Subject: WWII-L Digest - 2 Apr 1995 to 3 Apr 1995

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 00:00:51 -0400

There are 49 messages totalling 2556 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Military collections (2)
  2. Museums and collectors...a long reply. (2)
  3. Das Boot (6)
  4. Great WWII movies
  5. GEN: Bataan, again.
  6. Polish forces in the RAF during the Battle of Britain. (2)
  7. Hitler's Body (2)
  8. INF: USN Chronology 04-03-95
  9. WWII flicks
 10. INF: Search service for discharged service personnel
 11. INF: USN Chronology 04-02-95 (2)
 12. MacArthur/Philippines (2)
 13. Women's WWII Literature
 14. RE WEAP WW2 Rifles
 15. WWII Movies (3)
 16. Confirmation of Subscription
 17. WW2 Rifles
 18. Accidental Shootings
 19. Tactics (?) Assurance (2)
 20. WWII Reenactment and Event Schedule (3)
 21. Re[4]: Tactics (?) Assurance of Victory
 22. What If?
 23. WWII-Navy USS JUNEAU (CL-52)
 24. OKINAWA  COMMEMORATION
 25. Iwo Jima
 26. WWII Movies -Reply
 27. [INF] USAAF 4 APR 45
 28. History: Enfield Rifles (Long)
 29. Movies: Heimat and Stalingrad (was Re: Das Boot)
 30. INF: 50 Years Ago - 03-APR-1945
 31. Inf: Japanese Apology
 32. WWII Reenactment and Event Schedule -Reply
 33. Japanese midget subs at Pearl

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 13:51:46 +1000
From:    John Foster <[email-masked]>
Subject: Military collections

Hello to All
            On the subject of Military souvenirs and memorabilia etc I have
to agree with Jodi.Museums have fads and as the recent Smithsonian debacle
so do the directors and historians at museums.What is important at one time
may be put into storage later and if finance is a problem then so is
conservation practices.Here in Australia we have a National War Memorial
which I believe is our most visited museeum and or memorial.Much stuff was
stored for this museum from Both world wars in warehouses etc and there were
crates of helmets uniforms etc and 44 gallon droms of Japanese swords to
give ypu the picture.
            Recently we have had several big commemmorations and special
events and are planning more.So where can the armed forces go for advice on
uniforms and actual items to display or to recreate.You would say the
National War Memorial ,right.Wrong! How about the army navy etc and their
various museeums and experts.Wrong!For all this information and supply they
have had to go to private collectors.The museums don't have the info and all
their vast stocks have perished over the years so they are no longer fit to
use or just no longer.
            We have a regional museum and the local council bought a large
military collection to use as a tourist attraction and as a large reserve of
material for the museum.A promised grant was torpedoed my a local politician
who didn't agree with the purchase and used it as a vehicle to discredit
some party rivals for his job and so it was left in storage to rot.Now that
there is a bit of interest about the council is using the opportunity to
disperse the collection on the quite.It is not wanted in the new museum
because the fellow in charge has a different vision and is not "into"
military history.
            What I am trying to say is politics and academics can ruin
everything between them at times. To fellow collectors and local societies I
say bless you all and keep up the good work.After all most museums only have
collections to exhibit because some collector put it together and then
donated it.
Regards
John Foster

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 00:16:10 -0500
From:    "Robert J. Granvin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Military collections

In message <[email-masked]> World War II Discussion
List writes:
> Hello to All
>             On the subject of Military souvenirs and memorabilia etc I have
> to agree with Jodi.Museums have fads and as the recent Smithsonian debacle
> so do the directors and historians at museums.What is important at one time
> may be put into storage later and if finance is a problem then so is
> conservation practices.Here in Australia we have a National War Memorial
> which I believe is our most visited museeum and or memorial.Much stuff was
> stored for this museum from Both world wars in warehouses etc and there were
> crates of helmets uniforms etc and 44 gallon droms of Japanese swords to
> give ypu the picture.

Fads?  Museums display what is important at the time or what is important to
present a picture for a project.  The Smithsonian, for all the flap it got
over one (and ONLY one) display, is a superb world-class museum.  They made
some serious mistakes on one major display, but even on that note, every
museum is due a mistake once every hundred years or so...  What's important
is to keep a staff in the museum that _understands_ the importance of history
and ignores "peer presure."

The fact that there are huge sums of artifacts in storage is a good sign.
They are being preserved, even if not on display every moment of every day.

>             Recently we have had several big commemmorations and special
> events and are planning more.So where can the armed forces go for advice on
> uniforms and actual items to display or to recreate.You would say the
> National War Memorial ,right.Wrong! How about the army navy etc and their
> various museeums and experts.Wrong!For all this information and supply they
> have had to go to private collectors.The museums don't have the info and all
> their vast stocks have perished over the years so they are no longer fit to
> use or just no longer.

I would then put those museums on notice, and suggest that you don't use the
experiences of a small numbers of museums to reflect all.

I (and we) have done a LOT of research through museums and the information and
artifacts that are not on display.  Other than SOME (but not all) military
archives, we have never had any difficulty working with museums and the
military.

This isn't meant to slight what we can accomplish through private collectors
and researchers... They tend to often be the best source of information _on
specific issues and topics._  But when I want paperwork, it's usually the
big museums and archives that are best suited to provide them.

Know what is almost always the problem when you can't get very far with
museums, archives or the military?  It's lack of contacts.  You have to build
your contacts and reputation just like any other area.  It is sometimes easier
to work with private collectors, but that doesn't make them better.  You will
also find private collectors who are totally and irreversably un-helpful.
And then you'll get some that are so helpful so as to almost be considered
rash.

>             We have a regional museum and the local council bought a large
> military collection to use as a tourist attraction and as a large reserve of
> material for the museum.A promised grant was torpedoed my a local politician
> who didn't agree with the purchase and used it as a vehicle to discredit
> some party rivals for his job and so it was left in storage to rot.Now that
> there is a bit of interest about the council is using the opportunity to
> disperse the collection on the quite.It is not wanted in the new museum
> because the fellow in charge has a different vision and is not "into"
> military history.

First, it sounds like the "tourist attraction" concept was put together by
people who may have little or no expertise except in tourism.  If that's
the goal, fine... But tourism isn't the primary goal of a museum and should
never be.  If it happens to accomplish its goal and tourism (and that is NOT
hard to do), then super.

But if you have a museum director that controls the direction of the museum
because of his personal beliefs, then the museum BOARD needs to get some
teeth.  If the display is directed by a board of tourism, then it's no longer
a museum.

IMHO.

BTW:  Local support is, of course, very important.  If the museum can find
a way to include the local community in the funding of the museum, then the
museum is going to do a better job.  Keep in mind that the BASIC goal of the
museum is totally compatible with the basic goal of the local politicians:

The politicians want the museum to bring a lot of people into the community
to visit the museum.  The museum wants to bring a lot of people into the
community to visit the museum.  When museum attendance is high and grows,
the museum benefits.  When museum attendance is high and grows, the community
benefits.  The more the museum and community benefits, the more the museum
can collect, preserve and EXPAND to display more.

That's why MOST communities that support local museums stay OUT of the
direction of the museum.  Let the museum do what it does, does best and
quit messing with it.  As a success, everyone wins.

>             What I am trying to say is politics and academics can ruin
> everything between them at times. To fellow collectors and local societies I
> say bless you all and keep up the good work.After all most museums only have
> collections to exhibit because some collector put it together and then
> donated it.

When politics ruin a museum or display, it is almost always internal politics.
Clearly the thought of the Smithsonian is the example here.  The politics were
internal, not pressured from outside political influence.

There are good and bad in both cases.  What I object to is auctioning off
historically very important artifacts, because they almost always go to
private collectors and very often, though not always, end up not available
to the public or at least not available to the masses.  Museums exist to make
as much as possible available to the public.  Private collectors exist for the
full spectrum of reasons.  Those that place their collections on display are
to be commended.  Those that collect important artifacts to be stored in a
vault for investment reasons drive me nuts.

Local historical societies are very important, but their primary goal is to
preserve _local_ history -- a VERY important goal, because that's the thread
that makes all collections work.  We work a lot with the local and state
historical societies to get the information that is needed as well as to
supplement their details of local personalities and events.

But your opinion of museums, how they come into existence and/or why they
exist is entirely off base.  Most museums struggle for YEARS to collect
artifacts of importance.  Sure, almost all of it is donated, but it is almost
always one piece at a time.  Museums RARELY obtain entire collections.  When
you do get a complete collection, it's like a Christmas you've never seen
before.  Most museums rarely, if ever, experience that.  It also tends to
ignore that nearly all museums lend their artifacts to other museums.  Perhaps
your local museum has 10,000 pieces related to WWII that you can't see.  But
you may not realize that 500 of them are on display in Boston and next year,
another 1,000 are being loaned to a museum in France.  When I visit a museum
and see a display that says "Courtesy Museum of London," I am very grateful
to the Museum of London.  When I see "Courtesy collection of Mrs. Smith," I
am equally grateful to Mrs. Smith.

When museums go bad, they need to be fixed -- but they usually CAN be fixed.
When private collectors go bad, you can't do a thing about it.

So yes... To the collectors who are in it for the right reasons, God bless.
But I can't understand the castigation of museums.  That's the infastructure
that puts things in circulation.  But like a living body, the arteries are
just as important in the long run as the capillaries and the major organs.

/bob -- speaking as a minor player in the American Airpower Heritage Museum
and one of the major players in the development of a major aviation museum
in Minnesota.

--
Robert J. Granvin
Southern Minnesota Wing Confederate Air Force

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 02:26:05 -0400
From:    "Matthew R. Burchette" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Museums and collectors...a long reply.

Doug I have sent this to you direct 'cause it is so long but I have posted it
to the list as well. I can't say that I agree at all with your line of logic.
I will take the points one by one and offer my views on the subject a little
more clearly.

< Consider where museums come from. Some are publicly funded but many < are
private collections in which the collector has incorporated as a non-
       < profit corporation and opened his collection to the public.

Almost all museums get at least some of their funding from government grant
be they state, local, or federal. As soon as a collector incorporates as a
non-profit there are strict rules that they must abide by. One of those is
that they must have a board of directors. Establishing a board effectively
takes control away from the individual and puts it in the hands of the board
and the museum director. It therefore is not really the collectors collection
anymore. To go even further, the museum may one day wish to join the American
Association of Museums (AAM) and this accreditation process is a long,
arduous process. The surveyors will look long and hard at how the museum
stores, cares, and handles their artifacts and how the collections policy and
mission statement of the museum coincide with the board members and original
collector.

< I have also read of museums selling items to collectors to raise revenue.

This does happen. Mostly in the art museum community. Art museums routinely
buy and sell works that they need to complete a collection. The history
museums try to avoid this situation because of the negative PR it can cause.
museums are looked upon as the keeper of the culture and selling artifacts
usually does not go over too well with the public. trades between museums are
quite common though. In extreme cases museums may sell artifacts but then the
money is only used to help with the upkeep of the collections.

< Museums seek out items that are rare and valuable.

Museums do not seek out only rare and valuable items. Ninety percent of a
museums collection is made up of the mundane and inexpensive. A museum has a
mission statement that guides it in its collections acquisitions. this
statement allows the museum to collect a different number of items and they
can range from a Monet painting to a 1936 washing machine. What a museum
collects is dependent upon what area of history it is trying to educate the
public about.

< Often the value is based on what a collector will pay for that particular
item.

This is true no matter what area of the world you are in. Gas, oil,
furniture, art, etc. is all driven by the same theory.

< There is no guarantee that items will be safely preserved. For example, the
< Collier Aircraft Museum in south Florida was literally destroyed by
              < hurricane Andrew.

There is also no guarantee that the hurricane Andrew would not have hit a
private collectors hangers either. The point is that museums are infinitely
better equipped to care for their collections that the average collector.
Conservation supplies are very expensive, professional conservation is even
more expensive than the supplies. The collections in most museums are stored
in temperature and humidity controlled environments where they are monitored
constantly to check on their conditions. Insects, ultraviolet light, acid
migration, etc. is all kept at a minimum and the collections are housed in
acid free boxes on acid free paper in rooms with metal shelving to eliminate
off-gassing from wood shelving units or plastic bags. How many collectors do
you know that can give their collections that kind of 'round the clock care?

< Obviously there are items stored in museums that may never be seen by the
  < public.

That is a true statement. On the other hand there are things in museums that
most people would not really care to see. Museums are filled with items that
may in some way relate to their mission statement but may have little
interest for the general public. In a way the museum decides what aspect of
history it will teach its visitors through the artifacts it displays and how
it interprets them. For better or worse, museums have become the keeper of
our culture.

< I believe that many museum curators are also collectors.

