Sub Base marks 76th anniversary of Navy’s victory over Japanese fleet at Battle of Midway

The mission of the submarines, including the one J. Deen Brown was on, was to form a semi-circle southwest of Midway to ensure that Japanese transport ships loaded with thousands of soldiers and equipment couldn’t reach and invade the island.

In recent years, Brown, 95, of Oakdale, has been the sole Battle of Midway veteran at the Naval Submarine Base’s annual commemoration of the event. Navy officials and a small crowd on Monday marked the 76th anniversary of the three-day battle, recognized as the turning point of World War II in the Pacific

“I feel sometimes like maybe I’m being a little spoiled. But it is an honor and I do appreciate very much the attention and consideration I’ve received,” said Brown, who turns 96 on Friday.

The battle, which started at 4:30 a.m. on June 4, 1942, happened six months after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. After Pearl Harbor, Japanese commander Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto wanted to lure what remained of the American fleet to Midway and destroy it, then invade and use the island as a base for attacking Hawaii.

“Our nation and Navy’s response was just as forthright,” said Capt. Paul Whitescarver, commanding officer of the base, explaining that on June 4, 1942, U.S. aircraft flying from three aircraft carriers – USS Enterprise, USS Hornet, and USS Yorktown – attacked and sunk four Japanese carriers, which had attacked Pearl Harbor.

“By June 6, 1942, Admiral Yamamoto and his Japanese forces were forced to withdraw,” Whitescarver said.

The battle was not the most challenging for submarines – that would come later in the war – but Brown and the rest of the crew assigned to the USS Trout (SS 202) had to frantically prepare the submarine to head to Midway. The submarine only had two working engines because it had been damaged two months earlier while supporting the Doolittle Raid, the first U.S. air raid to strike the Japanese home islands.

“We didn’t anticipate having to go to Midway,” Brown said. “It came as a very, very quick surprise.”

The submarine was getting ready to receive a radar system, cutting edge technology at the time, and had to repair the other disassembled engines while underway to Midway in rough seas with “a rolling and tossing ship,” Brown said.

Midway laid the foundation for the ultimate end of the war, Whitescarver said, noting that D-Day, when Allied troops invaded Normandy, France, two years after the Midway battle, was a “cornerstone to that end” and marks its 74th anniversary on Wednesday.

———

© 2018 The Day (New London, Conn.)

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Read more from American Military News…

Eyes of Freedom brings power to heal

Now, the Eyes of Freedom memorial’s life-sized paintings of 23 U.S. Marines are ready to move on after watching over the Army National Guard Armory on Houk Road for five days. The paintings — which remain on view through 3 p.m. Sunday, June 3, at the armory, 1121 S. Houk Road — depict members of the Columbus-based Lima Company of the Marine Corps Reserves killed in Iraq in 2005.

Read more from Marine Insurance Company…

As Soon As His Wife Sent Him This Picture, This Marine Filed For A Divorce

It’s a story all military families share. No matter how much two people love each other, when a service man or woman gets deployed overseas, they have to leave their family for a few months. This can be hard on relationships. But more often than not, couples remain faithful despite the trying circumstances. The people who join the military and their family members are often people of value and faith. They cling to the power of community and the love they share with their children and partners.

But bad apples get into the bunch. And that’s what happened when one Marine realized that his wife was anything but faithful to him while he was fighting for freedom and America.

Eager to see a picture of his wife, a Marine asked his friend to pay his wife a visit. And when he did, he snapped a picture and sent it overseas to the hard-working Marine.

But as soon as the serviceman got a good look at the image, he was ready to file for divorce. The picture contained indisputable evidence that his wife was not faithful to him in the least. And if she is careless enough in an image that is being sent to her husband, imagine in what other ways she is cheating behind his back.

If you look closely at the picture, you can see something shocking. And the husband, a trained Marine, knew to look at all the details. You can see a hand reaching out from underneath the bed.

Obviously, the Marine’s wife had a visitor over. And when the friend unexpectedly arrived, “the friend” jumped out of bed and went underneath it.

