Sally vs. Carrie

 

In May 1977, my father took my brother and I to the movie theater at Quince Orchard, Maryland (Gaithersburg) and we finally got to see the first Star Wars movie – well after all our friends had.  In summer 1980, our cousins took us to see “The Empire Strikes Back” in Rockville, Maryland.  And in London, 1983, my brother and I saw “Return of the Jedi” at Leicester Square, with some highly vocal local boys who were kind of annoying.  But imagine our immense surprise when the bounty hunter taking Chewbacca in to Jabba the Hutt, and unfreezing Han Solo from his carbon freezing, takes off the helmet to reveal it’s… Princess Leia.  Soon after, the heretofore fully-clothed Leia now appeared in a highly provocative bikini – aka “Slave Leia” and a common sight in cosplay circles.  I think I speak for all males out there when I say that Carrie Fisher was definitely a knockout in that attire.

 Around the same time “Star Wars” came out, another popular movie came out.  In this film, a charismatic rogue, “Bandit”, drove a 1977 Pontiac Trans Am Special Edition eastbound from Texarkana to Georgia, distracting the police from a large rig carrying 400 cases of Coors beer further east than it could legally be sold at that time.  He picked up an attractive girl, “Frog” (Sallie Field) who was escaping from a wedding (Snowman, observing her bridal gown flying out from the Trans Am’s t-tops: “what’s she wearing now?”).  Her father-in-law-to-be, played by Jackie Gleason, wasn’t too pleased at this change of plans and took to pursuing the couple well outside his jurisdiction – as one angry local cop reminded him. 

 Sally Field and Carrie Fisher are two beautiful actresses who I sometimes confuse with one another: they are both very cute, somewhat short, and have iconic roles.   Field (DOB 11/6/46) is ten years older than Fisher (DOB 10/24/56) but remarkably still among us.  Fisher, sadly, passed away fairly recently (12/27/16).  Both are highly attractive, fairly short, and brunette.  Fisher has a famous actress mother, Debbie Reynolds (“The Unsinkable Molly Brown”), and I’m not sure Field’s parents are famous.   They both went on to other roles afterwards.   Fisher served as Sally’s (Meg Ryan) friend in “When Harry Met Sally”, and Field served as Forrest Gump’s mom.  

Camouflage

 Up until World War I, most countries’ military uniforms appeared to have little to do with allowing soldiers to blend into the environment in which they were fighting.  In the Revolutionary War, the British wore bright red coats, even evoking their colloquial name of “redcoats”.  In the US Civil War, Union soldiers wore dark blue.  In World War I, the French started out with dark blue jackets and bright red pants before switching over to light blue, commonly referred to as “horizon blue”.  By that point the Germans had switched from dark blue to field grey and the British had finally discovered khaki.  The US settled on a green color commonly referred to as “olive drab”, though US Marines in WWI wore a darker shade of green.

  During WWII, Germany and the US developed camouflage uniforms.   The Wehrmacht “splinter” pattern is less well known – though prevalent in the original “Inglorious Bastards” film from 1978.  So far as I can tell it was a smock but not a full uniform (except a little-used winter version).  The much-discussed Waffen SS developed a dot pattern in spring and autumn versions, though I rarely see the spring version.  The autumn version started out as a smock and wound up, by 1944, as a full uniform.  By now that dot cammo pattern is an easy way to distinguish SS troops, along with either SS (Sigrune) or Totenkopf black collar patches and their distinctive collar insignia, from private all the way up to the Reichfuhrer SS himself, Heinrich Himmler (who was too young to see combat in WWI). 

 For its part US forces developed a similar pattern, but had to reserve it for Pacific theater operations due to US troops in Europe being mistaken for SS.  I’m not aware the Japanese ever developed a camouflage uniform.  However, you don’t see the US WWII camouflage pattern appear after WWII, Korean and Vietnam War US troops are almost always seen in simple olive drab.

 Woodland camouflage.  By the mid-80s the US switched from olive drab to woodland camouflage as a standard, at least for the Army.   This is green, brown and tan.  By Operation Desert Storm (1991) we’d developed our first desert camouflage variety, later replaced with a slightly different pattern, obviously in desert colors, for the operations in Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003). 

