Which Of These Statements Is Not Like The Others?
By Mitch Berg
Three speeches purporting to be speeches (or syntheses of speeches) asking people to risk all in the brutal insanity of war:
Option A:
Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.
Option B:
To summarize, then: In just one month, the United States has worked with our international partners to mobilize a broad coalition, secure an international mandate to protect civilians, stop an advancing army, prevent a massacre, and establish a no-fly zone with our allies and partners. To lend some perspective on how rapidly this military and diplomatic response came together, when people were being brutalized in Bosnia in the 1990s, it took the international community more than a year to intervene with air power to protect civilians. It took us 31 days.
Moreover, we’ve accomplished these objectives consistent with the pledge that I made to the American people at the outset of our military operations. I said that America’s role would be limited; that we would not put ground troops into Libya; that we would focus our unique capabilities on the front end of the operation and that we would transfer responsibility to our allies and partners. Tonight, we are fulfilling that pledge.
Option C:
Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. Men, all this stuff you’ve heard about America not wanting to fight, wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of horse dung. Americans traditionally love to fight. All real Americans love the sting of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big league ball player, the toughest boxer. Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn’t give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. That’s why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans.
Which reads like a challenge to a nation sending its sons and daughters out to risk their lives, and which reads like the wrapup to a senior seminar lecture?
March 29th, 2011 at 6:53 am
I know I heard all of those at some time. The only one I’m sure of is B: Pee Wee Herman.
March 29th, 2011 at 7:12 am
totally unfair comparing (b) Barry Soetoro to real men like Churchill and Patton.
March 29th, 2011 at 7:57 am
Exit question: What is the difference between a Leader and a Community Organizer?
March 29th, 2011 at 8:05 am
Patton always had a way with words, especially when talking to men who were expected to go out and put themselves in harm’s way. But he’d never be allowed in today’s Army — the brass would hate having to go and answer Democratic oversight committees for the things he’d say.
March 29th, 2011 at 8:10 am
What the heck do you have against senior lecturers in comparing them to President Blagojevich?
March 29th, 2011 at 8:25 am
nerdbert;
Good points about General Patton. As much as his men villified him, they were extremely proud to have served under him. If you are fortunate enough to be able to speak with a WWII veteran of the European Theater that served in 3rd Army, if asked what unit they were with invariably reply with tremendous pride, “I was with Patton!”
March 29th, 2011 at 9:00 am
Back in the ’80s there was a book, “The Patton Principles”, by Porter Wilkinson. It was a “business” book, and was generally regarded as a terrible book on business mangement.
But I don’t read business management books.
What it was was a great treatise on leadership, and why Patton created the persona he did; basically, his entire persona was that of a warrior (to the point of his whole “I’ve been a warrior in six previous lives” bit), because asking men to risk their lives on a mission far from home is hard enough; asking them to do it under the leadership of someone who wasn’t totally committed to destroying the enemy immediately and utterly so they could go home ASAP was just absurd.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:11 am
Gee, a leader who isn’t totally committed. Who does that remind me of?
Let me be clear, we are going to clear out as soon as possible, because we don’t really want to be there in the first place.
I feel so inspired.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:15 am
“his men villified him”
Actual personal Patton story:
My grandfater was 2nd Airborne in WW2. He was in the raid at Pointe du Hoc. Later on in the war, not sure where he was at this point, he got injured injured and separated from his company (i.e. they went on without him while he stayed back and healed up; couple of days maybe).
On his way catching up, after a day or so of hoofing it, he got to an allied occupied town. He was tired and dirty and basically trudging along with his head down. He notciced some guy wearing boots with high shine. After the ordeal of the past couple of days, he shook his head, thought to himdelf “waht a nancy pantload” (or something to that effect) and kept marching on past.
Then he heard the “pantload” shout at him from behind: “What? You too good to salute brass?” He turned around. It was Patton, veins bulging. He dropped his sack and saluted. Patton asked him who he was with. “2nd Airborne,” he replied.