The post was later reported on HuffingtonPost.de where it went viral. Although some people think it is just a joke or a hoax, divorce papers do not lie.

Couldn’t this woman wait a few weeks until her heroic husband came back from overseas? Or was her itch just so bad that she needed it to get scratched at all hours of the day?

Thankfully, the Marines trained this husband to scour everything for details. And while this training usually saved his life on the battlefield and at war, it also helped save him from a fake marriage. He was able to spot the hand under the bed and expose his wife’s infidelity – even though he was hundreds of miles away at sea. The man had nothing to lose except for a wife who was nothing but bad news and heavy baggage. Thankfully this Marine was able to get away from her before she was able to get more from him and ruin his life because that is probably what would have happened if they had spent anymore years together.

Watch the video below to see it for yourself!

Some people suspect that the image might have been the result of Photoshop. But the divorce papers do not lie. Thankfully, this Marine has distanced himself from the cheating wife. He deserves someone who will wait for him while he fights America’s battles.

Watch the video below and tell us what you think!

Read more from American Web Media…

On Memorial Day, Getting Beyond ‘Thank You For Your Service’

Thucydides tells us that war changes the meaning of words. Social media demonstrated this maxim several years ago when “mil-splaining” military-related holidays was all the rage. From memes outlining the differences between Veterans, Armed Forces, and Memorial Day, to Fourth of July “safe space” declarations seemingly applied to all vets, the trend was everywhere. Thankfully, it seems now to have passed. 

Memorial Day is, of course, for remembering the fallen, those who died in service to the nation. Veterans and their families remember their loved ones in ways they deem appropriate, and the state remembers, too, in a somber, serious manner.

This remembrance should in no way preclude the typical family barbecue and other customs associated with the traditional beginning of summer. National holidays are for remembering and celebrating, not guilt. Shaming those who fail to celebrate a holiday according to one’s expectations is a bit like non-Christians feeling shame for skipping church: it shouldn’t matter because the day means different things to different people. Having a day on the calendar demonstrates the national consensus about honoring sacrifice; anything more than that is a slow walk towards superficiality. President Bush stopped golfing during the Iraq war, but it didn’t stop him from continuing it.

Instead, Memorial Day should engender conversation about our military and the gulf between those who serve and those who don’t. The conversation shouldn’t just be the military talking at civilians; it must be reciprocal. Increasingly civilians see “soldiers as symbols that allow them to feel good about themselves, and the country”—but many also see OxyContin that way. This situation is lamentable because the aforementioned “mil-splaining” could only occur in a country so profoundly divided from its military as to misunderstand basic concepts such as the purpose of holidays. It’s also striking how the most outspoken so-called “patriots” often have little connection to that which they so outlandishly support. Our “thank you for your service” culture is anathema to well-functioning civil-military relations.

The public owes its military more consideration, particularly in how the armed forces are deployed across the globe. Part of this is empathy: stop treating military members as an abstraction, as something that exists only to serve a national or increasingly political purpose. Our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines are deserving of praise and support—especially considering the burden they’ve carried—but what they need more is an engaged public, one that’s even willing to scrutinize the military. Because scrutiny necessitates engagement and hopefully understanding and reform.

But the civil-military divide goes both ways. Military members and veterans owe the public a better relationship as well. This Memorial Day, don’t cringe when someone says “Thank you for your service” and proceed to correct them. Open a dialogue: you might build a real connection. Better yet, volunteer to speak at a school or church: partly to explain your service, sure, but more so to show that military personnel are people, too, not just distant abstractions. Veterans are spread across the county and better able to interact with civilians than our largely cloistered active duty force. They shouldn’t go to schools, churches, and civic organizations for the inevitable praise. They should go to educate, nurture relationships, and chip away at the civil-military divide.

Perhaps by questioning the fundamentals—the “why” instead of the so often discussed “what” in military operations—the public would be in a better position to demand action from a Congress that, heretofore, has largely abdicated serious oversight of foreign policy. Perhaps the public, instead of asking “what” we need to break the stalemate in Afghanistan, could ask “why” there is a stalemate at all—and whether American forces can truly ameliorate the structural, cultural, and historical obstacles to achieving desired ends there.

A strategy is needed that’s rooted in serious analysis of American interests and strengths and a realistic assessment of the world. For nearly a generation, we have failed to align ends, ways, and means. Like “The Weary Titan,” America finds itself unable (or unwilling) to adapt to a changing world. Consumed by domestic strife and the emergence of nationalism, American foreign policy has wandered fecklessly since the end of the Cold War. While we can strike anywhere, this capability is wasted in search of a lasting peace.

What do we have to show for our expenditures? A divided country, financially exhausted while waging war across the globe against an elusive enemy—who is, frankly, not a threat remotely approaching the resources we have aligned against him. Beyond the material costs, there’s the social. Our military has become a syncretic religion, enjoying the support but not due consideration of the nation. This situation is genuinely tragic.

For America to dig its way out of its domestic and foreign troubles it must start with sobering analysis. For the civil-military dialogue, Memorial Day is as good a place to begin as any day. So this weekend, civilians should move beyond “Thank you for your service” and ask a vet about his or her service and lost comrades. Veterans, don’t expect praise and don’t lecture; speak with honesty and empathy, talk about what you’ve done and the conditions you’ve seen. You might be surprised what we can learn from each other.

John Q. Bolton is an Army officer who recently returned from Afghanistan. An Army aviator (AH-64D/E), he is a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. He is a 2005 graduate of West Point. The views presented here are his alone and not representative of the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.

Read more from The American Conservative…

‘The hell I can’t’: The heroism and higher calling of Andrew Jackson Higgins

Dwight D. Eisenhower called him the man who won the war. But Andrew Jackson Higgins — the man who invented the boats Allied soldiers and Marines used for amphibious assaults in World War II — preferred to think of himself as an inveterate tinkerer and …

Read more from Andrew Jackson …

Community salutes 51 new inductees in military service with ceremony

The rarity of the event held inside the USO building – since swearing-in ceremonies normally happen in Raleigh – provided a fitting backdrop to the young men and women who have signed on to serve as Marines, sailors, soldiers and airmen in active and reserve capacities.

Read more from Army Green Beret…

PBS Lets Vets Themselves Describe Life Inside the War Machine

'Going to War'Going to War. PBS. Monday, May 28, 9 p.m.

Served Like a Girl. PBS. Monday, May 28, 10 p.m.

So, an easy solution to the problem of Adderall abuse: It’s called “Afghanistan.”

“I think it’s hilarious that in America now, we have this big thing about medications and being present and all this other kind of stuff,” says a military veteran in PBS’ Going to War. “Because you’re never more present than you are in wars. Soldiers have figured this out eons ago. You have to be present to get shot at. I guarantee you are locked in.”

Going to War, produced by veteran documentarian Michael Epstein (LennoNYC) and spearheaded by commentary from war correspondent Sebastian Junger (Restrepo) and Vietnam veteran and author Karl Marlantes (What It Is Like to Go to War), is a collection of interviews with vets of U.S. wars over the past 60 years, plumbing their feelings about what to many was the most significant experience of their lives.

PBS has packaged it on Memorial Day with the peculiar but ultimately endearing tale of women back from the front, Served Like a Girl, the first directorial effort by filmmaker Lysa Heslov, airing as an episode of the Independent Lens series.

The relationship between soldiers and war is never as simple as outsiders make it out to be. Some certainly hate it. But others find a human resonance in war that otherwise eludes them: A sense of purpose, of brotherhood and even, paradoxically, of security. One vet interviewed in Going to War recalls that he felt safer in Vietnam, where “you know somebody’s got your back. In the world, it’s dog eat dog.”

That is, arguably, not a typical human response. But one of the most interesting things about the documentary is the frank admission of the soldiers—both male and female—is that they aren’t typically human, or at least weren’t when they were in the military. Going to war would be impossible, they say, if the military didn’t strip them of ordinary human sensibilities and rebuild them as a hive mind.

