Geskiedenis Podcasts

Resensie: Deel 11 - Militêre geskiedenis

Resensie: Deel 11 - Militêre geskiedenis

Einde Julie 1941 beveel Hitler Army Group South om die Krim in beslag te neem as deel van sy operasies om die Oekraïne en die Donetskom te beveilig, om die noodsaaklike Roemeense olieraffinaderye by Ploesti te beskerm teen Sowjet -lugaanval. Na weke van swaar gevegte, het die Duitsers die Sowjet -verdediging oortree en die grootste deel van die Krim oorskry. Teen November 1941 was die enigste oorblywende Sowjet -vastrapplek in die gebied die sterk versterkte vlootbasis in Sevastopol. Operasie Sturgeon Haul, die laaste aanslag op Sevastopol, was een van die min Duitse gesamentlike operasies van die Tweede Wêreldoorlog, met twee Duitse korpse en 'n Roemeense korps ondersteun deur 'n groot artillerie -belegstrein, die Luftwaffe's crack VIII Flieger Korps en 'n vloot van S-Bote verskaf deur die Kriegsmarine. Hierdie bundel ondersoek die impak van logistiek, weer en gesamentlike operasionele beplanning op die laaste groot Duitse oorwinning van die Tweede Wêreldoorlog.

Die He 100 kan beslis beskryf word as 'n engimatiese vliegtuig, waarvan nog relatief min bekend is. Die skrywer van die boek, 'n voormalige lugvaartingenieur, het jare lank navorsing gedoen oor die He 100. Die boek dek alle aspekte van die ontwikkeling van die vliegtuig, die verskillende subreekse wat geproduseer word, die hoëspoedprestasies en die gebruik daarvan. vir propaganda en intelligensie doeleindes. Die vliegtuie wat aan Rusland en Japan verskaf is, word ondersoek, asook latere projekte wat daarop gebaseer is. Hierdie bundel bevat ook 'n aantal voorheen ongepubliseerde foto's, kleurkunswerke en spesiaal vervaardigde gedetailleerde tegniese tekeninge.


Militêre geskiedenis

'N Leser hoor die 1945 Battle of Point Judith, R.I.

WW2TV sal D-Day vanaf Normandie se strande regstreeks wees

Woodadge sal op 6 en 7 Junie regstreeks vanaf die strande in Normandië uitsaai vir die herdenking van die D-Day-inval-Operation Overlord

‘Die Indiese kontingent ’ Boekresensie

Ghee Bowman beskryf die onbekende verhaal van Force K6 (ook bekend as die Indiese kontingent), van Duinkerken tot die einde van die Tweede Wêreldoorlog

Die Amerikaanse 1ste Infanteriedivisie in foto's

Amerika se eerste infanteriedivisie dien al meer as 'n eeu met lof in oorlog

‘Opreg! ’ Boekresensie

Frederica Fasanotti beskryf die probleme waarmee die Italiaanse weermag in die vroeë 20ste eeu te staan ​​gekom het in die stryd teen opstand in Libië en Ethiopië

Duitse mislukking by Chemin des Dames: hoe hulle in 1918 verloor het

'N Duitse knipoog oor die Chemin des Dames in Mei 1918 het meer veld gekry as wat verwag is voordat dit in 'n logistieke nagmerrie oorgegaan het

Vertaal vir Yamashita, die ‘ Tiger of Malaya ’

In 1945 beland 'n jong marinier met 'n aanleg vir tale te midde van 'n oorlogsmisdaadverhoor met internasionale gevolge


Die State of NJ -webwerf kan opsionele skakels, inligting, dienste en/of inhoud van ander webwerwe wat deur derde partye bedryf word, bevat, soos gerieflik, soos Google ™ Translate. Google ™ Translate is 'n aanlyn diens waarvoor die gebruiker niks betaal om 'n beweerde taalvertaling te bekom nie. Die gebruiker weet dat nie die State of NJ -webwerf of die operateurs daarvan enige dienste, inligting en/of inhoud hersien van enigiets wat om enige rede met die staat NJ -webwerf verbind kan word nie. -Lees die volledige vrywaring

Die Office of Student Protection Unit (OSP) doen kriminele agtergrondondersoeke van aansoekers vir posisies in openbare skole in New Jersey, privaatskole vir studente met gestremdhede, handvesskole en nie -openbare skole, sowel as vir gemagtigde verkopers en gemagtigde skoolbuskontrakteurs, deur werk deur die New Jersey State Police (NJSP) en die Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Lees dit voordat u aansoek doen & hellip

Om hierdie aansoek te voltooi, 'n Microsoft -internetblaaier soos Internet Explorer of Edge word aanbeveel. Alle ander bedryfstelsels en internetblaaiers is onbetroubaar met hierdie program. Moenie slimfone, tablette, iPads of ander mobiele toestelle gebruik nie.

Daar is drie verskillende soorte toepassings om van te kies om die rekordtoets vir kriminele geskiedenis te voltooi. Lees die onderstaande beskrywings om te bepaal watter van die toepassings vir u korrek is.

As:

U het nog nooit vir 'n skool, 'n buskontrakteur of 'n verkoper gewerk nie, of

U is met die vingerafdruk van Office of Student Protection voor Maart 2003, en verander die skooldistrikte, buskontrakteurs of verkopers, of

U was oorspronklik 'n vingerafdruk as 'n universiteitstudent of as vrywilliger en betaal 'n verminderde vingerafdrukgeld, of

U is voorheen gediskwalifiseer deur Office of Student Protection en u kriminele rekord is verwyder en hellip

Dan is jy 'n nuwe aansoeker.

U is met die vingerafdruk en goedgekeur deur die Office of Student Protection daarna Februarie 2003, en verander skooldistrikte of verkopers of

U is 'n skoolbusbestuurder wat u 'S' goedkeuring hernu en is na Februarie 2003 met vingerafdrukke en goedkeuring goedgekeur.

Dan is jy 'n argief aansoeker.

U is na Maart 2003 deur die Kantoor vir Studente Beskerming met u vingerafdruk en goedgekeur, en

U is met 'n vingerafdruk gedruk vir 'n plaasvervanger- of busbestuurderpos, en

U is deurlopend in 'n plaasvervangende pos werksaam by 'n skool of verkoper sedert die eerste jaar dat u goedkeuring vir kriminele geskiedenis uitgereik is, en u kan 'n memo van diensverifikasie verskaf.

Dan is jy 'n oordrag aansoeker.


Video


Rick Atkinson en dr. Nick Mueller, president en uitvoerende hoof van die National WWII Museum, bespreek The Guns at Last Light, die laaste boek in die epiese “Liberation Trilogy. ” In die eerste aflewering van hierdie “sneak peek ” video -reeks, deel Rick slegs 'n paar van sy ontdekkings rakende die inval in Normandië.

Video twee: In die tweede aflewering van hierdie “sneak peek ” video-reeks stel Rick ons ​​voor aan 'n minder bekende lid van die bekende Roosevelt-stam.

Video Drie: In die derde aflewering vertel Rick die verhaal van John K. Waters en sy betrokkenheid by die onbedoelde aanval van generaal George Patton op die gevangenekamp van Hammelburg.

Video vier: In die vierde aflewering beskryf Rick die inval van Suid -Frankryk en een van generaal Dwight D. Eisenhower se mees omstrede besluite.

Video Vyf: In die vyfde aflewering bespreek Rick die spanning tussen Eisenhower en Montgomery.

Video Ses: In die sesde aflewering bespreek Rick die mislukking van die Geallieerdes om Antwerpen ten volle te beveilig deur die Scheldtrivier betyds te beveilig.

Video sewe: In die sewende en laaste aflewering bespreek Rick die strategieverandering van Eisenhower oor die neem van Berlyn en die “fiksie ” van die National Redoubt.


