United States Navy People

"Military life and culture seem to be foreign territory for many of the people who write for national magazines and newspapers today. Every time they refer to Navy SEALs and other SOF as "Special Forces," they reveal themselves to be as ignorant as someone who doesn't know, say, a Shia Muslim from a Sunni. Recently, in a well-attended forum at a public university, a prominent journalist referred to the Joint Special Operations Command, an elite command that carried out the bin Laden operation, as "an executive assassination ring, essentially," for Vice President Dick Cheney. The fact that the guy who said this has a Pulitzer Prize might confirm your worst fears about those who write "news" for a living. (Naturally, in the same presentation, he also referred to special operations units as "Special Forces.")"

"It's funny how serving your nation makes you part of something larger than yourself but also sets you apart. You realize this when you come home and find so many people who know what you've done but can't personally relate to any of it. The military now stands apart from average Americans' lives as it never has before. About 1.4 million people are on active duty in our armed forces today- about half the number that were on active duty fifty years ago. About 2.4 million have served in the Global War on Terror, as it's known. That last number sounds pretty big but it's just 0.77 percent of America's population of 313 million- a truly shocking instance of the "1 percent versus 99 percent" problem. In Congress, where our political decisions are made (or not), only 21.8 percent of our representatives have served in the military. That's down from 74 percent in 1971, when the numbers were pushed up by the draft. That was also a time when you didn't need to be wealthy to run for elected office and most congressmen understood that the term "enemy" referred to someone with a gun on the other side of a demilitarized zone, not someone in the opposing political party."

"Now, the budgeteers always want to divide your force up into what they call a high-low mix. In other words, you build two kinds of weapons systems, one is highly capable, with advanced technology, and then you build another more or less ordinary group. Of course, in my view that's a stupid idea because you'll never get the Soviet to arrange things so that they send their medium-quality forces against your medium-quality forces, and their high-quality forces against your high-quality forces. What'll happen is, first thing you know, your low-quality forces will encounter the high-quality forces and that'll be the end of it."

"You've got to be willing to take orders. You've got to be willing to live in harsh circumstances. As someone has put it, you've got to be able to miss a meal if it's necessary. And you've got to have a wife that will put up with all these things. My wife has been wonderful. We moved twenty-six times, lived all over the world. When I was away, she was responsible for everything -- for buying houses, for paying the children's tuition, taking them to the hospital, etc., etc. Today, so many of the very young people are getting married, and we have also so many girls in the military. Someone over in the Pentagon told me the other day [when] I asked him what are the main problems now, he says: "Child care and pregnancy." But that wasn't present when I was a young officer."

"Of course, survival is very important, and how the people around you behave and how you can help them, and so on. I made up my mind that I was not going to be worried in the least in the future by any ordinary things."

"President Johnson was almost entirely focused on his efforts to introduce what was called the Great Society. He was unfortunate to be involved in the Vietnam War during the time when the public and media were getting more and more disenchanted over it, and he, in my view, looked at the war where he didn't want to put out enough effort to win it, but at the same time he wanted to put out enough not to lose it, which is not exactly the way to go about any kind of a combat. My view is that if you make the decision to get involved, you should get it over with as soon as possible. I could go into great length about this particular point."

"I have predicted for years that Germany was going to reunify. The Germans are going to be the most powerful nation in Europe, both militarily and economically as time goes on. I'm confident of that. I told some of my French friends one time that they could rest easier if they could get the Germans to sleep one hour later. What I'm really talking about there is the work ethic that they have, which has propelled them along. The same thing for the Japanese. The Japanese have everything in their favor in terms of high technology and production capability, and educated people."

"The point is [that] in the old days, when you only had a spear or maybe a one-shot rifle or something like that, you didn't have to go to school to learn how to work it. Today, we have tried in the United States to use technology to reduce manpower requirements. But what that does is impose on you the need for very intelligent people that can understand and maintain and operate these complex machines that we have today. So that's what you're up against. Every time the politicians have drawn a line and split a nation that was originally formed by a common culture and by geography and so on, it always results in a war."

