source of income. One family said they had rat cages piled up in a shed, each cage built to carry 6 rat, but they had no idea what the rats were being used for. Now hear this, after the war, the US military kept these same families in business. The US army unit 406 which was established in Tokyo to research viruses wink wink, would often drive out to these farms in their american jeeps collecting rats. Getting fleas was a much tricker task. One method was taking older Chinese prisoners and quarantining them with clothes carrying flea or flea eggs and allowing them to live in isolated rooms to cultivate more fleas. These poor guys had to live in filth and not shave for weeks to produce around 100 fleas a day. Now Unit 731 dealt with numerous diseases such as Cholera. Some experiments used dogs to spread cholera to villages. They would steal dogs from villages, feed them pork laced with cholera germs and return them to the villages. When the disease finished incubating the dogs would vomit and other dogs would come and eat the vomit spread it more and more. The dogs were also stricken with diarrhea and the feces spread it to other dogs as well. 20% of the people in villages hit by this died of the disease. Former army captain Kojima Takeo was a unit member involved in a Cholera campaign and added this testimony "We were told that we were going out on a cholera campaign, and we were all given inoculations against cholera ten days before starting out. Our objective was to infect all the people in the area. The disease had already developed before we got there, and as we moved into the village everyone scattered. The only ones left were those who were too sick to move. The number of people coming down with the disease kept increasing. Cholera produces a face like a skeleton, vomiting, and diarrhea. And the vomiting and defecating of the people lying sick brought flies swarming around. One after the other, people died." I've mentioned it a lot, Plague was a staple of Unit 731. The IJA wanted a disease that was fast and fatal, Cholera for instance took about 20 days, plague on the other hand starts killing in 3 days. Plague also has a very long history of use going back to the medieval times. It was one of the very first diseases Ishii focused on. In october of 1940 a plague attack was conducted against the Kaimingjie area in the port city of Ningbo. This was a joint operation with Unit 731 and the Nanjing based Unit 1644. During this operation plague germs were mixed with wheat, corn, cloth scraps and cotton and dropped from the air. More than 100 people died within a few days of the attack and the affected area was sealed off from the public until the 1960s. Another horrifying test was the frostbite experiments. Army Engineer Hisato Yoshimura conducted these types of experiments by taking prisoners outside, dipping various appendages into water of varying temperatures and allowing the limbs to freeze. Once frozen, Yoshimura would strike their affected limbs with a short stick and in his words “they would emit a sound resembling that which a board gives when it is struck”. Ice was then chipping away with the affected area being subjected to various treatments, such as being doused in water, exposed to heat and so on. I have to mentioned here, that to my shock there is film of these specific frostbite experiments and one of our animators at Kings and Generals found it, I have seen a lot of things in my day, but seeing this was absolute nightmare fuel. If you have seen the movie or series Snowpiercer, they pretty much nail what it looked like. Members of Unit 731 referred to Yoshimura as a “scientific devil” and a “cold blooded animal” because he would conduct his work with strictness. Naoji Uezono another member of Unit 731, described in a 1980s interview a disgusting scene where Yoshimura had "two naked men put in an area 40–50 degrees below zero and researchers filmed the whole process until [the subjects] died. [The subjects] suffered such agony they were digging their nails into each other's flesh". Yoshimuras lack of any remorse was evident in an article he wrote for the Journal of Japanese Physiology in 1950 where he admitted to using 20 children and 3 day old infant in experiments which exposed them to zero degree celsius ice and salt water. The article drew criticism and no shit, but Yoshimura denied any guilt when contacted by a reporter from the Mainichi Shimbun. Yoshimura developed a “resistance index of frostbite” based on the mean temperature of 5 - 30 minutes after immersion in freezing water, the temperature of the first rise after immersion and the time until the temperature first rises after immersion. In a number of separate experiments he determined how these parameters depended on the time of day a victim's body part was immersed in freezing water, the surrounding temperature and humidity during immersion, how the victim had been treated before the immersion ("after keeping awake for a night", "after hunger for 24 hours", "after hunger for 48 hours", "immediately after heavy meal", "immediately after hot meal", "immediately after muscular exercise", "immediately after cold bath", "immediately after hot bath"), what type of food