Tag Archives: erik lang

The Need for Increased Special Operations Forces Funding

Leave a reply

Erik Lang

Shock rippled through his body; instantly he knew he was hit.  His leg looked like it had been severed almost completely off just above the knee.  Staff Sergeant John Wayne Walding fired his weapon a few more times and began to attend to his knee.  He quickly formed a tourniquet around his leg to stem the flow of blood gushing out of the stump.  His leg was “flopping around,” so Walding folded his leg up parallel to his thigh and tied it in place.  While trying to inject his leg with morphine, he slipped and stuck his thumb by accident.  “Well, now my thumb feels pretty good,” he remarked to his fellow soldiers, which brought a chorus of laughs in the grim situation.  Without immediate access to a medical facility, Staff Sgt. Walding held his position and continued to fight the terrorists that outnumbered them.

This incredible account of Staff Sgt. Walding is completely true, verified by his peers on the battlefield with him.  Within this engagement, vast numbers of insurgents assaulted the joint Special Operations Forces unit.  Men just like Walding fought for many hours without relief in unfamiliar territory.  Not a single American SOF member was killed.  To fight back against a large enemy in their territory for hours requires impeccable skill and courage, both qualities embodied within Special Operations Forces.  Accounts like this prompt my thesis: to provide more government funding for the training, production, and use of Special Operations Forces.

Throughout this thesis are several terms or acronyms used some people have never heard before.  They are used to simplify the words the acronyms stand for.  SOF stands for Special Operations Forces and refers to every military branch’s special unit.  Spec. Ops. is used interchangeably with SOF.  Irregular Warfare is defined as “a violent struggle among state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant population(s).  Irregular warfare favors indirect and asymmetric approaches, though it may employ the full range of military and other capacities, in order to erode an adversary’s power, influence, and will” (Baseops).  This means our military cannot engage insurgencies in open battle as war has been previously conducted in wars past.  The enemy is not clothed or endorsed explicitly by any government, making open confrontation with them difficult and tedious.  The military now incorporates methods revolving around reconnaissance, covert missions, and ways of engaging the enemy without the convenience of always knowing who or where the insurgencies are.  IEDs are Improvised Explosive Devices and are one of the most frequent ways insurgents inflict casualties.

The history of American SOF began in the mid 1700s during the French and Indian War between France and England.  Lt. Col. Robert Rodgers commanded a group of American militiamen to fight against the French using methods similar to what the Indians used, involving stealthy ambushes and fighting and traversing in rough terrain unfamiliar to French soldiers.  This unconventional way of fighting was the beginning of the idea of SOF tactics (Couch 1).  In every war America has been engaged in since, the use of special groups like “Rodger’s Rangers” that performed feats beyond those of ordinary soldiers has become more prevalent.  In the War for American Independence, Francis Marion conducted daring raids on British camps in the swamps of South Carolina and Georgia.  In the Civil War, Colonel John Mosby led a group of volunteers behind Union lines and regularly conducted surprise attacks on supply lines and enemy soldiers.  He earned the nickname the “Grey Ghost” (25).  However, it wasn’t until World War II when the idea behind modern SOF began to take shape.

The Germans had their own groups of commandos that had devastating effects on Allied Forces.  In response, America’s William “Wild Bill” Donovan formed the OSS, or Office of Strategic Services, with the permission of President Franklin Roosevelt.  “Donovan trained them in parachuting, sabotage, silent killing, communications, and a host of behind-the-lines disciplines, including the recruitment and training of indigenous resistance forces” (29).  This is almost identical with what modern day SOF has become, especially in regards to training indigenous resistance fighters.  The OSS operated mostly in the European theater, working in the countries of Norway, Holland, Belgium, and France.  OSS worked behind German lines as saboteurs and intelligence gatherers and was a major contributing factor in helping end the war.  In the Pacific theater, the OSS also had great success, particularly in Burma.  OSS instructors helped organize Kachin and Karen rebels into an organized fighting force of 15,000 that wreaked havoc upon Japanese soldiers, killing thousands and wrecking crucial supply lines.  With the dissolution of the OSS after the war, many former employees began working for the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency).  Among them was William Donovan.  He worked closely with two veterans of World War II: Colonel Russell Volkmann and Colonel Aaron Bank, both of whom had extensive experience with the OSS.  This triumvirate made the nucleus of the modern day CIA.

During the Vietnam War and the military actions taken in El Salvador, the CIA operated closely with the military, perfecting their use of SOF.  In both of these military actions, SOF was instrumental in using its tactics and training to fight off Communist aggressors and train and equip the locals to fight the enemy.  After World War II and through Vietnam, input from other countries like England further assisted America in her growth of SOF.  Years of warfare have strengthened SOF to become the deadly, efficient fighting and instructing force it is today.

Today, the new enemy is terrorism, in whatever form it takes.  America is battling insurgencies around the globe, giving SOF credibility to help America adapt to the style of Irregular Warfare.  With the knowledge of fighting terrorist groups and infiltrating enemy lines, SOF is needed in today’s war more than ever.

