| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - November 07 2004 : 11:13:31 AM
This was forwarded to me from one of my buddies, I do not know where he got it, but it does ring true. After reading it, I thought, "What would General LeMay (Creator of the USAF's Strategic Air Command) think of the infamous 'social engineering' projects foisted upon the Air Force during the 1990's? For that matter, what would Admiral "Bull" Halsey think about women on U.S. Navy Warships? Or, how would General Patton react to the U.S. Army's policies concerning 'vulgarity' and 'hate speech'?" I think that one of the few American Warriors, who wouldn't be turning in his grave, would be General "Chesty" Puller of the Marine Corps. Thankfully, they are the one arm of our military which has always dug their heels in, regarding any such dubious 'improvements'.
Whatever your thoughts on the subject may be, I still believe that you will enjoy the following:
It’s almost 200 years since Lord Nelson’s famous naval victory over the French and Spanish in the Battle of Trafalgar. To kick-start the anniversary celebrations, an actor dressed as Nelson posed for pictures on the River Thames at Greenwich. But before he was allowed to board an RNLI Lifeboat, safety officials made him wear a lifejacket over his 19th century admiral’s uniform. How Would Nelson have fared if he had been subject to modern health and safety regulations?
You are now on the deck of the recently renamed British Flagship, HMS Appeasement.
”Order the signal, Hardy.”
”Aye, aye sir.”
”Hold on, that’s not what I dictated to the signal officer. What’s the meaning of this?”
”Sorry sir?”
”England expects every person to do his duty, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious persuasion or disability. What gobbledegook is this?”
”Admiralty policy, I’m afraid, sir. We’re an equal opportunities employer now. We had the devil’s own job getting ‘England’ past the censors, lest it be considered racist.”
”Gadzooks, Hardy. Hand me my pipe and tobacco.”
”Sorry sir. All naval vessels have been designated smoke-free working
environments.”
”In that case, break open the rum ration. Let us splice the main brace to steel the men before battle.”
”The rum ration has been abolished, Admiral. It’s part of the Government’s policy on binge drinking.”
”Good heavens, Hardy. I suppose we’d better get on with it. Full speed ahead.”
”I think you’ll find that there’s a 4 knot speed limit in this stretch of water.”
”Damn it man! We are on the eve of the greatest sea battle in history. We must advance with all dispatch. Report from the crow’s nest, please.”
”That won’t be possible, sir.”
”What?”
”Health and safety have closed the crow’s nest, sir. No harness. And they said that rope ladder doesn’t meet regulations. They won’t let anyone up there until a proper scaffolding can be erected.”
”Then get me the ship’s carpenter without delay, Hardy.”
”He’s busy knocking up a wheelchair access to the fo’c’sle Admiral.”
”Wheelchair access? I’ve never heard anything so absurd.”
”Health and safety again, sir. We have to provide a barrier-free
environment for the differently-abled.”
”Differently-abled? I’ve only one arm and one eye and I refuse even to hear mention of the word. I didn’t rise to the rank of admiral by playing the disability card.”
”Actually, sir, you did. The Royal Navy is under-represented in the areas of visual impairment and limb deficiency.”
”Whatever next? Give me full sail. The salt spray beckons.”
”A couple of problems there too, sir. Health and safety won’t let the crew up the rigging without crash helmets. And they don’t want anyone breathing in too much salt - haven’t you seen the adverts?”
”I’ve never heard such infamy. Break out the cannon and tell the men to stand by to engage the enemy.”
”The men are a bit worried about shooting at anyone, Admiral.”
”What? This is mutiny.”
”It’s not that, sir. It’s just that they’re afra |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Fitz Williams |
Posted - May 26 2005 : 08:46:47 AM
No, the artillery I was speaking of was the Colonial atrillery. Or should I say Patriot. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - May 26 2005 : 07:59:32 AM
quote:
Fitz Williams noted: I heard bad things about the BAR at Savannah last fall, and oddly enough, it had to do with the artillery.
My NJV sergeant told me the same thing of Savannah '04. I know that it was not the Royal Artillery Battery that was at Charleston this year. Those guys & gals were sharp, and 100% period from Thursday on till the end. They even went as far as to detail a firelock guard for the gun park, and set-up a field corral for their draught horses (constructed to 18th-century military specs). Everytime I walked past their street, I would conduct a self-inspection for fear of not appearing 'up-to-snuff', in front of such well-disciplined historians. Their commander was a neat guy to talk with, and all of his unit was very knowledgeable in every aspect of a gun-crew on campaign. Watching them perform their evolutions and firing drill was also a real treat, since everything was done 'by the numbers', and was documentable.
Your Most Humble Servant,
The Sarge |
| Fitz Williams |
Posted - May 24 2005 : 11:58:57 AM
quote:
I didn't witness any blatantly noticable anachronisms in the Crown Forces camp at Drayton Hall.
I wandered through the British encampment Saturday night looking for the 4th New Jersey, and it looked quite in order. That was why I missed the happenings at the other camp. It took a while to make the journey, especially at night, in the woods, sliding around in the muck, with only a small lantern. It seemed like a rather nice party at the sutler area, with the dancing and all.
I heard bad things about the BAR at Savannah last fall, and oddly enough, it had to do with the artillery. |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - May 24 2005 : 12:29:07 AM
quote:
Fitz William noted: So they either change the event to the correct format, or find another line of work. And if a bad event goes away, what have we lost? And if it changes for the better, everyone wins. The current problem is that too many of us just go along with whatever is dished out.