"If you want to really get worried, just leap out in the middle of the ocean and let somebody drop a few bombs around you and you can really get worried. It's a matter of relativity. So many people in the country today and the world today, frankly, have nervous breakdowns over what I consider to be nothing."

"The government is not going to be able to solve everything, but the politicians, of course, use that to get votes. I'm concerned about the ethics of the country and the focus on material things by the young people. And they want it overnight. You can't just start out as being a chief executive officer at General Motors, and you won't take any job less than that. That's nonsense. You've got to be fifty, sixty, even seventy years old before you've acquired enough knowledge and experience to handle those kinds of jobs."

"And I must say that throughout this entire Vietnam operation ah, I was appalled at the fact that so many people in and out of the government, and certainly I would put the media at the top of the list, seemed far more concerned about the lives of the people in Southeast Asia than they were the lives of the young men that were fighting for their country. Let me give you an example of this. For instance, when I was ah, describing the torture that was being inflicted on the POW's in ah, in North Vietnam I've actually had the American citizens tell me, "Well it serves them right – they had no business volunteering.""

"One must remember that the North Vietnamese, under Ho Chi Minh, had been fighting ah, first the French, then the Japanese, then the French again, and now the Americans. And they were professionals in every sense. Ah, the South Vietnamese, on the other hand, were ah, primarily those ah, that were ah, more or less, uh, under the command of the French, and had ah, never had an opportunity to uh, develop leadership."

"So, you've got to have patience, you've go to work, and you've got to remember, as I said a while ago, that it's not the people that you work for that are going to guarantee your success, it's the people that work for you. That's where you've got to put your attention, and take care of them first."

"Well, the only way, the only reason to go to war, at any time, uh, is to overthrow a government that's doing something you don't like. And if you announce at the outset that you are not going to overthrow the government, then, so far as I’m concerned ah, you should come home immediately."

"I tell young people [that] they are, in effect, the leaders in the future. Young people don't realize that they're not going to be young forever. Time marches on, and pretty soon they're going to have the mantle of responsibility. So the first thing they've got to recognize is that in order to be a leader, you must have knowledge. Education is the key to success, and it's becoming more and more so. Secondly, you've got to learn about human nature and how to deal with people. You've got to work at it; it doesn't just happen. So, in the first place, surely they know that they have an opportunity, just by virtue of living in the United States, that's not enjoyed by billions of others. Why is it that the pressure for immigration is so heavy in the United States? We don't have any boat people leaving the United States, everybody's coming this way. And why? Because of our freedom and our way of life, and the fact that the Lord has given us an area that's bordered on one hand by the Pacific Ocean, on the other side by the Atlantic Ocean. We have a marvelous climate. We only use less than 5 percent of the population to grow food. If there are no oranges in Florida, there are plenty of oranges in California. If there is no wheat in Montana, there's plenty of rice in Louisiana. In other words, the idea of having a famine never crosses our mind. So the opportunity is here, and the freedom is here, and these young people should realize how fortunate they are."

"I have a bit of advice to offer. Hold on to the people you are close to, and love them fiercely. Get up every morning and live like there is no tomorrow. Because one day you'll find it's true."

"But you've got to work. What bothers me is we've gotten to the point where the people in this country believe that any time they have a problem, the federal government in Washington will take care of it. It's got to educate them, it's got to train them, it's got to take care of their children. I think that's all nonsense. The concern I have is the breakdown of the family, which is a basic beginning of a strong nation."

"We can’t be spending so much time as Congress is doing now fighting each other and trying to ensure that the other side does not succeed."

"The next 50 years are not going to look like the last 50 years. We need new leadership and it starts at the top."

"My opponent continues to say whatever he thinks will get him elected, even lying about things that are easily verifiable, and really has a deep cynicism about this country and the people in it."

