Coral Sea Battle remembrance: A timely and appreciative visit by Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull

While honoring the remembrance of the 75^th anniversary of Coral Sea Battle in the Intrepid battleship, President Trump and Australian Prime Minister were exchanging the cordial remarks; I heard Trump uttered “Coral Sea Battle” and “we fought together” and Turnbull nodded smilingly uttering something.  This was is a stark contrast of their acrimonious and testy phone exchange over the refuge issue a few months ago.

Saying “Coral Sea” and “we fought together” in public, proves Trump was indeed diplomatic saying things quite appropriately.  Australia and United States were partners and comrades in fighting the Coral Sea Battle (May 4-8, 1942), but not equal partners by all measures.

The invading Japanese fleets were intercepted, thanks to the code-breaking, when it was 450 miles away from Australia coast.  It has been a historical debate as to who can claim victory; it was probably equal in terms of the loss of ships.  But, it was definitely a strategic victory as the invading and surviving Japanese fleet was turned away, and Australia was saved! A May 12 1942 NY Times report said the “rest of Japanese fleet were harried into flight.”  It was a “repulse” of the enemy, by General MacArthur’s phrase.

Based on a June 13, 1942 NY Times article the American losses were not made public until more than one month later, saying the great aircraft carrier Lexington was sunk many miles away from the battle site and the Japanese was not in a position to know it.  The U.S. military argued that hiding the truth from the public, thus from Japanese military planners, helped build the foundation of later Midway Battle victory.

It is true that some Australian battleships were under Rear Admiral Frank Fletcher.  I am still in the process of trying to find out how many Australian battleships involved.  Nevertheless, it was largely an American sea battle, an American sacrifice and an American victory.

In fact, the Coral Sea Week has been a big event in Australia, as an April 29, 1956 NY Times report (14 years after the event),

“Coral Sea Week stirs the imagination of younger Australians, many of whom served in the battle.  But, it is designed no less as an annual remembrance of the debt Australia owes the United States.  It was largely aircrafts from U.S. carriers that repulsed the Japanese, . . . The Battle saved Australia from Japanese invasion.”

The fleet defeated the Japanese was largely American and for that reason it was particularly appropriate for Australian P.M. Turnbull (himself, like Trump, also a deal-making billionaire) to come to the U.S. to celebrate the 75^th anniversary of Coral Sea Battle to express the goodwill and gratitude toward U.S. and to remind us we still have a close ally and comrade “down under”.

A May 12, 1942 (four days after the event) NY Times dispatch said, 

“Apparently the enemy ventured too far from his own bases and too close to ours for land bombers helped our naval fliers sunk many of his ships.  The rest were harried into flight, whatever was the purpose of its crippled force, it was not accomplished.  It is the first time a Japanese fleet has failed to reach its objective.  The toll of enemy ships sunk or damaged is now set at 21, a fleet in itself.  We do not know our own losses, but in so protracted an engagement they were certainly neither negligible nor easily replaceable.”

I couldn’t get the info as to the land bombers are Australian or American. 

Another  not directly related to Cora Sea Battle is that then Australian Prime Minister, Mr. Curtin, wrote a signed article in the Melbourne Herald on December 21, 1941, in which, he wrote, “We refused to accept the dictum that the Pacific struggle must be treated as a subordinate segment of the general conflict.”  Churchill resented by saying the article “was flaunted round the world by our enemies.”

It is true that without Churchill’s “beating Hitler first” policy, the war in the Pacific Theater would have ended much sooner.  But this is another topic.

Churchill and Macauley on Ireland

I am of the opinion that anyone or any nation that appeased and wouldn’t fight Nazi Hitler failed in their moral obligation.  Ireland maintained neutrality throughout the conflict is an example.

Winston Churchill

In early 1938 Ireland requested and British government agreed to renounce all rights to occupy two Southern Irish ports which were strategically important if war came.  The agreement was signed 4/25/1938, and that was between the “rape of Austria” [Churchill’s phrase] and German invasion of Czechoslovakia.

