What happened at Howland Island during WWII?

If the name “Howland Island” rings a bell with you at all, it’s probably because it was the spot in the Pacific Ocean that Amelia Earhart was trying to locate during her around-the-world flight. She didn’t find it. Her plane disappeared on July 2, 1937. But something I didn’t know is that the Japanese bombed Howland Island on December 8, 1941, one day after their attack on Pearl Harbor.

Howland Island is located about 1700 miles southwest of Hawaii. It lies roughly halfway on a direct line from Hawaii to Australia, which made it a good spot to refuel in the early days of transoceanic flying. That is if you could find it. The island is only 1.4 x .55 miles, approximately one square mile in size. Howland came up on my radar when I was watching an excellent YouTube video on World War II in the Pacific. In the list of locations that the Japanese attacked on December 7-8 that we all know, (Hawaii, the Philippines, Wake, Guam, etc.) the narrator included Howland Island. Since I had not heard this before I had to look into it.

Howland Island was on sailing maps by the late 1700s. It is believed that Captain Bligh landed on the island for a short stay in 1789 after being set adrift by the mutineers of the HMS Bounty. Whalers in the early 1800s knew where it was. The United States gained possession of Howland Island in 1856, but really the island was a hazard to navigation (there were multiple shipwrecks on the island) and a place to harvest bird guano. In 1935, colonists came to the island to establish both a scientific research facility and to solidify American claims to this and other South Pacific islands. The belief was that the island would be used as part of a chain of refuel stops for commercial aircraft. In fact, WPA funds were used to build an airstrip on the island specifically for Earhart’s flight.

The Japanese attacked the island on December 8, 1941, with 14 bombers based in the Kwajalein Islands. Two colonists were killed in the attack. There was extensive damage to the airstrip. Two days later a Japanese submarine shelled the island, destroying the remaining buildings that had survived the first attack. Two times a single bomber flew over and dropped bombs on the island, even though there was nothing left to bomb. The U.S. Navy rescued the survivors on January 31, 1942. A battalion of U.S. Marines occupied Howland in September of 1943 and the island was called Howland Naval Air Station. But the war moved on and it was abandoned in May 1944.

Today, Howland is an uninhabited, unorganized, territorial possession of the United States. In 1974, a wildlife refuge was created that included Howland and 12 miles of ocean around it. Entry to the Howland Island National Wildlife Refuge is only by a special permit granted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

The Brazilian Expeditionary Force During WWII

Brazil’s Contribution to the Allies in World War II

I read an article recently in Military History Magazine about the Brazilian Expeditionary Force in World War II. Realizing that I am rather “America-centric” in my reading, this opened my eyes to the contribution of Allied nations other than “The Big Three” Allied countries of the Soviet Union, Great Britain, and the United States.

Brazilian troops, newly arrived at Naples, Italy from

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. July 16, 1944. National Archives

Since the war began in 1939, the United States made ever-increasing overtures to Latin American nations to ally themselves with the countries fighting fascism. However, Brazil would become the only South American country to send troops into combat. Of course, this alignment was in Brazil’s best interest. The Atlantic is at its narrowest point between the coasts of Brazil and Africa. Brazil’s government knew that the United States would require air and naval bases for a safer and shorter route to get troops and supplies to Europe. A military alliance would also turn into a trading partnership that would give Brazil an advantage over its South American neighbors.

Initially, Brazil tried to maintain a neutral status. But after contracting for American bases to be built in Brazil, they severed diplomatic relations with Germany, Japan, and Italy on January 28, 1942. As a result Axis submarines began to target Brazilian merchant shipping. U-boats sunk 13 Brazilian merchant ships by July, killing 600. Brazil declared war on Germany and Italy on August 22, 1942.

The Brazilian Navy participated in the Battle of the Atlantic, escorting a total of 614 convoys. They sank a total of twelve submarines (11 German and 1 Italian) along their coast. Brazil lost a total of 36 ships, including merchant vessels, and losing approximately 1600 crewmen, both navy and civilian.

Shoulder sleeve insignia of 1st EID

By Government of Brazil - Wikipedia

Once war was declared, Brazil began to organize an expeditionary force to send to the European Theater. The country was woefully unprepared for war and the United States contributed to their training. However, political disagreements over the size, use, and command of the force delayed their deployment for two years. The first troops of the Brazilian 1st Expeditionary Infantry Division (1st EID) departed for Italy in July 1944. Before the end of the war, over 25,000 Brazilian soldiers would serve in Italy.

The 1st EID was assigned to the US IV Corps of General Mark Clark’s US Fifth Army. They fought alongside African American soldiers of the 92nd Infantry Division and Japanese Americans of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team. Although under American command, one could argue that the Fifth Army was a multi-national force. British units consisted of commonwealth and colonial forces from New Zealand, Canada, India, Nepal, Palestine, South Africa, Rhodesia, and various African colonies. Free French forces were comprised of Senegalese, Moroccans, and Algerians. Soldiers from occupied countries such as Poland, Greece, and Czechoslovakia were also part of the Fifth Army, as well as anti-fascist Italians.

The 1st EID wore a shoulder patch that has a caricature of a snake smoking a pipe. It was inspired by a saying in Brazil during their training that, translated from Portuguese meant “it’s more likely that a snake will smoke a pipe before the Brazilian Expeditionary Force would go to the front and fight.” The soldiers embraced this put down and came up with the motto “The snake will smoke.” The patch is the result of that and it gave them their nickname: “The Smoking Snakes.”

The 1st EID fought as part of the Fifth Army in northern Italy until the end of the war in May 1945. During their time in combat, the Brazilians took over 20,500 prisoners. They lost 948 men killed in action. For a rundown of their combat operations, read the article “The Boys from Brazil” by Jerome A. Long in the Winter 2023 issue of Military History magazine.

2nd Lt. Jorge E.P. Taborda, from Rio de Janeiro, a pilot

with the First Brazilian Fighter Squadron serving in Italy.

National Archives Photo. 

The Brazilian Air Force also made a significant contribution to the war effort. The 1st Squadron of the Brazilian 1st Fighter Aviation Group trained at US bases in Panama and was designated operational in May 1944. They participated in the defense of the Canal Zone until they deployed to Italy in September 1944. They flew the P-47 Thunderbolt, attached as a squadron of the US Air Force 350th Fighter Group. Most of their missions were supporting ground units. Unlike the ground element of the BEF, the aviators were not going to get any replacement pilots. Out of the 48 operational pilots that deployed with the squadron, 22 were lost: five were killed by anti-aircraft fire, eight others were shot down over enemy territory, six were medically grounded and three more were killed in accidents. In their cumulative 5,465 combat flight hours, the 1st Fighter Squadron amassed an impressive record of damage to the enemy.

Of course we are drawn to the history of our own country. But I think the takeaway here is that we need to acknowledge that the Second World War was definitely a world war. By my count, there were 21 combatant nations joining the Americans, the British, and the Soviets on the Allied side of the war. Not to mention the four former Axis nations that swapped sides and joined the Allies later in the war (Italy, Romania, Bulgaria, and Finland.) Who knows? Maybe knowing the contribution of a WWII ally will change how we view our foreign relations today.