Resensie: Deel 11 - Militêre geskiedenis - Geskiedenis

[Bykomende geskiedenis van die mediese departement (maak nie deel uit van die reeks "Amerikaanse leër in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog" nie):]

  • Organisasie en administrasie in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Mediese opleiding in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Mediese voorraad in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Mediese statistieke in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Personeel in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Bloedprogram in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Koue besering, grondtipe
  • Radiologie in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Fisiese standaarde in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Bestry psigiatrie
  • Ontwikkelinge in militêre geneeskunde tydens die administrasie van chirurg -generaal Norman T. Kirk
  • 'N Geskiedenis van die Amerikaanse weermag se tandheelkundige diens in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • 'N Geskiedenis van die Amerikaanse weermagdiens in die Tweede Wêreldoorlog
  • Wond Ballistiek
  • Deel I: Optrede van mediese konsultante
  • Deel II: Aansteeklike siektes
  • Deel III: Aansteeklike siektes en algemene medisyne

  • Deel I is nooit gepubliseer nie
  • Deel II: Environmental Hygeine The Quartermaster Corps: Organisasie, Voorsiening en Dienste, Deel I
  • The Quartermaster Corps: Organization, Supply, and Services, Deel II
  • The Quartermaster Corps: Operations in the War Against Japan
  • The Quartermaster Corps: Operations in the War Against Germany


Inhoud

Die NRA is in 1925 deur die KMT gestig as die militêre mag om China te verenig in die Noordelike Ekspedisie. Die onderskeid tussen party, staat en weermag was dikwels vervaag met behulp van die Komintern en gelei onder die leerstelling van die drie beginsels van die volk. 'N Groot aantal van die weermagoffisiere het deur die Whampoa Militêre Akademie gegaan, en die eerste kommandant, Chiang Kai-shek, het in 1925 die opperbevelhebber van die weermag geword voordat hy met die suksesvolle Noordelike Ekspedisie begin het. Ander prominente bevelvoerders was Du Yuming en Chen Cheng. Die einde van die Noordelike Ekspedisie in 1928 word dikwels beskou as die datum waarop China se krygstydperk geëindig het, alhoewel kleinschalige krygsheeraktiwiteite daarna jare lank voortduur.

In 1927, na die ontbinding van die Eerste Verenigde Front tussen die nasionaliste en die kommuniste, het die regerende KMT sy linkse lede gesuiwer en die Sowjet -invloed grootliks uit sy geledere uitgeskakel. Chiang Kai-shek wend hom dan tot Duitsland, histories 'n groot militêre mag, vir die herorganisasie en modernisering van die National Revolutionary Army. Die Weimar -republiek het adviseurs na China gestuur, maar weens die beperkings wat deur die Verdrag van Versailles opgelê is, kon hulle nie in militêre hoedanigheid dien nie. Chiang het aanvanklik beroemde generaals soos Ludendorff en von Mackensen versoek as raadgewers, maar die regering van die Weimarrepubliek het hom van die hand gewys, maar uit vrees dat hulle te beroemd was, sou die woede van die Geallieerdes uitgenooi word en sou dit nasionale aansien verloor vir sulke bekende figure om in wese as huursoldate te werk.

Toe Adolf Hitler in 1933 die kanselier van Duitsland word en die verdrag ontken, was die anti-kommunistiese Nazi-party en die anti-kommunistiese KMT spoedig in noue samewerking betrokke. met Duitsland wat Chinese troepe opgelei en Chinese infrastruktuur uitgebrei het, terwyl China sy markte en natuurlike hulpbronne vir Duitsland oopgemaak het. Max Bauer was die eerste adviseur van China.

In 1934 stel genl Hans von Seeckt, wat as adviseur van Chiang optree, 'n voorstel "80 -afdelingsplan" vir die hervorming van die hele Chinese leër in 80 afdelings van hoogs opgeleide, goed toegeruste troepe wat volgens Duitse linies georganiseer is. Die plan is nooit ten volle verwesenlik nie, aangesien die ewig kibbelende krygshere nie kon saamstem oor watter afdelings saamgesmelt en ontbind sou word nie. Aangesien verduistering en bedrog alledaags was, veral in ondersterkte afdelings (die toestand van die meeste afdelings), sou die hervorming van die militêre struktuur die afdelingsbevelvoerders se "opvatting" bedreig. Daarom het slegs agt infanteriedivisies teen Julie 1937 herorganisasie en opleiding voltooi. Dit was die 3de, 6de, 9de, 14de, 36ste, 87ste, 88ste en die opleidingsafdeling.

'N Ander Duitse generaal, Alexander von Falkenhausen, het in 1934 na China gekom om die weermag te help hervorm. [1] As gevolg van die latere samewerking van Nazi-Duitsland met die Keiserryk van Japan, is hy later in 1937 herroep. Na sy afskeidspartytjie met die familie van Chiang Kai-shek, het hy beloof om nie sy bedinkte strydplanne aan die Japanners bekend te maak nie.

Tydens die Tweede Sino-Japannese Oorlog het kommunistiese magte 'n tyd lank as 'n nominale deel van die Nasionale Revolusionêre Leër geveg en die agtste roete-leër en die nuwe vierde weermag-eenhede gevorm, maar hierdie samewerking het later uitmekaar geval. Gedurende die Chinese burgeroorlog het die Nasionale Revolusionêre Weermag groot probleme met verlatenheid ondervind, met baie soldate wat van kant verander het om vir die Kommuniste te veg.

Troepe in Indië en Birma tydens die Tweede Wêreldoorlog het die Chinese ekspedisiemag (Birma), die Chinese weermag in Indië en Y Force ingesluit. [2]

Die Amerikaanse regering het herhaaldelik gedreig om hulp aan China tydens die Tweede Wêreldoorlog af te sny, tensy hulle die totale bevel van alle Chinese militêre magte aan die VSA oorhandig. Na aansienlike stilstand val die reëling slegs deur as gevolg van 'n besonder beledigende brief van die Amerikaners aan Chiang. [3]

Na die opstel en implementering van die Grondwet van die Republiek van China in 1947, is die Nasionale Revolusionêre Leër omskep in die takdiensafdeling van die Republiek van China se weermag - die Republiek van China se weermag (ROCA). [4]

Die NRA het gedurende sy leeftyd ongeveer 4,300,000 gereelde gewerf, in 370 standaardafdelings (正式 師), 46 nuwe afdelings (新編 師), 12 kavalleriedivisies (騎兵 師), agt nuwe kavalleriedivisies (新編 騎兵 師), 66 tydelike afdelings (暫)編 師) en 13 reserwe -afdelings (預備 師), vir 'n totaal van 515 afdelings. Baie afdelings is egter uit twee of meer ander afdelings gevorm, en was nie terselfdertyd aktief nie.

Aan die toppunt van die NRA was die National Military Council, ook vertaal as Military Affairs Commission. Onder voorsitterskap van Chiang Kai-Shek het hy die personeel en bevele gelei. Dit het vanaf 1937 die hoof van die generale staf, generaal He Yingqin, die algemene personeel, die ministerie van oorlog, die militêre streke, lug- en vlootmagte, lugverdediging en garnisoenbevelvoerders en ondersteuningsdienste ingesluit. . [5]

Nuwe afdelings is ook geskep ter vervanging van standaardafdelings wat vroeg in die oorlog verlore geraak het, en die nommer van die ou afdeling is uitgereik. Daarom is die aantal afdelings in aktiewe diens op 'n gegewe tydstip baie kleiner as dit. Die gemiddelde NRA -afdeling het 5 000–6 000 troepe, ’n gemiddelde leërafdeling het 10 000–15 000 troepe, wat gelykstaande is aan’ n Japanse afdeling. Selfs nie die Duits-opgeleide afdelings was gelykstaande aan mannekrag met 'n Duitse of Japannese afdeling nie, met slegs 10 000 man.