The whole point of basic training is aimed at obliterating any sense of individuality. “The ego, it has to go,” says one vet. When that’s accomplished, drill instructors begin levying collective punishments: If one soldier’s bunk isn’t made right, his whole unit has to do punishment marches. By the end, the vets say note approvingly, all notions of personal survivability have been erased. “The moment you have self-preserving thoughts,” says one, “everything’s going to hell.”

The near universality of the experience emerges in a segment of Going to War in which vets from different units, wars and decades are all asked the same questions and their answers edited together in a stream-of-conciousness rap. First thought upon entering a war zone: “What the hell am I doing?” Second: “What’s wrong with those guys I’m replacing?” says one. “Zoned-out zombies, a mean hard look on their face.” The third, at the sound of the first bullets: “My God, we’re being shot at.”

Within the common framework, of course, the soldiers have individual stories. One of the most chilling comes from Al Grantham, who quit his bricklaying job in Alabama to join the Marines and fight in Vietnam. Knocked senseless by a North Vietnamese bullet during the battle of Hue, he was loaded onto a stack of casualties on the back of a tank and hauled outside the city. It wasn’t until he heard a medic shout, “Hey, this one’s not dead yet”—Grantham’s first thought was, “that poor sumbitch must be hurt bad”—that he realized the rest of the passengers on the tank were corpses and the poor sumbitch was him.

Yet the thinness and easy erasability of the line between life and death were not, for many of the vets, the most frightening discovery. It was the realization that they were, in some fundamental way, broken. “You’re tired of being tired, you’re scared of being scared,” remembers one.

And a former Marine describes with agonizing calm a day in Iraq when six car-bombs exploded in 15 minutes around his unit’s urban position. When the explosions finally stopped, all that could be heard were the shrills of Iraqi women cradling their dead. The Marine officer, trying to count his men and plot his next move, could barely hear himself think. “Maybe, he wondered idly, “I could kill them to shut them up.” His next shocked thought: “What am I capable of? … My God-given conscience is not going to stop me from doing these things.”

Served Like a Girl, in the early going, seems almost whimsical by comparison. It follows the contestants in the Ms. Veteran America beauty pageant, which raises money to support homeless vets.

They seem, mostly, an ordinary collection of female twentysomethings with only the occasional crackpot loose end—notably the contestant whose mother’s nipple was pecked off by a chicken. (“He had my nipple and I had his butt,” she declares without rancor.) Backstage at the pageant, much of their conversation consists of which self-administered sex toys best stand up to the rigors of desert warfare.

But as the film continues, the scars left by their combat tours start to be revealed: Broken marriages and child-custody fights. Macabre nightmares. Crippling guilt that they walked away from an IED explosion and their companions didn’t. Not all the scars are emotional. It’s not until about a third of the way through Served Like a Girl that you realized that one principal character is missing her legs. The Miss America pageant will never look quite the same to me again.

Read more from Reason.com…

Amphibious Vehicles Are the Military’s Latest Tax Dollar Sinkhole

One of the worst symptoms of the paralysis in Washington and at the Pentagon has been the inability to correctly match weapon systems with current enemy threat capabilities. Hence the United States Marine Corps is set to announce the final winner between defense contractors BAE Systems and SAIC to build and field their new Amphibious Combat Vehicle, or ACV.

Or should we say the old Amphibious Combat Vehicle? Because after 46 years and tens of billions of dollars, the Marines are right back where they started with this technology, which leaves no one—except maybe the contractors feeding off this farcical routine—feeling very satisfied.

So how did we get here?

The naval campaigns in the Pacific theater of World War II were successful due to the capability of the Marine Corps to conduct amphibious assaults against Japanese-held islands. Following the war this capability was written into law via the National Security Act of 1947, which stipulated that the Marine Corps was responsible for the seizure of advanced naval bases.

In order to move from Navy ships to enemy-held territory, the Marines must be transported across a distance of water and rely on what is generally called a connector. Both the Navy and Marine Corps operate various connectors from ship to shore, while the job of the Marines is to fight their way into enemy territory. Marine connectors only carry one weapon: Marines. Step one is to take the beach.