A Summary History of the 101st Airborne Division

View the Index of Unit Histories

 "The Screaming Eagles"
(Original article written 5-9-08 by Jim Broumley)

Since 1974 the 101st Airborne Division has been the United States Army's "Air Assault" Division. The Division is capable of lifting, by helicopter, a 4,000-soldier combined arms force up to 150 kilometers behind enemy lines in one lift. Having approximately 281 helicopters, including three battalions of Apache attack helicopters, makes the "Screaming Eagles" the most versatile fighting unit in the Army. It is the world's only air assault division. The 101st consists of three infantry brigades, Division Artillery, Division Support Command, the 101st Aviation Brigade, the 159th Aviation Brigade, the 101st Corps Support Group, and various other separate commands stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.

Although the Screaming Eagles won their fame and reputation during the Second World War, the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) can trace its lineage back to World War I. In the build-up to the Great War, the 101st Division was originally activated on July 23, 1918. Without fanfare, the Division was demobilized in December 1918. In 1921 the 101st Infantry Division was reconstituted as a reserve unit with headquarters in Wisconsin. This is where the distinctive "eagle head patch" was acquired. The eagle's head represented "Old Abe," the famed eagle mascot of the Wisconsin Infantry Regiment during the Civil War. The Division remained in the reserves until needed for World War II. The Screaming Eagles were disbanded as a reserve unit and reactivated in the regular army as the 101st Airborne Division on August 15, 1942.

The United States Army began testing the viability of parachute units in 1940, after seeing the success of British and German paratroop units in the early days of World War Two. The first tests, conducted at Fort Benning, Georgia, were so successful that soon the army was forming Parachute Infantry Regiments (PIR). Once the United States was thrust into the war, the army authorized airborne divisions. The 82nd and 101st would serve in the European Theater and later the 11th Airborne Division would see action in the Pacific.

Originally the 101st Airborne was comprised of the 502nd PIR and two glider infantry regiments (GIR), the 327th and the 401st. Also assigned were three artillery battalions and various support units. Rigorous training began at Fort Benning, Georgia and Fort Bragg, North Carolina. In June of 1943, the Division was joined by the 506th PIR, of "Band of Brothers" fame, who had been training at Camp Toccoa, Georgia at the foot of Currahee Mountain. The Division deployed to England in September 1943.

After eight more months of training in England, the Screaming Eagles were ready. On June 6, 1944, the Pathfinders of the 101st Airborne Division were leading the way into France for Operation Overlord: D-Day. In the fight against the German 6th Parachute Regiment for the town of Carentan, Lieutenant Colonel Robert G. Cole, Commander of the 3rd Bn, 502nd PIR, became the first member of the Division to be awarded the Medal of Honor. The 101st would spend 33 days in combat before returning to England to receive replacements and train for their next operation.

In September of 1944, the 101st Airborne Division made its second combat jump. This time the jump was in Holland for Operation Market Garden. During this battle, Private First Class Joe E. Mann of the 3rd Bn, 502nd PIR became the second member of the Screaming Eagles to be awarded the Medal of Honor. The Division spent 72 days in combat before being moved to France for refit.

On December 16, 1944, the Germans launched a surprise attack with thirteen armored and infantry divisions in the Ardennes region of Belgium. The front of the Americans was in danger of collapse. On December 17th the 101st received orders to move north out of France and defend the town of Bastogne, Belgium. This was the beginning of the Battle of the Bulge.

Bastogne was a hub of highways that moved through the Ardennes, a forested area that forced the German mechanized forces to use these roads. The Germans surrounded the city on December 20th, isolating the 101st and some elements of the 10th Armored Division. On December 22nd the Germans issued a demand for surrender. The acting Commander of the 101st, General McAuliffe, gave his famous reply of "Nuts." The Germans needed to seize the town of Bastogne for the success of their offensive. Although facing five German divisions, the Screaming Eagles held the town until help broke through on December 26th. The Division continued the defense of Bastogne for three more weeks, earning them the moniker of "The Battered Bastards of Bastogne."

The last mission of World War II for the Screaming Eagles was the taking of the German town of Berchtesgaden, Hitler's retreat in Bavaria. From March until August of 1945, the 101st Airborne served as occupation troops and took the surrender of German military units and prominent Nazi officials. In August of 1945, the Division moved to Auxerre, France to train for the invasion of Japan. The operation became unnecessary when Japan surrendered two weeks later. The 101st Airborne Division was deactivated on November 30, 1945, at Auxerre, France.

In the next eleven years, the 101st Airborne was activated and deactivated three times. Finally, in 1956 the Division was reorganized as a five-brigade division and came back to the Regular Army and its permanent home of Fort Campbell, Kentucky. Between 1956 and 1964 the Division was reorganized again and participated in several major exercises as the world transitioned into the nuclear age and the United States entered the Cold War. Most notable during this period was the 101st Airborne's deployment to Little Rock, Arkansas, in September of 1957 to assist in maintaining order during a series of civil disturbances. The unrest was a result of the integration of Central High School in Little Rock. This was a major event in the quest for racial equality and the professionalism of the troops of the 101st Airborne prevented possible tragedy.

The First Brigade of the 101st Airborne Division was deployed to Cam Ranh Bay, Vietnam on July 29, 1965. They were the third United States Army unit to arrive in country. The remainder of the Division arrived in Vietnam in December of 1967, just before the Tet Offensive of January 1968. During Tet, the Screaming Eagles were engaged in combat operations as far south as Saigon and as far north as Quang Tri. One platoon of the Second Brigade landed on the roof of the United States Embassy in Saigon which was under attack by the Viet Cong.

During the early days of Vietnam, the Division made its transition from parachutes to helicopters as the method of insertion. In July of 1968, the Division changed its name to the 101st Air Cavalry Division. The next year, on August 29, 1969, the Division changed its name again to the 101st Airborne Division (Air Mobile), making it the Army's second airmobile division.

In late 1971 and early 1972, the Screaming Eagles left Vietnam and returned to Fort Campbell. During almost seven years of action in Vietnam, the 101st Airborne participated in 15 campaigns. Most notable were Hamburger Hill in 1969 and Firebase Ripcord in 1970. The Division served in the northern I Corps area of operations against the NVA infiltration routes through Laos and the A Shau Valley. The Division supported the ARVN Operation Lam Son 719 which involved invading southern Laos in 1971, but only aviation units actually entered Laos. During Vietnam, seventeen Medal of Honor awards were given to members of the Division. The Division suffered 4,011 soldiers Killed in Action during Vietnam, which is twice the number of casualties from World War II. The 101st was the last American Division to leave the combat zone of Vietnam.