Die veldtogbrosjure van die Amerikaanse weermag oor die China Defensive -veldtog van 1942–45 het gesê: [6] [ mislukte verifikasie ]

Die NRA het slegs 'n klein aantal gepantserde voertuie en gemeganiseerde troepe. Aan die begin van die oorlog in 1937 was die wapenrusting georganiseer in drie gepantserde bataljons, toegerus met tenks en gepantserde motors uit verskillende lande. Nadat hierdie bataljons meestal vernietig is in die Slag van Sjanghai en Slag van Nanjing. Die tenks, pantsermotors en vragmotors uit die Sowjetunie en Italië wat nuut voorsien is, het dit moontlik gemaak om die enigste gemeganiseerde afdeling in die weermag, die 200ste divisie, te skep. Hierdie afdeling het uiteindelik opgehou om 'n gemeganiseerde eenheid te wees na die herorganisasie van afdelings in Junie 1938. Die pantser- en artillerieregimente is onder direkte bevel van die 5de korps geplaas en die 200ste afdeling het 'n gemotoriseerde infanteriedivisie binne dieselfde korps geword. Hierdie korps het gevegte in Guangxi in 1939–1940 en in die Slag van Yunnan-Birma-pad in 1942 verminder die gepantserde eenhede as gevolg van verliese en meganiese ineenstorting van die voertuie. Op papier het China 3,8 miljoen mans onder die wapen in 1941. Hulle was georganiseer in 246 "voorste" afdelings, met nog 70 afdelings wat aan agterste gebiede toegewys was. Miskien was veertig Chinese afdelings toegerus met wapens wat deur Europa vervaardig is en deur buitelandse, veral Duitse en Sowjetse adviseurs opgelei is. Die res van die eenhede was sterk en oor die algemeen onopgelei. Oor die algemeen het die nasionalistiese leër die meeste Westerse militêre waarnemers beïndruk as meer wat herinner aan 'n 19de- as 'n 20ste-eeuse weermag.

Laat in die Birma -veldtog het die NRA -leër 'n gepantserde bataljon met Sherman -tenks.

Ondanks die swak resensies wat Europese waarnemers aan die Europese opgeleide afdelings gegee het, het die Moslem-afdelings van die National Revolutionary Army, opgelei in China (nie deur Westerlinge nie) en gelei deur Ma Clique Moslem-generaals, die Europese waarnemers bang gemaak met hul voorkoms en vegvaardighede in die stryd. Europeërs soos Sven Hedin en Georg Vasel was in verwondering oor die voorkoms van die Chinese Moslem -NRA -afdelings en hul woeste gevegsvermoëns. Hulle is opgelei in moeilike, wrede omstandighede. [7] [8] [9] [10] Die 36ste Afdeling (Nasionale Revolusionêre Leër), wat volledig in China opgelei is sonder enige Europese hulp, was saamgestel uit Chinese Moslems en het 'n indringende Sowjet -Russiese leër tydens die Sowjet -inval geveg en ernstig geteister. Xinjiang. Die afdeling het 'n gebrek aan tegnologie en mannekrag, maar het die superieure Russiese mag erg beskadig.

Volgens Westerse waarnemers is die Moslem -afdelings van die weermag wat deur die Moslem -genl Ma Hongkui beheer word, sterk en gedissiplineerd. Ondanks die feit dat hy diabetes gehad het, het Ma Hongkui persoonlik met sy troepe geboor en besig met swaardheining tydens opleiding. [11]

Toe die leiers van baie van die krygsheer en provinsiale leërs met die KMT saamgesluit het en as offisiere en generaals aangestel is, het hul troepe by die NRA aangesluit. Hierdie leërs is herdoop as NRA -afdelings. Die hele Ma Clique -leërs is opgeneem in die NRA. Toe die Moslem Ma Clique -generaal Ma Qi by die KMT aansluit, is die Ninghai -leër herdoop tot die 26ste afdeling van die National Revolutionary Army.

Eenheid organisasie Redigeer

Die eenheidsorganisasie van die NRA is soos volg: (Let daarop dat 'n eenheid nie noodwendig ondergeskik is aan een onmiddellik daarbo nie, byvoorbeeld, kan verskeie weermagregimente onder 'n weermaggroep gevind word.) Die opperbevelhebber van die NRA vanaf 1925 tot 1947 was Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek.

    × 12 (戰區)
      Army Corps × 4 (兵團)-die Army Corps, 兵團, was een van die grootste militêre formasies in die NRA tydens die Tweede Sino-Japannese Oorlog. [12] Hierdie weermagkorps was saamgestel uit 'n aantal groepsleërs, weermag, korps, afdelings, brigades en regimente. In getalle afdelings was hulle groter as groepe van die Westerse weermag. Slegs vier is ooit gevorm om die groot magte te beveel wat die Chinese hoofstad verdedig tydens die Slag van Wuhan in 1938. (Sien Orde van die Slag van Wuhan).
        × 40 (集團軍 Groep Weermag)
          (路軍) × 30 (軍)
            × 133 (軍團 Weermaggroep) - het gewoonlik bevel oor twee tot drie NRA -afdelings en dikwels 'n aantal onafhanklike brigades of regimente en ondersteunende eenhede uitgevoer. [12] Die Chinese Republiek het 133 Korps tydens die Tweede Sino-Japannese Oorlog gehad. Na verliese in die vroeë deel van die oorlog, onder die hervormings van 1938, is die oorblywende skaars artillerie en die ander ondersteuningsformasies uit die afdeling onttrek en op korps of op weermagvlak gehou. Die korps het die basiese taktiese eenheid van die NRA geword met sterkte wat amper gelyk was aan 'n geallieerde afdeling.
              (師)
                (旅)
                  Regiment (團)
                    Bataljon (營)
                      (連)
                        (排)
                          (班)

                        Selfmoordgroepe Wysig

                        Tydens die Xinhai -rewolusie en die oorlogstydperk van die Republiek van China, "Dare to Die Corps" (tradisioneel Chinees: 敢死隊 vereenvoudigde Chinees: 敢死队 pinyin: gǎnsǐduì ) of "Selfmoordgroepe" [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] is gereeld deur Chinese leërs gebruik. China het hierdie selfmoordeenhede tydens die Tweede Sino-Japannese Oorlog teen die Japannese ontplooi.

                        "Dare to Die" -troepe is deur krygshere in hul leërs gebruik om selfmoordaanvalle uit te voer. [21] "Dare to Die" -korps is steeds in die Chinese weermag gebruik. Die Kuomintang het een gebruik om 'n opstand in Canton neer te sit. [22] Baie vroue het saam met mans by hulle aangesluit om martelaarskap teen die teenstanders van China te bewerkstellig. [23] [24]

                        'N "Dare to die corps" is effektief gebruik teen Japannese eenhede tydens die Slag van Taierzhuang. [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] Hulle het swaarde gebruik. [31] [32]

                        Selfmoordbomaanvalle is ook teen die Japannese gebruik. [33] [34] 'n Chinese soldaat het 'n granaatvest ontplof en 20 Japannese soldate in Sihang Warehouse doodgemaak. Chinese troepe het plofstof soos granaatpakke of dinamiet aan hul liggame vasgemaak en onder Japannese tenks gewerp om dit op te blaas. [35] Hierdie taktiek is gebruik tydens die Slag van Sjanghai, waar 'n Sjinese selfmoordbomaanvaller 'n Japannese tenkkolom gestop het deur homself onder die loodtenk te ontplof, [36] en tydens die Slag van Taierzhuang waar dinamiet en granate deur Chinese troepe vasgemaak was wat op Japannese tenks gejaag het en hulself opgeblaas het. [37] [38] [39] [40] In een voorval by Taierzhuang het Chinese selfmoordbomaanvallers vier Japannese tenks met granaatbundels uitgewis. [41] [42]