You might be surprised at how low that number really is. For ethical and
moral purposes curators, directors, etc. try not to collect when they get
into the business. Strictly taboo is collecting the same artifacts that the
museum collects. For example, I would not collect brown Moosehead bottles if
the museum I worked for was a collector of the same bottles. The possibility
of the public getting the wrong idea is too much trouble for the museum to
risk. If I bought items at an auction and the public saw me there and knew I
was the local museum director their immediate thoughts would be that I was
buying for myself. A problem I don't want. If no visitors come to my museum I
gotta shut the doors.

< Without collectors, there would be far fewer museums and far less interest
< in militaria.

There I think you are way off base. Without collectors there would be larger
museum collections. Now that the collectors have put a price on artifacts the
museums are getting fewer donations because people would rather make a buck
than donate an item to a museum.

I would like think that someday the collectors would not look upon the museum
as the enemy. We are here to keep the past from disappearing and let the
public come view and study it for as long as we can keep an item from
deteriorating. Think about that the next time you see a new moth hole in your
Wehrmacht tunic or the paper begins to turn brown in the letters from your
Civil War great-grandfather.

Yours in museology,
Matthew Burchette

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 09:28:48 +0200
From:    Cris Whetton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Das Boot

>I don't think Germany has produced a single film that addresses what WII
>was about from the German point of view.  The hard German films are about
>the 30s--how we seem to have gotten into some kind of mess--or are all
>Fassbinder epics about how corrupt we are because of that mess & because we
>sold our soul to the US.

I can recommend Edgar Reisz's epic 'Heimat'. OK, its 16hours and sub-titled
but it certainly gives a feeling for 'ordinary' Germans and their attitudes
towards nazism and the war.

Cris

Cris Whetton, Ility Engineering Ltd
(As from VTT Manufacturing Technology, Safety Engineering Dept.)

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 09:34:22 +0200
From:    Cris Whetton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Great WWII movies

>Cris, there was a US ensign aboard the Catalina, but it was flown by a
>British pilot.
>
>Ed
>
Ed, I'm 2,000km from my library and my memory isn't what it was but I
thought that there were 3US and 2 British aboard?

Cris

Cris Whetton, Ility Engineering Ltd
(As from VTT Manufacturing Technology, Safety Engineering Dept.)

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 09:45:25 +0200
From:    Cris Whetton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Das Boot

>But I do agree 1936-1949, especially home-front/family/community stuff, is
a fertile period for
>some fresh German film making.
>
>-- Jim Brady
>
Again, I do recommend 'Heimat'. It covers 1920 to 1982 and chronicles the
lives of a small German village in the Hunsruck - between the Rhine and the
Moselle. Some people embrace nazism, some drift into it, a few even oppose
it; most are indifferent. It is important to remember that this was Germany
at the time : mostly small villages where people knew very little of the
outside world. Members of my family who were living in Germany pre-1932-ish
claim that it is very authentic. Well worth the 16 hours. I seem to recall
that it was on Ch12 (PBS) in Philadelphia ca. 1988. I've never seen it on video.
Cris

Cris Whetton, Ility Engineering Ltd
(As from VTT Manufacturing Technology, Safety Engineering Dept.)

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 02:15:46 -0500
From:    "Jeffrey R. Keopp" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: GEN: Bataan, again.

Hi!  I am the Jeff referred to in Bob's posting and will just add a
few comments.  Unfortunately, I also did not take any notes and now
wish I had.
[text cut]

> However, this evening, we had a guest speaker at our annual Awards Banquet.
> Our planned speaker for the evening couldn't attend and arranged for a last
> minute replacement.  This was in the form of Mr. Philip Brain, currently of
> Edina, MN.  He survived the Bataan Death March and 3.5 years as a Japanese
> POW.  Jeff Keopp, a recent member to the list, was also at the banquet (heck,
> he signed the check that I countersigned :-), so perhaps he has some thoughts
> and recollections to add to this... I didn't take notes and wish I had...
>
[text cut]

> Almost immediately, they were reduced to two meals per day.  At the time of
> surrender, they were down to one meal per day.  He made it clear that most
> people were in no condition to effect a successful fight.  He said that the
> lack of food was taking such a physical toll that if you stood up too fast,
> the instant onset of dizziness would make you collapse.  These were not
> effective combat soldiers.
>
They were only on two meals per day for the first month, then they went
to the single meal for two months.

> The next half hour were the most riveting and difficult things I have listened
> to in a long while...
>
I agree with Bob, this was the most riveting and difficult things I have
listened in a long while.

[text cut]

> Part of the transport included being transported in steel box cars.  They
> were packed so dense that when POWs died en-route, and many did, they couldn't
> fall.  They stayed standing until the doors opened and they were let out at
> their next stop.
>
Phil said they were so tightly packed that you couldn't raise your arms
and the vents in the rail cars were shut.

[text cut]

The estimate he had is that about 10% of the 12,000 men who started the
march didn't make it.

> He spoke of one of three POW ships he was on.  Like the box cars, there was
> no room to sit or lie down.  One bucket left near the gangway was supposed to
> be used as a latrine, but you couldn't get to it.  As prisoners died, their
> bodies were passed overhead, out to the deck and thrown overboard.  Eventually
> enough prisoners died to where they had room to sit down.  By the end of the
> war, he had been on three POW ships.
>
His comment on the POW ships is that he would have preferred to be on
five Death Marches than on the ships.

[text cut]

> Some 2.5 years have now passed and the Allied forces are moving closer and
> closer.  They were now being shipped to Japan.  They knew this was the end
> for them one way or another.  They were told -- if Japan itself were invaded,
> every prisoner would be executed immediately.  Since they had no clue about
> what was to come, the atomic bomb or even the existence of the B-29, they
> really felt their days were numbered.  Japan _would_ be invaded and they
> would be killed.   The only way they would survive -- maybe -- is if Japan
> somehow won this war... And if they were, why were they moving all their
> prisoners to Japan?
>
> He was on the last ship to leave for the home islands that did not get
> attacked by American subs... though they heard nearby depth charge attacks.
>
> The ship that immediately followed them had 1,619 prisoners on board.  It was
> torpedoed.  Those survivors were put on a second ship which was also
> torpedoed.  A third ship was the home for those that survived and was also
> torpedoed.  By this time, 175 of the 1,619 prisoners were still alive.
>
Tom Smothers, father of the Smothers Brothers of folk singing and TV fame,
was killed during one of these torpedo attacks.  Phil had mentioned that
Tom Smothers had organized a 30 man choir in the first POW camp and that
the Japanese occasionally let them sing.  He also mentioned that Tom
had no previous musical background that he knew of.

[text cut]

> and food.  He mentioned that some chutes failed to open.  He also said that
> most of the food went into big vats to make "B-29 Stew."
>
Their meals up til now had been rice.  They would pour water on the rice
to get the dirt to settle to the bottom and rice worms to float.  Phil
said they guaged their protein intake by the number of worms.  He also
mentioned that the water would occassionally be shut off to the POW's
at the first camp in the Phillipines.

> He came home on a hospital ship.  When he got home, his family had no idea
> that he was coming home -- probably wasn't sure he was alive.  When he got
> to the west coast and called home, he found that his mother had had a heart
> attack and died in 1943 and his brother was killed in action in England,
> flying for the Air Corp.  Coming home was painful, but he was home.
>
> Throughout all of this presentation, I watched a few grown men get angry at
> the mistreatment he and others endured ... But mostly, I saw a lot of misty-
> eyed people of all ages.  When he finished, the standing ovation (which is
> fairly rare in our group) was immediate, honest and substantial.  The silence
> which followed was almost as painful.  Nobody knew what to say or do, so a
> brief recess was called which allowed a Pee and Bar break and to catch your
> breath.
>
I am still digesting all of what I heard.  It is hard to conceive enduring
what Mr. Brain has.  He says people in that situation form a thick crust
around themselves for protection.  He is just now talking about his
experience.

> But to come full circle, one can't justify the actions done based on the
> experiences of one man... But while I didn't ask him personally whether he
> felt -- at the time the orders were given -- that the surrender order was
> proper, he presented a picture that made it unquestionable that there was
> no alternatives.  They were beaten, hungry and had no hope.
>
> Was the order right or wrong?  The slaughter that followed is just plain, true
> and complete brutality and crimes beyond belief.  But I was left with the
> feeling that based on what was believed to be reality and what the true
> situation was of the man in the field, surrender was the proper course of
> action.  They had already met their objectives -- the bottle up enough
> Japanese forces to screw up their schedule and the supplies made it impossible
> to even feed their own troops adequately enough to keep them all _conscious_.
>
> The debate over the order will probably continue forever.  But before an
> order or decision is condemned, I've always felt it important to listen to
> the stories of those that were there.  I've met very few and listened to the
> story of only one.  But while in the past I've refused to make decision as
> to right or wrong, now I'm forced to acknowledge the decision as being the
> right one -- if all was as it was supposed to be.
>
I agree with Bob.

> (He also recalled the statement of one of the guards who said "We will beat
> America, even if it takes 100 years!"  He made the comment that sometimes he
> feels that after 50 years, they're halfway there... :-)
>
> All I know for certain at this point is that we need to get this guy's story
> on tape... Most incredible TRUE story of survival I've ever heard.  And the
> debate over Bataan continues -- and for this guy, in Japan as a POW, the
> debate over the atom bomb is just as close to the heart.  Atom bomb meant
> the POWs survived at went home.  Invasion meant that the POWs were executed.
> The atom bomb saved his life after all he had been through and survived, it
> probably boiled down to that one sequence of events.
>
> [I'm actually kinda glad our speaker-of-choice couldn't make it -- very
> heavy stuff for an awards banquet, but YOW...]
>
I was glad that Phil was able to talk to us about his experience.  I have
a somewhat personal interest in this part of history.  Recently, I learned
that my family had lost a cousin on the Death March.

I'm also keeping track of the related Bataan postings on the list.  Thanks
to all who are contributing!

Jeff Keopp
Confederate Air Force
Southern Minnesota Wing
[email-masked]
KA0HRT

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 10:18:13 +0200
From:    Cris Whetton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Polish forces in the RAF during the Battle of Britain.

>I was wondering if anyone could help with suggested materials for a paper
>I'm working on now.  It's about the Polish forces which managed to escape
>to Britain during the war and fight again for the Allies.  I'm trying to
>gather enough materials to concentrate entirely on the Poles who joined the
>RAF.  I'm also going to Europe in June, and would be interested in museums
>or records storage facilities anyone could suggest that I may visit to do
>research.  Unfortunately, I don't know Polish so any works will have to be
>in English.
>
>
>Thanks in advance,
>Micheal Whitaker
>[email-masked]
>
You could try:

1. The Imperial War Museum, London. Always very helpful.
2. 'After the Battle' magazine, London. They've published several articles
on this topic.
3. The Battle of Britain museum.
4. The Polish embassy, Military Attache's dept.
5. The Polish 'White Eagle Club' - ex-servicemen, branches everywhere.
6. The mad Pole who runs the cafe-cum-used-book-shop on Ely railroad station.
7. The Polish war cemetry, located somewhere near Newark, in Sherwood Forest.
8. My mother.

Best of luck.
Cris

Cris Whetton, Ility Engineering Ltd
(As from VTT Manufacturing Technology, Safety Engineering Dept.)

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 11:10:58 +0200
From:    Cris Whetton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Hitler's Body

>>From my English friend --
>
>there are rumors that the German magazine Der Spiegel will be publishing an ar
>ticle confirming that the Russians had Hitler's body but destroyed it.
>
>There was a television program about a year ago(?) speculating on this, but
>they couldn't cofirm it at the time.
>
>If I get more on this I will post it.
>
>Ron Charlton
>
The British magazine 'After the Battle' did a fairly comprehensive review of
the subject about two years ago. The Russians did have the body; they
destroyed most of it; part of the skull survives.

Cris

Cris Whetton, Ility Engineering Ltd
(As from VTT Manufacturing Technology, Safety Engineering Dept.)

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 04:00:13 PST
From:    "Keller, Theron P." <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: USN Chronology 04-03-95

UNITED STATES NAVY CHRONOLOGY
from:
//byrd.mu.wvnet.edu/pub/history/military/wwii/naval_chronology/chr4(4,5).txt

1945
04/03 Tue.  United States naval vessel sunk:
             Motor minesweeper YMS-71, by mine, off Borneo,
              04 d. 59'N,, 119 d. 47'E.
            United States naval vessels damaged, Okinawa area:
             Escort carrier WAKE ISLAND (CVE-65), by suicide plane,
              26 d. 05'N., 128 d. 57'E.
             Destroyer SPROSTON (DD-577), by dive bomber,
              26 d. 30'N.,127 d. 57'E.
             High-speed minesweeper HAMBLETON (DMS-20),
              by suicide plane,
              27 d. 00'N., 127 d. 00'E.
             LST 554, by storm,
              26 d. 20'N., 127 d. 45'E.
            German submarines sunk:
             U-1221, U-2542, U-3505, by Army aircraft, Kiel, Germany.