In 1974 the Army terminated jump status for the Division and the Screaming Eagles formally became America's Air Assault Division. The Screaming Eagles took on their current designation of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault). In the post-Vietnam years the Division has evolved into the rapid deployment force that it is today participating in major exercises and peace keeping operations throughout the United States, Honduras, Egypt, Rwanda, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and elsewhere.

Since the end of the Cold War, the 101st has served proudly in the Persian Gulf War in January of 1991, conducting an air assault deep into enemy territory in the Iraqi desert. The Division sustained no soldiers Killed in Action during the "100-hour war" and captured thousands of enemy prisoners. The 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) was the first conventional unit to deploy in the War on Terror. In 2002 the Division's Third Brigade participated in Operation Anaconda facing an intense period of combat in the rugged terrain of Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. In 2003 the Screaming Eagles, led by Major General David Petraeus invaded Iraq as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The Division has made a second deployment to Iraq in November of 2005 to conduct counterinsurgent operations and to train Iraqi security forces.

General Order Number Five, which gave birth to the 101st Airborne Division in the early days of World War II, begins "The 101st Airborne Division…has no history, but it has a rendezvous with destiny." The Division has certainly lived up to those prophetic words. The 101st is one of the most famous fighting forces in the world. Thousands upon thousands of proud soldiers have worn the distinctive "Screaming Eagle" shoulder patch, which is arguably the most recognizable unit insignia in the United States military.

View the Index of Unit Histories

The 1st Armored Division "Old Ironsides"

View the Index of Unit Histories

A Short History of the 1st Armored Division
"Old Ironsides"

The 1st Armored Division, nicknamed "Old Ironsides," is the oldest and most recognizable armor division in the United States Army. It was the first armored division to see combat in World War II. The Division is currently home-based at Fort Bliss, Texas, and is part of the US III Corps.

As part of the mechanization of the U.S. Army and the buildup for WWII, cavalry and reconnaissance units were brought together to form the 1st Armored Division at Fort Knox, Kentucky on July 15, 1940. Major General Bruce R. Magruder was the Division's first commander, serving in that capacity from July 1940 until March 1942. General Magruder is also responsible for the Division's famous nickname. In 1941, General George S. Patton Jr. had just named his 2nd Armored Division "Hell on Wheels." The 1st Armored Division needed a nickname too, so General Magruder held a contest to find a suitable name. Approximately two hundred names were submitted including "Fire and Brimstone" and "Kentucky Wonders." The General chose to study them over the weekend but none of the suggestions appealed to him. It happened that General Magruder had just bought a painting of the U.S.S. Constitution during a drive for funds for the preservation of that famous fighting ship, which is nicknamed "Old Ironsides." General Magruder was impressed with the parallel between the development of the tank and the Navy's "Old Ironsides" spirit of daring and durability. He decided the 1st Armored Division should also be named "Old Ironsides."

The 1st Armored Division boarded the Queen Mary at the New York Port of Embarkation, Brooklyn Army Terminal on May 11, 1942. Five days later the soldiers of the Division landed in Northern Ireland and trained on the moors. On October 29, 1942, Old Ironsides moved to England to depart for North Africa.

The 1st Armored Division's first contact with an enemy was as part of the Allied invasion of North Africa, Operation Torch on November 8, 1942. The Allies did receive unexpected, and heavy, resistance from Vichy-French units; however, the invasion forces suppressed all resistance in the beachhead area within three days. Old Ironsides then advanced toward Tunisia. The soldiers of the Division learned hard lessons about armored warfare and the harsh conditions of North Africa.

In January of 1943 Old Ironsides was part of II Corps and received the mission of defending central Tunisia against an Axis counterattack. In February the 1st Armored Division met with a superior German armored force at Kasserine Pass. The Division sustained heavy losses in personnel and equipment and was forced to withdraw. Old Ironsides was battered but kept in mind its lessons learned. The Germans outran their supply lines and faced determined Allied resistance. After three more months of hard fighting, the Allies could finally claim victory in North Africa. Old Ironsides was reorganized in French Morocco and then moved to Naples, Italy on October 28, 1943, to support the Allied effort there.

As part of General Mark Clark's U.S. Fifth Army, the 1st Armored Division took part in the attack on the infamous Winter Line in November of 1943. Old Ironsides then flanked the Axis forces in the landings at Anzio and moved on to participate in the liberation of Rome on June 4, 1944. The 1st Armored Division continued to serve in the Italian Campaign until German forces in Italy surrendered on May 2, 1945. In June of 1945, Old Ironsides was moved to Germany as part of the U.S. Army occupation forces.

In the drawdown of forces after WWII, the 1st Armored Division was deactivated on April 25, 1946. With the success of the Russian-made T-34 tank by the enemy at the outset of the Korean War in 1950, there was a renewed enthusiasm for armored forces in the U.S. Army. As part of the new buildup of forces, Old Ironsides was re-activated on March 7, 1951, at Fort Hood, Texas, and was the first U.S. Army unit to field the new M48 Patton tank.

Although the 1st Armored Division did not participate as a division in the Vietnam War, two of their subordinate units did. Company A, 501st Aviation and 1st Squadron, 1st Cavalry served with distinction. Both units earned Presidential Unit Citations and 1-1 Cavalry received two Valorous Unit Awards and three Vietnamese Crosses of Gallantry. Neither unit was officially detached from the 1st Armored Division. Veterans of both units may wear the Old Ironsides as a combat patch. Also, in 1967 three Old Ironsides infantry battalions were formed into the 198th Infantry Brigade and deployed to Vietnam. Two of those battalions, 1-6th Infantry and 1-52nd Infantry, were returned to the 1st Armored Division.

As Vietnam wound down, the United States turned its attention back to the Cold War in Europe. The 1st Armored Division was moved to Germany in 1971, home-based in the West German city of Ansbach. The Division remained in Germany for the next twenty years as part of the American forces committed to a NATO defense of Europe.

In November of 1990, Old Ironsides was alerted for deployment to the Middle East in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. In less than two months the Division moved 17,400 soldiers and 7.050 pieces of equipment by rail, sea, and air to Saudi Arabia in support of Operation Desert Shield. On February 24, 1991, the 1st Armored Division crossed into Iraq to begin Operation Desert Storm as the leading unit in VII Corps' main flanking attack. Its mission was to destroy the elite Iraqi Republican Guards Divisions. In an 89-hour blitz across the desert, Old Ironsides traveled through 250 kilometers of enemy territory. They destroyed 768 tanks, armored personnel carriers, and artillery pieces. The 1st Armored Division also captured 1,064 prisoners of war. Old Ironsides returned to Ansbach, Germany on May 8, 1991. Their triumph was celebrated by a visit from the Vice President of the United States and participation in victory parades in Washington D.C. and New York City.

The 1st Armored Division was called to serve once again, this time in the Balkans. Old Ironsides was ordered to Bosnia-Herzegovina and part of Operation Joint Endeavor on December 14, 1995. The 1st Armored Division was relieved by the 1st Infantry Division and returned to Germany in November of 1996.