the victim had been fed over the five days preceding the immersions with regard to dietary nutrient intake ("high protein (of animal nature)", "high protein (of vegetable nature)", "low protein intake", and "standard diet"), and salt intake. Members of Unit 731 also worked with Syphilis, where they orchestrated forced sex acts between infected and noninfected prisoners to transmit the disease. One testimony given by a prisoner guard was as follows “Infection of venereal disease by injection was abandoned, and the researchers started forcing the prisoners into sexual acts with each other. Four or five unit members, dressed in white laboratory clothing completely covering the body with only eyes and mouth visible, rest covered, handled the tests. A male and female, one infected with syphilis, would be brought together in a cell and forced into sex with each other. It was made clear that anyone resisting would be shot.” After victims were infected, they would be vivisected at differing stages of infection so that the internal and external organs could be observed as the disease progressed. Testimony from multiple guards blamed the female victims as being hosts of the diseases, even as they were forcibly infected. Genitals of female prisoners were infected with syphilis and the guards would call them “jam filled buns”. Even some children were born or grew up in the walls of Unit 731, infected with syphilis. One researcher recalled “one was a Chinese women holding an infant, one was a white russian woman with a daughter of 4 or 5 years of age, and the last was a white russian women with a boy of about 6 or 7”. The children of these women were tested in ways similar to the adults. There was also of course rape and forced pregnancies as you could guess. Female prisoners were forced to become pregnant for use in experiments. The hypothetical possibility of transmission from mother to child of diseases, particularly syphilis was the rationale for the experiments. Fetal survival and damage to the womans reproductive organs were objects of interest. A large number of babies were born in captivity and there had been no accounts of any survivor of Unit 731, children included. It is suspected that the children of the female prisoners were killed after birth or aborted. One guard gave a testimony “One of the former researchers I located told me that one day he had a human experiment scheduled, but there was still time to kill. So he and another unit member took the keys to the cells and opened one that housed a Chinese woman. One of the unit members raped her; the other member took the keys and opened another cell. There was a Chinese woman in there who had been used in a frostbite experiment. She had several fingers missing and her bones were black, with gangrene set in. He was about to rape her anyway, then he saw that her sex organ was festering, with pus oozing to the surface. He gave up the idea, left and locked the door, then later went on to his experimental work.” In a testimony given on December 28 by witness Furuichi during the Khabarovsk Trial, he described how “a Russian woman was infected with syphilis to allow the scientists to and out how to prevent the spread of the disease. Many babies were born to women who had been captured and become experimental subjects. Some women were kidnapped while pregnant; others became pregnant aer forced sex acts in the prisons, enabling researchers to study the transmission of venereal disease Initially Unit 731 and Unit 100 were going to support Japan's Kantokuen plan. The Kantokuen plan an operation plan to be carried out by the Kwantung army to invade the USSR far east, capitalizing on the success of operation barbarossa. Unit 731 and 100 were to prepare bacteriological weapons to help the invasion. The plan was created by the IJA general staff and approved by Emperor Hirohito. It would have involved three-steps to isolate and destroy the Soviet Army and occupy the eastern soviet cities over the course of 6 months. It would have involved heavy use of chemical and biological weapons. The Japanese planned to spread disease using three methods; direct spraying from aircraft, bacteria bombs and saboteurs on the ground. This would have included plague, cholera, typhus and other diseases against troops, civilian populations, livestocks, crops and water supplies. The main targets were Blagoveshchensk, Khabarovsk, Voroshilov, and Chita. If successful the Soviet Far East would be incorporated into Japan's greater east asia co-prosperity sphere. Within Kantokuen documents, Emperor Hirohtio instructed Ishii to increase production rate at the units, for those not convinced Hirohito was deeply involved in some of the worst actions of the war. Yet in the end both Emperor Hirohito and Hideki Tojo pulled their support for the invasion of the USSR and opted for the Nanshin-ron strategy instead. On August 9th of 1945 the Soviet Union declared war on Japan and invaded Manchuria. In response, the Japanese government ordered all research facilities in Manchuria to be destroyed and to erase all incriminating materials. A skeleton crew began the liquidation of unit 731 on August 9th or 10th, while the rest of the unit evacuated. All