When he said that, Patton’s face returned to it’s normal color. He asked where the rest of his company was, and my grandfather told him where they were and why he got separated. Patton then turned to his aide and said: “This guy’s Airborne. He takes land. Get him a shower and then get him a jeep.”
March 29th, 2011 at 9:23 am
Foot,
I think it was 2nd Rangers (the unit at Pointe Du Hoc; you described him pretty well back at KAR). And that battle was most likely the Huertgen Forest where, as luck would have it, most of the memoir I ghostwrote back in 1990 (“Shavetail, by William Devitt) also took place.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:25 am
That’s correct. Rangers. Brain was on Autopilot.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:47 am
Rangers. like the Airborne should all be revered as American heroes.
Speaking of leadership, here is Great Leader Obama:
And that’s why building this international coalition has been so important because it means that the United States is not bearing all the cost. It means that we have confidence that we are not going in alone, and it is our military that is being volunteered by others to carry out missions that are important not only to us, but are important internationally. And we will accomplish that in a relatively short period of time.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/03/29/obamateurism-of-the-day-480/
Anyone else feel the need for a shower?
March 29th, 2011 at 10:39 am
nerdbert…perhaps you read this week that officers and non-commissioned officers are being forced to take gay-rights sensitivity training now. Not making this up.
Imagine Patton ordered to take a class where he is lectured on not reacting in a bad way if he sees two male soldiers engaging in public displays of physical affection. That is what the training consists of (according to NRO).
March 29th, 2011 at 10:59 am
There’s a utility to using bold words to draw a line in the sand. Patton and Churchill both understood by clearly stating your objectives – with unambiguous clarity – helped define the national soul.
We’re doomed. Bachmann is right – 2012 can’t come soon enough.
March 29th, 2011 at 11:19 am
Chuck, yep, I heard first hand about that from my daughter’s boyfriend. He wasn’t exactly impressed, especially after a few beers. But rampant, unthinking political correctness is the reality of the Federal government these days.
Foot, I had a great uncle and aunt who served under Patton. She made it back, he didn’t. On the very, very rare times she spoke about WWII she used the exceptionally rare profanity in describing Patton, but spoke with admiration about what he got out of those under him. I never understood why she declined to talk about WWII until after she passed away and I found out she was one of the first nurses into Dachau.
March 29th, 2011 at 11:24 am
two male soldiers engaging in public displays of physical affection.
I suspect that that would be a violation of some part of the UCMJ. Even if it were a mixed-gender couple.
March 29th, 2011 at 11:52 am
Yes, but the UCMJ doesn’t apply to homos. They’re special.
March 29th, 2011 at 12:10 pm
After my last post, I remembered reading some accounts from German soldiers and even officers about Patton. He apparently instilled fear in some of Germany’s most respected General officers. I remember one that stood out most poignantly. It was from a Major that had survived many battles, including the Battle of the Bulge. He stated that he had a difficult time maintaining order among his men when they learned Patton was advancing on Bastogne, because they al wanted to run.
Like Lt. Spears in Band of Brothers said, “Maybe Tiberius felt that there were benefits to having people view you as the meanest son of a bitch in the valley!
March 30th, 2011 at 7:52 am
Obama is doing the best he can . . . to vote “present.” Which is why he’s not facing the truth about Libya, among other places — the rebels/freedomfighters/whatever simply can’t win without boots on the ground. A few dozen A-teams (remember: the original mission of Army Special Forces was to lead local insurgents) doing training and running laser designators for the indirect fire would be only a start, but the chances of getting out with none of them dead or captured is, pretty clearly, zilch). The rebels need modern weaponry, but handing an untrained peasant a Stinger or a helicopter is, at best, useless.
That said, I hope Sarkozy has figures that out, and has decided to expend some of the utterly expendable Legion folks. No political cost to him when they get killed, after all.