In 1999, Old Ironsides was deployed again. This time 1st Armored Division was supporting Operations Allied Force and Joint Guardian. Operation Allied Force took Old Ironsides soldiers to Albania in response to the ethnic cleansing and fighting there. Operation Joint Guardian was to uphold the United Nations Security Council resolution to bring peace back to the Kosovo region.

The 1st Armored Division began its participation in the global war on terrorism when it received deployment orders to the U.S. Central Command on March 4, 2003. By April 15th Old Ironsides was moving out to participate in Operation Iraqi Freedom. During their 15-month deployment, Task Force 1st Armored Division was the largest division-based task force in U.S. Army history. Units serving with the Task Force included brigade-sized elements from the 82nd Airborne Division, the 3rd Infantry Division, the 1st Cavalry Division, the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, the 124th Infantry Battalion, the 18th and 89th Military Police Brigades and the 168th MP Battalion. At its height, more than 39,000 soldiers were part of Task Force 1st Armored Division. The Division took responsibility for Baghdad in April of 2003. Old Ironsides was scheduled to return to Germany in April of 2004, but their tour was extended by three months to defeat a Shia militia led by Moqtada Al Sadr.

The Division's 3rd Brigade was deployed to Iraq once again for Operation Iraqi Freedom III in January of 2005, this after only eight months at home. They were attached to the 3rd Infantry Division as part of Task Force Baghdad. The 2nd Brigade Combat Team (BCT) deployed to Kuwait in November 2005 in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom IV. Old Ironsides' 1st Brigade deployed again to Iraq in January 2006.

In 2005, the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) commission determined that the 1st Armored Division should leave its home bases in Germany and move to Fort Bliss, Texas. While it took several years to accomplish the movement, Old Ironsides' division headquarters uncased its colors in May 2011.

Like their naval namesake, the 1st Armored Division carries with it the traditions and military values for which Old Ironsides has been known for over half a century. They also are the standing armor division of the United States Army, on the cutting edge of technology and tactics, and remain relentlessly strong today. Both active soldiers and veterans are proud to wear the 1st Armored Division patch and say, "I was with Old Ironsides."

View the Index of Unit Histories

Nonfiction R&R: Fire and Fortitude

This book Review and Recommendation is on "Fire and Fortitude, The US Army in the Pacific War, 1941-1943" by John C. McManus.

If you are like me, when you think of World War II in the Pacific, you immediately think of the Marine Corps. Maybe it’s all those old war movies like “Sands of Iwo Jima,” or the marine narratives by Eugene Sledge and Robert Leckie? But I must admit my ignorance. I was shocked when I read in “Fire and Fortitude” about the contribution of the Army versus the Marines.

This in no way detracts from the amazing accomplishments of the USMC during the Second World War. That being said, the Army presence in the Pacific dwarfed the marines. In the Pacific Theater during WWII, the Marine Corps fielded six combat divisions. The United States Army, on the other hand, deployed twenty-one combat divisions, along with several regimental combat teams and separate battalions. Not to mention massive numbers of logistics, medical, intelligence, and transportation personnel. With so many army personnel fighting against Japan, why aren’t some of the battles and campaigns that were predominantly army operations more well-known?

In “Fire and Fortitude," the author cites historian and writer Cole Kingseed for five reasons the Army is not known for its contribution to the war in the Pacific Theater: The “Germany first” strategy that prioritized the European Theater, a maritime nature of the war in the Pacific that led to a naval-dominated narrative, MacArthur’s PR campaign that failed to credit the accomplishments of subordinate units, press coverage weighted to the European Theater because correspondents found it a more pleasant environment over remote Pacific islands, and the racial aspect of fighting Japan and their approach to war.

I'm glad to see that we’re starting to take a long-overdue look at the Army in the Pacific. There seem to have been a number of books that focus on an aspect of this huge subject area published over the last couple of years. “Fire and Fortitude” (2019) is the first volume in a trilogy chronicling the US Army in the Pacific. McManus begins this book with a look at the pre-war army. He then provides a review of Pearl Harbor from an army perspective that I found unique. He, of course, covers Bataan and Corregidor, but I found the chapter on the struggle to take Buna during the Papuan Campaign in New Guinea to be the most interesting. Probably because it is one of the least highlighted battles in the media and popular history.

The second volume of the trilogy is already out in hardback. I’m looking forward to the release of the third. I’ve read a couple of other works by McManus, like “The Dead and Those About to Die.” “Fire and Fortitude” has the same level of readability combined with historical detail. What Ian Toll has written about the Navy in the Pacific, and Rick Atkinson accomplished for the European Theater, John McManus has tackled for the Army in the Pacific. Definitely a must read. 

Book R & R: Agent Sonya

This book “Recommendation and Review” is for “Agent Sonya” by Ben Macintyre.

I am a Cold War veteran, having spent three years patrolling the East German border back in the 1980s. Maybe that’s why I like spy stories so much. Fiction or nonfiction, it doesn’t matter. At least from a media standpoint, the Cold War made for some good spy stories. You had definitive bad guys (that would be the Soviets) versus us, the good guys. This book isn’t like that.

“Agent Sonya: Moscow’s Most Daring Wartime Spy” by Ben Macintyre is the true story of Ursula Kuczynski, also known as Ruth Werner, Ursula Beurton, Ursula Hamburger, or her code name: Sonya. She was born in Germany in 1907 and was a teenager and young adult during the political upheaval immediately following World War I. She became a devout, ideological communist, passionately opposed to the rise of fascism in her country. When her husband was offered a job in Shanghai, she went with him. There in China, she met other communists and was recruited into working for Soviet intelligence. Over her career worked in China, Poland, Switzerland, and Great Britain. Although Sonya didn’t “spy” firsthand, she did run agents in these locations and radio information back to Moscow.

I’ve read books by Ben Macintyre before, specifically Rogue Heroes and Agent Zigzag. So I knew the writing would be excellent and that this book, like the others mentioned, would be a true story that reads like fiction. What makes this book different from the usual spy story is that it is told from the perspective of Kuczynski. I gained an understanding of why a person would embrace Communism during the 1920s, especially if faced with a weak government (the Weimar Republic) and a threat of Fascism. As an aside, Ursula became disillusioned with the Soviet Union after the purges by Stalin in the 1930s, but she never lost her idealistic faith in communism. During the story of her career as a spy during the 30s and 40s, you of course sympathize with Ursula and are on the virtual edge of your seat during the times she was nearly caught.

SPOILER ALERT! If you don’t want to know the rest of the story, skip the next paragraph.