I will prove how SOF needs more government funding to put more soldiers in the field by clearly demonstrating SOF is the most effective and efficient type of soldier (better qualified to combat Irregular Warfare than basic military units), is thoroughly successful in missions, and plays a large part in the War on Terror and would have an even greater impact with proper funding.  Arguments against extra funding for SOF are the assertions they are uncontrollable, ineffective, and fiscally irresponsible due to the uniqueness of SOF compared to standard infantry units.

Irregular warfare is a type of combat that involves countering insurgencies and guerrilla militias with precision strikes usually in isolated engagements.  The difference between traditional warfare and irregular warfare are the enemy and the strategies associated with fighting against them.  Traditional warfare was army against army, country against country.  The enemy was well known, specific to a country, and marked by uniforms of that country.  With irregular warfare, the enemy lives among the innocent, blending in with societies eliminating open warfare as an option for confrontation.  Currently, the war on terror is fought against insurgencies like the Taliban or Al-Qaeda, which blend in with cultures and societies and attack American forces in isolated skirmishes and ambushes.  “Irregular warfare is emerging as a dominant form of warfare for the future.  Yet irregular warfare, at its root, contains many of the characteristics found on today’s battlefront in Afghanistan and Iraq and in the Global War on Terror (GWOT)” (Cannady 4).  With irregular warfare fast becoming the normal form of war, it is critical for America to adapt and effectively combat such insurgencies.  An adapting style of war calls for a special breed of soldier: a soldier that is highly effective, skilled, and enduring.  This breed of soldier is found in American Special Operations Forces.

America’s military is comprised of four branches of service: the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Air Force.  Each of these services has its own group(s) of special operation forces.  These higher trained and qualified forces are superior to standard military units, given the nature of Irregular Warfare.  Simply put, these basic units are incapable of effectively completing missions in the War on Terror, making funding for soldiers that are effective and capable for this type of war imperative.  The Army has three different groups of Spec. Ops.  They are the Army Rangers, the Green Berets, and Delta Force.  The “Ranger Regiment is a flexible, highly-trained, and rapidly-deployable light infantry force with specialized skills that enables it to be employed against a variety of conventional and special operations targets.…  They generally practice to parachute into the middle of the action, to perform strikes and ambushes and to capture enemy airfields” (Powers 2).  The Army Rangers are a more trained group of infantry than the basic grunts.  They pride themselves on being first in the fight in any firefight.  They aren’t the Spec. Ops. Soldiers that wear camouflage face paint and night vision goggles, but they go through an intensive training course, hardening them for heavier, direct combat.  The Army’s Green Beret (Special Forces) soldiers’ primary job is instruction.  These are the soldiers America sends to aid foreign countries in properly training their military.  Given the nature of their job, Special Forces (SF) personnel must be fluent in at least one other foreign language, preferably two or three.  SF are incredibly effective in communicating with natives in countries, which provides them with the ability to penetrate enemy territory and conduct reconnaissance missions providing intelligence to command centers in friendly territory.  This knowledge base gives SF superior reasoning capabilities and insight into a foreign country’s unresolved issues, providing valuable assistance to the leaders of any country.  Every SF member is required to possess these skills, something not seen within basic infantry units.  SF’s efficiency when it comes to foreign relations is much higher to the alternative basic Army infantry.  Direct action and counter-insurgency are also part of SF’s job description.  Finally for the Army Special Operations is the Delta Force, the group least thought of when Spec. Ops. is mentioned.  Delta operates mainly on a classified level, often working in conjunction with organizations like the C.I.A. 

Back in 1977, when hi-jacking aircraft and taking hostages seemed to be the “in thing,” an Army Special Forces officer, Colonel Charles Beckwith, returned from a special assignment with the British Special Air Service (SAS), with a unique idea.  He sold the idea of a highly-trained military hostage-rescue force, patterned after the SAS, to the head-honchos at the Pentagon, and they approved (4).

Delta Force is rumored to have its own fleet of helicopters painted with civilian colors in order not to draw attention.  The main objective of Delta Force today is to be the silent resolvers.  If there is an incident developing America can’t officially get involved in, then Delta Force is sent to get in and out without alerting anyone to America’s presence.  At least, that’s what the rumors are.  The Army infantry doesn’t have the proper training to accomplish what Delta can.  Delta’s effectiveness in these precarious situations is evidenced in unclassified missions during the War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Navy’s Spec. Ops. Group is the now famous SEALS.  SEALS are trained for land, sea, and air assaults.  These men are required to pass the rigorous Basic Underwater Demolition/SEALS (BUDS) course, which is a six-month long, physically grueling selection and assessment program.  One section of BUDS is “Hell Week,” where the candidates must participate in physical activities almost constantly for six straight days in a sleep-deprived state (allowed only 4 to 5 hours of sleep).  The SEALS’ most valuable contribution is underwater and amphibious assaults partnered with demolitions expertise.  No other SOF groups, especially basic military units, are trained to combat Irregular Warfare as effectively as SEALS.  They are trained in every type of environment and go through countless scenarios of missions.  They are also the only group to actively train for conflicts in arctic or subzero conditions.  SEALS thrive in aquatic environments, and their superior physical capabilities make their missions near flawless.