"But the only way to move forward is to have the assurance that every single member of our body takes their oath seriously and can be trusted to ensure they are doing everything in their power to protect the Constitution and serve in our government."

"I don’t think any cases I worked on were particularly high profile. They were generally different violent crimes, drug offenses, racketeering, Ponzi schemes and tax schemes."

"There's just this sense from members of Congress that they had an inside understanding of the Capitol complex, which was chilling, that they had done some sort of reconnaissance, or had inside information about the layout."

"I believe the decision to have an abortion should be between a woman and her doctor — not the government. States across the country are installing total bans, denying women healthcare and putting their lives at risk."

"She lies about my positions because she has a record of non-production and not getting things done."

"I think it would be a tough decision if this was in some way a political decision."

"We have a better vision for the future than the president does. And yet it’s a risk that I think we all felt we had to take to defend our national security."

"These are uncertain times and to see so many people across the nation putting their faith in Democrats and our plan to bring down costs, protect rights and freedoms, and invest in the future of our kids and families, is incredibly hopeful for the future of our nation"

"It's an honor to fight for our communities and I'll keep working for flood mitigation efforts"

"I believe it is my responsibility as a member of Congress to ensure that I protect our country from any and all threats. And that is what I intend to do."

"Master Chief Petty Officer Delbert D. Black was born on July 11, 1922, in Orr, Oklahoma, graduating from high school in 1940. He enlisted in the U.S. Navy on March 14, 1941. Upon completion of recruit training in San Diego, he was assigned to USS Maryland (BB 46) and was aboard in Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. He then served aboard eight ships and six shore commands. On January 13, 1967, the Secretary of the Navy announced Master Chief Black as the first MCPON. As such, he was the highest-ranking enlisted man in the Navy, and served as the enlisted representative to the Chief of Naval Operations. He counseled the highest Navy councils on problems associated with enlisted guidance, leadership, and policy. MCPON Black was the first Navy enlisted man to receive the Distinguished Service Medal. His other awards included the Navy Unit Commendation, Navy Good Conduct (seven stars), American Defense (one star), American Campaign, Asiatic Pacific (eight stars), World War II Victory, China Service, Navy Occupation, National Defense (one star), Korean Service, Vietnam Service (three stars), Antarctica Service, United Nations, Philippine Liberation (two stars), Philippine PUC, Vietnam Campaign with device, and Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces Meritorious Unit Citation (Gallantry Cross)."

"The Chief can, and should, take the responsibility of keeping every Sailor under their leadership informed. If one of their Sailors has a problem, they have a problem. There should be no excuses. There is a solution to every problem, and it should be pursued until their Sailor is satisfied that every means has been exhausted in the effort to find a solution."

"There is an old saying, "Give every dog two bites"; but Kimmel and Short were not even allowed one; they were relieved from active duty forthwith. Admiral Turner, however, was conceded two bites- Pearl Harbor and the Battle of Savo Island, after which he became a highly successful practitioner of amphibious warfare. General Marshall functioned brilliantly as Chief of Staff; and Admiral Stark, as Commander United States Naval Forces Europe in London, acquitted himself very well. Admiral Kimmel and General Short were so shaken by the attack that they had to be relieved anyway; but they might, with justice, have been given honorable commands elsewhere."

"From: CINCPAC To: All ships present AIR RAID PEARL HARBOR X THIS IS NO DRILL"

"The Pacific Fleet was inferior to the Japanese Fleet in every category of fighting ship... Japan, at the outbreak of hostilities, had nine aircraft carriers in commission. We had three carriers in the Pacific and those did not have their full quota of planes. Although the battleships of the fleet were all approximately the same age as the heavy ships of the Japanese Navy, our ships were particularly deficient in short-range anti-aircraft weapons..."

"All this was long ago. Nearly two-thirds of my classmates are dead, and not one of us is left on active duty. But there might be one if a close friend of mine received his justice. I refer, and will refer again, to Husband E. Kimmel."