Why a book devoted to this one spy? One of her agents she ran in Great Britain was another German Jew, a talented physicist by the name of Klaus Fuchs. Fuchs had escaped from Hitler’s Germany and was sponsored into Great Britain. He was investigated and cleared to work on Britain’s atomic bomb project, despite being a devout communist. Once Fuchs realized what the project was about, he decided to share all the information about his work with the Soviet Union. Agent Sonya was his handler in Great Britain. When Great Britain’s nuclear bomb program was merged with the Manhattan Project (the United States nuclear bomb project), Fuchs was sent to work in the U.S. and passed off to a KGB handler in America. The information that Fuchs passed to the Soviets arguably gave them the bomb or certainly allowed them to develop their own five years earlier than expected. When Fuchs' treachery was found out, it would lead straight back to Ursula. In 1950 she escaped Great Britain and settled into retirement in East Germany, eventually writing a book about her own escapades.

So you have to ask: Did Agent Sonya help to start the Cold War or did she prevent World War III by helping to maintain a balance of power? Don’t try to answer that question without reading the book. I think it will change the way you look at that period of our history. It did mine. 

Book R & R: The Boy Who Followed His Father into Auschwitz

This book Recommendation and Review is for “The Boy who Followed His Father into Auschwitz” by Jeremy Dronfield.

By the cover design and title, I mistakenly at first thought this book was a work of fiction. So did my wife who first saw it on the shelf in our local bookstore. She read it; she was enthralled by it. Then she insisted that I read it. She is not a big reader of nonfiction history and rarely pushes me to read nonfiction (that’s because my nonfiction reading stack is always piled so high). So, I moved this read to the top of the list. Really glad I did.

This is a true Holocaust story that reads like fiction. In fact, the author started out a fiction writer but switched to narrative nonfiction. If you read a lot of books about World War II, you might know Jeremy Dronfield from his previous nonfiction work, “Beyond the Call.” At the time I’m writing this, “The Boy Who Followed His Father into Auschwitz” has 4.8 stars on 1853 reviews on Amazon. With numbers like that, it is no wonder it is a bestseller and I'm probably wasting your time telling you that the book reads like a novel. A “page-turner” as my dad would say.

The book is about the Kleinmann family of Vienna, Austria. There is the father, Gustav, a combat veteran of the First World War, his wife Tini, and their four children, Edith, Fritz, Herta, and Kurt. They are a Jewish family, but not overly devout, living in a Jewish neighborhood. They are part of the community; they have non-Jewish friends and neighbors. The story begins with the impending vote in Austria on Anschluss, the joining of Germanic peoples together under the Third Reich. The family lives through the arrival of the Nazis, the growing prejudice of their non-Jewish neighbors, and Krystallnacht. All this beginning in March of 1938, a year and a half before the beginning of World War II in Europe and over three and a half years before America entered the conflict.

Soon after, the Nazis begin to arrest Jewish adult males, initially as political prisoners. Gustav and his eldest son, Fritz, are caught up in this and sent to Dachau. Fritz was only sixteen. I had the opportunity to visit Dachau, a concentration camp outside of Munich, when I was stationed in Germany back in the 1980s. This connection allowed me to visualize the Kleinmanns in this evil and depressing place. Gustav and Fritz are transferred to other camps during the course of their years as slave laborers. While they are in captivity, Tini attempts to get her other children sponsored to immigrate to Great Britain and the United States. She is only partially successful. After years of starvation and beatings with no word from the other members of his family, Gustav is informed that he and hundreds of other prisoners will be sent to Auschwitz, the infamous Nazi concentration camp in Poland. Upon hearing this news, Fritz volunteers to go to Auschwitz with his father. Both believe this is a sentence of certain death, but they believe that it is better to be together than to die alone.

The book is based on a diary Gustav kept during his six years in concentration camps. Not only will you learn of the horrors of the concentration camp system, but also how difficult it was to flee Germany or an occupied country. Hint: countries like the United States and Great Britain limited the intake of refugees, and once the war was declared on and by these countries, even this avenue was cut off to the victims of the Nazi regime. This is an amazing story and through the experiences of this one family the reader gains a visceral understanding of the different ways that people suffered during the Holocaust.

I wish that every American would read this book. I spent three years in Germany, forty years after the war. I found the German people to be warm and friendly. I enjoyed my time there. Though I could never reconcile how the people I met there who were alive during that time could possibly allow the rise of fascism and the Holocaust to take place, much less enter a pathway to war that would eventually destroy their country. I worry that we have demonized the Nazis to such a level that we can’t learn anything from this period of history. I hope that is not the case. This is different than reading about fighting the war. This is about learning about the cause and effect of it. Please read two books. First, “The Nazi Seizure of Power” by William Sheridan Allen. In this book, you’ll learn how the Nazis took over Germany, not by Hitler from the top down, but on a grassroots level through local action by Nazi party members. The other is this book, “The Boy Who Followed His Father into Auschwitz” by Jeremy Dronfield. If you’ll make that investment of time, and it won’t be boring, then you’ll understand the what and the how. I doubt we’ll ever understand the why.

Book Review: To Wake The Giant

Book R&R: "To Wake The Giant: A Novel of Pearl Harbor" by Jeff Shaara

In the spirit of full disclosure, I am a Jeff Shaara fan. I have read every book he has written, as soon as they become available. When I heard that he was going to revisit World War II and specifically Pearl Harbor, it went straight to the top of the reading pile. Besides, with the 75th anniversary of the end of WWII upon us, the subject is very appropriate.

"To Wake the Giant" begins approximately one year before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. In the usual Jeff Shaara formula, he tells the story of the event by following major historical characters who played a role in decision making and examples of "regular people" who were greatly affected by the event. In the case of "Wake the Giant," Shaara provides the perspective of the United States' chief negotiator with Japan, Secretary of State Cordell Hull, the architect of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, and a new enlistee to the U.S. Navy named Tommy Biggs, who gets assigned to the USS Arizona.

Of course, we hear the voices of other characters who are part of the multitude that made or were affected by this pivotal event in World history. Secretary of State Hull, of course, meets with President Roosevelt and Secretary of War Stimson among others that include Japanese Ambassador Nomura. These meetings let the reader know what the American government knew leading up to the war. Dialog between Yamamoto, his staff and other admirals, show us the planning for the attack. And in Hawaii, we see the preparations for war through the viewpoint of Admiral Husband E. Kimmel and his staff. Finally, Tommy Biggs and his shipmates show us what life was like for a battleship sailor in the weeks before the war and the horrific battle on December 7, 1941.

"To Wake the Giant" is a page-turner. I was never bored or distracted. Like all Shaara novels, the book is well researched and very readable. To me, this author writes the epitome of factual historical fiction, which as I've said many times is a great way to learn details of an event. And if you're not careful, you might even become a fan of history. So put this book on your summer reading list.

Midway: A battle, a book, and two movies

I miss the old movies from the 60s and early 70s. My dad loved them, we'd watch them together and I actually learned a lot of military history from watching those Saturday reruns (some of that history I admit had to be corrected). One of those was the 1976 movie Midway with Charlton Heston and Henry Fonda. This was on our list of classic war movies, so I bought a copy on DVD for my dad a few years ago. When the new version of Midway came out in 2019 with Woody Harrelson as Admiral Nimitz, I had to see how it compared, so I added a copy of that version to my collection.

