Showing posts with label Standing Armies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Standing Armies. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

"A People's History of the U.S.Military" by Michael A. Bellesiles (2012)


In this well written book, author Michael A. Bellesiles has taken the entire history of the United States and boiled it down into 10 chapters, each covering a period of our nation’s history and the role the Armed Forces played in those conflicts. It is more of a sociological look at the evolution of our national defense than an actual history of the battles fought. In short, this is a very revealing book about how our citizen soldiers became the Armed Forces as we know them today. From the early militias to the mountains of Afghanistan, Mr. Bellesiles has written a highly readable account of an often overlooked perspective of the wars we have fought, as well as the ordinary men and women who have fought them.

Beginning with the American Revolution and its local militia, the author explores the weaknesses and strengths of an untrained yet highly motivated force and how that motivation was essential to achieving victory on the battlefield. Surprisingly, even General Washington had his doubts about local militia and their ability to stand up against well trained troops. By the war’s end he had a completely different outlook on the subject.

The War of 1812 was supposed to mimic the victory of the militia in the Revolution, but instead exposed the weakness of not having a standing army to defend our young nation. The only real victory on the battlefield in that war came weeks after the peace had been negotiated at Ghent, with neither side gaining a thing. That victory, by General Jackson in New Orleans in January 1815, only served to further obfuscate our nations need for a real army.

The War with Mexico, which set us up for our own Civil War, was fought with a hodge-podge of both militia and Federal Troops. Their performance made the public, as well as the government, understand that we did need some sort of standing Army to defend the nation. Our Navy was doing a splendid job of defending our coast and even raiding other vessels, but our land was still vulnerable.

The Civil War changed much of the prevalent thinking about drafting soldiers for a specific term of service, although the laws did allow you to buy out of the draft, or else send a substitute. The Draft Riots in New York City during July 1863 were largely the consequences of what many believed to be the unfair practice of allowing these substitutes.

The Indian Wars of the late half of the 19th Century galvanized our cavalry troops, who would be the bulwark of our national defense for decades to come. And during the Spanish American War, which extended from Cuba to the Philippines, our cavalry troops were landed by our Navy wherever they were needed.

World War One was fought by volunteers. Although there was a national registration of men eligible for service, the war was largely fought and won by volunteers eager to experience the “glory” of conflict.

After the First World War ended America found herself taking a leading role in the world. By 1940 that role had grown so large, and the threat of a new war was so imminent, that we began an actual draft lottery. This would set the template for military service up to and through the Korean and Vietnam Wars. It was a good system, with every eligible American being called upon to serve his country. 

The draft also acted as a deterrent against becoming involved in “questionable” wars, such as Vietnam. Resistance to the draft in that conflict helped to bring the war to an end, ushering in the all-volunteer military which we have today.

In this lively written and informative book, the author has taken the time and effort to chronicle the history of our Armed Forces and what the continuing evolution of our military means in an ever changing and increasingly dangerous world. This is a great book for veterans and also lovers of military history.

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Washington Said It - Don't Blame Me!


My recent Kent State Post got me an e-mail from my daughter, Sarah, which likened what I said to paragraphs 20-25 of George Washington's Farewell Address in New York at the end of the Revolutionary War. This was, to say the least, high praise indeed, coming from her. But, truthfully I had no idea what Washington said in paragraphs 20-25 of his farewell Speech. So I set out to rectify that, in case it should ever come up I want my daughter to think I knew all about it, but seeing as she reads this thing, I guess I'm not fooling anyone. But here it is, don't blame me, Washington said it- although I do tend to agree with him. Google the entire speech, it's worth reading as we plunge into a campaign year that is sure to be filled with venomous rhetoric and false allegations from both sides of the aisle. You'll find me sitting quietly by...

Paragraphs 20-25 of Washington's Farewell Address in New York

20 I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

21 This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

22 The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

23 Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

24 It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

25 There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

20 I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

21 This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

22 The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

23 Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

24 It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

25 There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.