In his war memoir, Churchill didn’t have kind words on this ignominious episode,

“The reader is now invited to move westward to the Emerald Isle.  ‘It's a long way to Tipperary,’ but a visit there is sometimes irresistible.  In the interval between Hitler's seizure of Austria and his unfolding design upon Czechoslovakia we must turn to a wholly different kind of misfortune which befell us. . . . in 1938 Brtish Government negotiated with Ireland and renounced all rights to occupy two Southern Irish ports which were strategically important if war comes.”

“Personally I remained convinced that the gratuitous surrender of our right to use the Irish ports in war was a major injury to British national safety.  A more feckless [irresponsible, unthinking] act can hardly be imagined at such a time.  It is true in the end we survived without the ports.  It is also true that if we had not been able to do without them we should have retaken them by force rather than perish by famine.  Many a ship and many a life were soon to be lost as the result of this improvident example of appeasement.”

Thomas Macauley

The historian Thomas Macaulay was prescient when he wrote of Ireland in his The History of England almost 100 years before this event,

“. . . how, Ireland, cursed by the domination of race over race, and of religion over religion, remained indeed a member of the empire, but a withered and distorted member, adding no strength to the body politic, and reproachfully pointed at by all who feared or envied the greatness of England.”

Macauley said of Scotland in quite a different tone,

“. . . how Scotland, after ages of enmity, was at length united to England, not merely by legal bounds, but by indissoluble ties of interest and affection. ”

Churchill admired and read Macauley.

Paying tribute to “those that leave their valiant bones in France” on June 6 D-Day

Today (June 6 D-Day) is the day to pay tribute to “those that leave their valiant bones in France” and a good time to re-read the story of the Battle of Agincourt, before which Henry V made the famous Crispin’s Day speech to rally his outnumbered (5 to 1) troops.  We read the lines in Shakespeare’s Henry V (Act 4, Scene 3)

And those that leave their valiant bones in France,

Dying like men, . . . .

They shall be famed; for there the sun shall greet them,

And drew their honors reeking up to heaven.

Knneth Branagh playing Henry V

Shakespeare’s line made Henry V all the more glorious.  This always reminds me of the General Patton’s speech to the Third Army on the eve of D-Day, even though they didn’t participate the June 6 D-Day invasion, they played a pivotal role in the Battle of the Bulge...

In this Youtube one can see Henry V’s speech, played by the famous Shakespearian actor, Kenneth Branagh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-yZNMWFqvM

What's he that wishes so?
My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin:
If we are marked to die, we are enough
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires:
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England:
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more, methinks, would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.

This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day.'
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember'd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

Atilla the Huns and the Germans during the Wars: How to call your enemy’s name

A friend sent me an email reporting the outrage of the world renowned historians as China lays claim to Genghis Khan, basically said “元朝” is not part of Chinese history.  This inspires me to write this post.

The author made a good point, but I think the problem lies in “Who is the Chinese?” This calls for an expert opinion, not mine.  But I do know how the Westerners (namely British and American) perceive Genghis Khan (成吉思汗).  If the Americans know my name that has a “元” (Yuan), as in “元朝”, I may be in trouble.

Churchill

Churchill once said, he “hated nobody and he didn’t feel he had any enemies—except the Huns, and that was professional!”

Huns is the derogatory term for the Germans.  When in war one needs a bad name for one’s enemy to show one’s utmost contempt.  Atilla the Huns fits it well.  In the memory of Europeans he was barbarous, savage, most feared and most hated and that is the enemy one should fight at all costs.  Calling Germans Atilla the Huns began in WWI and continued to be used during WWII; it was Churchill’s favorite word.

It could be from Kaiser Wilhelm’s own remark, when sending German soldiers to China during the 1900 Boxer Rebellion, he exhorted his troops, “No mercy will be shown! No prisoners will be taken! As the Huns under Attila made a name for themselves which is still mighty in traditions and legends today, may the name of Germany be so fixed in China by your deeds that no Chinaman shall ever again dare to look at a German in askance.”