Which version is better you ask? Tough question. Right off the top, I’ll tell you I liked the older version better. But for the life of my I couldn’t figure out why. Is it because the Charlton Heston version used real aircraft and historical footage? (the onboard carrier scenes were filmed on the USS Lexington.) Maybe the computer-generated battle scenes in the 2019 version were a turnoff. That and a bit of overacting? Maybe? Just a little? Amazon customers couldn’t help. Both movies are well received with thousands of reviews. Well, maybe we should ask which one was more historically accurate. And that’s where the book comes in.

I admit that I am not nearly as familiar with WWII naval history as I am with the land-based battles. I did not know a great deal about the Battle of Midway. When I don’t know about something, I can’t just take Wikipedia’s word for it. I have to go find a book. No disrespect to Wikipedia, it’s a great resource for background information. I just have to have a book. I chose “The Battle of Midway” by Craig L. Symonds. The book was really good. I’m not the only one who thinks so, it has 4.7 stars on 590 reviews. The book begins with Admiral Chester Nimitz taking over as CincPac in the days following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. We’re given all of the background we need that leads us up to the battle, including the Battle of the Coral Sea, the breaking of Japanese codes, and the Doolittle Raid. The book then provides a blow by blow telling of the Battle of Midway that occurred just six months after Pearl Harbor. I enjoyed reading it.

Which movie was more historically accurate? First, ignore the storyline in the first movie involving Heston’s fictional character and his son. Then I would say with the broad-brush strokes they are both historically accurate. But I have to admit that when it comes to details and character portrayals, the 2019 Woody Harrelson version beats out the 1976 version. For example, Joe Rochefort, the officer in charge of breaking one of the Japanese codes that were so instrumental in the American victory was portrayed in the 1976 movie as eccentric and unconventional. That is not a true description of this brilliant officer, and he was more accurately depicted in the 2019 movie. As it turns out, the 2019 movie did a much better job of showing the real men who played integral parts in the battle. McClusky really did damage his lungs with a faulty air tank, and Admiral Yamaguchi did, in fact, choose to go down with the Hiryū. As it turns out, it seemed like the 2019 movie of Midway was based on Symonds’ book.

I know I haven’t helped you choose just one of these. But hey, while you are socially distancing yourself you’ve got time to enjoy all three. My recommendation, as always, is to read the book first. 😉

D-day plus 75 years and other stories to be heard.

I’m going to go out on a limb and assume that even if you are not a fan of history, but you participate in social media, or certainly if you watch the evening news, you know that it is the 75^th anniversary of the WWII Allied invasion of France. Over the past eight years we’ve had a number of significant anniversaries of our country’s military history. They include the 150^th anniversary events that took place during the American civil war, the 100^th anniversary of WWI battles, and now the 75^th anniversary of World War II and the 50^th anniversary of the Apollo Moon Landing. I appreciate these benchmark anniversaries because like James Holzauer’s winning streak bringing new fans to Jeopardy, the buzz about the anniversary of a significant historical event will make more people take note and hopefully learn about these great trials and triumphs of our past. The difference between the 75^th anniversary of the Normandy invasion and the other wars mentioned is that we still have a lot of regular people who can tell us what it was like.

Surviving veterans and eyewitnesses to the Second World War are in their nineties. I heard on ABC News the other night that over 300 World War II veterans pass away every day. And the thought occurred to me that we aren’t considering how many non-veterans we are losing who can tell us what it was like on the home front during the war years. Of course I love my military history, but one of the most fascinating and educational places I’ve visited is the Rosie the Riveter and WWII on the Home Front National Historical Park. There is a lot to learn from those who stayed home, worked, and sacrificed to win the war.

And what about veterans and civilians from other countries? When it comes to meeting folks from our “Greatest Generation,” I’m lucky to be a baby boomer. When I was in my twenties most WWII veterans were in their sixties, so I have met a few in my time. Moreover, having been stationed in Germany for three years, I met a few German veterans and civilians who experienced the tragedy of war first hand. My landlord’s father (I called him “Opa Willie”) fought on the Russian front, but deserted at the end of the war so that he could surrender to American forces. Good thing he did. I dated a German woman for a while whose father was a POW held by the Russians. They did not repatriate him for eleven years. And I met that girl’s apartment manager, who was married at age 19 and only spent three weeks with her husband before he went off to fight in the war. He never returned and remained missing in action. She never remarried.

As an aside, do you think that Germany has learned from its history? I think so. When I visited the concentration camp at Dachau, I saw school children arrive on a bus for a field trip. That is just one example of how the Germans don’t hide from their past. This week, Chancellor Angela Merkel thanked the Allies for “liberating Germany from the Nazis.” I’m sorry, but I just can’t see the United States being that forthright, especially when you read reports that say that only about forty percent (40%) of Americans can correctly answer the history questions on the citizenship exam.

I regret that I didn’t start a serious study of history until after my years in the army. I believe my conversations with the veterans I had met would have taken a different turn. Like many young people, I had different priorities. Nevertheless, I can’t help but wish I could go back and take the opportunity to conduct an in-depth oral history interview with all of these people I’ve met over the years. Of course, there are members of this great generation still with us. And it is not too late to hear their stories and it is never too late to learn our history, so that we don’t have to repeat it.

PT-305, Restoration Under Way

USS PT-105 running at high speed, during
exercises off the U.S. east coast, with
other units of Motor Torpedo Boat Squadron
Five, 12 July 1942.
www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-p/pt105.htm

Okay, everybody knows what a PT boat is, right? You did see the movie "PT-109" with Cliff Robertson, yes? Or certainly "They Were Expendable" with John Wayne? If not go get those classic movies today. The "PT" stands for "Patrol Torpedo." Pretty straightforward, it's a patrol boat that is armed with torpedoes. The PT boats were designed similar to pre-WWII motor racing boats, so they were fast. But they were made out of wood, so they were vulnerable. PT boats were used in every theater of WWII, but are particularly well known for their work in the Pacific.

An article in the Times-Picayune came up on my radar this morning about the project to restore PT-305 at the National WWII Museum in New Orleans. Apparently this project has been ongoing for more than a year. The article has a great video embedded that is certainly worth viewing. The dedication of the skilled volunteers who are putting in their time and effort to extend the life of this boat is amazing. I was so impressed by the article, that I wanted to know more. I found a video on YouTube that has some shots of the boat when it was brought it to the museum. Contrast that image with the shots in the video in the Times article. Those volunteers have come a long way in a year.

PT-305 has basically been in service since it was built at the Higgins Industries shipyard in New Orleans in 1943. The video gives the boats service history, so rather than tell you, I thought it would be easier to just show you:


An amazing project, isn't it? Of course, PT-305 is not the last or only PT boat to be restored. The restoration of PT-658 has already been completed in Portland, Oregon. But once the boats are brought back to their original condition, they have to be maintained, hence there will always be a need for volunteers and donations. Help save our history where you can, when you can, and however you can.