test subjects were killed and cremated so no remains would be found. The design of the facilities however, made them hard to destroy via bombing, several parts of the buildings left standing when the Soviets arrived. While most of the unit's staff managed to escape, including Ishii, some were captured by the soviets. Some of these prisoners told the Soviets about the atrocities committed at Pingfang and Changchun. At first the claims seemed so outrageous, the Soviets sent their own Biological Weapons specialists to examine the ruins of Ping Fang. After a thorough investigation, the Soviet experts confirmed the experiments had been done there. The real soviet investigation into the secrets of Unit 731 and 100 began in early 1946, thus information was not readily available during the Tokyo Tribunal. Both the Americans and SOviets had collected evidence during the war that indicated the Japanese were in possession of bacteriological weapons though. Amongst the 600,000 Japanese prisoners of war in the USSR, Major General Kiyoshi Kawashima and Major Tomoio Karasawa would become essential to uncovering the Japanese bacteriological warfare secrets and opening the path to hold the Khabarovsk trial. The Soviets and Americans spent quite a few years performing investigations, many of which led to no arrests. The major reason for this was similar to Operation Paperclip. For those unaware, paperclip was a American secret intelligence program where 1600 German scientists were taken after the war and employed, many of whom were nazi party officials. The most famous of course was Wernher von Braun. When the Americans looked into the Japanese bacteriological work, they were surprised to find the Japanese were ahead of them in some specific areas, notably ones involving human experimentation. General Charles Willoughby of G-2 american intelligence called to attention that all the data extracted from live human testing was out of the reach of the USA. By the end of 1947, with the CCP looking like they might defeat Chiang Kai-Shek and the Soviet Union proving to be their new enemy, the US sought to form an alliance with Japan, and this included their Bacteriological specialists. From October to December, Drs Edwin Hill and Joseph Victor from Camp Detrick were sent to Tokyo to gather information from Ishii and his colleagues. Their final conclusion laid out the importance of continuing to learn from the Japanese teams, and grant them immunity. The British were also receiving some reports from the Americans about the Japanese Bacteriological research and human experimentation. The British agreed with the Americans that the information was invaluable due to the live human beings used in the tests. The UK and US formed some arrangements to retain the information and keep it secret. By late 1948 the Tokyo War Crimes Trial was coming to an end as the cold war tension was heating up in Korea, pushing the US more and more to want to retain the information and keep it all under wraps. With formal acceptance, final steps were undertaken, much of which was overseen by General Douglas MacArthur. On May 6, 1947, Douglas MacArthur wrote to Washington that "additional data, possibly some statements from Ishii probably can be obtained by informing Japanese involved that information will be retained in intelligence channels and will not be employed as 'War Crimes' evidence.” Ishii and his colleagues received full immunity from the Tokyo War Crimes Trial. Ishii was hired by the US government to lecture American officers at Fort Detrick on bioweapons and the findings made by Unit 731. During the Korean War Ishii reportedly traveled to Korea to take part in alleged American biological warfare activities. On February 22nd of 1952, Ishiiwas explicitly named in a statement made by the North Korean FOreign Minister, claiming he along with other "Japanese bacteriological war criminals had been involved in systematically spreading large quantities of bacteria-carrying insects by aircraft in order to disseminate contagious diseases over our frontline positions and our rear". Ishii would eventually return to Japan, where he opened a clinic, performing examinations and treatments for free. He would die from laryngeal cancer in 1959 and according to his daughter became a Roman Catholic shortly before his death. According to an investigation by The Guardian, after the war, former members of Unit 731 conducted human experiments on Japanese prisoners, babies, and mental patients under the guise of vaccine development, with covert funding from the U.S. government. Masami Kitaoka, a graduate of Unit 1644, continued performing experiments on unwilling Japanese subjects from 1947 to 1956 while working at Japan's National Institute of Health Sciences. He infected prisoners with rickettsia and mentally ill patients with typhus. Shiro Ishii, the chief of the unit, was granted immunity from prosecution for war crimes by American occupation authorities in exchange for providing them with human experimentation research materials. From 1948 to 1958, less than five percent of these documents were transferred to microfilm and stored in the U.S. National Archives before being shipped back to Japan.
Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1914 ROYAL FLYING CORPS Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.
Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1914 BELGIUM Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.
Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1914 HINDENBERG Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.
Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1914-1918 US MERCHANT NAVY Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.
Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1916 VERDUN Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.
Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.
Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1918 JOHN MONASH Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.
Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1919 LONDON CHURCHILL Z PERSHING Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.
SEASON 4 EPISODE 12: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:45) SPECIAL COMMENT: I suppose it could've been worse. Rather than reacting to Russia’s drone attack on Poland the way he did (“What’s with Russia violating Poland’s airspace with drones? Here we go!”) Trump could’ve done the Martin Sheen bit from “Dead Zone” where as the messianic psychopath president Greg Stillson he starts World War 3 and announces “The missiles are flying hallelujah, hallelujah.” "What’s with Russia violating Poland’s airspace…?” Seriously, jackass? That’s your JOB, you great decaying pile of burger grease. YOU are supposed to KNOW “what’s with Russia violating Poland’s airspace?” and if you DON’T, get out, turn the government over to a general or an ex-general or somebody who understands that your owner Putin PLAYED YOU AGAIN, and that when everybody, everybody in this country with an IQ greater than 47 said that we have to support Ukraine because if we do not stop Putin in Ukraine his next stop was Poland and you twisted your bulbous face into that stupid 45-degree angled smirk, you were WRONG and everybody else in AMERICA – all 340,111,000 of us – WE were RIGHT. There are 10,000 American troops IN Poland. What would have happened if mere DEBRIS from one of the drones destroyed in the air hit a U-S base, or ONE U-S soldier? Would Trump have tweeted out a shrug emoji? Does it even register any more that even in the narrowest of views of this disaster – Trump IS the commander-in-chief and he is RESPONSIBLE for keeping American soldiers safe. ANYBODY NOTICE THAT GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S OLD LAWYER went on CNN and admitted that there was a quid pro quo that got her moved from a high-octane Florida prison to Club Fed in Texas? Now there’s ANOTHER Trumpstein cover-up? AND LASTLY, No I’m not in favor of shooting commentators. Or politicians. Or anybody. But my god, this is America. All we have done for virtually all our history is shoot political opponents. Add to it THIS America that MAGA wanted, where the military is politicized, and politics are militarized, and Trump has spent a decade stochastically encouraging terrorism against, and assassination of, his opponents, where conservatives REPEATEDLY call for the killing of Trump’s opponents. Trump was shot a year ago and not one of his supporters was willing to support meaningful gun restrictions. You can have many reactions to the death of Charlie Kirk and I hope sorrow and disgust are among them for you as they are for me - but surprise shouldn’t be one of them. Kirk himself said in April 2023: "You will never live in a society when you have an armed citizenry and you won't have a single gun death. That is nonsense. It's drivel. But I am -- I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal." B-Block (30:13) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: The online poster who says it's ok for JD Vance to boast about war crimes because his mother was an addict. We started, writes an Andrew Klavan, to lose our civil rights as a result of the civil war. And to prostitute yourself as Jeff Shell has: from liberal anti-Trump head of NBC to installing a political officer inside CBS News to rat on journalism and anti-Trump facts. What a waste of life. C-Block (42:07) 24 YEARS SINCE 9/11: Apart from applying the "midpoint" rule to really sense how long ago something was (9/11 was the "midpoint" between September 1977 and today) there is one story that has stayed with me permanently. The man's name was Tomas Reyes, he wasn't anywhere near the World Trade Center - but he was supposed to be. How I came to meet him as part of my reporting on that horrible day.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
When the president orders a strike, who decides if it's legal? Sarah Isgur and David French unpack the commander in chief's powers after a hit on an alleged Venezuelan drug-smuggling vessel. The Agenda:—The laws of armed conflict—Violating the Constitution?—The complexity of terror designation—SCOTUS to decide fate of Trump's tariffs—Interim docket before the emergency docket—Sarah name-drops Jonah Goldberg—SCOTUS interim docket decision on immigration stops in L.A. Show Notes:—Orin Kerr on Los Angeles immigration enforcement case Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices