The total number of serving British servicemen killed in Afghanistan, since 2001, has now risen to 48.
Yesterday, Royal Marine Jonathan Holland, of 45 Commando, was killed by a mine strike in the extremely unsafe Sangin Valley (Helmand Province). Today, a so-far un-named Royal Marine, from 42 Commando, died of wounds sustained on convoy duty at the beginning of the month.
Our thoughts should go out to their friends and family, at their time of grief, as should our gratitude.
Lest we forget!
Thursday 22 February 2007
Wednesday 21 February 2007
Prince Harry to Iraq?
The Royal Family tend to get a pretty bad press in this country. However, unlike Tony Blair's eldest son, who has recently spent some fun time in the States working as 'a political intern', both Prince William and Prince Harry have gone through officer training at Sandhurst.
Now it looks like that Prince Harry will be accompanying his cavalry Regiment to Basra. If Prince Harry does accompany "A" Squadron, with the Blues and Royals, then he'll be closely following in his Uncle's footsteps who served in the Falklands.
His great-grandfather, the future King George VI, saw action during World War One, and his grandfather Prince George Duke of Kent died on active service, with the RAF, in 1942.
However, despite the 'minor' royals serving during times of conflict, long gone are the days when the reigning monarch took to the field. The last to do so was George II, who took command against the French at Dettingen in 1743. The Blues and Royals were actually present at this victory during the War of the Austrian Succession. As such, it would be highly unlikely that Prince William, as a future monarch, will be sent anywhere near the war zone.
Now it looks like that Prince Harry will be accompanying his cavalry Regiment to Basra. If Prince Harry does accompany "A" Squadron, with the Blues and Royals, then he'll be closely following in his Uncle's footsteps who served in the Falklands.
His great-grandfather, the future King George VI, saw action during World War One, and his grandfather Prince George Duke of Kent died on active service, with the RAF, in 1942.
However, despite the 'minor' royals serving during times of conflict, long gone are the days when the reigning monarch took to the field. The last to do so was George II, who took command against the French at Dettingen in 1743. The Blues and Royals were actually present at this victory during the War of the Austrian Succession. As such, it would be highly unlikely that Prince William, as a future monarch, will be sent anywhere near the war zone.
Tuesday 20 February 2007
The Peasants are Revolting!!!
AD1381, and the peasants of England were getting a bit upset with their rulers. In the Essex village of Fobbing, they were so upset that they forcibly evicted the visiting tax collector. So started the Peasants Revolt.
Fast forward to today. An on-line petition, on the government's own web site, had over 1.6 million signatories rejecting the notion of even greater 'stealth taxes' intended for the motorist. Notably, that of charging the driver to use public roads. The Prime Minister has already made it clear that he will ignore the call from a sizeable proportion of the country, for no such tax, and that he will enforce any damn tax he choses to foist upon us.
Back to 1381 again. The taxes that had caused so much contention, went to the funding of the continuing war against the French. This might have gained some sympathy then, and probably would now, but the problem was that this particular tax was regressive in nature. The authorities had deemed it fair that the highest in the land should pay the same as the lowest. One shilling!
Any road charging, that this government intends to introduce, will mean that the richest can continue to travel with little meaningful inconvenience, whilst us mere peasants will have our travels restricted by the grasping minions of New Labour. We will all pay the same, despite income or need.
Once again, as I have written before, this government fails to learn the lessons of history. Those revolting peasants murdered the three establishment figures considered most culpable; Simon Sudbury, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Robert Hales (the King's Treasurer).
Now, I'm not advocating that we all descend on London and 'top' the Prime Minister and Chancellor in a fit of pique. But what is clear, from the ICM poll today, is that Gordon Brown's reign will be a short one indeed! No doubt, both Blair and Brown will be calling us, the plaebian electorate, revolting.
Fast forward to today. An on-line petition, on the government's own web site, had over 1.6 million signatories rejecting the notion of even greater 'stealth taxes' intended for the motorist. Notably, that of charging the driver to use public roads. The Prime Minister has already made it clear that he will ignore the call from a sizeable proportion of the country, for no such tax, and that he will enforce any damn tax he choses to foist upon us.