Book R & R: The True German

This Book Review and Recommendation is on "The True German: The Diary of a World War II Military Judge" by Werner Otto Muller-Hill, introduction by Benjamin Carter Hett.

Werner Otto Muller-Hill was an upper-middle class German from Frieburg. He served as a military judge in the First World War before he went home to pursue a legal career. He was recalled to active duty in the German Wehrmacht, again to serve as a military judge in 1940. He was very pro-German, and very anti-Nazi. He started keeping a journal in March 1944 as a record for his young son, in the event he did not survive the war. Defeatism and criticizing the Fuhrer were crimes in Hitler's Germany, so if the things Muller-Hill wrote in his diary were ever found out, it could mean his death. But he survived the war, closing his journal two weeks after the German surrender to the Allies. He was sixty years old at the end of the war. Muller-Hill died in 1977.

German military justice was draconian during WWII. For example, the introduction provides the statistic that during WWI, German military courts sentenced 48 soldiers to death. However, under Nazi rule from 1933 to 1945 at least 20,000 and maybe as many as 33,000 or more soldiers, civilians, and POWs subject to military justice were put to death. (p. xvi) As Benjamin Carter Hett says, "Nazi military law...specified both harsh penalties and a speedy procedure, with few rights for defendants." (p. xix) Werner Otto Muller-Hill was one of the "good" judges though, who obviously thought a soldier would perform better back in his unit rather than hanging on the end of a rope.

What makes Muller-Hill's diary so interesting, and so valuable as a historical tool, is the amount of information he had, or moreover, what he knew. On April 5, 1944 Muller-Hill wrote that "We are rushing head-long into the worst kind of defeat...In a year we'll know more!!!" He almost predicted the outcome of the war and the date of Germany's defeat. Filtered through propaganda, briefings through his chain of command, newspaper and radio, this rear echelon officer knew quite a bit about things that previously we thought the average German did not. Along with his insight, he was often sarcastic and sometimes humorous. He talks of missiles being fired at London as "retribution" for the landings in Normandy (pp. 49-52) and also predicts the futility of the Battle of the Bulge (p. 131). He praises the attempt on Hitler's life (p. 59) and is upset about the use of 14-year old boys being put into defensive positions toward the end of the war (p. 92).

Most startling is Muller-Hill's rant about a speech given by Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels, where he writes "What nerve this man has! How dare he talk about gruesome maltreatment of women and children, when we've summarily murdered hundreds of thousands of Jewish women and children in Poland and Russia!" (p. 155). For me this helps to dispel the myth that the general populace of Germany, particularly the Wehrmacht, had no knowledge of the Holocaust before the end of the war.

"The True German" is a quick read, and in the real voice of an astute observer of what was going on around him. Reading this book provides the opportunity to hear what a very knowledgeable German officer was thinking at the time the events unfolded around him. His words are not filtered by a historian or other writer. The book is, in fact, a primary source document, both enlightening and entertaining. A nice addition to your WWII library.

The publisher, Palgrave Macmillan, provided a review copy of "The True German."

Book R & R: Operation Barbarossa

This Book Review and Recommendation is on "Operation Barbarossa: Nazi Germany's War in the East, 1941-1945" by Christian Hartmann.

Regular readers know that recently I have advocated viewing WWII through different perspectives, for example reading about some myth-breaking facets of the war like sex crimes committed by Allied Forces, or how we treated deserters, or the experiences of soldiers from different nationalities. Operation Barbarossa was the German invasion of the Soviet Union, what we commonly refer to as "the Russian Front." Because there were no U.S. forces fighting in that Theater, the typical American knows as much about it as they do say, the British fight for Singapore. "Operation Barbarossa: Nazi Germany's War in the East, 1941-1945" can remedy that. It is a quick read (208 pages including back matter) and a palatable history of the major theater of World War II.

In June of 1941, Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union along an 1800 mile front with over four million Axis soldiers. By the fall of 1941, the German offensive pushed into Russia to within twenty miles of Moscow. The Russians held and later pushed the Germans back, with the help of war material sent from the United States under the Lend-Lease program. The fighting on the Eastern Front involved the largest battles of the war, some of which are know to use in the west, like the siege of Leningrad, Stalingrad, Kiev, and the Battle of Kursk. The latter being the largest tank battle in history. By the end of the war in 1945, Operation Barbarossa would account for an estimated 26.6 million Soviet casualties, 13 million of which were civilians. These numbers represent as much as sixty-five percent of all Allied casualties incurred during the war, including the war with Japan. The German Army lost 2,743,000 soldiers on the Eastern Front (pp. 157-158). That's about half of Germany's military casualties during the Second World War.

Christian Hartmann is a military historian at the Institut Fur Zeitgeschichte in Munich and is a senior lecturer at the Staff College of the German Armed Forces in Hamburg. In his book, Operation Barbarossa: Nazi Germany's War in the East, 1941-1945, Hartmann has given us a succinct, yet very readable history. I found his concluding chapter on the aftermath of the war particularly insightful. Hartmann points out that Operation Barbarossa was the clash between the two largest totalitarian systems existing prior to WWII. The war between the Nazis and Stalinist Russia laid waste to both countries. While this condition gave rise to the Cold War, it also allowed for a new Germany to be built from scratch. And because of the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union, the western Allies were forced to take a chance on creating a new, industrialized and autonomous Germany from the beginning, rather than focusing on punishment and reparations. Hartmann also posits that a factor in the Cold War staying cold was the memory of the destruction wrought during the German-Soviet war. I agree.

Why do we study military history? When I was an army officer, I thought it was to learn how to better fight the next war. I'll allow that's probably still true. But as a much older and wiser civilian I'd have to say that one reason we study a past war is so we'll learn the lesson of how terrible war is. I recommend being familiar with the shocking scale of Operation Barbarossa, especially in relation to our operations on the Western Front. Christian Hartmann's book is an excellent resource for that.

Comanche Code Talkers

Photograph from the article "Charles Chibitty: Comanche Code Talker"

posted on the U.S. Army website.

It never ceases to amaze me how much I don't know. I'm working as hard as I can to fix that, the not knowing part, but I'm afraid I'm going to run out of time. Whenever I run across some factoid that I'm not familiar with or I don't think was explained well enough, I have to run down some more information on it. Here's a perfect example from this morning: I ran across a newspaper article that caught my eye while doing an Internet search for something completely different (yep, that still happens). This article in the Lawton Constitution informed me (before I hit information cutoff and they demanded a subscription to read the rest of the article) that the annual Comanche Fair this year would be honoring the Comanche Code Talkers from World War II. In fact, if you can't make it to the fair, there is a museum exhibit dedicated to the Code Talkers that you can visit year-round at the Comanche National Museum and Cultural Center, in Lawton, Oklahoma.