                        Strafbataljons Redigeer

                        Tydens die Chinese burgeroorlog het die Nasionale Revolusionêre Leër (NRA) bekend geword dat hulle van 1945 tot 1949 strafbataljons gebruik het. 'N Eenheid wat bestaan ​​uit woestyne en diegene wat beskuldig word van lafhartigheid, het die strafbataljon die volgende taak verken: die verkenning van die hoofmagte om te kyk of daar hinderlae is, riviere en strome oorsteek om te sien of dit rybaar is en oor ongemerkte mynvelde loop. [43]

                        Diensplig wysig

                        Die weermag is gevorm deur bloedige en onmenslike dienspligveldtogte. Dit word deur Rudolph Rummel beskryf as:

                        Dit was 'n dodelike aangeleentheid waarin mans vir die weermag ontvoer is, sonder onderskeid deur persbendes of weermag-eenhede onder diegene op die paaie of in die dorpe en dorpe, of op 'n ander manier bymekaargekom het. Baie mans, sommige baie jonk en oud, is gedood om hulle te weerstaan ​​of te probeer ontsnap. Sodra hulle versamel is, word hulle aan 'n tou vasgemaak of vasgeketting en met klein kos of water, lang afstande na die kamp opgeruk. Hulle het gereeld gesterf of is langs die pad doodgemaak, soms het minder as 50 persent lewendig die kamp bereik. Dan was werwingskampe nie beter nie, met hospitale wat soos Nazi -konsentrasiekampe soos Buchenwald gelyk het. [44]


                        Onlangse aanwysings in die militêre geskiedenis van die antieke wêreld. Publikasies van die Vereniging van Ou Historici, 10

                        Die onderwerp van antieke oorlogvoering het die afgelope jare akademies en by die publiek gewild geraak. Met Onlangse aanwysings in die militêre geskiedenis van die antieke wêreld die redaksie poog om 'n omvang van gebruik te bied aan sowel spesialiste as nie-spesialiste op die gebied, wat die onlangse tendense in die navorsing oor antieke militêre geskiedenis hersien, 'n oorsig gee van die bibliografie van hierdie tendense en oor die algemeen die gesondheid van die dissipline.

                        Die inleiding van die redakteur bepaal die parameters waarop die volume gebaseer is. Skrywers het opdrag gekry om hul literatuuroorsig tot die afgelope 15 jaar te beperk, en om te fokus op nuwer benaderings tot die studie van antieke oorlogvoering. Die meerderheid literatuur wat nagegaan word, is Engels-taal, as gevolg van die beoogde gehoor vir die bundel. 'N Waargeneemde wanbalans teen die ou Midde -Ooste en die laat oudheid word herstel deur die opname van hoofstukke daaroor, saam met die meer bekende Griekse en Romeinse materiaal. Die redakteurs erken dat resensies van die antieke militêre geskiedenis van Persië, Noord -Afrika en vlootoorlog wenslik is, maar dit was buite die omvang van die bundel. Die inleiding bevat ook die teoretiese ontwikkeling van die antieke militêre geskiedenis oor die afgelope eeu, van tradisionele "tromme en trompette" -benaderings, deur die "gesig van stryd", "oorlog en samelewing" en "militêre revolusie" skole van die sewentigerjare, en wat uitloop op die veelheid van metodologiese en teoretiese benaderings wat vandag gebruik word. Alhoewel sommige aspekte van die benaderings wat bespreek is, moontlik 'n groter verduideliking vir 'n nie-spesialis-gehoor vereis, bied dit 'n geskikte agtergrond vir die hoofstukke wat volg.

                        Seth Richardson se "Mesopotamië en die 'nuwe' militêre geskiedenis" beslaan 'n tydperk van drie millennia in die Nabye Ooste, 'n taak wat die skrywer toegee, is onmoontlik om op 'n omvattende manier uit te voer. In plaas daarvan word vier belangstellingsgebiede - die weermag en die samelewing, die weermag as 'n samelewing, die weermag en die staat, en die weermag en ideologie - in 'n tematiese studie ondersoek. Oor die rol van oorlogvoering en militêre organisasie in staatsvorming word ou aannames ten opsigte van die belangrikheid daarvan omvergewerp, aangesien die getuienis dui op 'n geringe rol vir die weermag in die staatsvormingsperiode. Die saak is goed gemaak, hoewel 'n bewering dat vroeë bronswapens nie gevegsdoeltreffend was nie, twyfelagtig lyk. Richardson merk korrek op dat die getuienis uit Egipte blykbaar 'n baie meer sentrale rol toon vir militêre geweld in staatsvorming, wat veralgemeende gevolgtrekkings nie raadsaam maak nie. 'N Aansienlike gedeelte van die hoofstuk word gewy aan ekonomiese aangeleenthede in die vorm van afdelings wat handel oor grondbesit en betaling vir militêre diens, en oor die werking van militêre ekonomieë. Wat grondbesit betref, word die belangrikheid van grond by die totstandkoming van verpligtinge tot militêre diens beklemtoon, alhoewel opgemerk word dat dit moeilik is om vas te stel of dit werklike diens of betalings aan troepe ondersteun. Richardson voer aan dat teen die eerste millennium 'n 'militêre ekonomie' in die Neo-Assiriese ryk na 745 vC beskryf kan word, hoewel hy minder duidelik is oor die gevolge hiervan. 'N Gedeelte oor omvang en diversiteit in oorlogvoering dui op die toenemende omvang van militêre magte tot 60 000 man in die 18de eeu vC, en dui daarop dat die funksionele aard van die dokumente wat sulke getalle aanteken, geloofwaardigheid verleen. Die betrokkenheid van die weermag by massa-deportasies en herkolonisasies uit die middel van die tweede millennium maak ook oortuigend 'n saak vir die belangrikheid van die weermag in die diversiteit en onstabiliteit wat dit veroorsaak het.

                        Die mees snydende aspek van die rituele aspekte van oorlogvoering wat in hierdie hoofstuk behandel word, is miskien die kwessie van lewer-waarsêery en die rol daarvan as 'n vorm van militêre intelligensie. Richardson vestig die aandag op die huidige gebrek aan begrip van hoe dit geïntegreer is met meer bekende vorme van militêre intelligensie. Die rol van briewe en ander dokumente om die amptelike verhale van triomf met verhale oor swaarkry teë te werk, word goed hanteer en lei natuurlik tot 'n bespreking van die politieke rol van die weermag, en die agentskap wat deur militêre eenhede uitgeoefen word, word duidelik gemaak. Hierdie afdeling handel ook oor vrae oor geslag, alhoewel die bewyse dubbelsinnig blyk te wees oor 'n beduidende geslag van soldate of hul vyande, met metafore uit die dierewêreld, eerder as geslag, wat die verslane kenmerk.

                        Everett Wheeler gebruik 'n metafoor van Lewis Carroll om die militêre historici van Antieke Griekeland as 'Mad Hatters or March Hares' te kategoriseer. Sy "Mad Hatters" is diegene wat tradisionele historistiese metodologieë volg, terwyl die "March Hase" die aanvaarding van teorieë en metodes uit die sosiale wetenskappe verteenwoordig. Wheeler erken dat die metafoor 'n te vereenvoudigde model is van onlangse tendense in die militêre geskiedenis van antieke Griekeland, maar gebruik dit vaardig in die hoofstuk. Daar word bewys dat beide die 'oorlog en samelewing' en 'gesig van stryd' denkskole die afgelope twintig jaar die veld oorheers het, en beide word beskou as 'n deel van die 'hare'. Meer kritiek word gerig op die "face of battle" -skool, met die gebruik van Victor Davis Hanson na die "Tweede Wêreldoorlog" "buddy theory" en sy geloof in die Griekse uitvinding van beslissende stryd, wat veral aandag geniet. Wheeler het ook moeite om kennis te neem van die skuld wat Hanson en John Keegan aan die Franse offisier Ardant du Picq van die negentiende eeu skuld.