Information compiled by U.S. Navy Historians.  For more information,
contact the Naval Historical Center at (202) 433-3940.
Archived by: "Larry W. Jewell" <[email-masked]>
Posted by:
Theron P. Keller
Logicon, Inc.
Dahlgren, VA  22448 USA
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 07:37:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII flicks

 >Speaking of OPEN CITY, I saw a film recently called 'The Scarlet and the
 >Black'.  It is supposed to be based on a true story of an Irish priest
 >who worked at the Vatican who sheltered escaped allied PWs and others in
 >the months before Rome fell.  I thought it was a nice little movie.
 >
 >Chuck McCormick
 >[email-masked]

THE SCARLET AND THE BLACK is a film made for US TV and released in 1983.  It
starred Gregory Peck, Christopher Plummer, John Gielgud, Raf Vallone, Barbara
Bouchet, Olga Karlatos, Bill Berger, and Edmund Purdom.  Leonard Maltin, in
his MOVIE AND VIDEO GUIDE 1994, says "Peck (in his first dramatic starring
role on TV) and Plummer play a real-life cat-and-mouse game, as respectively,
a Vatican official who clandestinely harbored allied POW escapees throughout
German-occupied Rome and the Nazi officer trying to catch him red-handed.
Gielgud is Pope Pius XII in this well-made thriller, adapted by David Butler
from J.P. Gallagher's book THE SCARLET PIMPERNEL OF THE VATICAN."

If I remember it correctly, the character Peck is playing is told that if he
leaves the Vatican grounds he will be shot and there is one scene where a
German soldier has a rifle with scope on him as he approaches the boundry
between the Vatican and Rome.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Jack McKillop              |  Those who have long enjoyed such |
|  Bellcore                   |  privileges as we enjoy forget in |
|  Piscataway, NJ USA         |  time that men have died to win   |
|  [email-masked]  |  them.                     FDR    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 07:40:21 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INF: Search service for discharged service personnel

Hello, Jim!

Thank you very much for the address. I will write Sgt. Ratzel
forthwith.

Hope all is well, and please stay in touch.

All the best, and thanks again.

Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 11:14:08 +0200
From:    Robert Martensson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INF: USN Chronology 04-02-95

>             Attack transport CHILTON (APA-38), by suicide plane,
>              Okinawa area,
>              25 d. 59'N., 127 d. 17'E.

>             Attack cargo ship LACERTA (AKA-29),
>              accidentally by United States naval gunfire,
>              Okinawa area,
>              26 d. 21'N., 127 d. 43'E.

What kind of ship was the Attack Transport (APA) and
Attack Cargo (AKA) ships?

        Thanks for any information

        Robert Maartensson
        [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 08:35:47 -0500
From:    "Robert J. Granvin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Museums and collectors...a long reply.

I know we've left the purvue of the list charter here, unfortunately...
Therefore, I'll shut up immediately following, before inflicting the wrath
of Joe...  :-)

> < Consider where museums come from. Some are publicly funded but many < are
> private collections in which the collector has incorporated as a non-
>        < profit corporation and opened his collection to the public.
>
> Almost all museums get at least some of their funding from government grant
> be they state, local, or federal. As soon as a collector incorporates as a
> non-profit there are strict rules that they must abide by. One of those is
> that they must have a board of directors. Establishing a board effectively
> takes control away from the individual and puts it in the hands of the board

The board of directors also must, in nearly every case, be elected officers
who serve one or two year terms.  Many organizations also put term limits on
some or all of their officers (unlike Congress... :-)

> and the museum director. It therefore is not really the collectors collection
> anymore. To go even further, the museum may one day wish to join the American
> Association of Museums (AAM) and this accreditation process is a long,
> arduous process. The surveyors will look long and hard at how the museum
> stores, cares, and handles their artifacts and how the collections policy and
> mission statement of the museum coincide with the board members and original
> collector.

The AAM process is indeed arduous.  Once you have actually met every detail
and requirement for accreditation, the paperwork will take approximately 18
months to be completed by the AAM.  During this time, you must have already
met 100% of the accretitation requirements and you _will_ be scrutinized to
make sure that you maintain it during the review process.  Following final
accreditation, you will be routinely inspected -- both with and without
warning -- to verify your status and that you are maintaining all proper
requirements.  If you fail, your accreditation will be removed and you may be
forced to start the process over again.

Accreditation is critically important to inter-museum loan, acquisition of
artifacts _and_ local and state financial support.

>
> < I have also read of museums selling items to collectors to raise revenue.
>
> This does happen. Mostly in the art museum community. Art museums routinely
> buy and sell works that they need to complete a collection. The history
> museums try to avoid this situation because of the negative PR it can cause.
> museums are looked upon as the keeper of the culture and selling artifacts
> usually does not go over too well with the public. trades between museums are
> quite common though. In extreme cases museums may sell artifacts but then the
> money is only used to help with the upkeep of the collections.

The sale of artifacts is one of the most painful decisions any museum makes.
Just about every museum goes through it at one time or another and they
absolutely HATE doing it.  I've never met a museum, however, where the sale
of artifacts was done purely for the financial gain.

>
> < Museums seek out items that are rare and valuable.
>
> Museums do not seek out only rare and valuable items. Ninety percent of a
> museums collection is made up of the mundane and inexpensive. A museum has a

90% is probably a low number.  It's the mundane and inexpensive that tells
a story.  Lay out a mess kit or a complete footlocker and a real story is
told.  In Midland, we have a display where an aviators survival gear is
spread out on a "beach" so you can see every item that one person would
normally carry on a mission.  Almost none of these things are "rare and
valuable" yet they are important historically and tell a real story.

Yet the rare and valuable are important as well.  First printings of certain
books, a very rare radio, parts of uniforms from notable people, etc... All
these things can center-piece important displays -- but even here, every other
piece falls into the category of "mundane and inexpensive."

> < Often the value is based on what a collector will pay for that particular
> item.
>
> This is true no matter what area of the world you are in. Gas, oil,
> furniture, art, etc. is all driven by the same theory.

And is often what keeps many artifacts out of circulation.  Museums (the
structure that displays and loans artifacts) rarely can afford to acquire
certain important pieces.  All one has to do is watch CNN semi-religiously,
and you'll see stories about _another_ Picasso being sold at auction from
one collector to another.  This is probably your only time to ever see that
painting.  It's almost guaranteed that it will never make its way to the
Minneapolis Museum of Art's three month exhibit on the Picasso masterpieces.

>
> < There is no guarantee that items will be safely preserved. For example, the
> < Collier Aircraft Museum in south Florida was literally destroyed by
>               < hurricane Andrew.
>
> There is also no guarantee that the hurricane Andrew would not have hit a
> private collectors hangers either. The point is that museums are infinitely

For example, Kermit Weeks' Air Museum which was severely damaged in Florida.

> better equipped to care for their collections that the average collector.
> Conservation supplies are very expensive, professional conservation is even
> more expensive than the supplies. The collections in most museums are stored
> in temperature and humidity controlled environments where they are monitored
> constantly to check on their conditions. Insects, ultraviolet light, acid

Ouch, ouch, ouch.  All one has to do is price UV protectant glass and plastic
sleeves for lighting (yes, interior lighting has to be UV protected!) and you
will see where most of the museum's money goes.

And there is no debate over these practices.  You do it, or you lose your
accreditation.  You lose your accreditation, and you can lose your ability
to collect artifact, lose funding, lose support...

> < Obviously there are items stored in museums that may never be seen by the
>   < public.
>
> That is a true statement. On the other hand there are things in museums that
> most people would not really care to see. Museums are filled with items that
> may in some way relate to their mission statement but may have little
> interest for the general public. In a way the museum decides what aspect of
> history it will teach its visitors through the artifacts it displays and how
> it interprets them. For better or worse, museums have become the keeper of
> our culture.

Many times museums contain multiple copies of the same artifact.  We're
fortunate now that our vehicle collection is increasing.  Two years ago, we
had a very early 1941 Willy's jeep.  That has been joined by a 1943 Willy's
jeep and a 1942 Ford jeep.

Technically, only one example needs to be on display, and with three, we can
take the time to totally rebuild and restore one and put it on rotation or
out on loan.  But, we've chosen to put all three on display when possible,
as it shows the evolution and functional differences of the jeeps from year
to year and manufacturer to manufacturer, subtle though they may be.  Did you
know that the grill on the Willy's jeep changed after the first several hundred
were built?  I didn't, but do now...

> < Without collectors, there would be far fewer museums and far less interest
> < in militaria.
>
> There I think you are way off base. Without collectors there would be larger
> museum collections. Now that the collectors have put a price on artifacts the
> museums are getting fewer donations because people would rather make a buck
> than donate an item to a museum.

A very recent example is an artifact that we are trying to authenticate at the
moment.  It doesn't fit into our narrow profile, but does fit into our overall
view of the museum.  This is an artifact that came into the possession of a
person who until now couldn't be considered a collector, but more of an
interested party.

This is a small framed display dated 1903.  Contained within was a copy of a
telegram sent to a local group announcing the successful first flight of the
Wright Flyer, a hand drawn technical sketch (complete with errors and
corrections) of the Flyer and a page from what is claimed to be Wilbur
Wright's diary in his own handwriting.  The age is clearly quite old.  The
original display was put together in such a way that it's obvious the pieces
were not considered important but not _that_ important at the time.  The glue
used to affix the papers shows the age, as well as the materials.  Whether
any of it is authentic is a question, but the age isn't debateable and the
fact that there are hand written originals within makes the job of verification
at least a bit easier.  This was rescued from -- guess: A collection that was
literally being THROWN OUT by a party who inherited it and (1) didn't know what
they may have had and (2) didn't have any interest in it.

But, as a private collector, the individual's goal is to sell the artifact for
its cash value if it turns out to be authentic.  Until then, it is on loan to
us.  Of course, although the individual has made it clear that a cash
contribution to us will be made from the sale, we would still rather have the
artifact than the cash.   But we have no control over the disposition of the
artifact and had he not been  in the right place at the right time, no one
would ever have seen it again.

Authentic or not, it's an interesting study.

I know of another case where a soldier on the Phillippines, was one of the
first to arrive at a (recently) abandoned airfield.  The Japanese had
disposed of much of their personal items and "blended" into the population,
which made the Allied soldiers rather nervous.  This person, however, found
two, complete, perfect condition Japanese flight suits with all the gear
that goes with it.  He managed to keep them and get them home.  One fit him
perfectly and the other fit his wife perfectly.  For _years_ they wore them
to Halloween parties.  When his first wife passed away, he boxed up lots of
things, including the flight suits for storage.  His second wife, wanting to
make a home with her personality involved, did a major housecleaning which
included, without anyone realizing it, the box of flight suits and other WWII
memorabilia being tossed out on the curb to be picked up the sanitation
trucks.

I can give you countless examples of where original photos, medals and other
gear has been tossed out by surviving family members or even family members
thinking they are doing you a favor.

When we talk about "collectors" we have to realize that most "collectors" are
not like us -- those that protect and understand the value of the pieces we
may have.  They are the average person who may have kept some things of
sentimental value from their experiences or picked them up somewhere along the
line.  Many don't realize the value of what they have or don't feel that their
own stories are important.  And so, those items are at risk every day from the
409 Squadron.

>
> I would like think that someday the collectors would not look upon the museum
> as the enemy. We are here to keep the past from disappearing and let the
> public come view and study it for as long as we can keep an item from
> deteriorating. Think about that the next time you see a new moth hole in your
> Wehrmacht tunic or the paper begins to turn brown in the letters from your
> Civil War great-grandfather.

Or you forget to make it clear in the will that you haven't written that these
artifacts must be preserved and make sure that your family/executor know full
well the value of "that old dusty stuff in the attic that he fussed over for
so long."

The lack of knowledge on the part of inheritors is much more responsible for
the loss of artifacts than any natural disaster hitting archives.  We can
calculate the losses from that, but the losses from the dumpster are both
enormous and impossible to fathom.

--
Robert J. Granvin
Southern Minnesota Wing Confederate Air Force

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 09:10:25 EDT
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MacArthur/Philippines

   Hi Richard,... re: MacArthur... as I understand it, had all intentions
of holding the Philippines, however did not deploy his troops for defense
of the islands. The Japanese faced mainly Filipino troops who couldn't
deal with Japanese armor. Once the Japanese got aground, that was it.
Apparently fog on Formosa had delayed the Japanese assault on 8Dec41
against the Philippines, and B17s that were circling the island of
Luzon (so as not to be caught on the ground) were landed and prepped
for an immediate response to the attack at Pearl. Poor timing and
inadequate early warning systems found them on the ground at the
same time the Japanese aircraft struck. We lost most of the regions
B17s and P40E fighters in that one event.

The British had already shown their true color in Hong Kong, where according
to Liddell Hart, "The early loss of this British outpost in the Far East
was the clearest of all examples of how strategy, and common sense, can
be sacrificed vainly for the sake of fanciful prestige."