 Multicam Black.  Recently I developed an affinity for jungle hats, in particular of camouflage variety.  And there’s apparently a new variety out there these days, “multicam black”.  I ordered one, and the label had this eerie description: “Multicam black was developed to meet the unique needs of law enforcement operating in high risk environments. It projects a distinctly authoritative presence appropriate for domestic operations.”  So here’s a camouflage variant expressly designed for domestic military operations against our own civilian population.  I’m not Angela Davis, Bernie Sanders or Tom Morello, but language like that really makes you wonder if the police understand that they are NOT the military when facing US citizens at home.  Even the FBI, training at Quantico – of all places – designate non-target civilians as “the taxpayer”, meaning Special Agents are repeatedly reminded that innocent civilians are paying their salaries.   Having said all that, multicam black is pretty cool, like a goth version of woodland camouflage. 

Friends Revisited

 I initially posted a tribute to a high school friend, but due to his military status, and at his request, I deleted it.  I don’t want to cause him any problems by sharing more information than the general public has a right to know, even if it is positive.  I also note that I addressed the “friends” issue in general back in 2013, so to redo everything I’ll have to reconcile the two to avoid embarrassing friends or repeating my prior blog.  To the friend in question, “das tut mir leid. Entschuldigen Sie, bitte.”  Sadly, circa 2020 he’s the high school friend we meet up with most often. 

 The other high school friend, PH, now lives in Colorado.  He’s never been in the military, but I’ll keep things discreet and refrain from referring to him by name (just initials).  We visited him in Colorado twice, and sometimes his job brought him back to the East Coast, in which case we’d meet up for drinks to catch up. 

 When we grew up in Maryland, we went to Catholic school.  Oddly, none of our neighborhood friends went to that school; all our friends from school lived elsewhere in the Gaithersburg area.  As of 2020 I am not in contact with any of the neighborhood kids anymore.  The nearest neighbor, Paul, went to UMCP initially and I met up with him at the Ellicott cafeteria, but soon thereafter transferred to another college and I haven’t heard from him since.   Of the St. Martin’s crowd, I chat with KR on Facebook but have no other contacts.

 That brings me up to law school.  I’m still friends with JG who lives down in Virginia Beach, and JR who lives near Fair Oaks.  JG has a general practice, whereas JR is mainly in immigration, but licensed in Virginia so he can handle other cases which cross his desk as suit him and his clients.  My close friend JB, with whom I mowed lawns the summer after first year and attended the Grateful Dead at RFK in 1992, moved down to NASCARolina and seems to be doing well there. 

 Question Marks.  My buddy Ken, with whom I went to college at UMCP from 1986-90, disowned me in 2008.  From 1991 to 2008 I visited him in Bloomfield, Ford, and Hillsborough, New Jersey multiple times and attended various concerts with him.  However, in 2008 his wife left him and I made a comment which he took badly.  Everyone else I talked to said the comment was unobjectionable and his reaction was abnormal.   He’s also unfriended me on LinkedIn, of all sites.  I have not physically abused him, insulted him, attacked him, cheated him, or done anything to deserve his contempt.  I just seem to upset him very easily. 

 It’s sad, because Ken turned me on to Blue Cheer, Alice in Chains, King Crimson, and many stoner rock bands, plus he gave me a heads up for the Black Sabbath concert at Richie Coliseum on the Cross Purposes tour in 1994.  More than anyone else I know, he shares my love of obscure and bizarre bands, many of whom he turned me onto.  Sadly, he refuses to even communicate through mutual friends.  Well, that’s his business.  I wish him luck and good fortune wherever he might be. 

 The other is Baron, with whom I went to college.  Here’s a guy who lit up the room and dominated the conversation with an extremely strong personality and immense charisma.  We hung out considerably and got along fine.  After college he moved to New York City and I lost contact with him. 

 What’s strange is that he is completely absent from the Internet, from Facebook, and from LinkedIn.  His background is in finance, not the military or intelligence, so his complete absence from social media is a major mystery.  I’m not aware he had any legal troubles or run-ins with the SEC, which would be the most plausible issues to induce him to keep a low profile.  And he was far from shy or introverted.   

His legacy is “choose to miss out.”  Back when he was a stock broker, he’d have to cold call clients to get them to invest, and naturally not all of them were ready to throw money at him just so he would earn a commission.   But he also had a habit of making an offer which was mostly in his best interest, not yours, and when you declined, he’d shake his head and reply, “sorry you chose to miss out.”   Now we laugh and use the expression whenever we decline similar offers not in our best interests.   

For his sake, I hope Baron is ok, wherever he is, and not in Witness Protection or hiding for any reason.  Maybe he can hook up with Ken – with whom he was friends – and they can share their UMCP memories, such as they might be. 