"Goddamnit, use your common sense!"

"King had the brains, all right, but I hated his guts."

"Whereas Leahy was stern, reserved, and even dour, King was nothing short of bombastic. Throughout his career, King's personality was routinely commented upon- and frequently feared- by his contemporaries and junior officers alike. His seniors usually found it merely annoying, although many- Forrestal was clearly an exception- tended to overlook his grating manner because there was no question that this demanding and strong-willed individual was also highly intelligent and capable of delivering results. King simply had no tolerance for subordinates who failed to carry out his orders to his satisfaction. Considering King's satisfaction was a very high bar, many failed to clear it. "On the job" wrote historian Robert Love in his history of the chiefs of naval operations, "[King] seemed always to be angry or annoyed." But some of that anger or annoyance may well have been a mask that was best breached when one stood up to him or took the initiative in doing what King likely would have done had he been in the other's shoes."

"With Forrestal as Navy secretary, King knew retirement would follow quickly. He had gotten along with Knox only because the Chicago newsman knew nothing about the Navy, admitted it, and stayed out of King's way. Forrestal would not. During the war, King had cursed Forrestal out in the halls of the Navy Department, and had browbeaten him into staying out of naval operations. "I didn't like him, and he didn't like me," King said."

"I was in such a hurry to see Kimmel that I commandeered the first boat I found. Machine-gunners were firing at everything that moved, and bullets whizzed around us all the way to CINCPAC's landing, but the black-out saved us from damage. In peacetime Pearl, the officers wore whites on Sundays. Kimmel and his staff were still wearing their Sunday uniforms, crumpled, and spotted with mud. Their faces were haggard and unshaven, but their chins were up. Kimmel himself was a marvel of cool efficiency, although the hysteria that surged around him mounted by the minute: eight Japanese transports had been seen rounding Barbers Point; Jap gliders and paratroopers- their uniforms were described- had just landed at Kanoehe. I broke out laughing. Kimmel wheeled on me. "What the hell is there to laugh about?" I said, I've heard a lot of wild reports in my life, but that's the wildest I ever heard! The Japs can't possibly tow gliders here from their nearest base, and certainly they're not going to waste their precious carrier decks on any such nonsense. My God!""

"Even then, I think everyone present knew that the disaster would be formally investigated, but I'll take my oath that not one of us would have guessed that the blame would fall on Kimmel, because not one of us thought he deserved it- any part of it. I want to emphasize my next statement. In all my experience, I have never known a Commander in Chief of any United States Fleet who worked harder, and under more adverse circumstances, to increase its efficiency and to prepare it for war; further, I know of no officer who might have been in command at the time who could have done more than Kimmel did. I also want to repeat and reemphasize the answer I made when the Roberts Commission asked me how I happened to be ready for the Japanese attack. I told them, "Because of one man: Admiral Kimmel." Who, then, is to blame? Look at it logically: the attack succeeded because Admiral Kimmel and General Short could not give Pearl Harbor adequate protection. They could not give it because they did not have it to give. They did not have it because Congress would not authorize it. Congress is elected by the American people. And the blame for Pearl Harbor rests squarely on the American people and nowhere else. Instead of trying to dodge our responsibility by smirching two splendid officers, we should be big enough to acknowledge our mistakes- and wise enough to profit by him."

"The gravest charge against Admiral Kimmel and General Short is that they virtually ignored the "war warning" dispatch of 17 November from Washington. Admiral Kimmel, as we have seen, did send air reinforcement promptly to Wake and Midway Islands. He had already (with Admiral Bloch's cooperation) set up the surface and air patrol off the mouth of Pearl Harbor which encountered the midget submarines. Thus, the charge whittles down to this: that he did not repeat this warning and beef-up air patrol after 17 November. He thought that he had done everything that could reasonably be expected, in view of the intelligence received. Nevertheless, an "unwarranted feeling of immunity from attack" prevailed in Oahu at the crucial moment, as Admiral King observed; and it is not unfair to hold Kimmel and Short responsible."