In a foot note he provides support: "In March 1935, General Dill, who
had become director of Military Operations and Intelligence, asked me
to go to the War Office for a talk with him about current and prospective
defence problems. The discussion focused on the Far East, and particularly
on the question of trying to hold Hong Kong in the event of war with Japan.
According to a note of the discussion made that evening: 'I suggested, and
he appeared to agree, that it would be better to risk its loss by holding
it too lightly than to strengthen it so much as to make it, morally a
"Verdun" or "Port Arthur" with great danger to our prestige if lost."

Can you believe that?

'Regards, Alan

Alan Wild, Sr. Prog/Analyst
ACC - Lippitt - URI
Kingston, RI  02881

American Legion, Post 102
I am the NRA.

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 16:45:44 +0200
From:    Cris Whetton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Women's WWII Literature

>Hello everyone,
> Myself and another colleague are working on a book project concerning
>Women's War Literature. I am responsible for the section on WWII and
>would like to ask your assistance for names of writers I can include. I
>am interested in the following material:
>1) Any fictional works  (novels, short stories, poetry)
There is a lot of work _about_ women in WW2, but not much by them. Mary
Wesley's "The Camomile Lawn" might be a good start. Nevil Shute's "Requiem
for a Wren".

>2) Any nonfiction collections (essays, diaries, letters)
"After the Battle" magazine has had a lot of contributions & reminiscences
by women who served in WW2.
The IWM library probably has a good list.
I have an interesting book back in the UK on women in the forces (entiltled
ISTR something like "In love and war") A bit sociological, but some
interesting stuff.
Several memoirs of resistance heroines, but mostly in French. Biog of Odette
Hallowes, who died last week. Also that of Nancy Wake, recently reissued in
pbk in the UK.

>3) Cartoons by women or cartoons that have women caricatures related somehow
>   to WWII (So far, I've found some interesting HomeFront cartoons...)
>4) Autobiographies/Biographies about or by women regarding WWII
(see above)

>5) Any materials from women war correspondents
>
>In addition, if anyone can provide any additional resources I may consult
>to assist me with my search, please send me email at: [email-masked]
>                  Thanks...
>                            Regards, Mary
>
I might be able to be more specific when I return to the UK at the end of
this month.

Cris

Cris Whetton, Ility Engineering Ltd
(As from VTT Manufacturing Technology, Safety Engineering Dept.)

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 07:41:45 -0700
From:    Ed Kettler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: INF: USN Chronology 04-02-95

You wrote:

>
>>             Attack transport CHILTON (APA-38), by suicide plane,
>>              Okinawa area,
>>              25 d. 59'N., 127 d. 17'E.
>
>>             Attack cargo ship LACERTA (AKA-29),
>>              accidentally by United States naval gunfire,
>>              Okinawa area,
>>              26 d. 21'N., 127 d. 43'E.
>
>
>What kind of ship was the Attack Transport (APA) and
>Attack Cargo (AKA) ships?
>
>        Thanks for any information
>
>        Robert Maartensson
>        [email-masked]
>
>
Robert,

Attack Transports (APA) primarily carried personnel and their immediate
operational supplies.  A typical APA could carry a battalion.  The
Attack Cargo (AKA) carried the heavy equipment, engineering supplies,
tanks, etc.  The APA usually carried LCVPs and LCAs, while the AKA
carried LCMs as landing craft.  A Regimental Landing Team required 3
APAs and 1 AKA, but this changed once the LSTs arrived, and also varied
from invasion to invasion in the Pacific.

Some of the ships were existing hulls taken over from commerce, while
others were purpose built.  APAs converted from existing hulls were
usually from combination passenger/cargo ships.  True liners, like the
Queen Mary, were used as troops ships (AP).  Some of the Victory Ships
were built as AKAs and APAs.  A quick way to tell if a ship is an AP or
an APA is to look at the boats:  if they are regular lifeboats, it is an
AP; LCVPs = APA, LCMs = AKA.

HTH,
Ed Kettler
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 08:11:51 PDT
From:    "Mark H. Walter" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE WEAP WW2 Rifles

hansoff writes:
>
>   Do you happen to have any mail lists for rifles and other firearms?  I
> would be very interested in adding those to my mailbox.  Thanx...

Here are 2 lists from the list of lists on sri.com you might be interested in:

[email-masked] or [email-masked]
 Subscription Address: [email-masked]
 Owner: Andy Beals [email-masked]
 Last Update: 8/22/94
 Description:
  This is a list for folks interested in black powder arms.

[email-masked]
 Subscription Address: [email-masked]
 Owner: Karl Kleinpaste <[email-masked]>
 Description:
  This mailing list has been created to provide an environment in which
  sportsmen can discuss issues of concern to them.  Topics include but are
  not limited to hunting, firearms safety, legal issues, reloading tips,
  maintenance suggestions, target shooting, and dissemination of general
  info.  The list is not intended to discuss the merits of gun control.

 Mark Walter  [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 10:48:03 -0500
From:    "William L. Huber - SAA" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII Movies

Since we are talking movies, does anyone know what ever became of the
Arnold Schwarzenegger project to be DC Comic's Sgt. Rock?  If they
chose not to release it I believe I can think of at least one reason
why.  Arnie speaks pretty good American but I don't think Sgt Rock
fans could deal with a Sgt. Rock with an Austrian accent.

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 12:19:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MacArthur/Philippines

 >   Hi Richard,... re: MacArthur... as I understand it, had all intentions
 >of holding the Philippines, however did not deploy his troops for defense
 >of the islands. The Japanese faced mainly Filipino troops who couldn't
 >deal with Japanese armor. Once the Japanese got aground, that was it.
 >Apparently fog on Formosa had delayed the Japanese assault on 8Dec41
 >against the Philippines, and B17s that were circling the island of
 >Luzon (so as not to be caught on the ground) were landed and prepped
 >for an immediate response to the attack at Pearl. Poor timing and
 >inadequate early warning systems found them on the ground at the
 >same time the Japanese aircraft struck. We lost most of the regions
 >B17s and P40E fighters in that one event.

snip   snip   snip   snip   snip  snip
 >
 >Alan Wild, Sr. Prog/Analyst

The way the USAF tells the story, the word about the Pearl Harbor
attack reached the Philippines between 0300-0330 hours local on 8
Dec.  Upon hearing the news, General Lewis Brereton, Commanding
General Far East Air Force, went to MacArthur's HQ and requested
permission to use the B-17s to bomb Formosa.  Mac said no; the
Philippines were a Commonwealth of the US and just because the
Japanese attacked the US did not mean that the Philippines were at
war with Japan.  The Japanese airfields were fog bound the morning
of 8 Dec local and the Japanese were afraid that the delay in
getting off the ground would enable the USAAF to attack them.
Because MacArthur would not allow us to attack Formosa, our
aircraft were circling Luzon.  When lunch time came, they landed to
refuel and allow the pilots to eat.  (Hey, peacetime habits die
hard!)  And as luck would have it, the lifting of the fog over
Formosa allowed the Japanese to get off the ground and arrive over
Luzon during lunch.  The rest is history.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Jack McKillop              |  Those who have long enjoyed such |
|  Bellcore                   |  privileges as we enjoy forget in |
|  Piscataway, NJ USA         |  time that men have died to win   |
|  [email-masked]  |  them.                     FDR    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 12:34:46 -0400
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII Movies

        The Sinatra movie is "None But The Brave."

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 11:49:07 EST
From:    Mike Knoll <[email-masked]>
Subject: Confirmation of Subscription

     OK - 635671

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 13:18:40 EST5EDT
From:    "Dr. Tom Veve" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Das Boot

Whyohwhy?  Because (as I watched the movie) I thought I was a crew
member and I was not going to survive.

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 13:15:19 -0400
From:    Pat Marsden <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WW2 Rifles

> Subject: Re: WW2 Rifles
> hansoff writes:
> >
> >   Do you happen to have any mail lists for rifles and other firearms?  I
> > would be very interested in adding those to my mailbox.  Thanx...
> >
>

There is     <[email-masked]>    which has technical discussions
of firearms.  The subscription procedure is the same as WWII-L.

patrick,

--
Patrick D. Marsden          | Naval Research Laboratory     | (202)-404-8229
Computational Physics, Inc  | Planetary Atmospheres Section | Opinions are mine
[email-masked] | Code 7641                     |  and mine alone.
http://power.nrl.navy.mil   | Washington, D.C.  20375       |      * NRA *

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 14:03:02 -0400
From:    Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Accidental Shootings

Steve New <[email-masked]> asks:
> Did the Marines actually use M-60s in Vietnam?  I thought the heaviest
> armor in theater was the M48.

A quick scan of "M60 in Action" indicates that only M60 variants were in
Vietnam: the M728 Combat Engineer Vehicle (obstacle removal/tank recovery)
which had a 165mm demolition cannon, and the M60AVLB (bridging vehicle)
which had no gun.  There are apocryphal stories of M60 MTBs in Vietnam (and
of an M728 locking horns with an T55 and winning!), but no photos or records
support these claims.  It is dubious that they would have been sent since
the only significant advantage would have been its 105mm gun over the M48's
90mm gun and it wasn't necessary to upgun against the older Soviet tanks
the US was likely to encounter.  So, unless someone had his face stuck in
the tube of the M728, or the incident occurred somewhere else, I would say
that the original story is an urban legend.

Anyway, we should move back to WWII, but I first had to indulge my armor
fetish!  Thanks for your patience.
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
You're a good man, Mulligan.

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 13:56:41 PDT
From:    Jim Brady <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Das Boot

>>
>Again, I do recommend 'Heimat'. It covers 1920 to 1982 and chronicles the
>lives of a small German village in the Hunsruck - between the Rhine and the
>Moselle. Some people embrace nazism, some drift into it, a few even oppose
>it; most are indifferent. It is important to remember that this was Germany
>at the time : mostly small villages where people knew very little of the
>outside world. Members of my family who were living in Germany pre-1932-ish
>claim that it is very authentic. Well worth the 16 hours. I seem to recall
>that it was on Ch12 (PBS) in Philadelphia ca. 1988. I've never seen it on video.
>Cris
>
>Cris Whetton, Ility Engineering Ltd

If anybody knows were there is a copy of this series...! Same, by the way, for Das Boot, which
one movie guide says was a TV movie in Germany shown in installments. There are some
parts in the book that are not covered in the feature-film version, such as an encounter with an
Italian (I think) steamer on the way back home from the Mediterranean. U96 signals the ship to
surrender to inspection or get sunk...The ship captain is late in complying. U96 turns around
to fire from its stern tube, and then...

--- Jim Brady

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

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 12:41:34 -0700
From:    Jim O'Neil <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Tactics (?) Assurance

>  I believe the Shoals were maintained as a Coast Guard loran or weather
>station long after the war.  It was a dangerous place in storms.
>
>Edward Miller   [email-masked]

Thanks for the excellent info... now can you tell us what happened to the
French Frigate? <g>

Jim O'Neil   Indecision is the cornerstone of Military Flexibility

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 14:56:43 CST
From:    "SCHERRER, TIM" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WWII Reenactment and Event Schedule

This is the spring WWII Reenacting and event schedule for the Mid-West.
There are probably many events on the East and West coast that I am
unaware of, as well as a few probably in the Mid-West that didn;t get to
me as well.  WWIIHRS means World War II Historical Reenactment Society.
WWIIAPS means World War II Airman's Preservation Society, and CAF Means
Confederate Airforce.

Apr 15-16 Avoca, WI, WWIIHRS, Western Front Airborne Battle

Apr 21-23 Camden, OH, WWIIHRS, Western Front Battle

April 22, Aurora, IL, WWIIHRS, WWII Dinner and Dance

April 28-9 Yorkville, IL, WWIIHRS, WWII Basic Training Revisited

April 28 St. Louis, MO, WWIIHRS, Jefferson Barracks Display and public
         battle--various time periods

May 6-7 Geneva, IL, WWIIHRS, Living History Display and Public Battle

May 6-7 Kansas City, MO, V-E Day Celebration, WWIIHRS, includes display
s, parade, and steam train ride into Union Station, also aircraft
display at KC downtown Airport

May 6-7 Ft. Knox, KY, WWIIHRS, Western Front Tactical Battle on Sat and
Public battle on Sunday

May ???  Memphis, TN, WWIIAPS, Memphis Belle Last Mission Anniversary

May 20 St. Paul, MN, CAF, Fleming Field Hanger Dance

May 26-8 Fort Smith, AR, WWIIHRS, Living History Display and Public Bat
tles

June ???  Dyersburg, TN, WWIIAPS, Airshow

July 27-Aug 2 Oshkosh, WI, CAF and WWIIAPS, Annual Fly-in

Aug 4-6 Aurora, IL, WWIIHRS, Living Histpry Display and Public Battles

Aug 4-6 St. Paul, MN, CAF, 18th Annual Airpower Display at Holman Field

August ??  Worth, IL, WWIIHRS, Living History Display and public battles

Aug 11-12 Tinley Park, IL, WWIIHRS, Living History Displays and Public
Battles

Sept 2-4 Jefferson, IN, WWIIAPS, Clark County Airshow

Sep 5-10 St. Louis, MO, WWIIAPS, 8th Air Force Reunion, Adams Mark Hot
el

Sep ??  Westmont, IL , WWIIHRS, Living History Displays and Public Battl
es

Oct 6-8 Yorkville, IL, WWIIHRS, WWIIHRS National Battle and meeting

If there are other events that people would like to see added to the
schedule please let me know.  Also, please feel free to repost this list
to other mailing lists--send it to friends etc.  I have more information
on most of these events so please contact me directly for more
information.  It will be a great summer!!  All I am thinking right now
for may is Kansas City and chuga chuga chuga chuga.