Without me.      

Vietnam War

 

Yet again I notice a massive oversight:  I’ve done blogs on all those obscure wars no one really cares about, but haven’t addressed this one directly, though I have done so in other blogs.  This war actually occurred in my own lifetime and veterans exist in my presence, though I’m not aware of any relatives who fought.  My uncles were WWII veterans and too old by this time, most of my male cousins were too young, the only one possibly old enough was in college and probably exempt from the draft for that reason.

 Golf.  My brother likes to play golf, a hobby I don’t share – my preference is shooting guns at the range.  So sometimes they pair him up with a partner.  One time his partner wound up being an elderly veteran.  My brother asked him, “WWII?” which prompted Mr. War Guy to respond, “how old do you think I am?  No, Vietnam.”  Well, with the war 40 years ago and no children serving, that means US Vietnam war veterans (enlisted men, NCOs and junior officers) would be at least 60-70 years old by now; senior officers and generals would be long dead.  By now the WWII veterans are dead, and absent magic, so would be our AEF and Civil War veterans as well.  As noted earlier, the last veterans of the Franco-Prussian War (1870-71) died in the early 1950s.

 Draft.  This was the last war for which we actually drafted soldiers – we switched to a volunteer military in 1973.  The Selective Service is still in existence and I happily registered when I turned 18 in January 1987, but my subpar hearing kept me out of West Point, ROTC, JAG, and the National Guard.   

 Movies.  There are plenty of movies about the war. I don’t think I’ll try to mention all of them, but those of them that I will mention, I will cite chronologically in the narrative.  I’m also seeing some Vietnam War segments in “The Umbrella Academy”, to the point where the character (Klaus, #4) is still wearing his combat uniform back home far away from combat.   See below….

 Background.  Among other items which French Emperor Louis Napoleon, aka Napoleon III, accomplished between 1848 and 1870 – the biggest being expanding Paris to its current 20 Arrondissement size and giving us those wide avenues – the other foreign policy “thing” he did outside Mexico was taking “Indochina” from China and making Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia a French colony.  Hanoi and Saigon received a French treatment, the latter becoming the de facto “Paris of Southeast Asia” – just as Beirut was the “Paris of the Middle East” and Bucharest fancies itself the “Paris of Eastern Europe”. 

 During WWII the Japanese took Indochina away from France, while the Germans took France away from France.  We sent advisors to Vietnam to help a communist guy, Ho Chi Minh, train his own rebels, the Viet Minh, to fight against the Japanese.  They did so with the understanding and expectation that after the war, Vietnam would become independent, but the US saw fit to give it back to France.  A new guerilla war broke out, and by 1954 the Viet Minh had defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu.   Promised elections never materialized, so by 1956 Vietnam was separated into North (communist) and South (pro-US, another mish-mash corrupt democracy). 

 By the late 1950s the North Vietnamese began a campaign to take over South Vietnam.  [Movie:  “The Quiet American” with Brendan Fraser and Michael Caine.]  The US sent advisors, but not ground troops.  [Movie: “Go Tell The Spartans” with Burt Lancaster].  By late 1963 the guerilla war was going poorly for the North Vietnamese until Ngo Dinh Diem was assassinated.  This threw the South Vietnamese regime into turmoil and allowed the North Vietnamese to get back on track.

 Gulf of Tonkin & Ia Drang.  By 1964 the communists were on the verge of winning the war.   President Johnson got US forces sent to Vietnam by 1965, with the first encounter between US ground troops and the NVA at Ia Drang.  This deployment was the only strategic surprise we enjoyed against the North Vietnamese.  [Movie:  “We Were Soldiers” with Mel Gibson].

 Tet 1968.  [Movie:  “Full Metal Jacket” with Matthew Modine and Adam Baldwin.  This is actually my favorite Vietnam War movie.]  The story had been that the war was going great (from 1965-68) and we were winning.  We really had not much idea how many forces the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) and Viet Cong (VC) had, just a vague estimate, so comparing what we understood to be enemy casualties – the body count – with what we believed was the enemy’s troop strength, came up with a fairly arbitrary assessment of our progress.  In January 1968, during the Vietnamese New Year holiday time (analogous to Chinese New Year) the North Vietnamese launched simultaneous attacks across South Vietnam.  Half of Hue was taken, and VC guerillas even infiltrated the US Embassy compound in Saigon.   Eventually all those gains were wiped out with heavy casualties, putting the NVA/VC so far behind that it would take until 1972 to rebuild to the point of making another general offensive.   But the huge surprise of a general offensive when Westmoreland, McNamara, and the President had been telling the American people that the enemy was on its last legs killed the administration’s credibility – the sad irony being that in the aftermath of the offensive the NVA/VC were in fact in a very weak position.  [Movie: “Platoon”].