Back to 1381 again. The taxes that had caused so much contention, went to the funding of the continuing war against the French. This might have gained some sympathy then, and probably would now, but the problem was that this particular tax was regressive in nature. The authorities had deemed it fair that the highest in the land should pay the same as the lowest. One shilling!
Any road charging, that this government intends to introduce, will mean that the richest can continue to travel with little meaningful inconvenience, whilst us mere peasants will have our travels restricted by the grasping minions of New Labour. We will all pay the same, despite income or need.
Once again, as I have written before, this government fails to learn the lessons of history. Those revolting peasants murdered the three establishment figures considered most culpable; Simon Sudbury, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Robert Hales (the King's Treasurer).
Now, I'm not advocating that we all descend on London and 'top' the Prime Minister and Chancellor in a fit of pique. But what is clear, from the ICM poll today, is that Gordon Brown's reign will be a short one indeed! No doubt, both Blair and Brown will be calling us, the plaebian electorate, revolting.
Still No Justice for Military Policemen
Despite the speed in which the current British government attempts to prosecute British soldiers for any unfounded allegations made in Iraq, it seems that this approach does not extend to those who murder our servicemen.
It seems a long time ago that we heard of the murders of Sgt Simon Hamilton-Jewell, Cpl Russell Aston, Cpl Paul Long, Cpl Simon Miller, L/Cpl Benjamin Hyde, and L/Cpl Tom Keys. These serving military policemen were killed in June 2003, after a mob of 400 Iraqis surrounded, and stormed, an unprotected police station at Majar al-Kabir.
The fact that the MoD failed to adequately arm and support these soldiers is deplorable in itself. However, the failure of Tony Blair to keep a promise to the families, that the perpetrators would be brought to justice, is even less forgiveable. This despite Geoff Hoon, the then Defence Secretary, having told the families that "we have the names of those responsible". There can be no excuses, and this government must realise where it's priorities lie.
It seems a long time ago that we heard of the murders of Sgt Simon Hamilton-Jewell, Cpl Russell Aston, Cpl Paul Long, Cpl Simon Miller, L/Cpl Benjamin Hyde, and L/Cpl Tom Keys. These serving military policemen were killed in June 2003, after a mob of 400 Iraqis surrounded, and stormed, an unprotected police station at Majar al-Kabir.
The fact that the MoD failed to adequately arm and support these soldiers is deplorable in itself. However, the failure of Tony Blair to keep a promise to the families, that the perpetrators would be brought to justice, is even less forgiveable. This despite Geoff Hoon, the then Defence Secretary, having told the families that "we have the names of those responsible". There can be no excuses, and this government must realise where it's priorities lie.
Working Lunch Should Stick to Finance and Consumer Affairs
One of the big fallacies is that the first Viking raid, in England, was at the monastery of Lindisfarne. It doesn't help when the leading daily finance and consumer programme, on the BBC, helps to maintain such myths. I personally love 'Working Lunch', and is one of the few programmes on the BBC (Bloated Broadcasting Corporation) worth watching. Still, the subject of the BBC and 'stealth taxes' should be left for another day. However, 'Working Lunch' got it wrong yesterday.
Lindisfarne was attacked, and destroyed, in 793AD. This would make it the second known raid, as my home island of Portland was attacked some five years previous to this. The actual year is not known, although a span of four years is widely accepted, but what is known is that the King of Wessex's Reeve was killed in the attack at Church Ope.
The Reeve was a particularly important man in Saxon society, and was the King's representative in the community. In particular, the Reeve performed the function of judge in court cases, as well as over-seeing parish council meetings, etc.
Lindisfarne was attacked, and destroyed, in 793AD. This would make it the second known raid, as my home island of Portland was attacked some five years previous to this. The actual year is not known, although a span of four years is widely accepted, but what is known is that the King of Wessex's Reeve was killed in the attack at Church Ope.
The Reeve was a particularly important man in Saxon society, and was the King's representative in the community. In particular, the Reeve performed the function of judge in court cases, as well as over-seeing parish council meetings, etc.