TAS

************************************************************************
*  Tim A. Scherrer          "You'll be fighting WWII for the rest of   *
*  Facilities Supervisor     your life", Ron Scherrer, 1971            *
*  WP:816-785-5253                                                     *
*  HP:816-665-6704                                                     *
*  ID# [email-masked]                             *
************************************************************************

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:57:06 EST
From:    "OConnor, Christopher M" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[4]: Tactics (?) Assurance of Victory

I know we knew about Midway, for tha is why we send out the Yorktown
hile it still had workers on board.  THat was a work of Magic(not the
intel source).  I still I am of the assumption though that the JApanese
could have help onto PEarl long enough, to move on and take more land or
negotiate a peace in their favor.  Anyway I would be interested in
hearing anyoene's vies on this subject.
Chris

>>From:         "OConnor, Christopher M" <[email-masked]>
>>Subject:      Re[2]: Tactics (?) Assurance of Victory
>>
>>I'm not sure werew I read it I did, but once again I could be
>>wrong.  I think that I am confused with  your statement about not
>>being accidental.  Are you saying that they were there because
>>the US had previous knowledge of the attack on Pearl.  Also what do
>>you think about the theory of invasion vs. just bombing.
>>Thanks fro the not Chris
>
>Chris,
>
>If you review your sources, I think you will find it was Midway, not
>Pearl,  We did know about Midway prior to the event.  As another person
>on the list posted, it may have been MAGIC rather than LUCK, as we were
>able to read some of the Japanese ciphers and codes.  As for invasion
>vs. bombing, I'm not much for what if, but it's one thing to bomb,
>another to invade, and something more to keep your troops there and
>supplied.
>
>John Riegsecker
>Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
>University of Puget Sound
>
>[email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:31:40 -0500
From:    "Louis R. Coatney" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII Reenactment and Event Schedule

Tim,

     The Aberdeen Proving Ground's Tiger I was back in Germany
being refitted, when my son and I visited it in 1993.  Do the
museums ever allow their equipment to participate in the events.
I would think it would be great advertising.

Lou Coatney, [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 16:47:44 -0400
From:    "Peter I. Hidas" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Das Boot

WEre all members of the SS also members of the Nazi party? Was
membership compulsory for them?
Peter I. Hidas, Montreal

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:25:23 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Das Boot

Hello, Cris!

Beg to differ. The Germans produced a mini-series for television that
dealt with a family in East Prussia, and showed how the war affected
this family; from sending a father and brother off to fight to the
horrible ending. It was most poignant and, from the German nationals
who viewed this with me at the time in Germany, all said that "it
could have been written by thousands of people who endured the
conflict".

Although not a "movie" but it left me with a feeling that persists to
this day, and I have never forgotten what I saw. It was called
"Jokhenen" (Yoh-kay-nen).

Hope this has been of interest.

All the best.

Terry

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 16:51:17 -0400
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII Movies

On Fri, 31 Mar 1995, Chip Merton wrote:

>
> I saw a film several months ago that was a joint US/Japanese production,
> produced by and staring Frank Sanatra. Basicly the story is about a group of
> US servicemen who crash land on an island that has been bypassed but still
> occupied by an equal number of Japanese. A very interesting side note is
> that the special effects (which were rather good for the mid to late 1950's)
> were done by the same company that worked on my other favorite type of film...
>   The Cheap Japanese Horror Movie  (i.e. Godzilla, Mothra, Gamera, et. al)
>
> Anyway my question... What is the name of this film?

> Thanks

"None But The Brave"

        (you're welcome)

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

                                          Greg Kelley
                                          St. Paul Public Library
                                          [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 17:00:13 -0400
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Polish forces in the RAF during the Battle of Britain.

        Scanning the shelves here at Pitt's main library, I saw a couple of
books which you might want to check out;
        M. Lisiewicz (ed.), "Destiny Can Wait: the Polish Air Force in the
Second World War" (London, Heinemann, 1949-- I was looking through this in
relation to something else and noticed a nice section on Polish airmen in
England)
        Arkady Fiedler, "Squadron 303; the Story of the Polish Fighter Squadron
with the RAF" (New York, Roy, 1943)

        Also, I'm assuming you might have already referenced Wladyslaw Anders'
"Army In Exile; the story of the Second Polish Corps" (London; McMillan, 1949).
Anders got to the west the hard way, via Soviet POW camps, but was one of the
major commanders of the Polish forces in exile, and fought his corps under
British command.  This one I've read, its pretty interesting.  Sorry these are
so old, but thought they might help in building your bibliography.

        Regards

        Mike Yaklich

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 17:21:13 -0400
From:    Ron Charlton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: What If?

The May selection booklet from The Military Book Club arrived today and one
of the main selections is a book called "The Hitler Options" edited by
Kenneth Macksey.

The book is a collection of essays by authors such as Macksey, Bryan Perret,
James Lucas, etc. that discuss various campaigns and  what Hitler could have
done, what his chances for success might have been and where the "what if"
campaigns deviate from what actually took place.

This posting is for information only. I only know of this book from the MBC
selection booklet. Since I haven't read it I can not comment on its worth.

Ron Charlton
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 18:21:12 -0500
From:    "Jordan J. Gardner" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WWII-Navy USS JUNEAU (CL-52)

Wanting to hear from anyone concerning U.S.S. JUNEAU
(CL-52)..anti-aircraft cruiser..sunk Friday, 13 November 1942..during
battle of Guadalcanal..crew of 700..150 survived sinking..ten ultimately
lived..with the passing of Mr ART FRIEND, Miller, MO recently only three
remain alive..book "LEFT TO DIE" by Dan Kurzman, published in Feb/Mar
1994 tells most of it..however research could have been better..reunion
of JUNEAU assimilated with U.S.S.ATLANTA (CL-51), sister ship to JUNEAU
due to number of survivors..ATLANTA scuttled to prevent capture..next
reunion in San Antonio, TX sometime this year..
Sincerely;
J.J.Gardner (son of survivor H.J.Gardner, MM1C, USN-deceased)

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 19:47:45 EDT
From:    Henry Sirotin <[email-masked]>
Subject: OKINAWA  COMMEMORATION

To All:

C-Span broadcast two versions, long and short, of the Okinawa
commemoration at the Pentagon on Saturday, 1 April. The long
version included the color guards, formation inspection, and
pass-in-review. The senior guests included Gen. Carl Mundy,
Commandant of the Marine Corps, Undersecretary of the Army
Joe Reeder, and a Marine veteran of the campaign, Mr. Benis
Frank, currently Chief Historian of the Corps. Units present
included the Marine Band ("The President's Own"), elements
of the 1st battalion, 3rd Regiment, USA ("The Old Guard"),
and the Honor Guards of the Air Force, Coast Guard, and Navy.

Appropriate comments were made by Gen. Mundy, Mr. Reeder,
and Mr. Frank, before an audience of several hundred veterans,
family members, and officials. Mr Frank took the inspection,
accompanied by the detachment commander.

The C-Span short version included only the remarks by
Gen. Mundy and Mr. Frank.

OKAY, so much for the social note.

Ben recalled his experiences, from the clear, bright morning of the
landings to seeing the Japanese plane carrying the parley delegation
to Manila landing on Ie Shima as he and his fellow Marines prepared
for Olympic. He spoke for all veterans of the emotions of combat,
of the surprise in seeing the initial lack of Japanese resistance,
and of understanding the meaning of the Betty with the green crosses-
they would be going home, not to a third (or more) invasion.

But the most interesting moment (for me) was watching Ben on the
inspection tour- a few years and a few pounds, but perfect march
discipline throughout. Never seen anyone lose five decades that
quickly. Yep, there's no such thing as an ex-Marine....

If a non-Marine can be permitted, Semper Fi!, Ben, and thanks again
for what you and your buddies did for us.

Henry Sirotin

PS- If you're interested, C-Span sells tapes of its shows at $35/hr.
The entire ceremony ran about 50 minutes.

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 19:48:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Iwo Jima

>From the US Air Forces News Service

292.  Bomber veterans return to Iwo Jima
by Marine Corps Cpl. Jeff Hawk
     IWO JIMA (AFNS) -- Fifty years ago on Iwo Jima, American
Marines and sailors fought against entrenched Japanese forces to
secure an emergency landing strip for crippled B-29 bombers.
     A half-century later, nearly 1,000 survivors of the battle and
veteran B-29 crewmembers returned here to honor those who
fought for the island.
     "The taking of this island saved our lives," said Robert Wetter,
an Army Air Forces staff sergeant during World War II.  Wetter
served as a B-29 central fire control gunner, with the 883rd
Bombardment Squadron (Very Heavy), Twentieth Air Force, which was
based on Saipan Island during the war.
     Nearly 2,400 B-29s carrying 27,000 crewmen made unscheduled
landings on Iwo Jima before the war's end.
     The Marines had barely captured one airfield when the first
Superfortress landed on the island, March 4, 1945.  The battered
bomber, "Dinah Might," stayed long enough to make repairs before
heading back to Saipan.  Though Dinah Might's time on the island
was only a few short hours, veterans of the battle said it gave them
an added sense of purpose.
     "We knew there was a reason why we had to take this island,"
said veteran Marine Corporal Robert Jones, who used a flame thrower.
"Those planes got the hell kicked out of them."
     Wetter said the bomber's landing in the midst of the battle
showed the perilous situation crews often faced as they returned
from bombing missions in Japan.  His B-29 Superfortress made two
such emergency landings on the island.
     "We landed here because we couldn't close our bomb bay doors
and the drag was taking up our fuel.  We landed, refueled and
repaired the doors in a few hours, then blew back out to Saipan, "
said the veteran.
     On another mission, Wetter's bomber was so low on fuel the
only options were to land on Iwo Jima or ditch into the ocean.
     According to Wetter, when the Japanese held the island
aircrews couldn't fly too low because of the anti-aircraft fire.  As a
result, they had to fly around the island, which meant using more
fuel.  "It was imperative to neutralize the island and make it safe,"
he said.
     During the commemorative visit to Iwo Jima, veterans toured
old battle sites and had an opportunity to speak to other veterans.
Wetter said he finally got the chance to thank those who helped
fight to secure the island, and to tell them he hoped his
participation in B-29 raids in Japan saved lives by weakening
Japan's ability to wage war.
     (Courtesy PACAF News Service.  Hawk is assigned to the Iwo
Jima Joint Information Bureau)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Force News Agency                   :  DSN: 945-6164
AFNEWS/IICX                             :  [email-masked]
Kelly AFB, TX 78241-5000                :  131.13.24.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 19:55:55 -0400
From:    "Neil C. Carmichael" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII Movies -Reply

Europa, Europa.  Good movie.

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 19:59:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: [INF] USAAF 4 APR 45

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
WEDNESDAY, 4 APRIL 1945
FTP SITES
  1. ftp.rutgers.edu in directory pub/wwii/usaf
  2. byrd.mu.wvnet.edu (129.71.32.152) in pub/history/military/airforce/
     wwii_chronology

AIRCRAFT MENTIONED IN THIS REPORT:
  A-20, Douglas Havoc
  A-26, Douglas Invader
  B-17, Boeing Flying Fortress
  B-24, Consolidated Liberator
  B-25, North American Mitchell
  B-26, Martin Marauder
  F-3, Douglas Havoc
  F-5, Lockheed Lightning
  F-6, North American Mustang
  L-5, Stinson Sentinel
  OA-10, Consolidated Catalina
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang

NOTE: A number in parenthesis after a target name indicates the number of
bombers attacking.

AMERICAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  ZONE OF INTERIOR (ZI): The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) designates General
of the Army Douglas MacArthur Commander-in-Chief, US Army Forces, Pacific
(CINCUSAFPAC) and Fleet Admiral Chester W Nimitz Commander-in-Chief, Pacific
(CINCPOA).