Dick Brown in the Hagar the Horrible comic strips also used Atilla the Huns extensively; like Hagar himself, Atilla the Huns is also lovable.  I love Hagar so much; sometime I wonder this may be why I love Pirates so much.  Ladies and gentlemen, here are Hagar the Horrible and his perpetual arch-rival, Atilla the Huns.

negotiate with strength

General Patton always call Germans Kraut, another derogatory term, again its used began in WWI.

On 4/12/1945 when the Third Army (under Patton) liberated the first of Nazi death camp, Patton insisted Omar Bradley to go to take a look, “You'll never believe how bastardly these Krauts can be,” Patton said, “until you've seen this pesthole yourself.”

German forces launched a surprise attack thru Ardennes Forest in Belgium and Luxembourg on 12/16/1944, thus began the Battle of the Bulge.  Patton, upon Ike’s urgent request, agreed to turn his Third Army (from Saar) to Bastogne to relieve General Hodges, he said “But what the hell, we'll still be killing Krauts.”

In his A Soldier’s Story, Omar Bradley wrote,

Bradley, Ike, Patton, all West Point graduates

Patton lighted a fresh cigar and pointed to the Bulge [this is how The Battle of the Bulge got its name] where it pierced the thin blue lines on our war map, “Brad,” he exclaimed, “this time the Kraut's stuck his head in a meat grinder.” With a turn of his fist he added, “And this time I've got hold of the handle.”

During the peak of the Battle of the Bulge, Patton prayed [he prayed often] in the Pescatore Chapel in Luxembourg on 12/23/1944, “Sir, this is Patton talking.  The past fourteen days have been straight hell—rain, snow, more rain, more snow—and I am beginning to wonder what's going on in Your headquarter.  Whose side are You on anyway? . . . . I am sick of the unnecessary butchery of American youth, and in exchange for four days of fighting weather, I will deliver You enough Krauts to keep Your bookkeepers months behind in their work.  Amen.”

I throw this in so you will love (this is more than like or admire) Patton as much as I do.

Reading Band of Brothers on D-Day

D-Day and Band of Brothers) on D-Day; 70^th anniversary today.

It is fitting to read two of Stephen Ambrose’s books (

Band of Brothers is the story of the Easy Company, 506^th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101^st Airborne Division, U.S. Army.  I wrote about the 101^st Airborne Division on D-Day of 2010.

http://doctorjytsai.blogspot.com/2010/06/heavy-heart-of-supreme-allied-commander.html

The title of Band of Brothers comes from Shakespeare’s Henry V,

From this day to the ending of the World,

. . . we in it shall be remembered

. . . we band of brothers.”

Like the soldiers of Henry V in the Battle of Agincourt, the men in the Easy Company of 506^th Parachute Infantry Regiment made their name on D-Day and beyond; they are truly band of brothers!

Why read WWII history?

Justin Beber recently visited Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo thinking it was just a “beautiful site and only a place of prayer”. Justin is really popular and in high demand; the courthouses in many cities (Miami, Toronto and Los Angeles) have all called for his appearance. He probably has limited knowledge about WWII; unfortunately he may not be alone among many of his fans or idolators.

There is nothing wrong in having a shrine memorizing the war dead, but having a war museum defending Japan’s wartime aggression and atrocities is not acceptable and not in the best interest to Japanese people.

Elie Wiesel wrote, “I emphasize that I do not believe in collective guilt.  The children of killers are children, not killers.  We must never blame them for what their elders did.  But we can hold them responsible for what they do with the memory of their elders' crime.”

I was never tired of reading WWII history. How could the highly educated German people follow blindly in delirious excitement to war, to destruction and to death?

In his second wartime speech before he took premiership, Church said of Hitler, “a haunted, morbid being, who, to their eternal shame, the German people in their bewilderment have worshiped as a god.” German people paid the ultimate price.

One needs to read WWII, especially the German and Japanese people so that we will never again have another Hitler or Hideki Tojo.