Monday 19 February 2007
The End of the Line
Our current government has a lot to answer for. One of those things is the way that they have trampled on our traditions. Whilst we have been settling into our new home, one of the events that didn't pass me by was the disbandment of a number of regiments; including the one from my own county.
In the name of rationalisation, the government chose to merge the Devonshire and Dorset Light Infantry, the Royal Gloucestershire Berkshire and Wiltshire Light Infantry, the Light Infantry, and the Royal Green Jackets. This new regiment will simply be called 'The Rifles'.
The original Rifles were a number of regiments that combined both Light Infantry and Rifle Regiments. These regiments were established, by General Sir John Moore (1761-1809), at Shorncliffe in the early 1800s. Whatever the government, and Ministry of Defence might say, the current regiment has no relationship to the original concept, and is merely an exrcise in cost cutting.
For 'The Dorsets', this is a particularly a sad time. This fine regiment dated back to 1689, as the 39th Regiment of Foot. Battle honours included Plassey, Gibraltar, Albuhera, Vittoria, Pyrenees, Nivelle, Nive, Orthes, Maharajpore and Sevastopol. In 1881 they were combined with the 54th Regiment of Foot where they saw action in South Africa during the Boer War, and in all theatres of the war during the 1st and 2nd World Wars. They were merged with the Devonshire Regiment in 1958, and were to suffer the first British Army mortality in Northern Ireland at the beginning of the 1970s.
So, a sad ending for the regiment that was 'Primus in Indis'!
In the name of rationalisation, the government chose to merge the Devonshire and Dorset Light Infantry, the Royal Gloucestershire Berkshire and Wiltshire Light Infantry, the Light Infantry, and the Royal Green Jackets. This new regiment will simply be called 'The Rifles'.
The original Rifles were a number of regiments that combined both Light Infantry and Rifle Regiments. These regiments were established, by General Sir John Moore (1761-1809), at Shorncliffe in the early 1800s. Whatever the government, and Ministry of Defence might say, the current regiment has no relationship to the original concept, and is merely an exrcise in cost cutting.
For 'The Dorsets', this is a particularly a sad time. This fine regiment dated back to 1689, as the 39th Regiment of Foot. Battle honours included Plassey, Gibraltar, Albuhera, Vittoria, Pyrenees, Nivelle, Nive, Orthes, Maharajpore and Sevastopol. In 1881 they were combined with the 54th Regiment of Foot where they saw action in South Africa during the Boer War, and in all theatres of the war during the 1st and 2nd World Wars. They were merged with the Devonshire Regiment in 1958, and were to suffer the first British Army mortality in Northern Ireland at the beginning of the 1970s.
So, a sad ending for the regiment that was 'Primus in Indis'!
Thursday 1 February 2007
Captain Calthrop and the Art of War
Captain Calthrop is probably best known for the rather poor translation of Sun Tzu’s ‘Art of War’ in 1905, and subsequently revised in 1908. Whilst the Giles translation has become the standard text, Calthrop’s was the first. For that, we should be grateful.
Having become a little annoyed with all the criticisms of Calthrop, I wanted to find out more about him. To be honest, there doesn’t seem much to find. Everard Ferguson Calthrop served in the Royal Field Artillery (R.F.A.), during the Boer War, and then worked for the Foreign Service in Japan.
Calthrop’s translation of the ‘Art of War’ was written whilst he was in Japan, and was also to provide translations on Japanese military reports of the Russo-Japanese War for the Royal United Services Institute.
However, during the Great War, as Lieutenant-Colonel he was officer commanding of the 38th Brigade Royal Field Artillery (R.F.A.). He was killed in action at Ypres on 19th December 1915, and is laid to rest at Ypres Reservoir Cemetery.
Having become a little annoyed with all the criticisms of Calthrop, I wanted to find out more about him. To be honest, there doesn’t seem much to find. Everard Ferguson Calthrop served in the Royal Field Artillery (R.F.A.), during the Boer War, and then worked for the Foreign Service in Japan.
Calthrop’s translation of the ‘Art of War’ was written whilst he was in Japan, and was also to provide translations on Japanese military reports of the Russo-Japanese War for the Royal United Services Institute.
