Return To Henderson Hall
, Arlington, Virginia
October 3 2002 at 12:31 PM
No score for this post
Dick G Login Dick Gaines
from IP address 126.96.36.199
Return To Henderson Hall…
Return To Henderson Hall….
by Dick GDick G
Login Dick GainesForum Owner
I recently had occasion to return briefly to Henderson Hall HqBn HQMC after an absence of some 40 years. Was in the Laurel, Maryland area that week, and drove down to Arlington on that Sunday afternoon, stopping by at HH for only a few minutes time
As I expected, the old HH known to me, of numerous white, wooden buildings no longer exists; in their place is a group of red brick buildings, etc. The only objects I saw that could possibly have survived from the old days, are the gatehouse and swimming pool maybe.
I had forgotten that the Navy Annex sits so close to the Pentagon–on the way in I observed first the Pentagon coming into view, and then the blackened, gaping hole where the aircraft had impacted on 9/11/01!
Went by the War Memorial initially, was also surprised that the figures in the familiar replacement flag statue appeared to be not as large as I had remembered them to be.
Also, I next proceeded out to Columbia Pike, in Arlington, and was again surprised, to see that the old street of my many liberties was still much the same as I recalled in my days there from 1959 till 1962.
It occurred to me, as I observed these things, that I could never have conceived of myself, now in my mid-sixties, standing on that same ground now in the year 2001, and seeing the things I was seeing.
Life is strange.
Freedom is not free, it must be won anew by each generation.My brief visit on last Sunday afternoon brought back many memories of my time there, and I may write this up in more detail at a later date.
20 Oct 2001
The significance, if any, to Hillary’s American flag w/upside-down stars??? (via ~ The GUNNY “G” BLOG & E-MAIL ~)
October 1 2002 at 1:33
PMScore 5.0 1 person Dick G
Login Dick GainesForum Owner
from IP address 188.8.131.52
From the book,
The United States Marines:
by BGen E.H. Simmons, NIP, 1976
“There had been “Reservists Female” in World War I…Despite, or perhaps because of this experience, the Marine Corps was the last of the four armed services to organize a Women’s Reserve in World War II.
Pressed and prodded on the issue, General Holcomb, with undisguised reluctance, wrote to the Secretary of the Navy….
By Holcomb’s own frequently recounted story, when he went home that night to the Commandant’s House and announced his decision to bring women into the Corps, Archibald Henderson’s portrait fell off the wall.
President Roosevelt was much more approving…”
GySgt USMC (Ret.)
How “Chesty” Puller Got His Nickname!
September 28 2002 at 8:50 AM
Score 5.0 1 person Dick G Login Dick GainesForum Ownerfrom IP address 184.108.40.206
From the book, Semper Fi, MAC:
Ch, The Old Breed, conversation WO Joseph Crousen and SgtMaj Francis McGrath, page 34
“Don’t get too chesty, captain,” he’d say. ‘Don’t get too chesty”
“Chesty,” you see, was an old Marine expression meaning cocky.
That’s how Lewis Puller got the nickname “Chesty,” even though most of the old timers always called him Lewie.”
GnySgt USMC (Ret.)
COLONEL PETER JULIEN ORTIZ, OSS MARINE
While preparing the Marine POWs appendix for Victory and Occupation, vol V of Historyof U.S. Marine Corps Operations in World War II, to locate the names and places of the variousPOW camps in which Marines were incarcerated, I had to use the casualty report prepared by theReports and Statistical Unit, Personnel Service Branch at Headquarters Marine Corps.
The Vast Left-Wing Media Conspiracy VIDEOThe Wall Street Journal ^ | 07-22-10 | FRED BARNESPosted on Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:01:20 PM by GOP_Lady
Everyone knew most of the press corps was hoping for Obama in 2008. Newly released emails show that hundreds of them were actively working to promote himWhen I’m talking to people from outside Washington, one question inevitably comes up: Why is the media so liberal?
The question often reflects a suspicion that members of the press get together and decide on a story line that favors liberals and Democrats and denigrates conservatives and Republicans.My response has usually been to say, yes, there’s liberal bias in the media, but there’s no conspiracy.