How not to complain about this bitter winter? Read the stories in the Eastern Front

While digging ourselves out of the drive ways under the bitter cold, I was not complaining at all; I was thinking about the German and Russian soldiers fighting in the Eastern Front.  I recently finished reading two books: In Deadly Combat: A German Soldier's Memoir of the Eastern Front by Gottlob Herbert and Hitler’s War by David Irving.  I am hoping the hell is not just a human invention; it is an absolute necessity; without hell where could Hitler go?

When Hitler forbade the German army to retreat; the German soldiers had to dig the fox holes or trench in the white tundra; they had to use explosives to make holes.  Initially when they went to sleep under the bitter cold (-22º F), they’re afraid they might not wake up.  After surviving in the living hell for so long; when they went to sleep, they’re afraid they might wake up again.  (Mark Twain said something to this effect).

It was said that Russian soldiers could take the cold better; whoever said that was apparently not there to see how Russian soldiers suffered; they might have better fortitude and took it as it came, the suffering was just the same.  I’ll list a few statistics to make the point.

^ 27 million Russian died, of whom 16 million were civilians.

^ June 1944: estimated 90% of all Russian young men between the ages of 18 and 21 are already killed in action.

^ The Russian lost 20 casualties for every German, 6 tanks for every panzer; in 10/1941 their losses were even worse than those of summer, with 64 divisions written off.

^ Hitler launched Barbarossa on 6/22/1941 and by 2/20/1942 German army had counted 112,627 of frost victims, of which no fewer than 14,357 were amputees. "Barbarossa" had now cost the German forces close to 1,000,000 casualties, including 200,000 dead.

The Battles of Monte Cassino: mourning the loss of the medieval monastery

The newspaper said today (January 17) in 1944 Allied forces launched the first of four battles for Monte Cassino in Italy.  It is indeed the battles worth mentioning.

“All roads lead to Rome” was not exactly true when it comes to the battles of Italy during WWII.  In early 1944 when the German armies were pushing back by the Russian troops steadily in the Eastern front and when the German cities were bombed day and night (Churchill told Colville in 1941 that his goal was “to bomb every Han corner of Europe”) up to the point that Churchill asked, “Are we beasts?” after watching a film of the bomb damage done to Germany.

And yet the Allied forces had only advanced seventy miles in eight months; it was mainly for Monte Cassino, which is a rocky hill 80 miles southeast of Rome.  Allied dropped 400 tons of bombs in February and 990 tons of bombs on March 15, 1944, killing the bishop and hundreds of refuges, reducing the medieval monastery (which was built by St. Benedict nearly 1500 years ago ) to ruins.  All of these ferocious bombings failed to dislodge the German troops. 

Hitler exulted his army; even the British General Alexander told Churchill, “I doubt if there are troops in the world who would have stood up to it and then gone on fighting with the ferocity they have.”

The medieval monastery was bombed to ruins

The eventual capture of Monte Cassino on May 18, 1944 led to the rapid advance of the Allied troops to Rome.  American troops entered Rome on June 4; the eve of the D-Day (June 6, 1944 Normandy landing).  Churchill’s wife, Clementine, wrote to her husband on June 5, “I feel so much for you at this agonizing moment—so full of suspense, which prevents one from rejoicing over Rome!”

The monastery has since been rebuilt and restored, but the loss of the ancient treasure and civilization can never be recovered.  Humans are not the only victims of the war.

The restored monastery at Monte Cassino

Yamamoto: the man behind the Pearl Harbor Attack on December 7, 1941—A date of infamy

Seventy years ago today (Dec. 7), which as FDR said, has lived in infamy.  Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto (山本 五十六) masterminded the sneaky Pearl Harbor attack.  Ironically if Yamamoto had his way, this wouldn’t have happened.  Not only was he against the Tripartite pack (Rome-Berlin-Tokyo), he was also opposed fighting with America.  Not that he was pro-America; he knew very well that Japan couldn’t win the war with America in the long run.  He said, “I shall run wild considerably for the first six months or a year but I have utterly no confidence for the second and third year.”  He was prophetically correct as the Battle of Midway (June 4-7, 1942) proved the turning point of the war in favor of America.