                        'N Meer onlangse ontwikkeling in kontinentale geleerdheid word deur Wheeler aangespreek as' geskiedenis en geheue '. Hierdie benadering fokus op die moeilikheidsgraad van die rekonstruksie van die geskiedenis uit altyd foutiewe menslike herinneringe. Wheeler is skepties oor of daar genoeg bronne uit die oudheid is om hierdie benadering te ontplooi. Ietwat gunstiger ontvang is die Schlachtenmythen ('Strydmites') genre, wat die konstruksie en manipulasie van gevegte in die geheue van 'n deelnemende samelewing bestudeer.

                        Revisionisme word in 'n enkele afdeling behandel, met onderwerpe wat die bestaan ​​van reëls in oorlogvoering, vrede, internasionale reg, binnelandse militêre aangeleenthede en oorlog en die ekonomie dek. Wheeler spreek nie die meerjarige "oop" of "geslote" falanksdebat aan nie, en noem eerder sy hoofstuk in die Cambridge History of Greek and Roman WarfareAlhoewel 'n kort opsomming, gegewe die beoogde nie-spesialis-gehoor, waarskynlik hier gepas sou gewees het. Die verdeling tussen "Hatters" en "Hares" is minder prominent in die historiografie van Alexander en die Hellenistiese tydperk, en Wheeler voer oortuigend aan dat meer aandag aan die hervormings van Philip II gegee moet word. Die hoofstuk bied baie stof tot nadenke, maar die skeptisisme van die skrywer oor baie van die werk van die "hase" en die gebrek aan dekking van sekere onderwerpe (daar is byvoorbeeld min oor seks), maak dit miskien 'n eienaardige inskrywing gegewe die doelwitte van die bundel.

                        Sara Phang pak die onderwerp van die Romeinse leër in die Republikeinse en Keiserlike tydperke aan. Hierdie hoofstuk beklemtoon die vordering wat gemaak is deur die toepassing van temas en metodes van breër Romeinse sosiale en kulturele studies op die weermag, wat die tradisionele isolasie van die onderwerp beëindig. Die hoofstuk is ook opmerklik vir die gebruik van argeologiese bewyse, hoewel die klem sterk op tradisionele historiese bronne val. 'N Prominente tema is die anachronistiese aard van konsepte soos' groot strategie 'en masjienagtige dissipline en oefening, wat op die Romeinse militêre geskiedenis toegepas is. In laasgenoemde geval is die argument vir 'n losser formasie goed gemaak, hoewel die toevallige verwysing na hierdie formasies 'aansienlik losser en wyer is as antieke hopliet of vroeë moderne infanterieformasies' die meerjarige en voortdurende debat oor hoplietformasies masker.

                        In ooreenstemming met die volume se fokus op nuwe benaderings tot die antieke militêre geskiedenis, vermy Phang se hoofstuk tradisionele tegnologiese besprekingsonderwerpe ten gunste van benaderings met demografiese, politieke, ekonomiese en kulturele faktore wat die weermag met die breër Romeinse samelewing verbind het. Hierdie benaderings neem die antieke militêre geskiedenis na 'n nuwe gebied. Die impak van oorlogvoering op kultuur word geïllustreer deur die anti-Helleense etos van 'n streng weermag wat gepropageer is na die verowering van die Hellenistiese Ooste, ondanks die Romeinse aanvaarding van 'n paar Hellenistiese tradisies van oorwinning en weelde. Die toenemende skeiding tussen die senatoriale klas en die weermag gedurende die keiserlike tydperk word ondersoek. Desondanks word Romeinse soldate as sub-elites gegooi, met toegang tot rykdom, geletterdheid en dominante kulturele vorme. Die demografie van die weermag het aansienlike onlangse aandag geniet, aangesien die ouer idee van 'n toenemend 'oorerflike' weermag wat deur kinders van soldate gewerf word, ondermyn word deur die klein aantal soldate wat gesinne oprig. Die toenemend provinsiale aard van werwing en die vervaag van etniese identiteite binne die weermag word ook bespreek. Die huidige status van geslags- en seksualiteitsstudies in die antieke geskiedenis gee aanleiding tot 'n aantal interessante studiegange, waaronder die gevolge van die Romeinse konstruksie van manlikheid op die ideologie van imperialisme: ikonografie van verkragtingslagoffers is gebruik in die uitbeelding van verowerde volke. Daar word voorgestel dat militêre benaderings tot geslag en seksualiteit agter die van die Romeinse geskiedenis in die algemeen bly, met verdere waardevolle bydraes moontlik. Phang se hoofstuk bied 'n goeie inleiding tot baie nuwe rigtings in die antieke militêre geskiedenis, hoewel die beperkinge van die ruimte beteken dat meer detail soms wenslik sou wees.

                        Doug Lee se "Militêre geskiedenis in die laat oudheid: veranderende perspektiewe en paradigmas" dek die periode van die vroeë derde tot vroeë sewende eeu nC, 'n era wat volgens Lee 'n aantal belangrike historiese gebeure met militêre dimensies bevat. Attention is also drawn to recent scholarship challenging preconceptions of imperial decline as being inevitable – an intellectual inheritance from Edward Gibbon – and sometimes finding more positive aspects to the period. This can certainly be seen in the assessment of the army’s organization and effectiveness. A previous view of the limitanei (troops based in frontier provinces) was that they were inferior to the comitatenses (troops of the emperor’s mobile field army) by dint of their position as landholders causing them to be seen as a “peasant militia” this sees revision due to the fact that limitanei were used for offensive operations as late as the sixth century, and that they did not necessarily work the land. More broadly, the point is made that Late Antiquity sees notable military successes as well as failures, and that failures might be due to poor leadership and planning rather than an inherently ineffective army.

                        The issue of technological change is also discussed, with changes to equipment occurring, perhaps most notably in the form of heavy armoured cavalry. However, Lee argues that infantry remained centrally important. Moreover, given that the period did not see any huge developments in military technology, social factors relating to the army may be more profitable avenues of research. These are covered in a section on demographics, recruitment and identity. Perhaps the most interesting part of the chapter, this section discusses the focus of recruitment on “martial races” from inside and outside the empire, and their rise to military and political prominence. Questions of personal identity also feature, with the matter of the citizen status of “barbarians” being said to have received little attention. The religious allegiances of the military are shown to have been fluid, as might be expected of a period characterised by conflicts between Christianity and Paganism. Gibbon’s view that Christianity weakened the empire’s military capability is challenged, as Christianity could have positive effects upon morale, and bishops were known to organize defenders during sieges. It is further suggested that Christianity provided a new ideological aspect to the wars with a Zoroastrian Sasanian Persia that held a substantial Christian minority within its borders.

                        Overall, criticism may be directed at the nature of some of the entries in the volume, which through either the historiography that they cover or the views of their authors cleave more closely to traditional approaches to military history than might be expected in a volume devoted to “new directions”. Phang’s chapter is exemplary in the prominence it gives to new thinking. Still, the volume admirably achieves its aim of producing an overview of military history which is accessible to scholars and students from outside the field of military studies. For those within the field, the ability to see perspectives from other periods, and mine the bibliography, will also be valuable.