However, during the Great War, as Lieutenant-Colonel he was officer commanding of the 38th Brigade Royal Field Artillery (R.F.A.). He was killed in action at Ypres on 19th December 1915, and is laid to rest at Ypres Reservoir Cemetery.
Regionalisation and the The Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy
As the government continues in its attempt to push through their plans for Regional Assemblies, within England, they attempt to suggest that this is a return to some previous system of political representation. This is of course absurd, and demonstrates a distinct lack of historical nowledge.
By the time of the Roman invasion, Celtic Britain had reached the third stage of Adam Smith’s four stages of economic development; farming. Although the Celts, in Albion at least, had past the stages of hunting and pasturage, they had yet to develop the concepts of commerce. Ostensibly, Albion was a land settled by tribes, and would have had no concept of a greater community. After the Romans left Britannia, an agrarian society was subject to invasions by an assortment of Angles, Saxons, and Jutes from approximately 450A.D.
These newly colonised ‘regions’ were to form an Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy; independent kingdoms namely Cornwall, East Anglia, Kent, Mercia, Northumbria, Sussex and Wessex. To further confuse issues, Angleland’s western kingdom of Cornwall was to remain predominantly Celtic in nature, whilst the eastern side of the country was to absorb Norsemen from a number of Scandinavian kingdoms.
The last successful invasion of Angleland by the Normans in 1066, and subsequent conquest and subjugation of the Anglo-Saxon peoples, saw the historic seats of power subjugated to an ever-increasing centralisation of power. So, when the government talks about returning power to the regions I ask myself, what the hell are they talking about.
By the time of the Roman invasion, Celtic Britain had reached the third stage of Adam Smith’s four stages of economic development; farming. Although the Celts, in Albion at least, had past the stages of hunting and pasturage, they had yet to develop the concepts of commerce. Ostensibly, Albion was a land settled by tribes, and would have had no concept of a greater community. After the Romans left Britannia, an agrarian society was subject to invasions by an assortment of Angles, Saxons, and Jutes from approximately 450A.D.
These newly colonised ‘regions’ were to form an Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy; independent kingdoms namely Cornwall, East Anglia, Kent, Mercia, Northumbria, Sussex and Wessex. To further confuse issues, Angleland’s western kingdom of Cornwall was to remain predominantly Celtic in nature, whilst the eastern side of the country was to absorb Norsemen from a number of Scandinavian kingdoms.
The last successful invasion of Angleland by the Normans in 1066, and subsequent conquest and subjugation of the Anglo-Saxon peoples, saw the historic seats of power subjugated to an ever-increasing centralisation of power. So, when the government talks about returning power to the regions I ask myself, what the hell are they talking about.
Military Strength v The Will to Win
It is reasonable to assume that, in general terms, the country with greatest resources will invariably win a protracted war. The American Civil War instantly springs to mind whereby Federal resources, in conjunction with an ability to deprive the Confederacy of theirs, ensured an eventual win.
In cases whereby the sides were pretty much even, although resources may have not been, attrition is very much the name of the game. During the Napoleonic Wars, Britain was able to maintain trading links around the world. Despite the uneven resources in manpower, British economic might and geographical position allowed the continued ‘bank rolling’ of the war until the French war effort eventually collapsed.
However, sometimes it is necessary to set aside logic and wonder where things went wrong. During the American Revolution, Great Britain appeared to have all the things going for it. Wealth, manpower and support from a sizeable proportion of the population. But this brings in another factor; which sees the biggest side losing against all the odds. That of the ‘will to win’. There are times when the lesser power demonstrates that it refuses to be beaten, and that the larger protagonist decides continuation is not worth the cost.
During the American Revolution, such a time came during the winter of 1777 at Valley Forge. Despite, numerous losses in battle, from the cold, and from disease, an Army that should have simply ceased to exist was, by the summer of 1778, one to reckon with. I would argue that the Continental Army, in itself, was never particularly effective. But that is for another day. What is important is that a continued existence sent out a statement to the British government; “You can’t make us go away, and we’re not going to do so!”