I always wonder what would have happened to Yamamoto on the post-war war criminal trial had he survived the war.  His aeroplane was shot down over Solomon Islands on April 18, 1943 after a Japanese message was decrypted by the American Pacific Fleet’s Radio Unit.  America couldn’t rejoice and celebrate in public, lest Japan would suspect their secret code was broken.  This is the ultimate revenge for the Pearl Harbor attack.

Yamamoto spent two years studying at Harvard (1919-1921), exactly the same time when Lin Yutang (林語堂) was at Harvard (Lin entered Harvard in 1919 and left for France then University of Leipzig in Germany in 1921, where he obtained his Ph.D.) I wonder whether Yamamoto and Lin met during their stay at Harvard.  It was said that Yamamoto read all books about modern naval warfare in Harvard libraries.  Lin Yutang also said it was at Harvard Widener Library where he “first found himself and first came alive.”  I visited Widener many times, but never had time to stay long enough to experience exhilarating feeling as Lin did. 

Lost a buddy, Ernie Pyle, today (April 18) in 1945

The famed American war correspondent Ernie Pyle was killed by Japanese gunfire on the Pacific island of Ie Shima, off Okinawa, today (April 18) in 1945.

In the Spring of 1945 Harvard President James Conant wanted to bestow an honorary degree; Pyle sent an Thank You note and left for Pacific Theater (as the war in Europe had come to an end then) and never returned.  Pyle was the only one awarded an honorary degree posthumously by Harvard.  I believe Sir Alexander Fleming (the discoverer of penicillin) was also an honorary degree recipient in 1945.  Penicillin saved lots of lives at the end of WWII.

I copied some of Ernie Pyle’s dispatches writing about the London Blitz.

December 30, 1940

For on that night this old, old city—even though I must bite my tongue in shame for saying it—was the most beautiful sight I have ever seen.

It was a night when London was ringed and stabbed with knife.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You may have read about the story of how St Paul Cathedral came out miraculously unscathed during the London Blitz; here is Pyle’s dispatch:

The greatest of all the fires was directly in front of us.  Flames seemed to whip hundreds of feet into the air.  Pinkish-white smoke ballooned upward in a great cloud, and out of this cloud there gradually took shape—so faintly that we weren’t sure we saw correctly—the gigantic dome and spires of St. Paul Cathedral.

St. Paul’s was surrounded by fire, but it came through.  It stood there in its enormous proportions—growing slowly clearer and clearer, the way objects take shape at dawn.  It was like a picture of some miraculous figure that appears before peace-hungry soldiers on a battlefield.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

St. Paul Cathedral was where Prince Charles and Diana wedded in 1981.  Prince William and Katie choose Westminster Abbey (are you ready?), where Diana’s funeral took place.

Today (March 7) in 1945 John Gapen crossed the Rhine River, using Ludendorff Bridge

I am reasonably sure that either today (March 7) or tomorrow in 1945 John Gapen (see photo) crossed the Rhine River at Remagen, Germany, using the damaged but still passable Ludendorff Bridge.  He said his unit passed through Ludendorff Bridge under German fire on the second day of Allied control.

John passed away at age of 95 last May.  He was our neighbor and friend of thirty some years. He was the hero of the Battle of the Bulge. Remagen 1945: End Game against the Third Reich (see photo below) was his book.  It is fitting to say he and his Greatest Generation finished off Hitler for us.

He is still on our thought and talk often, especially on day like this.

Old soldiers never die. They just fade away

(I borrowed this drawing from Dr. Lawrence Sun whose artistic skill was well hidden from us during his stay at Pittsburgh. It captures the essence and character of this “old soldier”—resolute, intelligent, awe-inspiring, charismatic, flamboyant, and handsome; he was quite a complicated hero; he was not a simple man, indeed.)

Today (July 8) in 1950 President Truman named General Douglas MacArthur (the American Caesar as the title of one of his biographies said) commander-in-chief of United Nations forces in Korea, as we all know he was recalled and released of duty because of “insubordination” nine months later and ended his military career with the “Old soldiers never die. They just fade away” speech at the Joint Session of Congress.