                        Correcting Military Service Records

                        The National Archives and Records Administration cannot make changes or corrections to military records or to your discharge status other than to make minor administrative corrections to fix some typographical errors.

                        You will need to apply to the review board for your respective service branch for corrections or changes. Instructions on what to submit for each are listed below.

                        (DO NOT submit these forms to the National Archives. Be sure to use the appropriate address for your service branch as listed on the back of the form.)

                        The following information is from the Department of Veteran's Affairs Guide to Federal Benefits for Veterans and Dependents and is provided as a courtesy. We encourage you to check directly with the VA for updates or changes:

                        • Military Service Record
                          Submit DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Recordsto the relevant service branch. (You can either view and download the form, or right-click the form and select "Save link as" or otherwise save the file and then open it.)
                          • Please Note: The form is expired at the time of posting, we are awaiting update from the DoD Forms Manager. In the interim, this form can be used until a new version is released.

                          Correction of Military Records

                          The secretary of a military department, acting through a board for correction of military records, has authority to change any military record when necessary to correct an error or remove an injustice. A correction board may consider applications for correction of a military record, including a review of a discharge issued by courts martial.

                          The veteran, survivor or legal representative generally must file a request for correction within three years after discovery of an alleged error or injustice. The board may excuse failure to file within the prescribed time, however, if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so. It is an applicant’s responsibility to show why the filing of the application was delayed and why it would be in the interest of justice for the board to consider it despite the delay.

                          To justify any correction, it is necessary to show to the satisfaction of the board that the alleged entry or omission in the records was in error or unjust. Applications should include all available evidence, such as signed statements of witnesses or a brief of arguments supporting the requested correction. Application is made with DD Form 149, available at VA offices, from veterans organizations or from the Internet ( http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/forms/index.htm).

                          Review of Discharges

                          Each of the military services maintains a discharge review board with authority to change, correct or modify discharges or dismissals that are not issued by a sentence of a general courts-martial. The board has no authority to address medical discharges. The veteran or, if the veteran is deceased or incompetent, the surviving spouse, next of kin or legal representative may apply for a review of discharge by writing to the military department concerned, using DoD Form 293. This form may be obtained at a VA regional office, from veterans organizations or from the Internet: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/forms/index.htm. However, if the discharge was more than 15 years ago, a veteran must petition the appropriate service Board for Correction of Military Records using DoD Form 149, which is discussed in the “Correction of Military Records” section of this booklet. A discharge review is conducted by a review of an applicant’s record and, if requested, by a hearing before the board.

                          Discharges awarded as a result of a continuous period of unauthorized absence in excess of 180 days make persons ineligible for VA benefits regardless of action taken by discharge review boards, unless VA determines there were compelling circumstances for the absence. Boards for the correction of military records also may consider such cases.

                          Veterans with disabilities incurred or aggravated during active military service may qualify for medical or related benefits regardless of separation and characterization of service. Veterans separated administratively under other than honorable conditions may request that their discharge be reviewed for possible recharacterization, provided they file their appeal within 15 years of the date of separation. Questions regarding the review of a discharge should be addressed to the appropriate discharge review board at the address listed on DoD Form 293.


                          Request Military Service Records

                          Recent military service and medical records are not online. However, most veterans and their next of kin can obtain free copies of their DD Form 214 (Report of Separation) and the following military service records any of the ways listed below.

                          Looking for records?

                          If you are unable to start the form online and prefer to submit a traditional request form, you can mail or Fax it:

                          How can I check on the status of my request?

                          Allow about 10 days for us to receive and process your request before checking your request status.

                          Please indicate whether you know your request number using the buttons below:

                          You may also telephone the NPRC Customer Service Line (this is a long-distance call for most customers): 314-801-0800. Let wel: Our peak calling times are weekdays between 10:00 a.m. CT and 3:00 p.m. CT. Staff is available to take your call as early as 7:00 a.m. and as late as 5:00 p.m. CT.

                          Click "+" to display more information:

                          What if I’m not the Veteran or next-of-kin? Can I still access files?

                          • It depends on the date the service member separated from the military. Military personnel records are open to the public 62 years after they leave the military. (To calculate this, take the current year and subtract 62.) Records of any veteran who separated from the military 62 (or more) years ago can be ordered by enigiemand for a copying fee (detailed below under “cost”). See Access to Military Records by the General Public for more details.

                          But what if it's been less than 62 years?

                          • Records of individuals who left service less than 62 years ago are subject to access restrictions and only limited information or copies may be released to the general public within the provisions of the law. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Privacy Act provide balance between the right of the public to obtain information from military service records and the right of the former military service member to protect his/her privacy. See Federal Records Center Program to access these records.

                          Cost: Most basic requests are free but it depends on the discharge date. (Learn more)

                          Free if Discharge Date is LESS than 62 years ago:

                          Generally there is no charge for basic military personnel and medical record information provided to veterans, next of kin and authorized representatives from Federal (non-archival) records.

                          Some companies advertise DD Form 214 research services and will charge a fee for obtaining copies. This is provided as a free service by the National Archives and Records Administration.

                          Costs for Discharge Dates MORE than 62 years ago:

                          There is a fee for records that are considered "Archival," which depends on the discharge date. If the request is made 62 years after the service member's separation from the military, the records are now open to the public and subject to the public fee schedule (44 USC 2116c and 44 USC 2307). This is a rolling date, the current year minus 62 years. Leer meer.

                          These archival requests require the purchase of the COMPLETE photocopy of the Official Military Personnel File (OMPF):

                          • A routine OMPFs of 5 pages or less: $25 flat fee
                          • A routine OMPF of 6 pages or more: $70 flat fee (most OMPFs fall in this category) OMPF: $.80 cents per page ($20 minimum)

                          If your request involves a service fee, you will be notified as soon as that determination is made.

                          Response Time: most requests for separation documents can be processed within 10 days (Learn more)

                          Response times from NPRC vary depending on the complexity of your request, the availability of the records, and our workload.

                          • Requests for separation documents DD 214 within 10 days (about 92% of the time)
                          • Requests that involve reconstruction efforts due to the 1973 Fire, or older records that require extensive search efforts, may take 6 months or more to complete.

                          We work actively to respond to each request in a timely fashion, keep in mind we receive approximately 4,000 - 5,000 requests per day.

                          Please do not send a follow-up request before 90 days have elapsed, as it may cause further delays.

                          Who may request military service records?

                          You may request military service records (including DD 214) if you are:

                          • A military veteran, of
                          • Next of kin of a deceased, former member of the military.
                            Die next of kin can be any of the following:
                            • Surviving spouse who has not remarried
                            • Vader
                            • Moeder
                            • Seun
                            • Dogter
                            • Suster
                            • Broer

                            Public access depends on the discharge date:

                            Records are accessioned into the National Archives, and become archival, 62 years after the service member's separation from the military. This is a rolling date, the current year minus 62 years. See more information on records older than 62 years.

                            Archival records are open to the public and can be ordered online for a copying fee. See Access to Military Records by the General Public for more details.

                            What information do I need for the request?

                            Required Information:

                            Your request must contain certain basic information for us to locate your service records. This information includes:

                            • The veteran's complete name used while in service
                            • Service number
                            • Social Security number
                            • Branch of service
                            • Dates of service
                            • Date and place of birth (especially if the service number is not known).
                            • If you suspect your records may have been involved in the 1973 fire, also include:
                              • Place of discharge
                              • Last unit of assignment
                              • Place of entry into the service, if known.

                              Recommended Information (optional):

                              While this information is not required, it is extremely helpful to staff in understanding and fulfilling your request:

                              • Die purpose or reason for your request, such as applying for veterans benefits, preparing to retire, or researching your personal military history.
                              • Enige deadlines related to your request. We will do our best to meet any priorities. For example, if you were applying for a VA-guaranteed Home Loan and need to provide proof of military service by a specific date.
                              • Any other specific information, documents, or records you require from your Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) besides your Report of Separation (DD Form 214).