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA THEATER

  CHINA THEATER (Fourteenth Air Force): In French Indochina, 2 B-25s sink a
junk in the Gulf of Tonkin and 6 P-38s strafe trucks around Dien Bien Phu,
Moc Chau, and Son La.

  INDIA-BURMA THEATER (Tenth Air Force): Combat operations are restricted to
attacks on a troop concentration and rice and fuel supplies behind enemy
lines in C Burma; transports operate on steady basis throughout the day.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): 2 missions are flown.
  Mission 926: 1,431 bombers and 866 fighters are dispatched to hit
airfields, a shipyard and a U-boat shipyard in Germany; they claim 30-4-30
Luftwaffe aircraft; 10 bombers and 4 fighters are lost.
  1. 438 B-24s are sent to hit Parchim (33) and Perleberg (29) Airfields; 97
hit Wesendorf Airfield, the secondary; attacks are visual; they claim 6-4-6
aircraft; 6 B-24s are lost, 1 damaged beyond repair and 76 damaged; 1 airman
is KIA and 59 MIA. Escorting are 324 P-47s and P-51s; the P-47s claim 14-0-20
aircraft and the P-51s claim 9-0-3 aircraft; 1 P-47 and 3 P-51s are lost.
  2. 443 B-17s are sent to hit Fassberg Airfield (149); secondary targets hit
are Hoya (37) and Dedelsdorf (13) Airfields; targets of opportunity are
Unterluss (39) and other (24); bombing is visual; 1 B-17 is lost, 2 damaged
beyond repair and 58 damaged; 1 airman is KIA, 6 WIA and 4 MIA. The escort is
220 of 232 P-51s; 1 is lost.
  3. 505 of 526 B-17s hit the Deutsche shipyard at Kiel using H2X radar; 2
others hit Eggebeck Airfield, a target of opportunity; 3 B-17s are lost and
50 damaged; 27 airmen are MIA. 208 of 223 P-51s without loss.
  4. 22 of 24 B-17s fly a DISNEY mission attacking the Finkenwarder U-boat
yard at Hamburg without loss.
  5. 19 P-51s fly a scouting mission and claim 0-0-1 aircraft.
  6. 25 P-51s escort 8 F-5s and 2 P-38s on photo and radar reconnaissance
missions over Germany, claiming 1-0-0 aircraft.
  7. 16 P-51s escort 1 OA-10 and 2 B-17s on air-sea-rescue patrols.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS
    First Tactical Air Force (Provisional): The 405th Fighter Squadron, 371st
Fighter Group, moves from Metz, France to Eschborn Airfield, Frankfurt,
Germany with P-47s.
    Ninth Air Force: HQ XXIX Tactical Air Command (Provisional) returns to the
operational control of HQ Ninth AF (from the RAF Second Tactical AF) as the
US Ninth Army reverts to control of the Twelfth Army Group (from the Twenty
First Army Group); the British ground and air HQ have operationally
controlled the XXIX Tactical Air Command and Ninth Army since shortly after
the Ardennes breakthrough and the Battle of the Bulge.
    In Germany, 330+ B-26s, A-20s and A-26s hit the Ebrach oil depot,
Crailsheim marshalling yard and barracks area, Grossaspach supply depot, the
town of Ellswangen, Backnang rail and road junction, and 2 targets of
opportunity; fighters escort the bombers, fly patrols, sweeps, and armed
reconnaissance, attack special targets, and support the US 104th Infantry
Division at Scherfede and Hardehausen, the 9th Armored Division in the
Warburg area, the XX Corps in the Muhlhausen-Kassel areas, the 2d and 5th
Armored Divisions in the Hameln and Minden areas on the Weser River, and the
8th Armored Division as it assaults the Ruhr pocket in the Lippstadt area.
Units moving: the 107th Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron, 67th Tactical
Reconnaissance Group, from Vogelsang to Limburg, Germany with F-6s; the 125th
Liaison Squadron, IX Fighter Command (attached to Twelfth Army Group), from
Munchen-Gladen to Haltern, Germany with L-5s; the 155th Photographic
Reconnaissance Squadron, 67th Tactical Reconnaissance Group, from Le Culot,
Belgium to Maastricht, the Netherlands with F-3s; the 355th Fighter Squadron,
354th Fighter Group, from Rosieres-en-Haye, France to Ober Olm, Germany with
P-51s; and the 494th, 495th and 496th Bombardment Squadrons (Medium), 344th
Bombardment Group (Medium), from Cormeilles-en-Vexin, France to Juzaine
Airfield, Florennes, Belgium with B-26s.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  AAFMTO: HQ 90th Photographic Wing (Reconnaissance) begins a movement from
San Severo, Italy to the US.

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): Again bad weather prevents
bomber operations and limits efforts to reconnaissance and escort missions
and to strafing attacks by 94 P-51s on rail traffic in the Munich and
Regensburg, Germany; Plzen, Czechoslovakia; and Linz, and Gmunden, Austria
areas.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, B-25s continue to blast
communications along the Brenner rail line, ranging from the railroad bridge
at Drauburg to the Camposanto railroad bridge; the B-25s also inflict
considerable damage on the Merano methanol plant; P-47s concentrate on enemy
movement, rail lines, and ammunition and fuel dumps throughout the Po Valley.
The 489th Bombardment Squadron (Medium), 340th Bombardment Group (Medium),
moves from Alesan, Corsica to Rimini, Italy with B-25s.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA)

  AAFPOA (Seventh Air Force): 24 B-24s from Angaur Island, Palau Islands, hit
a building at Bunawan, Mindanao Island.

  HQ AAF (Twentieth Air Force): HQ 40th and 462d Bombardment Groups (Very
Heavy) arrive at West Field, Tinian Island from India.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA [SWPA, Far East Air Force (FEAF)]: On Formosa, B-24s
bomb Toyohara Airfield, Mako harbor, and Tokichito Island and A-20s hit
Shinchiku factories and rail yards. B-24s bomb the harbor at Hong Kong. P-38s
and P-51s pound various targets in C Luzon Island while A-20s and P-38s hit
the Calauag area. A-20s pound NW Negros Island and B-24s bomb targets on C
Mindanao Island. The 17th Reconnaissance Squadron (Bombardment), 71st
Tactical Reconnaissance Group, moves from San Jose, Mindoro Island to
Lingayen, Luzon with B-25s.

SOURCES:
AIR FORCE COMBAT UNITS OF WORLD WAR II, Office of Air Force History,
  Headquarters USAF, 1961, ISBN 0-912799-02-1
COMBAT SQUADRONS OF THE AIR FORCE, WORLD WAR II, Office of Air Force
  History, Headquarters USAF 1982
THE ARMY AIR FORCES IN WORLD WAR II: COMBAT CHRONOLOGY, 1941-1945 by the
  Office of Air Force History, Headquarters USAF, 1973
THE MIGHTY EIGHTH WAR DIARY by Roger A. Freeman, ISBN 1-85409-071-2
WORLD WAR II IN THE NORTH PACIFIC by Kevin D. Hutchinson, 1994,
  ISBN-0-313-29130-6

Jack McKillop
USAF (Airways and Air Communications Service)
1955-59

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Jack McKillop         |  Those who have long enjoyed such      |
|  Bellcore              |  privileges as we enjoy forget in      |
|  Piscataway, NJ USA    |  time that men have died to win them.  |
|  [email-masked]  |                       FDR              |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

03/2357Z APR

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 19:57:38 EDT
From:    Jonathan Perkins <[email-masked]>
Subject: History: Enfield Rifles (Long)

     Based on some of the feedback to my earlier posting on the Enfield
pattern rifles, I thought I would go ahead and post something a bit more
substantive.  Although it transcends the strict boundaries of the WWII list,
I thought some might be interested to see the historical lineage of the
World War 2 rifles.  In the same vein, I have cross-posted this to the
World War I list, as I thought it might be of passing interest to people
there as well (my apologies in advance to those who subscribe to both
lists, and have to suffer through it twice!).  What follows is an abbreviated
history of the Lee-Enfield bolt-action rifles and the Enfield P-13/P-14/
P-17 family.

     * Early history *

     The Lee turnbolt action was developed by James Paris Lee, a Scots-born
inventor who emigrated to Canada and the United States.  Lee established the
Lee Arms Company in Bridgeport, Connecticut, in 1879.  The first rifle
produced by the company was the Model 1879, which was manufactured by E.
Remington and Sons of Ilion, New York, from 1880-1884.  This rifle was issued
a US patent in 1879, and about 250 were purchased by the U.S. Navy in 1881 to
arm newly-commissioned warships.  The M1879 in USN service was chambered for
the .45-70 Government black powder round, but could be chambered in .44-77
Necked and .43 Spanish to order.

     The Model 1882, produced by E. Remington and Sons from 1882-1884,
entered U.S. army trials in 1882, featuring an improved bolt design.  It
competed favourably against the Chaffee Reece and Hotckiss rifles, but the
U.S. Army of the time stuck to its tried and true Model 1873 "Trapdoor"
single-shot breech-loading rifles in .45-70 Government.  In 1884, Remington
produced 750 of the Model 1882 rifles for U.S. Army trials.  The U.S. Army
Ordnance Board again reported favourably on the rifle, but the Model 1873
"Trapdoor" was retained in U.S. Army service.  The Navy, meanwhile, ordered
another 700 of the rifles in 1884.

     The Model 1885, produced by E. Remington & Sons from 1886-1887 and by
Remington Arms Company (which took over manufacture from E. Remington & Sons
after the latter company's collapse in 1886) from 1888-1892, featured a new
magazine design and a different bolt head.  Roughly 1,500 of these rifles
were delivered to the U.S. Navy between 1888 and 1889.  The USN M1885's were
again chambered in .45-70 Government, while other trials rifles produced for
Denmark and Britain were chambered in .43 (11mm) Spanish.

     The Model 1899, produced by the Remington Arms Company from 1899-1906,
was the last of the U.S. Lee rifles.  It was chambered in a variety of
calibres, including the 6.5mm Lee, 7x57mm and 7.65x53mm Mauser, .303, .30-30
Winchester, and .30-40 Krag.  Quite a few were sold in South and Central
America prior to 1900, but sales then dropped off in favour of Mauser
designs.

     * British Military Rifles *

     The first Lee-actioned rifles appeared in Britain during 1880, when 3
Model 1879 Lee rifles firing the .45 Gatling cartridge were ordered for
trials.  At the end of the trials in March of 1881, the Lee emerged as the
top contender.  In 1883, further rifles in .45-70 Government were tested at
Enfield, leading to further testing of an "Improved Lee" pattern.  In 1887,
successful tests with a Model 1885 Lee chambered in .43 Spanish led to an
order for 300 rifles for trials against the .402 Lee-Burton.  The same year,
however, the .402 calibre round was abandoned in favour of trials of a .298-
calibre Rubin bullet that promised greater accuracy and flatter trajectory.
Further trials rifles with the new round were produced in 1888.

     a. Lee-Metford Rifles

     The pattern for the Lee-Metford "Rifle, Magazine, .303-inch (Mark I)"
was sealed on 12 December 1888.  These rifles were 49.5 inches overall, with
30.2 inch barrels based on the Metford rifling system (7 grooves, with a
left-hand twist of 1 turn in 10 inches).  The standard rifle weighed 9.5
pounds unloaded.  The rifles were chambered for the new .303-inch round,
which at the time was a 215-grain round-nosed bullet encased in a cupro-
nickel jacket.  Backed by 70 grains of compressed black powder, this round
attained a muzzle velocity of about 1,850 feet per second.  The Lee Metford
Mark I rifles were fitted with regular sights ranging from 300 to 1,900
yards, as well as an "Extreme Range Sight" on the stock that was graduated
from 1,800 to 3,500 yards.  These rifles were fitted with an 8 shot
detachable box magazine, and had a magazine cut-off plate on the side of the
receiver.  This allowed the rifles to be used as single shots for aimed
volley fire, reserving the rounds in the magazine for shorter-range rapid
fire.

     The Lee-Metford Mark I* was introduced from 1890, with the pattern
sealed in January 1892.  The rifles featured changes to the safety catch, the
bolt mainspring and magazine spring, and a new sight was introduced.  The new
sight featured a blade front sight, and modified the range settings to
accord with a new smokeless powder (Cordite) .303 round with a muzzle
velocity of about 1,970 fps.  The long range sight was now graduated for
ranges from 1,600 to 2,900 yards.

     The Lee-Metford Mark II pattern was sealed in April 1893, although the
design had been in production since 1892.  The new rifles introduced the
standard 10-round Lee magazine of the later rifles, featured lighter
barrels, and changes were made in the bolt and the magazine cut-off.

     In September 1894, a cavalry carbine was introduced -- the Lee-Metford
Mark I.  The carbine was 39.9-inches in length overall with a barrel length
of 20.75 inches, weighed 7.5 lbs unloaded, and featured a 6-round magazine
that was almost flush with the bottom of the stock.  The carbine's bolt
handle was made flatter than the standard rifle's so that it would fit in the
saddle bucket of the day.