The Americans were to find this out during the North Vietnamese Thet Offensive, in April 1968. Although the Thet Offensive was a military failure for the North Vietnamese, it sent a message to the American public. The same one sent to the British, some 200 years previously. “You can’t make us go away, and we’re not going to do so!”
Unfortunately, Allied Forces have now encountered the same problem in Iraq. Countries such as Spain and Italy had already made the decision that costs were too high. Now it appears that the United States has once again reached the same conclusion, that the costs are just not worth it, and is beginning to initiate the process of withdrawal.
In cases whereby the sides were pretty much even, although resources may have not been, attrition is very much the name of the game. During the Napoleonic Wars, Britain was able to maintain trading links around the world. Despite the uneven resources in manpower, British economic might and geographical position allowed the continued ‘bank rolling’ of the war until the French war effort eventually collapsed.
However, sometimes it is necessary to set aside logic and wonder where things went wrong. During the American Revolution, Great Britain appeared to have all the things going for it. Wealth, manpower and support from a sizeable proportion of the population. But this brings in another factor; which sees the biggest side losing against all the odds. That of the ‘will to win’. There are times when the lesser power demonstrates that it refuses to be beaten, and that the larger protagonist decides continuation is not worth the cost.
During the American Revolution, such a time came during the winter of 1777 at Valley Forge. Despite, numerous losses in battle, from the cold, and from disease, an Army that should have simply ceased to exist was, by the summer of 1778, one to reckon with. I would argue that the Continental Army, in itself, was never particularly effective. But that is for another day. What is important is that a continued existence sent out a statement to the British government; “You can’t make us go away, and we’re not going to do so!”
The Americans were to find this out during the North Vietnamese Thet Offensive, in April 1968. Although the Thet Offensive was a military failure for the North Vietnamese, it sent a message to the American public. The same one sent to the British, some 200 years previously. “You can’t make us go away, and we’re not going to do so!”
Unfortunately, Allied Forces have now encountered the same problem in Iraq. Countries such as Spain and Italy had already made the decision that costs were too high. Now it appears that the United States has once again reached the same conclusion, that the costs are just not worth it, and is beginning to initiate the process of withdrawal.
King Weiwang and the Implementation of Tax
Yesterday, I mentioned King Weiwang and his relationship with one of my favourite philosophers; Zhuang Zi. I thought I might mention King Weiwang again, whilst the subject was still fresh in my mind, and because he is of interest to me for several reasons.
King Weiwang was part of the Zhou dynasty, and reputedly ruled from 378-343 B.C in what is now Shandong Province. He is of interest to me because of his part in the Warring States Period, whereby the Warring States supposedly saw innovations in the fields of commerce, agriculture, and iron-working. It is interesting to see how often developments are achieved in time of war, despite the disruption that societies are forced to deal with.
King Weiwang’s particular contribution to the aforementioned developments was the overseeing of complimentary reforms in the tax system and the military. This, of course, is not without parallel in the western world. William Pitt ‘The Younger’ introduced fundamental tax reform by levying Income Tax to fund the war against France and her allies. Abraham Lincoln did likewise to help fund the United States in their struggles against the Confederacy. King Weiwang just happened to do it some 2,150 years earlier!
King Weiwang was part of the Zhou dynasty, and reputedly ruled from 378-343 B.C in what is now Shandong Province. He is of interest to me because of his part in the Warring States Period, whereby the Warring States supposedly saw innovations in the fields of commerce, agriculture, and iron-working. It is interesting to see how often developments are achieved in time of war, despite the disruption that societies are forced to deal with.
King Weiwang’s particular contribution to the aforementioned developments was the overseeing of complimentary reforms in the tax system and the military. This, of course, is not without parallel in the western world. William Pitt ‘The Younger’ introduced fundamental tax reform by levying Income Tax to fund the war against France and her allies. Abraham Lincoln did likewise to help fund the United States in their struggles against the Confederacy. King Weiwang just happened to do it some 2,150 years earlier!
Up and Running
Just a warm welcome to those who have been redirected from my previous site, or have just found my 'blog' for the first time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)