                              For additional details on what information may or may not be included, please see the Special Notice to Veterans and Family Members regarding requests for copies of military personnel and/or medical files.

                              Where to Send My Request

                              You can mail or fax your geteken en gedateer request to the National Archives' National Personnel Record Center (NPRC). Be sure to use the address specified (either in the instructions on the SF-180 or in our online system, eVetRecs). Most, but not all records, are stored at the NPRC. (See full list of Locations of Military Service Records.)

                              NPRC Fax Number :
                              FAX: 314-801-9195

                              NPRC Mailing Address:
                              Nasionale Personeelrekordsentrum
                              Militêre personeelrekords
                              1 Archives Drive
                              St. Louis, MO 63138
                              PHONE: 314-801-0800*
                              *Our peak calling times are weekdays between 10:00 a.m. CT and 3:00 p.m. CT. Staff is available to take your call as early as 7:00 a.m. and as late as 5:00 p.m. CT.

                              Please note that requests which are sent by Priority Mail, FedEx, UPS, or other "express" services will only arrive at the NPRC sooner. They will not be processed any faster than standard requests. See the section above on emergency requests and deadlines.

                              Other Methods to Obtain Military Service Records

                              Other potential methods to obtain your records include:

                              Special Note on Contacting by Email: Requests for military personnel records or information from them kan nie be accepted by email at this time. The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a) and Department of Defense directives require a written request, signed and dated, to access information from military personnel records. Our email address should only be used only to request general information (hours of operations, procedures and forms) or to submit compliments, complaints, or concerns.

                              NOTE: If you send messages using WebTV or a free-email service, you will not receive our response if your mailbox is full. Messages sent to full mailboxes are returned to us as "undeliverable." You may wish to include your mailing address in your message so that we may respond via the U.S. Postal Service.

                              How Can I Check on the Status of My Request?

                              Allow about 10 days for us to receive and process your request, then you may check on the status. If you know your request number, click the Check Status button below to go to the check status page.

                              If you do not know your request number, please provide the following information using the Online Status Update Request form.


                              Review: Volume 11 - Military History - History

                              The Hawaiian Situation: The Invasion of Hawaii
                              Digital History ID 4050

                              Author: Eugene Tyler Chamberlain
                              Date:1893

                              Annotation: Hawaiian annexation.

                              After a century of American rule, many native Hawaiians remain bitter about how the United States acquired the islands, located 2,500 miles from the West Coast. In 1893, a small group of sugar and pineapple-growing businessmen, aided by the American minister to Hawaii and backed by heavily armed U.S. soldiers and marines, deposed Hawaii's queen. Subsequently, they imprisoned the queen and seized 1.75 million acres of crown land and conspired to annex the islands to the United States.

                              On January 17, 1893, the conspirators announced the overthrow of the queen's government. To avoid bloodshed, Queen Lydia Kamakaeha Liliuokalani yielded her sovereignty and called upon the U.S. government "to undo the actions of its representatives." The U.S. government refused to help her regain her throne. When she died in 1917, Hawaii was an American territory. In 1959, Hawaii became the 50th state after a plebiscite in which 90 percent of the islanders supported statehood.

                              The businessmen who conspired to overthrow the queen claimed that they were overthrowing a corrupt, dissolute regime in order of advance democratic principles. They also argued that a Western power was likely to acquire the islands. Hawaii had the finest harbor in the mid-Pacific and was viewed as a strategically valuable coaling station and naval base. In 1851, King Kamehameha III had secretly asked the United States to annex Hawaii, but Secretary of State Daniel Webster declined, saying "No power ought to take possession of the islands as a conquest. or colonization." But later monarchs wanted to maintain Hawaii's independence. The native population proved to be vulnerable to western diseases, including cholera, smallpox, and leprosy. By 1891, native Hawaii's were an ethnic minority on the islands.

                              After the bloodless 1893 revolution, the American businessmen lobbied President Benjamin Harrison and Congress to annex the Hawaiian Islands. In his last month in office, Harrison sent an annexation treaty to the Senate for confirmation, but the new president, Grover Cleveland, withdrew the treaty "for the purpose of re-examination." He also received Queen Liliuokalani and replaced the American stars and stripes in Honolulu with the Hawaiian flag.

                              Cleveland also ordered a study of the Hawaiian revolution. The inquiry concluded that the American minister to Hawaii had conspired with the businessmen to overthrow the queen, and that the coup would have failed "but for the landing of the United States forces upon false pretexts respecting the dangers to life and property." Looking back on the Hawaii takeover, President Cleveland later wrote that "the provisional government owes its existence to an armed invasion by the United States. By an act of war. a substantial wrong has been done."

                              President Cleveland's recommendation that the monarchy be restored was rejected by Congress. The House of Representatives voted to censure the U.S. minister to Hawaii and adopted a resolution opposing annexation. But Congress did not act to restore the monarchy. In 1894, Sanford Dole, who was beginning his pineapple business, declared himself president of the Republic of Hawaii without a popular vote. The new government found the queen guilty of treason and sentenced her to five years of hard labor and a $5,000 fine. While the sentence of hard labor was not carried out, the queen was placed under house arrest.

                              The Republican Party platform in the presidential election of 1896 called for the annexation of Hawaii. Petitions for a popular vote in Hawaii were ignored. Fearing that he lacked two-thirds support for annexation in the Senate, the new Republican president, William McKinley, called for a joint resolution of Congress (the same way that the United States had acquired Texas). With the country aroused by the Spanish American War and political leaders fearful that the islands might be annexed by Japan, the joint resolution easily passed Congress. Hawaii officially became a U.S. territory in 1900.

                              When Capt. James Cooke, the British explorer, arrived in Hawaii in 1778, there were about 300,000 Hawaiians on the islands however, infectious diseases reduced the native population. Today, about 20 percent of Hawaii's people are of native Hawaiian ancestry, and only about 10,000 are of pure Hawaiian descent. Native Hawaiians were poorer, less healthy, and less educated than members of other major ethnic groups on the islands.

                              Sugar growers, who dominated the islands' economy, imported thousands of immigrant laborers first from China, then Japan, then Portuguese from Madeira and the Azores, followed by Puerto Ricans, Koreans, and most recently Filipinos. As a result, Hawaii has one of the world's most multicultural populations.

                              In 1993, a joined Congressional resolution, signed by President Bill Clinton, apologized for the U.S. role in the overthrow. The House approved the resolution by voice vote. The Senate passed it 65 to 34 votes.


                              Dokument: Daniel Webster, Secretary of State, on July 14, 1851, wrote to Luther Severance, representing the United States at Honolulu:

                              Mr. Webster went further, directing Mr. Severance to return to the Hawaiian Government an act of contingent surrender to the United States, placed in his hands by that Government, and specifically warned Mr. Severance against encouraging in any quarter the idea that the Islands would be annexed to the United States.

                              Up to January 16, 1893, the broad principles laid down in Mr. Webster’s quoted words were not only the rule of conduct for the Government of the United States in its relations with the Government of Hawaii but they were also recognized by those who desire, as well as by those who do not desire, the annexation of the Hawaiian archipelago to this country. The state papers of Secretary Marcy and Secretary Blame, and the published utterances of other distinguished citizens of the United States who have regarded annexation as the ultimate and desirable destiny of these islands of the Pacific, will be searched to no purpose for indications of a belief that annexation should be brought about otherwise than in fidelity to treaty obligations, openly in the face of day, in entire good faith and known to all nations, and without the menace or actual application of superior military force. A belief to the contrary is so repugnant to the traditions and temper of the American people, and so clearly involves adherence to the theory of insular colonial expansion by conquest, that one may safely assert it will find scant favor among the people of the United States.