"Of course, what we should all like to attain in writing history is style. “The sense for style,” says Whitehead in his Aims of Education, “is an aesthetic sense, based on admiration for the direct attainment of a foreseen end, simply and without waste. Style in art, style in literature, style in science, style in logic, style in practical execution, have fundamentally the same aesthetic qualities, namely, attainment and restraint. Style, in its finest sense, is the last acquirement of the educated mind; it is also the most useful. It pervades the whole being. . . Style is the ultimate morality of mind.”"

"Unfortunately, there is no royal road to style. It cannot be attained by mere industry; it can never be achieved through imitation, although it may be promoted by example. Reading the greatest literary artists among historians will help; but do not forget that what was acceptable style in 1850 might seem turgid today. We can still read Macaulay with admiration and pleasure; we can still learn paragraph structure and other things from Macaulay; but anyone who tried to imitate Macaulay today would be a pompous ass."

"And although American historians cannot hope, as Theodore Roosevelt did, to “watch the nearing chariots of the champions,” or to look forward to the day when “for us the war-horns of King Olaf shall wail across the flood, and the harps sound high at festivals in forgotten halls,” we may indeed “show how the land which the pioneers won slowly and with incredible hardship was filled in two generations by the overflow from the countries of western and central Europe.” We may describe the race, class, and religious conflicts that immigration has engendered, and trace the rise of the labor movement with a literary art that compels people to read about it.You do not need chariots and horsemen, harps and war-horns, to make history interesting."

"And in this flight of history from literature the public was left behind. American history became a bore to the reader and a drug on the market; even historians with something to say and the talent for saying it (Henry Adams, for instance) could not sell their books. The most popular American histories of the period 1890–1905 were those of John Fiske, a philosopher who had no historical training, but wrote with life and movement."

"Theodore Roosevelt in his presidential address before the American Historical Association in 1912 made a ringing plea to the young historian to do better: “He must ever remember that while the worst offense of which he can be guilty is to write vividly and inaccurately, yet that unless he writes vividly he cannot write truthfully; for no amount of dull, painstaking detail will sum up the whole truth unless the genius is there to paint the truth.”"

"A few hints as to the craft may be useful to budding historians. First and foremost, get writing! Young scholars generally wish to secure the last fact before writing anything, like General McClellan refusing to advance (as people said) until the last mule was shod. It is a terrible strain, isn’t it, to sit down at a desk, with your notes all neatly docketed, and begin to write? You pretend to your wife that you mustn’t be interrupted; but, actually, you welcome a ring of the telephone, a knock at the door, or a bellow from the baby as an excuse to break off. Finally, after smoking sundry cigarettes and pacing about the house two or three times, you commit a lame paragraph or two to paper. By the time you get to the third, one bit of information you want is lacking. What a relief! Now you must go back to the library or the archives to do some more digging. That’s where you are happy! And what you turn up there leads to more questions and prolongs the delicious process of research. Half the pleas I have heard from graduate students for more time or another grant-in-aid are mere excuses to postpone the painful drudgery of writing."

"Even the earliest colonial historians, like William Bradford and Robert Beverley, knew that; they put conscious art into their narratives. And the historians of our classical period, Prescott and Motley, Irving and Bancroft, Parkman and Fiske, were great literary craftsmen. Their many-volumed works sold in sufficient quantities to give them handsome returns; even today they are widely read. But the first generation of seminar-trained historians, educated in Germany or by teachers trained there, imagined that history would tell itself, provided one was honest, thorough, and painstaking. Some of them went so far as to regard history as pure science and to assert that writers thereof had no more business trying to be “literary” than did writers of statistical reports or performers of scientific experiments. Professors warned their pupils (quite unnecessarily) against “fine writing,” and endeavored to protect their innocence from the seductive charm of Washington Irving or the masculine glamour of Macaulay."