During World War II, the Navy ships could move to within a few miles of the Japanese-held islands before loading Marines into connectors. But with the advent of ballistic missile technology during the Cold War, a new weapon made its debut: the anti-ship missile.

The idea is simple. If Navy ships are within range of an anti-ship missile, they risk being severely damaged or even sunk. The solution is standoff. The Navy ships must stay outside the effective range of the missiles or use defensive measures to shoot the missiles down. This forces the ships further out to sea and increases the distance the connectors must travel over the open ocean to transport the Marines.

The connector vehicle the Marines adopted in 1972 was the Amphibious Assault Vehicle or AAV. AAVs are stored in hollow lower sections of naval ships known as well decks, which can be flooded so the AAV can exit the aft end of the ship into the ocean. The vehicle moves through the water using two traditional water propellers and also has tracks similar to a tank in order to drive on land. The AAV can carry around 20 Marines, swim through the water at seven knots (nautical miles per hour; seven knots is eight mph for comparison), and has an advertised water range of approximately 20 nautical miles, which in reality is closer to five nautical miles.

But anti-ship missile technology advanced in the 1980s, and proved deadly in the 1982 Falklands War between Great Britain and Argentina as the British lost two ships* to French-built Exocet missiles. So the Marine Corps and Navy rewrote their doctrine to move their ships over the horizon to approximately 12 nautical miles.

This strategy necessitated a new connector vehicle. Marine amphibious doctrine requires a “swift introduction of sufficient combat power ashore.” If the AAV can only swim at seven knots and the ships are 12 nautical miles away, you are looking at close to a two-hour ride to the beach. Time equals distance divided by speed. For the Marines stacked like sardines in full combat gear in the sweltering troop compartment of the AAV, this bumpy two hours becomes a rather nauseating and incapacitating experience.

So work began in earnest on the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, or EFV, in the 1980s. It was designed with a powerful jet propulsion system that allowed it to plane above the water like a speedboat and achieve 25 knots, three times as fast as the AAV with a water range of approximately 65 nautical miles. Over the course of 20 years, more than $3 billion was invested in the program. Operational EFVs were due to be in service by 2015, completely replacing the aging AAVs.

But potential adversaries didn’t stagnate. They developed a defensive Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) strategy. Waters around potential landing sites would be mined, and the range, speed, and lethality of anti-ship missiles enhanced significantly.

The increasing complexity of the operating environment did not go unnoticed. During the Obama administration’s first term, Undersecretary of the Navy Robert O. Work envisioned an either/or type of scenario for the future of amphibious conflict. Either Marines would land essentially unopposed as in Grenada in 1983 or the A2/AD posture of our enemies would be so preventative as to require a massive bombardment using long-range stand-off weapons like Tomahawk missiles and bombers to clear out anti-ship missiles and other defenses. Neither situation necessitated the use of a high-speed, heavily armored connector like the EFV.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates canceled the EFV program in 2011. Immediately afterwards, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Amos, decided to pursue the next iteration of troop connector named the Amphibious Combat Vehicle, or ACV. High speed on water remained a top priority as late as 2013.

After some research proposals were explored, General Amos decided in January 2014 that the ACV would be developed in a phased approach with a decreased need for speed on water. The ACV 1.1 was to be an off-the-shelf, armored, wheeled vehicle that met requirements for armor protection on land but would rely on connectors like the Navy’s Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC, aka Hovercraft) to move it swiftly from over the horizon at 40 knots to a few miles from its objectives, where it would then swim the last few miles. The LCAC has a large deck area that can accommodate several ACVs. Traditionally the LCAC would bring in heavy equipment like tanks or trucks after Marines secured a beach since the LCAC lacks armor protection.

The phased acquisitions approach was a tacit admission that you can’t have your cake and eat it too. The Marine Corps asked industry for a vehicle that offered protection first and then speed on the water at some point in the future.

The ACV 1.1 would not be able to self-deploy and swim from a ship like the AAV or EFV. The Marine Corps would buy a smaller number of the ACV 1.1, upgrade older AAVs and keep them in service until 2030, and research and develop ACV 1.2, a high-speed, fully amphibious vehicle.