     April 1895 saw the introduction of the last of the Lee Metford types,
the Lee Metford Mark II*.  These rifles featured longer bolts, changes to the
cocking piece, and changes to the safety catch.

     b. Lee-Enfield Rifles

     Adoption of the Mark I .303 cartridge using Cordite propellant in 1892
quickly caused excessive wear in the Metford pattern of rifling, which had
been designed to deal with the fouling of black powder.  To deal with the
problem, Enfield pattern rifling was introduced (named after the Royal Small
Arms Factory at Enfield Lock, north of London).  The new rifling involved 5
deeper square-shouldered grooves compared with the Metford Pattern's 7
shallower grooves.  The result was the Lee-Enfield family of rifles.

     The "Rifle, Magazine, Lee-Enfield, .303-inch (Mark I)" was sealed in
November 1895.  It was broadly similar to the Lee Metford Mark II* with the
exception of the new rifling, which necessitated off-setting the sights
to the left by 0.05 inches in order to compensate for bullet drift.  The Lee
Enfield Mark I* followed in 1899, deleting the cleaning rod that had been a
feature of the Lee-Metford rifles, which was no longer needed (a pull-through
sufficed, as the Cordite ammunition made the rifles easier to clean).  A Lee-
Enfield cavalry carbine, the Mark I, was introduced in 1896.  It was
basically similar to its Lee-Metford predecessor.  The Mark I* carbine was
introduced in 1899, similar to the earlier model except for the deletion of
the cleaning rod.

     Introduction of the "Rifle, Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield (Mark I)" (the
famous SMLE) began in 1902.  Intended to be a compromise between the long
infantry-pattern rifles and the shorter cavalry carbines, the new rifle was
44.56 inches long overall with a 25.19-inch barrel, and weighed 8.15 lbs
unloaded.  Sights consisted of a barleycorn front (an inverted V) and tangent
rear leaf graduated to 2,000 yards, with both sights being protected by metal
ears.  The rifles were not well-received by the self-styled musketry experts
of the time, who complained that they were too short for target use and
too long for the cavalry.  Further, thought at the time was turning toward
aperature rear sights, more powerful and flatter-shooting cartridges, and
tighter locking systems as found on the Mauser rifles (the locking lugs of
the Lee are at the back of the bolt, where they engage the sides of the
receiver, as opposed to the Mauser, whose locking lugs are at the front of
the bolt and engage the receiver ring near the breech.  While the Mauser was
stronger and more accurate, the Lee design gave a lightning-fast bolt throw).
Addressing one of the main criticisms of the old Lee-Enfields, the new SMLE
introduced charger-loading via a bridge guide that straddled the receiver
(from the Mark III on).  Experience in South Africa vs. Boer Mausers, which
could be quickly charged from a 5-round stripper-clip, had shown the value of
this feature.  Several of the older Lee-Enfield patterns had been fitted with
charger guides on the bolt head, but these were fragile and unreliable.

     The SMLE Mark I* was introduced in March 1906, making some changes in
the stock furniture and adopting the magazine cut-off of the naval pattern
rifles that had been made in 1903.  Throughout the period 1903-1906, there
were also a number of converted SMLE patterns that modified older Mark I,
Mark I*, Mark II, and Mark II* Lee-Enfields to the shorter pattern.  These
were variously known as the SMLE Mark II and Mark II* Converted patterns.

     The most numerous pattern of the SMLE, the Mark III, was introduced in
1907.  The principle change was in the sights: a simple front blade (coming
in 5 heights) was substituted for the barleycorn, a wider rear tangent sight
was fitted, and a bridge charger guide was introduced.  In 1910, the sights
of the Mark III's were modified to accommodate the new Mark VII cartridge,
which raised the muzzle velocity to 2,230 feet per second, and the magazine
was modified slightly to accept the new round's pointed spitzer-type bullet.
During World War I, several sniper patterns of the SMLE were introduced.
Most of these used relatively low-power (2.5x or 3x) telescopic sights
calibrated for ranges between 100 and 600 yards.  In 1916, the Mark III* was
introduced, making several changes to ease wartime manufacture.
Manufacturers had the option of omitting the long-range sights (all did) and
a few other features to aid production.  As a result, most Mark III* rifles
lack the magazine cut-off of the pre-war rifles.  The SMLE rifles were
produced by the Royal Small Arms Factory, Enfield Lock, Middlesex (1907-22);
the Birmingham Small Arms Co. Ltd., Small Heath (1907-1943); the Standard
Small Arms Company, Birmingham (1916-1918); National Rifle Factory No. 1
(1918-1919); the Royal Australian Small Arms Factory, Lithgow; and Ishapore
Arsenals, India.

     Transition between the SMLE pattern rifles and the No. 4 Lee-Enfields of
WW II began with the Mark V in 1922.  This pattern introduced an aperature
rear sight at the rear of the receiver, with a large "battlesight" aperature
available for use when the precision aperature was folded down.  The Mark V
was unsatisfactory as an experimental gun, however, and it was quickly
cancelled in favour of the Mark VI, which featured a heavier barrel and other
changes to the rear sight.

     Development of the No. 1 Mark VI into the No. 4, Mark I began in 1929
(the nomenclature for British infantry rifles changed in 1926, with the SMLE
pattern rifles becoming known as the No. 1 series).  Variations to the No. 1
Mark VI and Mark VI B continued until 1939, when the No. 4 Mark I was
formally adopted (although it was not issued until Spring 1942).  The No. 4
was 44.43 inches overall (o/a length varied with the butt fitted--these came
in bantam, standard, and long lengths) and weighed 9.06 lbs unloaded.  The
barrel was heavier than on the SMLE and was bedded differently.  Headspacing
was accomplished by changing the bolt head, which came in a variety of sizes.
These rifles were produced at the Royal Small Arms Factory at Fazakerly,
Lancashire; the Royal Ordnance Factory at Maltby, Yorkshire; and at a
Birmingham Small Arms (BSA)-controlled factory near Birmingham.  Several rear
sight patterns were used.  The Mark 1 sight was a folding pattern, with a
precision aperature adjusted by a worm screw and graduated from 200-1,300
yards in 50 yard increments.  The Mark 2 featured a simple "L"-shaped sight
with aperatures for 300 and 600 yards.  The No. 4 Mark I* was introduced in
1941, featuring simplifications to the design to ease manufacture.  The Mark
I* rifles (about 2 million) were produced exclusively in Canada and the
United States.  Canadian rifles were produced at the Long Branch arsenals in
Toronto and were considered some of the best rifles of the type made.  U.S.
rifles were produced by Savage Arms Company in Chicopee Falls, Massachusetts.
Some of the wartime rifles also featured 2-groove rifling as a further
manufacturing expedient, and a number of modified rear sights, made of cheaper
pressed metal and using a simple slide instead of a worm screw adjustment,
were introduced as an aid to mass production.

     Wartime variants of the No. 4 include the Mark I (T) sniper rifles.
These were select specimens fitted with the No. 32 telescopic sight.  Many of
the converted sniper rifles were modified by famed gunmakers Holland &
Holland, with BSA-produced guns being preferred.  Savage-Stevens and Long
Branch rifles were used as well, however.  During 1943, there had also been
a request for a lighter rifle for jungle use.  This resulted in the No. 5,
which featured an 18.7 inch barrel and weighed only 7.16 lbs unloaded.  These
carbines enjoyed only limited popularity: they were lighter to carry, but
recoiled viciously and suffered from accuracy problems.

     The oddest Lee-Enfield variant is the DeLisle suppressed carbine in
.45 ACP.  These used a modified Lee-Enfield action fitted to a large silencer.
Firing the sub-sonic .45 ACP round, the carbines were extremely quiet--it is
said that upon firing, all one would hear was the firing pin drop on the
cartridge primer.  Unfortunately, any gains in silenced firing were negated
by the noise of working the bolt.  Given their longer barrels, these rifles
could be quite accurate out to about 200 yards with the .45 ACP cartridge.
Versions fitted with fixed wooden stocks and folding-butt versions were
produced.

     Post-war variants of the No. 4 include the Mark 2, the Mark 1/2 (a Mark
I modified to Mark 2 standard) and the Mark 1/3 (a Mark I* brought up to Mark
2 standard).  The Mark 2 and its variants were introduced as of 1949, and
featured only minor changes to simplify the design.  From 1960 on, some of
the No. 4 rifles were modified to 7.62x51mm NATO and were re-designated as
the L8 series.  Some of the Mark I(T) rifles were converted into the L42
series of sniper rifles, which were the standard service sniper rifles up
until the adoption of the Accuracy International L96A1 sniper rifle in 1986.
The L42 series rifles were also of 7.62mm NATO calibre, as was the L39
competition rifle.

     * Enfield Rifles *

     a. Enfield P-13

     As a result of the growing controversy within the self-styled firearms
community (but not the military) surrounding the introduction of the SMLE,
the War Office began development of a rifle more in pace with the musketry
developments of the day.  This meant that the rifle was based on a modified
Mauser action and featured a prominent rear aperature sight.  Further, the
new rifle featured a smaller calibre round of high velocity, which gave a
flatter trajectory.

     The "Rifle, Magazine, Pattern 1913" was introduced in 1913.  It featured
an aperature rear sight graduated from 400-1,900 yards and a battle sight for
600 yards.  Auxiliary long range sights were fitted to the left side of the
stock.  The rifle fired a new .276-calibre (7mm) round, which was loosely
based on the .280 Ross then in vogue with target shooters.  (Note: In my
original post, I incorrectly cited this as a .243-calibre round--Mea Culpa!
The .276-calibre round is more closely equivalent to the current .280
Remington/7mm Remington Express, or the 7mm-06 wildcat round.  It is also
quite similar to the .276-Pedersen which the U.S. Army experimented with
between 1923-1932 for the Pedersen semi-automatic rifle).  The .276 round
featured a 165-grain bullet at 2,800 feet per second, the ammunition being
manufactured at Royal Laboratories, Woolrich.  Drawbacks to the new cartridge
were numerous: heavy recoil, excessive metal fouling, a high degree of muzzle
flash and blast, rapid erosion of the barrel and chamber, barrel overheating,
irregular chamber pressures, and premature ignition in the chamber.

     b. Enfield P-14

     The onset of World War I highlighted a number of critical production
shortages in the manufacture of the SMLE.  No production line for the Pattern
1913 Enfield existed, but the design was considered to be suitable for mass
production.  The experimental .276 calibre round was shelved and the rifle
modified to fire the standard .303 round.  This changed the sight graduations
from 200-1,650 yards with a 400-yard battlesight aperature, and the long
range sight set for distances up to 2,600 yards.  Production for the Pattern
1914 was contracted out entirely to U.S. firms.  Remington Arms-Union
Metallic Cartridge Company produced the majority of the rifles at their
factory in Eddystone, Pennsylvania -- these are known as the Pattern 1914
Mark 1E.  The Mark 1R was produced by Remington at their Bridgeport,
Connecticut factory, while the Mark 1W was produced by Winchester Repeating
Arms Company in New Haven, Connecticut.  All were largely similar, but some
variations in manufacture meant that certain parts were not always
interchangeable.  All of the basic Pattern 1914 1E/1R/1W rifles were produced
in a 1E*/1R*/1W* pattern as well, featuring different fore-ends and other
minor changes.  British contracts for the Pattern 1914 were cancelled in late
1916.

     The rifle was not terribly popular with the troops due to its overall
length of 46.3 inches, its longer barrel of 26 inches, and its smaller 5
round magazine.  Nevertheless, it found its niche as a sniper rifle,
particularly in the form of the Pattern 1914 Mark 1*W (T), which carried an
Aldis telescopic sight.

     c. Enfield 1917

     U.S. production of the Pattern 1914 meant that they had a ready supply
source for this pattern of rifle when they entered the war in 1917.  The U.S.
modified the rifle to fire the .30-06 round and issued it as the Model 1917.
Eddystone was the largest manufacturer, followed by Remington and Winchester.
The Model 1917 was, in fact, more prevalent among U.S. troops (at least in
training and early deployment) than was the contemporary Springfield Model
1903 -- the manufacturers of the Model 1917 produced over 2 million rifles
during the war, while Springfield and Rock Island Arsenal produced only
313,000 M1903 rifles during the same period.  Many of the Model 1917 rifles
were shipped to Britain as Lend-Lease equipment during World War II, where
they occasionally caused confusion with British rifles chambered for .303-
calibre ammunition.  After many accidents where .303 ammunition was
accidentally chambered, most of these rifles were subsequently painted with
a broad red stripe to denote their use of .30-06 ammunition.

     Anyway, hope this is informative and interesting to some.  All replies
and comments welcomed.

     Sources:

Barnes, Frank C.  _Cartridges of the World_, 6th Edition.  Northbrook, IL:
     DBI Books, Inc., 1989.

de Haas, Frank.  _Bolt Action Rifles_, Revised Edition.  Northbrook, IL: DBI
     Books, Inc., 1971, 1984.