 Westmoreland out, Abrams In.   “Seek & Destroy” vs “Clear And Hold”.  [Movie:  “Hamburger Hill”].   Part of the problem was that US General Westmoreland was using a strategy called “seek and destroy”.  US/ARVN units would seek out enemy forces, engage them, push them away, then leave the area, which would be reoccupied by the enemy in our absence.  Unless we knew for certain that we had literally killed all the enemy soldiers, this strategy was doomed to failure.

 In 1969 General Westmoreland was replaced by General Abrams.  Abrams had a better idea:  after clearing a village or area of enemy troops, hold it with a garrison force and move to the next province over.  Now you’ve secured the area.  Overall this works better, but with one major catch:  it takes a lot of troops, both US and ARVN, to make it work.  From 1972-73 we were drawing down troops, leaving the ARVN to fight by themselves.  The South Vietnamese didn’t have enough troops on their own to make “clear and hold” work. 

 Over the Border.  Another problem was that, politically, neither Johnson nor Nixon could justify a comprehensive campaign of invading North Vietnam, destroying the NVA up there, and conquering Hanoi.  Even if we succeeded in clearing all of South Vietnam of the NVA and VC, what then?  We’d have to keep US troops in South Vietnam indefinitely.   If you want the war to end, and for us to be able to bring our troops home, you are going to have to invade North Vietnam and decisively defeat the North Vietnamese Army.   And if you can’t do that, you’ve entered a war you will never win.  So what’s the point?

 Easter Offensive 1972.  As noted, the Tet Offensive depleted the NVA/VC to the point where it took until 1972, four years later, for them to launch another one.  At this point we still had troops in VN but were drawing them down.  Even so, the ARVN managed to hold off the NVA and this offensive was another failure.

 April 1975.   By now, the US troops had gone and US support for South Vietnam was at its lowest.  The North’s patience was rewarded when the ARVN collapsed and NVA forces were able to overrun South Vietnam and crash the gates into Saigon, which fell by April 30.  By now it was GAME OVER for South Vietnam.

 Office.  I work with Vietnamese clients.  Half of them are named Nguyen, the rest Tran, Huynh, Pham, Phan, Luu, etc.  They come mostly from South Vietnam, Saigon in particular (no one is going to call it Ho Chi Minh City).   It’s rare that I get any clients from North Vietnam, though my office manager is originally from north of Hanoi – she was a little girl when the Japanese occupied her part of the country. 

 M16s & Helicopters.   The two biggest flavors which distinguish this war for us Americans are the M16 rifle – taking over from the M14 – and helicopters bringing troops in and out of battle. 

 At the risk of doing NORML more favors, I’ll bring up this issue.  I’ve been watching “Band of Brothers” and “The Pacific”, both of which take place during WWII and focus on US soldiers in Europe and the Pacific.  Almost all of them smoke.   As noted in a prior blog, I do not and never have.  Barring personal experience and not having any friends who do smoke, I gather that nicotine calms and relaxes you without impairing your judgment.  Sure enough, these soldiers seem very relaxed after a cigarette but can function and talk normally.  Any long-term health issues are eclipsed by a concern of surviving the next battle and the war as a whole.  They have more immediate concerns than lung cancer.

 Vietnam is the first war where you see US soldiers smoking marijuana.  When Napoleon sent his troops to Egypt, alcohol was absent due to Egypt being a Muslim country.  However, hashish, which is highly concentrated cannabis, was available and rapidly proved very popular with the French soldiers, who persisted in enjoying it despite Napoleon’s express prohibition.  They even brought it back to France with them.  In “Platoon”, Sgt Elias (Willem Dafoe) and his supporters enjoyed marijuana.   There was even a real-life soldier, Peter Lemon, who had blazed up in a firebase, just when the enemy decided to attack.  He fought just as well as anyone else and even won a medal – the Congressional Medal of Honor.  https://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/medal-of-honor-peter-lemon-was-high-on-marijuana-he-single-handedly-fought-off-two-waves-of-vietcong.html

 

Well, that ends my long-overdue analysis of this controversial and fairly recent US conflict….