Jer-Yuan Tsai The following was what I wrote about MacArthur at Sermo (physician-only online site). This was the dark days and an agonizing defeat for the all-time hero in American military history. The saving of the "Hero of the Pacific" is a tale to tell.

How can we have a "hero" when the 70,000 troops General MacArthur led in Corregidor couldn't be saved? Was he a press-made and self-made hero? In the months before his great escape (2,500 miles of Japanese-controlled waters) from Philippine to Australia, there was a tremendous pressure (press, broadcast, and even in FDR press conferences) on FDR to bring the hero and the savior out.

Unlike Ike, General Marshall felt MacArthur's loss would be catastrophic. Ike worked under MacArthur at Philippine and was not too impressed about his competence. Marshall called Ike back to get the first hand info about Philippine.

Churchill also had a hand in this decision. At the time when FDR was agonizing about the pros and cons of saving the general, Churchill was living at the White House at the end of December 1941 and he told FDR how he decidedly ordered Lord Gort out of Dunkirk, the event inspired him to make that "Wars Are Not Won by Evacuations" speech. And that helped FDR to make the decision assuming "if MacArthur were captured or killed, the Japanese would have scored a tremendous psychological victory."

To me there was no comparison between these two events. More than 330,000 Allied troops had reached England during the Dunkirk retreat, but many of the 70,000 gallant men perished just on the Bataan Death Match alone.

To be fair the fall of Corregidor garrison was not MacArthur's fault; the troops were ill equipped and the promised reinforcements never arrived mainly due to the devastating effects suffered by the U.S. Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor.

Before MacArthur escaped Philippine on March 11, 1941, he issued food ration to assure the survival of the Bataan and Corregidor garrisons until July 1, by which time he expected to be back; and as we know it his "I shall return" didn't occur until two and half years later. Either a false promise or a poor judgment.

This was MacArthur's agonizing defeat, but a great general doesn't have to win every battle.

Is the weather always neutral in war? Ike didn’t think so

On the eve of D-Day, let’s talk about war, not love (and put Burns’ “Red, Red Rose” in the back burner). Weather was very much involved in war, Normandy invasion was no exception and it is neutral. Ike disagreed, he wrote, “Some soldier once said, ‘The weather is always neutral.’ Nothing could be more untrue.” In Tunis, Italy, France, and Germany, mud was a formidable barrier to Allied advances (see photo).

Ike was worried about the weather for D-Day 21 months before the event; he wrote to Patton on September 5, 1942, “I am searching the Army to find the most capable chaplain to assure a fairly descent break in the weather when the big day comes.”

The final conference of D-Day preparation took place on May 15, 1944; King George VI, Churchill and generals by the score were there. All set to go; the day and time to attack was in the hands of the weather. Ike needed the darkness (night) to conceal the greatest armada (4000 ships and several thousand smaller crafts), the moon light for air bombardment (11,000 first-line aircrafts), and low tide so that Rommel’s beach obstacles could be exposed and removed.

Ike met with the Meteorologic Committee twice a day (9:30 PM and 4AM); let’s not forget the ‘weather men’ were our heroes, too.

German meteorologists were convinced June 5-7 couldn’t be the days of attack; German Field Marshal von Rundstedt had stated that the Allies would need four consecutive days of good weather for a cross-Channel assault and no such four day clear weather was forecast. Rommel went home on June 4 for his daughter’s [Lucie] birthday. German navy thought the seas too rough to send out their patrol boats. The German defenders knew the long-waited attack had begun when the first shots were fired at them.

Lawrence Cancelmi the weather is NEVER neutral in battle....napoleon would attest with conviction....history should have taught the german army to always think of the weather, and in two instances they failed to read the opponent's manner of utilizing the climate....al stewart's road to moscow descrides the battle of stalingrad very well, including general gudarian.[inventor of the 'blitzkrieg'] to the exile of many of the russian army to siberia for being prisoners of the german army