                              The dethronement of Queen Liliuokalani and the establishment of an oligarchy on the island of Oahu, “until terms of union with the United States of America have been negotiated and agreed upon,” were effected on the afternoon of Tuesday, January 17, 1893, in the presence of a considerable body of the naval forces of the United States, armed with Gatling guns, and stationed in the immediate vicinity and in plain sight of the Palace and Government Building, where the so-called revolution was consummated.

                              The local causes of this so-called revolution, remote and proximate, are relatively immaterial to the United States. They, with the general issue of annexation, dwindle before the question: What were the purpose and the effect of the presence of the forces of the United States in Honolulu on January the sixteenth and seventeenth?

                              The recognized government of a nation with which we were at peace had officially notified Minister Stevens, our representative, of its ability to preserve order and protect property. The Vice-Consul-General of the United States, Mr. W. Porter Boyd, testifies that no uneasiness was felt at the consulate, and that the landing of the troops was a complete surprise to him. All the signs of street life betokened good order, and, soon after the blue-jackets had trailed their artillery through the streets, the population of Honolulu was enjoying the regular Monday evening out-of-door concert of the Hawaiian Band. The landing of the troops was promptly followed by the protests of the proper authorities of the kingdom and the island, transmitted officially to Minister Stevens. No evidence has been presented to Commissioner Blount to show that there was any apprehension or any desire for the presence ashore of the men of the Boston under arms, except on the part of the members of the Citizens Committee of Safety. The matter was not referred to at the mass meeting of the foreign population, organized by that committee, and held but a few hours before the troops landed.

                              The Committee of Safety, at whose request Mr. Stevens summoned the troops, did not prefer that request as American citizens. It could not, for only five of its thirteen members owed allegiance to and were under the protection of the United States. By the admission of several of their own number to Mr. Blount, they were engaged in plotting secretly the overthrow of the government and the establishment of themselves in power until they could transfer the Islands to the United States, and Minister Stevens was in their full confidence at the time they asked for, and he ordered, the lauding of the troops. They had been threatened with arrest by the government they planned to overthrow, and he had promised to protect them. The troops of the Boston were the only means he had of keeping good that promise, and he did not scruple to use them for it. But even to the thirteen engaged in the plot the danger of arrest was not so imminent as to deter them from requesting Mr. Stevens not to land the troops too soon for their purposes. Mr. W.0. Smith, the attorney-general of the Provisional Government and a leader in the committee, testifies that at a conference on Monday afternoon, at four o’clock, “our plans had not been perfected, our papers had not been completed, and, after a hasty discussion--the time being short--it was decided that it was impossible for us to take the necessary steps, and we should request that the troops be not landed until the next morning, the hour in the morning being immaterial--whether it was nine, eight, or six o’clock in the morning--but we must have further time to prevent bloodshed.” Nevertheless the “Boston’s” men landed at five o’clock, Mr. Stevens being apparently the only man on the Island of Oahu who deemed their presence necessary at that time.

                              To keep pace with Mr. Stevens haste the Committee of Safety met secretly a few hours later and selected Judge Sanford B. Dole as the civil head of their oligarchy, and Mr. John II. Soper, a citizen of the United States, as the head of its military forces, then in existence only in the imagination of the conclave. Mr. Soper admits that he did not agree to accept the command of the provisional “army” until he was assured that Minister Stevens would recognize the Provisional Government on Tuesday. On their part both Judge Dole and Minister Stevens apparently did not have entire confidence in the prowess of “General” Soper, as witness the following letter to Judge Dole the next day:

                              U. S. Legation, Jan. 17, 1893. Think Captain Wiltse will endeavor to maintain order and protect life and property, but do not think he would take command of the men of the Provisional Government. Will have him come to the Legation soon as possible and take his opinion and inform you soon as possible.

                              Yours truly, John L. Stevens.

                              The purpose of the presence of the blue-jackets, in the minds of the committee that asked for it, is summed up in the admission of Judge Dole that when the troops were first furnished they could not have gotten along without their aid, and of Mr. Henry Waterhouse of the Committee:

                              The forces of the United States, thus brought ashore against the protest of a friendly Power, at the request of men engaged in a plot to overturn that Power, were stationed, remote from the residences of Americans, less than a hundred yards from the Government Building, designated by Minister Stevens as the place in which the Provisional Government should be established to secure his recognition, and in plain sight of the Queens palace windows. Admiral Sketrett sums up the disposition of the forces thus:

                              The Queen was dethroned and the oligarchy established by proclamation, read by a citizen of the United States, shortly before three o’clock, and recognized, in the name of the United States, by Minister Stevens before it was in possession of any point held in force by the Queen’s government. With more prudence Captain Wiltse, in command of the “Boston,” declined to recognize it until it came into possession of the military posts of the Queen, as it did by her voluntary surrender of them early in the evening. Her surrender was in terms to the superior force of the United States, and until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon the facts being presented to it, undo the action of its representative, and on this understanding it was accepted by the junta.

                              On February 25, 1843, King Kamehameha III ceded the Hawaiian Islands to Lord George Paulet under duress of the guns of Her Majesty’s ship “Carysfort,” subject to review by the government of Queen Victoria, and the British flag was raised over Honolulu. On July 31 of the same year Rear Admiral Richard Thomas, representing the Queen, declined to accept the cession, and recognized the King as the lawful sovereign of the Islands, stating that this act of restoration should be accepted by the King

                              The people of Hawaii have dedicated one of the public squares of Honolulu to the memory of this just and generous restoration of their national life.

                              The questions raised by Commissioner Blount’s report—and the statement of facts given in these pages rests on the testimony of annexationists--take precedence of any question of territorial expansion. Through the action of their representative the United States were placed on January16 and 17 in the position of armed invaders of a friendly state, giving countenance and moral support to a plot to overturn a Government, which could not otherwise have succeeded and would not otherwise have been attempted. The character of that Government does not enter into the question of the observance of our treaty obligations to it or into that consideration which is due to the weak from the strong in the mind of every American.

                              Additional information: The North American Review , Volume 157, Issue 445


                              9/11 Anniversary and Memorial

                              On December 18, 2001, Congress approved naming September 11 “Patriot Day” to commemorate the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. In 2009, Congress named September 11 a National Day of Service and Remembrance.

                              The first memorials to September 11 came in the immediate wake of the attacks, with candlelight vigils and flower tributes at U.S. embassies around the world. In Great Britain, Queen Elizabeth sang the American national anthem during the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace. Rio de Janeiro put up billboards showing the city’s Christ the Redeemer statue embracing the New York City skyline.

                              For the first anniversary of the attacks in New York City in 2002, two bright columns of light were shot up into the sky from where the Twin Towers once stood. The “Tribute in Light” then became an annual installation run by the Municipal Art Society of New York. On clear nights, the beams are visible from over 60 miles away.

                              A World Trade Center Site Memorial Competition was held to select an appropriate permanent memorial to the victims of 9/11. The winning design by Michael Arad, “Reflecting Absence,” now sits outside the museum in an eight-acre park. It consists of two reflecting pools with waterfalls rushing down where the Twin Towers once rose into the sky. 

                              The names of all 2,983 victims are engraved on the 152 bronze panels surrounding the pools, arranged by where individuals were on the day of the attacks, so coworkers and people on the same flight are memorialized together. The site was opened to the public on September 11, 2011, to commemorate the 10-year anniversary of 9/11. The National September 11 Memorial & Museum followed, opening on the original World Trade Center site in May 2014. Theਏreedom Tower, also on the original World Trade Center site, opened in November 2014.