But this solution appears to have been smoke and mirrors. In March 2015, Marine Commandant Joseph Dunford testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee concerning the program. He said industry might merge the ACV 1.1 and ACV 1.2 requirements together.

BAE Systems and SAIC were awarded $100 million each in December of 2015 to develop 16 test vehicles for ACV 1.1. And lo and behold, abracadabra, both company’s test vehicles could self-deploy and swim from a ship at, wait for it, seven knots—as fast as, you guessed it, the 1972 version.

Since the introduction of the AAV, almost 50 years have passed and many billions have been spent in research and development. And now the taxpayer will be footing the bill for a connector that holds fewer Marines than in 1972 (13 versus 20), swims at the same speed, and is more expensive.

The Marine Corps and industry are touting the fact that the ACV is under cost and ahead of schedule. The program is projected to cost $1.2 billion with 204 vehicles operational by 2020.

In October 2017, deputy Marine commandant Lieutenant General Beaudreault stated that “we have to find a solution to getting Marines to shore, from over the horizon, at something greater than seven knots. We’ve got to have high-speed connectors.”

It appears the deputy commandant didn’t get the memo. As the F-35 and USS Gerald Ford programs have shown, whenever the system wins, the warfighter and taxpayer lose.

*Story has been changed to reflect the British loss of one destroyer and one container ship during the Falklands War in 1982.

Jeff Groom is a former Marine officer. He is the author of American Cobra Pilot: A Marine Remembers a Dog and Pony Show (2018).

Read more from The American Conservative…

Navy vet Dave Bray releases storyteller album with powerful messages

U.S. Navy veteran Dave Bray just released his new album, “Music on a Mission,” and it’s a first-of-its-kind storyteller album that he hopes will garner a lot of attention. It has already debuted in the No. 6 spot on iTunes.

“I proudly sing and speak out about, God and Country, Patriotism and Respect, and the problems with our Nation,” Bray recently told American Military News. “I decided to narrate the record so that the listener completely understands the meaning and importance of each of the songs. I tell stories about the selflessness and sacrifice of our Nation’s Heroes.”

“Music on a Mission” (Courtesy of Dave Bray)

“I talk about the history of the songs and discuss the epidemic of Godlessness that is blanketing our country. I speak about our youth and shed light and warning on the PC narrative that is being shoved down their throats,” Bray continued. “It is a listening experience truly unlike any other. It will draw you in mentally and emotionally, and give you goosebumps. Only until you listen will you truly understand the importance of ‘Music on a Mission.’”

Bray is known to his fans as the “rock ‘n’ roll patriot.”

He served as a Corpsman with the 2nd Battalion/2nd Marines.

Bray was also one of the original members of Madison Rising, a patriotic post-grunge and hard rock band.

One of the songs on “Music on a Mission” is the anthem called “Last Call,” which is dedicated to all fallen police officers.

Bray has performed “Last Call” at various remembrance ceremonies and funerals of fallen police officers.

Of his new album, Bray said he wanted to create something people would like and be impacted by.

“Music on a Mission” (Courtesy of Dave Bray)

“It’s an hour of really entertaining talk radio mixed with some absolutely amazing songs,” he pointed out.

“The music is like something you would hear on a movie soundtrack. The kind of songs that give you goosebumps, fill you with pride or tear at your heart,” Bray continued.

“There is a war going on in this country that no one is willing to fight. It is the war for the minds of our children,” he said. “I used ‘Music on a Mission’ as an opportunity to speak directly to our citizens, both young and old, about the current state of America and what we are leaving behind for our youth. This album is extremely relevant to the times in which we live.”

Bray said all the songs on “Music on a Mission” directly correlate to the daily battles of law enforcement, firefighters, veterans, the U.S. military and faith.

The album is “all about being a God-fearing, freedom-loving, flag-waving patriot,” Bray added. “It’s about standing up for what’s right. So don’t just show the next generation how to stand up. Teach them what it means to be an upstanding citizen.”

The album is currently available on iTunes and Amazon, and also on Bray’s website.

Read more from American Military News…