Soros-funded group wants feds to probe talk radioWorld Net Daily ^ | July 18, 2010 | Aaron KleinPosted on Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:56:21 PM by Freedom FrayedA George Soros-funded, Marxist-founded organization with close ties to the White House has urged the Federal Communications Commission to investigate talk radio and cable news for “hate speech.
Is this man Obama’s worst nightmare ?WND ^ | July 19, 2010 | Chelsea SchillingPosted on Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:48:13 PM by RobinMastersHe could be President Obama’s worst nightmare – a business mastermind, a natural problem solver and a black man of “substance” who says he would “take the race card off the table” in a challenge against Obama as the GOP presidential candidate in 2012.
(I dunno how I got involved in this thread–I wuz jus’ siitting here posting something when…–GyG )
THE CONSTITUTION LIMITS THE PRESIDENT EVEN AS “COMMANDER IN CHIEF” PART 1&2 (via ~ The GUNNY “G” BLOG & E-MAIL ~)
LESSER OF TWO EVILS PART 1&2 By Jon Christian Ryter (Two-Party System) (via ~ The GUNNY “G” BLOG & E-MAIL ~)
U.S. Presidents and Those Who Kill for Them
“The Czar can send any of his officials to Siberia, but he cannot rule without them, or against their will.”
~ John Stuart Mill
What kind of a man would kill someone he didn’t know for someone else he didn’t know? I suppose our opinion of such an individual would depend on the circumstances. Most people would condemn a hit man for hire even as they would praise a man who came to the defense of a little old lady in a parking lot who was being attacked with deadly force by a gang of thugs.
But what kind of a man would kill someone he didn’t know, who had never harmed or threatened him, his family, his friends, or anyone he knew for someone he didn’t know, who didn’t know him, and had never been harmed or threatened by the person he wanted killed?
And even worse, who would do such a thing at a moment’s notice, without giving it a second thought, laugh while he did it, brag about it afterward, and then expect to be lauded as a hero?
It pains me to say that the answer is a soldier in the U.S. military.
Since World War II, the nature and role of the U.S. military has drastically changed. Now, although I believe World War II to be neither necessary (see Pat Buchanan’s Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War) nor good (see my Rethinking the Good War), and although I realize that U.S. troops, especially since the time of Theodore Roosevelt, have often been sent to countries the United States was not at war with, World War II is still a notable turning point. It marks the end of congressional declarations of war and the permanent establishment of the military as the president’s personal army instead of the defender of the country against attack or invasion.
On five different occasions, the United States has declared war on other countries a total of eleven times. The first was Great Britain in 1812 (the War of 1812). The second was Mexico in 1848 (the Mexican War). The third was Spain in 1898 (the Spanish-American War). The fourth was Germany and Austria-Hungary in 1917 (World War I). The fifth was Japan, Germany, and Italy in 1941 (World War II) and Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania in 1942 (World War II).
That Congress issued these declarations of war doesn’t mean that they should have been issued. It just means that it was recognized that a major military engagement called for a real declaration of war by the Congress according to Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution.
The Founders were united on keeping the power to instigate war out of the hands of the executive. I have given Jefferson’s thoughts on the matter here. The reason for this limitation can be seen in a letter from Madison to Jefferson: “The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.”
The executive power of the king of Great Britain to wage war at the time of the American Revolution should be contrasted with the limitation of the U.S. president’s power under the Constitution. As relayed by constitutional scholar Edwin Vieira, Sir William Blackstone explained in his Commentaries on the Laws of England that the English king was “the generalissimo, or the first in military command within the kingdom” and exercised “the sole prerogative of making war and peace,” “the sole power of raising and regulating fleets and armies,” and “the sole supreme government and command of the militia.” In the Constitution, the powers the king could exercise were assigned to Congress. As found in Article I, Section 8, the Congress has the power
- To declare War
- To raise and support Armies
- To provide and maintain a Navy
- To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces
- To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions
- To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States
- Read more…