Hogg, Ian V. and John Weeks.  _Military Small Arms of the 20th Century_, 6th
     Edition.  Northbrook, IL: DBI Books, Inc., 1992.

Walter, John.  _Rifles of the World_.  Northbrook, IL: DBI Books, Inc., 1993.

--
----------
Jon Perkins--Ottawa, Canada
[email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 20:24:14 -0400
From:    David Rising <[email-masked]>
Subject: Movies: Heimat and Stalingrad (was Re: Das Boot)

Jim Brady asked where to find a copy of Heimat. Sorry to sound like a
broken record (re. Stalingrad posts) but I have only ever seen this video
avaliable in Canada (Toronto). It _is_ however available on video there to
buy and rent. I recently checked on Stalingrad, BTW, and it is _not_
available in the U.S. at the present moment (to rent or buy). Couldn't
tell you why Canada is getting all the good German flicks first. Cheers,
David Rising

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 21:10:36 EDT
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: 50 Years Ago - 03-APR-1945

On 03-APR-1945, the following occurred -

World War II - The Battlefronts
-------------------------------
Western Front - The British XXX Corps reaches the Dortmund-Ems canal. In
the U.S. 9th Army sector, the XIII Corps completes capturing the Munster
and reaches the Weser. The XIX Corps is advancing towards the east, putting
pressure on the Ruhr pocket. The XVIII Airborne Corps and the III Corps
begin attacking the Ruhr pocket. In the 3rd Army sector, the 80th Division
continues its offensive against Kassel. In the 7th Army sector, the 45th
Division captures Aschaffenburg. The French 1st Army takes Karlsruhr and
prepares to occupy the Black Forest.

Eastern Front - The 2nd Ukraine Front reaches the open country around
Vienna. Heavy fighting is occuring near Bratislava, which is beseiged by
the 2nd Ukraine Front.

Philippines - Heavy fighting is occurring on Negros and Cebu.

Okinawa - The 6th Marine Division advances about 5 miles towards the
isthmus of Ishikawa. The 1st Marine Division is moving along the Katchin
peninsula and reaches Hizaonna. In the XXIV Corps area, the 7th Division is
moving down the east coast of the island and reaches Kuba. The 96th
Division is advancing more slowly inland and on the west coast.

Washington - General MacArthur is named Commander-in-Chief of all U.S. land
forces in the Pacific and Admiral Nimitz of all naval forces by the Joint
Chiefs of Staff.

=============================================================================

Sources: "United States Army in World War II, Chronology 1941-1945" compiled
by Mary H. Williams, Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of
the Army, "2194 Days of War" by Cesare Salmaggi and Alfredo Pallavisimi,
"Facts On File Yearbook 1945, Person's Index Of World Events" edited by R.L.
Lapica.

Copyright 1995 by John B Davis, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Previous articles are archived at ftp.webcom.com in directory /pub/jbd/www
and can be accessed via the WWW by URL: http://www.webcom.com/~jbd/ww2.html.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Davis                           |                      [email-masked]
Cary, North Carolina                 |            http://www.webcom.com/~jbd/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 14:23:46 -1000
From:    Jim Adams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Inf: Japanese Apology

The following is an article in today's (April 4,95)
Honolulu Advertiser, by Jerome T. Hagen, retired
brigadier general, USMC.  He presently teaches a history
course, "War in the Pacific" at Hawaii Pacific University.

JAPANESE APOLOGY WOULD END 50 YEARS OF BITTERNESS OVER
ATROCITIES

With the anniversary of the end of World War II in the
Pacific almost upon us, it would be wonderful if the
Japanese people would rise to the challenge, wrest
control of the apology issue from the politicians and
call upon their emperor to have the prime minister
publicly apologize to the world for Japan's aggression.

And it would be most appropriate for such an apology to be
made in Honolulu during the 50th anniversary ceremonies.

If Hirohito could bear the unbearable and think the
unthinkable in order to surrender his nation to the
allies on August 15, 1945, then the emperor today could
and should end a 50-year period of bitterness by making
such a gesture.

The Japanese people should not be blamed for the lack of an
apology; they did not start the war.  It was only when
the emperor thought his subjects had suffered enough from
fire-bombings, atomic bombs and 15 years of agression in
China that he acted to stop the war.  Several authors,
including Haruko and Theodore Cook suggested several
reasons why the Japanese have not been able to apologize
for the war.  The reasons include:

--This was the first major defeat for Japan.  There are
well established procedures for the victors, but seldom
is the tale of the defeated told or publicly acknowledged.

--The war period for Japan lacks a clear start and for many
Japanese, a clear finish. Because of the national
censorship and propaganda programs, the population was as
confused and desperate as the Chinese, which Japan had
been terrorizing since 1931.  Japan is estimated to have
suffered about 4 million military and civilian casualties
during the war.  For these people and their families,
August 15, as a date for the end of war, has little or no
significance.

--The responsibility for the war was never officially
placed on anyone.  Ask someone, "who was responsible for
Germany's aggression?"  The answer is certain to be
Adolph Hitler.  Ask the same question about Japan's
aggression and you do not get a consensus of opinion.
The issue remains clouded to this day.

To be sure, there is plenty of blame, but who is to bear
it?  The emperor?  The military?  The numerous cabinets
which were so ineffective?  The industrialists?  The
zealots in the Kwangtung Army?

--MacArthur replaced the military government and started
rebuilding Japan. The issue of responsibility was left
unexplained and the need for an apology was not
considered important.

--Finally in manyways it was a good defeat for the
Japanese.  The country emerged as an economic leader with
personal freedoms and a democratic process never before
imagined.

In summary, there has been little except the Yasukuni
shrine and an annual August 15, "Day Comemorating the End
of the War," to remind the Japanese of the war.  At the
annual ceremony, the emperor reads a short statement, a
moment of silence is observed and the nation gets on with
business.

There is no discussion of the reasons for the war, no
debate of the causes, costs or consequences.  The
ceremony participants are blank faced and generally mute.
 The war years are clearly not etched in time or public
memory.  Only the Japanese people can change this.  Such
a change would be welcomed by the world.

****************************************************************************
Jim Adams                       [email-masked]
Cultural Resource Manager
USS Arizona Memorial, NPS       (808) 422-2771  extension 130
1 Arizona Memorial Place
Honolulu, Hawaii 96818
****************************************************************************

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 14:36:24 -1000
From:    Jim Adams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Hitler's Body

I saw an article in today's paper about this.  It said that Russia
(Soviets) in 1970 excavated Hitler's body, as well as Eva Brawn, and the
Gobbel family (I think my spelling is off but I don't have time to check
- please accept my apology) and cremated the remains of the bodies.  They
were worried about a resurge of neo-nazism trying to get hold of their
remains.  Article stated that the soviet army had burried these boddies
in secret in 1945 in East. Germany.

How valid this article is, I don't know.

****************************************************************************
Jim Adams                       [email-masked]
Cultural Resource Manager
USS Arizona Memorial, NPS       (808) 422-2771  extension 130
1 Arizona Memorial Place
Honolulu, Hawaii 96818
****************************************************************************

On Sun, 2 Apr 1995, Ron Charlton wrote:

> >From my English friend --
>
> there are rumors that the German magazine Der Spiegel will be publishing an ar
> ticle confirming that the Russians had Hitler's body but destroyed it.
>
> There was a television program about a year ago(?) speculating on this, but
> they couldn't cofirm it at the time.
>
> If I get more on this I will post it.
>
> Ron Charlton
>

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 21:34:38 -0400
From:    "Neil C. Carmichael" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WWII Reenactment and Event Schedule -Reply

Across the Rhine in Chestertown, Maryland.
Operation Varisty-Plunder and V-E day.

Tactical, Commerations and Dedications, Displays, Living Histories,
and Vistor Activies.

May 25- May 28 1995

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 21:55:23 -0500
From:    Joseph Feld <[email-masked]>
Subject: Japanese midget subs at Pearl

I was wondering if anyone could tell me, has the subemerine sunk by the
Ward ever been found?  Also, is it true that one of the midget subs
actually fired on an American ship at Pearl Harbor?

Joseph Feld
[email-masked]
Ferndale, MI

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

Date:    Tue, 4 Apr 1995 02:55:00 UTC
From:    "Edward S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Tactics (?) Assurance

  > Thanks for the excellent info... now can you tell us what happened to
  > the  French Frigate? <g>

  Yes.  In 1786 the French explorer La Perouse was cruising along the
Leeward Hawaiian atolls on a voyage of discovery.  One fine night his
frigates Astrolabe and Broussole almost ran onto the shoal.  They veered
away just two cables length from the surf.  He named it Basse des Fregates
Francaises, Shoal of the French Frigates, because, said La Perouse, "it had
nearly proved the final termination of our voyage."

Source: Edwin H. Bryan, Jr., "American Polynesia and the Hawaiian Chain"
(Honolulu: 1942)

BTW, Midway was not discovered until 1859.  It was claimed by the US in 1867
(our first offshore territory, just before the Alaska purchase) for use as a
commercial coaling station and thus named for its position exactly halfway
across the North Pacific.  The navy failed at blasting a channel in 1870 and
gave up until a second try in 1938-40.

Edward Miller   [email-masked]

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

Date:    Mon, 3 Apr 1995 23:18:42 EST
From:    "OConnor, Christopher M" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII Reenactment and Event Schedule

Do you happen to know of any re-enactments in the East.  If you come
upon any then I would appreciate you sending them to me.  Thanks-Chris

>This is the spring WWII Reenacting and event schedule for the Mid-West.
>There are probably many events on the East and West coast that I am
>unaware of, as well as a few probably in the Mid-West that didn;t get to
>me as well.  WWIIHRS means World War II Historical Reenactment Society.
>WWIIAPS means World War II Airman's Preservation Society, and CAF Means
>Confederate Airforce.
>
>Apr 15-16 Avoca, WI, WWIIHRS, Western Front Airborne Battle
>
>Apr 21-23 Camden, OH, WWIIHRS, Western Front Battle
>
>April 22, Aurora, IL, WWIIHRS, WWII Dinner and Dance
>
>April 28-9 Yorkville, IL, WWIIHRS, WWII Basic Training Revisited
>
>April 28 St. Louis, MO, WWIIHRS, Jefferson Barracks Display and public
>         battle--various time periods
>
>May 6-7 Geneva, IL, WWIIHRS, Living History Display and Public Battle
>
>May 6-7 Kansas City, MO, V-E Day Celebration, WWIIHRS, includes display
>s, parade, and steam train ride into Union Station, also aircraft
>display at KC downtown Airport
>
>May 6-7 Ft. Knox, KY, WWIIHRS, Western Front Tactical Battle on Sat and
>Public battle on Sunday
>
>May ???  Memphis, TN, WWIIAPS, Memphis Belle Last Mission Anniversary
>
>May 20 St. Paul, MN, CAF, Fleming Field Hanger Dance
>
>May 26-8 Fort Smith, AR, WWIIHRS, Living History Display and Public Bat
>tles
>
>June ???  Dyersburg, TN, WWIIAPS, Airshow
>
>July 27-Aug 2 Oshkosh, WI, CAF and WWIIAPS, Annual Fly-in
>
>Aug 4-6 Aurora, IL, WWIIHRS, Living Histpry Display and Public Battles
>
>Aug 4-6 St. Paul, MN, CAF, 18th Annual Airpower Display at Holman Field
>
>August ??  Worth, IL, WWIIHRS, Living History Display and public battles
>
>Aug 11-12 Tinley Park, IL, WWIIHRS, Living History Displays and Public
>Battles
>
>Sept 2-4 Jefferson, IN, WWIIAPS, Clark County Airshow
>
>Sep 5-10 St. Louis, MO, WWIIAPS, 8th Air Force Reunion, Adams Mark Hot
>el
>
>Sep ??  Westmont, IL , WWIIHRS, Living History Displays and Public Battl
>es
>
>Oct 6-8 Yorkville, IL, WWIIHRS, WWIIHRS National Battle and meeting
>
>If there are other events that people would like to see added to the
>schedule please let me know.  Also, please feel free to repost this list
>to other mailing lists--send it to friends etc.  I have more information
>on most of these events so please contact me directly for more
>information.  It will be a great summer!!  All I am thinking right now
>for may is Kansas City and chuga chuga chuga chuga.
>
>TAS
>
>************************************************************************
>*  Tim A. Scherrer          "You'll be fighting WWII for the rest of   *
>*  Facilities Supervisor     your life", Ron Scherrer, 1971            *
>*  WP:816-785-5253                                                     *
>*  HP:816-665-6704                                                     *
>*  ID# [email-masked]                             *
>************************************************************************

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

End of WWII-L Digest - 2 Apr 1995 to 3 Apr 1995
***********************************************