You and I are in 100% agreement on this. I didn't witness any blatantly noticable anachronisms in the Crown Forces camp at Drayton Hall. The Provost and Quartermaster performed their assigned tasks in the most efficient, yet diplomatic, manner. Kudos to them!!!
quote:
Monadnock Guide added: Don't get me started on that damn PC crap. A reasonably good definition is: "The elevation of sensitivity over sense." In itself that's too polite, - but it's a start.
I agree with you, my friend. Which is exactly the point I was making; why would one wish to erradicate historical events as a prophylactic against offending someone with an imagined aggrieved status? The truth may not be pretty or pleasant at times, but it does give license to 'bury our heads in the sand', and pretend that it did not happen, or otherwise 'soften' its report. Remember, "Those who do not learn from history, are condemned to repeat it."
Your Most Humble Servant,
The Sarge |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - May 23 2005 : 6:06:46 PM
Don't get me started on that damn PC crap. A reasonably good definition is: "The elevation of sensitivity over sense." In itself that's too polite, - but it's a start. |
| Fitz Williams |
Posted - May 23 2005 : 4:08:17 PM
There is a solution to this. All sites, managers, rangers, officials are measured, and the measurement is on the numbers of visitors a site/event generates. And who makes an event possible? Us. So if we stay away, the numbers go down (or disappear altogether), and all of a sudden jobs are in jeopardy. So they either change the event to the correct format, or find another line of work. And if a bad event goes away, what have we lost? And if it changes for the better, everyone wins. The current problem is that too many of us just go along with whatever is dished out.
This is a post from someone on another board about the 225th at Charleston:
"I just got back last Sunday night from the 225th Re-enactment of the Seige of Charleston (SC). This huge historical event was run by "BAR rules". We got huge flyers with multiple rules on fires and camps and making things historically correct. I was even thinking of not going to it because of the "ANAL FACTOR". I went, needless to say, and the entire weekend a woman in the artillery camp stood around the big pit fire in shorts and a T-shirt with sneakers. After the rain on Sat her husband and their kids cooked and walked around all morning in modern clothing. He was an artillery commander from New York. I asked several people about this and finally was directed to the "Artillery Commander" an Old Salt who's been in the hobby for ages.... When I asked him about it he said they were not in his unit. I told him that though they were not in his "unit" they were still under his command and that he should do something about it. He said back to me "Who are you to tell anyone what they can or can't wear at an event"....I nearly took his head off.. but I just walked away...
This kinda @#$% is what makes me hot and bothered...cigarettes, modern glasses, rubber duck shoes, modern clothing, seeing the occasional pop can on a table is nothing compared to seeing a man cooking in camp in a pair of Land's End shorts and boat shoes."
I was not in camp at night, so I missed all that. But I did see a lot of other things apparently ignored. In the future I think I will ask more questions about how an event is conducted before I load up my car and burn all that gas.
|
| SgtMunro |
Posted - May 23 2005 : 2:51:03 PM
An addition to the original posting was forwarded to me from my friend out east. It is an article from the BBC News website, dated 22 May 2005:
Battle must not 'bash' French
Lord Admiral Nelson won the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805. A re-enactment of the Battle of Trafalgar is not an opportunity for "French-bashing", says the Royal Navy.
Instead of the British taking on a French/Spanish fleet at next month's event to mark the battle's bicentenary a "red" force will take on a "blue".
Navy organisers fear visiting officials may be embarrassed at seeing their side beaten, The Sunday Times reported.
Portsmouth MP Mike Hancock said an event which did not acknowledge who the enemy was is "absolute twaddle".
The Lib Dem MP said: "If we are going to re-enact it we should do it properly. I am sure the French do not pull any punches when they celebrate Napoleon's victories.
"The French will be there - let's not rub it in but at least be accurate. I see no reason why we should not be out there proud as punch proclaiming it."
He said it was unlikely the decision was made by a serving naval officer and concluded it must have been "a faceless bureaucrat somewhere who thinks their next posting might be in Paris."
One event sponsor said: "Surely 200 years on we can afford to gloat a bit."
"Not even the French can try and get snooty about this."
Official literature for the event refers to "an early 19th-century sea battle" instead of the Battle of Trafalgar, The Sunday Times said.
Fireworks
Organisers have confirmed there will be no "sides" at the Trafalgar 200 event on 28 June, which is taking place off Southsea, near Portsmouth, it added.
The Ministry of Defence said: "This is not a historical re-enactment. It is a piece of theatre, and not supposed to be historically accurate."
The spectacle will involve tall ships in a mock battle alongside fireworks, lights and music.
Lord Admiral Horatio Nelson, whose fleet was based at Portsmouth, famously led his sailors to victory in 1805.
His 27 ships defeated the combined French and Spanish fleet of 33 ships, sinking or capturing 22 vessels off Spain.
Nelson died during the battle but his victory paved the way for a century of British naval supremacy.
A spokeswoman for the Royal Navy said of the event: "This is an illustration and theatre on water.
"Nelson is featured, but we are not billing it as Britain versus France. This will not be a French-bashing opportunity."
Sarge's assesment: I have to throw-in with MP Hancock, it is "absolute twaddle" to re-write history so that it is far more 'convienent'. To all of my fellow living historians here in Mohicanland, I ask you this; what would you think if the battle you are reenacting was treated with such a PC brush-off? For instance, at the 225th of the Battle of Saratoga, the event organizers refered to the forces as 'Red' and 'Blue', so that we did not offend our modern allies, the British? I've said it before, and I'll say it again, we have gotten way too soft...
|
| 42ndOfficer |
Posted - November 07 2004 : 5:51:06 PM
"Who the hell was Chesty Puller?"
Barracks conversation "The Boys in Company C" 1977 |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - November 07 2004 : 12:43:54 PM
 That is funny!
Ah-h-h-h-h-h... the times, they are a'changin'..... |
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