I know what you're thinking, Comanche Code Talkers? I thought the Code Talkers were Navajo, like the movie, right? I had to do some quick research on this. Turns out, members of several tribes served as Code Talkers during both WWI and WWII. Code Talkers are soldiers who can use their native language in radio and telephone communications like a code, since to the enemy the language is so obscure they have virtually no hope of translating it. During WWI the Army started the practice using Native American soldiers of the Cherokee, Choctaw, and Comanche tribes. They proved to be very effective. So much so that during the inter-war years, Adolf Hitler sent about thirty anthropologists to Oklahoma to try to learn Native American languages. They failed. The languages were too difficult and there were too many dialects.

During WWII the United States Marine Corps accelerated the program and recruited more than 400 Navajo Code Talkers. (The USMC also experimented with the Basque language, utilizing about 60 native speakers of that language.) The size of the Marines' Code Talker program and exposure in popular culture has resulted in most of us associating "Code Talkers" with the Navajo tribe. Because of Germany's attempt to learn Native American languages, the U.S. Army was hesitant to use Code Talkers in the European Theater. However, on a limited scale, the U.S. Army employed some Native American speakers against the Germans. That included recruiting from 27 Meskwaki (Fox) men from Iowa who joined the Army as a group. Eight of them eventually became Code Talkers and served in combat against the Germans in North Africa.

The United States Army also recruited seventeen Comanche Indians to serve as Code Talkers. As a further safety measure they developed a "code within a code" by coming up with over 100 code words within their own language. Fourteen of these men were assigned to the 4th Infantry Division and landed on Utah Beach on D-Day. Two of the Code Talkers were assigned to each regiment in the division and the rest were assigned to division headquarters. Their unique skills were put to work on their first day in Normandy. Although several were wounded, all of the Comanche Code Talkers survived the war.

The last Comanche Code Talker passed away in 2005. However, a grateful nation does not stop honoring these men who through their special skill and service saved untold numbers of their fellow American soldiers.

Book R & R: The Deserters

This Book Review and Recommendation is for "The Deserters: A Hidden History of World War II" by Charles Glass.

The United States put approximately sixteen million men and women in uniform during WWII. Only about ten percent of them actually saw combat as front line soldiers, marines, and sailors. If you have ever read even one book on the combat history of a unit, you will come to realize that most combat units during the Second World War, once initial training was complete and sent to a theater of operations, saw combat over and over, for weeks at a time. Units would participate in a campaign, then be sent to a rear area to receive and train replacements, before heading into combat again for the next campaign. It was not uncommon, like in the case of the 509th Parachute Infantry Battalion, to see at the end of the war only a handful of men still remaining who had been with the unit from the start.

Of course we all now know about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and the affect it has on military personnel in every echelon. However, during WWII, "combat fatigue" was commonly believed to be something you could more or less cure in a few days with a little rest, recreation, and a hot meal. About 50,000 men deserted from the battlefields of Europe during the war. (There were negligible desertions in the Pacific, as the soldiers and marines really had no place to desert to.) According to author Charles Glass, many of these soldiers left the line as a result of "shell shock" or "battle fatigue," or what we now call PTSD. Others became disillusioned with the war, wondering what they were going to die for. Over seventy percent of deserters were from front line units, and they were judged harshly and treated quite unfairly by their rear echelon peers and commanders.

Charles Glass is the former Chief Middle East Correspondent for ABC News, and has authored other highly praised narrative histories with a World War II theme like "Americans in Paris." In "The Deserters: A Hidden History of World War II" he examines the reality of what it cost in terms of human sacrifice to win the Second World War. To accomplish this Glass tells us the stories of three soldiers, one British and two American, who ran afoul of the system's treatment of those soldiers who deserted as a reaction to "battle fatigue" (PTSD). It is well researched and engagingly written. Along the way you will learn about the incompetence of the medical evaluation of these men and the cruelty of the military justice system. You will read how the military handled executions, (for crimes other than desertion, Private Eddie Slovak was the only soldier executed during WWII for that offense), and learn about criminal gangs of deserters in Paris and London who were actually slowing the war effort because of their theft of Allied military supplies for sale on the black market. If you are like me, "The Deserters" will expose a facet of the war in Europe that you have never considered.

Here's an anecdote for you: During my masters program, I took a class on the Civil War. On the first night of class the professor stated clearly that "in this class we will never read or discuss anything having to do with anyone pointing a gun at another person." He meant that the class was about the results and reactions to the war, not the tactics and strategy of it. We read and discussed books about the literature of the war, the medical and burial systems during the war, the home front during the war, and so on. We read, wrote a paper on, and passionately discussed (some might say argued) thirteen books in thirteen weeks and it was one of the best classes on military history I've ever had, a real eye-opener.

If you wish to have a well informed, thorough understanding of war, and particularly WWII, then I cannot urge you strongly enough to read this book. 

Book R & R: The Last Battle

This Book Review and Recommendation is on "The Last Battle: When U.S. and German Soldiers Joined Forces in the Waning Hours of World War II in Europe" by Stephen Harding.

"The Last Battle" is the story of the Battle for Schloss Itter in Austria that took place on May 5, 1945. This was five days after Adolf Hitler committed suicide and just two days before the end of WWII in Europe. The castle outside the village of Itter, Austria was used by the Nazis as a VIP prison for (mostly French) political prisoners during the war. It was under the administration of the Dachau concentration camp, less than a hundred miles to the north in the suburbs of Munich. As the war was winding down and American forces were advancing, the castle's guards deserted and left the prisoners to their own devises. The French diplomats correctly assumed that retreating SS units would arrive at the castle and execute them. They sent runners to find American forces to come to their aid, while also contacting the local Wehrmacht (German Army) commander who had let the local resistance forces know that he was anti-Nazi and wished a peaceful surrender.

An American rescue mission comes in the form of a platoon-sized task force from the 12th Armored Division commanded by CPT Jack Lee. Unfortunately because of various problems on the road during this behind the lines mission, Lee arrives with only one Sherman tank and about fourteen American soldiers. The Wehrmacht contingent who voluntarily chose to join the Americans and help defend the castle against the approaching SS forces consisted of two officers and about ten soldiers. This small force of Americans and Germans, along with a few of the French prisoners, defend Schloss Itter against an attack by the Waffen-SS from the early morning hours of May 5th until a relief column from the American 142nd Infantry Regiment arrives late in day.

This story is a perfect example of the legitimacy behind the cliche that "sometimes truth is stranger than fiction." Stephen Harding tells a good story and is to be congratulated for bringing it to us. Unfortunately it is a short story, although that is not the fault of the author. The Battle for Schloss Itter is too long a tale to be abridged into a magazine article, but too short for a 300-page monograph. "The Last Battle" comes in at about 173 pages not counting the back matter. That includes a thorough history of the castle and the biography of each of the French prisoners, which slows the story down for those who are anxious to hear of this unique situation where "regular" German soldiers joined with their American and French enemies to fight the SS. Other than that, once the Americans come into the area of operations, the story becomes a "page turner." What I found most interesting (as I usually do) is the epilogue where the reader learns what the players in this story did with the rest of their lives.

"The Last Battle" is a good story well told of an improbable episode in WWII history.