The United States Air Force has two different Spec. Ops. groups: the Air Force Pararescue Jumpers (or PJs) and the Air Force Combat Controllers.  “‘These things we do, that others may live.’  That’s the official motto of Air Force Pararescue.  If you have an aircrew member down in enemy territory, wounded or not, you can’t get anyone better to pull him/her out of there than Air Force Pararescue” (6).  PJs are responsible for responding to military personnel in distress quickly and transporting them to safety, and if necessary, fight off enemy hostiles harassing those in need.  PJs are required to have an extensive knowledge of medicines and treatments for any type of abrasion to the body and be able to treat the wounds in the field, while airborne, or even under fire.  Training for these soldiers lasts roughly a year, preparing them for almost every rescue scenario known.  Air Force Combat Controllers are soldiers who operate makeshift air traffic control towers in the field very close to enemy positions.  Their responsibility is to sneak into hostile territory, direct air traffic during missions, and then sneak back out without detection.  They are, of course, trained to react accordingly to defend against hostiles if they are discovered.

Marine Corps Force Recon is the final Spec. Ops. group.  They only recently joined the Spec. Ops. umbrella but have made great contributions to the SOF community and in missions like Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.  The Force Recon team is trained to conduct pre- and post-mission reconnaissance of the target location(s), advising Marines and other assaulting forces on the terrain, number of hostiles, etc.  Among the Marine Corps Force Recon men are the Marine snipers, highly qualified and trained separately in the Marine Recon sniper school.

The training for each of these Special Operations groups is long, intensive, and extremely difficult, physically and more so mentally.  The SOF soldier must be able to overcome all odds thrown against him by neutralizing the enemy, complete the assigned mission, and fall asleep with a clean conscience … then wake up the following day and do it all over again.  To live this lifestyle is taxing on the mind and must be lived by only those who are mentally sound.  Those who crack under pressure are quickly weeded out during SOF recruitment and testing.

The training courses are designed specifically to each group and their specialties, but elements similar in each group’s training program are the emphasis on physical taxation.  Physical Testing (PT) is every day, all day.  Punishments are given in the form of more running, sit ups, pushups, or whatever the instructors decide.  Physical fitness is mandatory, and those who fail to pass this qualification are quickly weeded out and sent home.  Communicating and acting as a team is critical to the execution of Spec. Ops. missions.  Numerous exercises and leadership reaction drills enforce the idea no one man can successfully operate by himself.  The team itself must work together in order to achieve perfection in execution.  These thorough and taxing training programs cannot be done by standard soldiers.  Special Operations Forces live up to their name; they are special.  Irregular Warfare and the War on Terror cannot be fought effectively by standard military troops.  They aren’t trained nearly as well as SOF.  This simple truth calls for more government resources to be dedicated toward SOF programs to take the fight to the enemy and keep Americans free from terror.

The quality of the soldiers from the Special Operations Forces breed are exceptional.  The contrast between the regular soldiers on tour and the Spec. Ops. warrior leaves a chasm of experience, training, and success.  The Special Forces Creed succinctly states the mindset of the SOF warrior:

I am an American Special Forces Soldier!  I will do all that my nation requires of me.  I am a volunteer, knowing well the hazards of my profession.  I serve with the memory of those who have gone before me.  I pledge to uphold the honor and integrity of their legacy in all that I am — in all that I do.  I am a warrior.  I will teach and fight whenever and wherever my nation requires.  I will strive always to excel in every art and artifice of war.  I know that I will be called upon to perform tasks in isolation, far from familiar faces and voices.  With the help and guidance of my faith, I will conquer my fears and succeed.  I will keep my mind and body clean, alert and strong.  I will maintain my arms and equipment in an immaculate state befitting a Special Forces Soldier, for this is my debt to those who depend upon me.  I will not fail those with whom I serve.  I will not bring shame upon myself or Special Forces.  I will never leave a fallen comrade.  I will never surrender though I am the last.  If I am taken, I pray that I have the strength to defy my enemy.  I am a member of my Nation’s chosen soldiery, I serve quietly, not seeking recognition or accolades.  My goal is to succeed in my mission — and live to succeed again.  De Oppresso Liber (North 4).

Simply put, Special Operations Forces are better at confronting terrorism through Irregular Warfare.  They are self-motivated and encouraged by their peers to live the words of the creed.

This drive and passion led to their effectiveness during missions.  In Operation “Chromium,” the objective of the joint U.S. Special Forces and Iraqi commandos was to take down an insurgent kingpin named Abu Obaeideah with his followers in Samarra, Iraq on the 10th of September, 2007.  Up to this mission, the SF unit had been training the Iraqi commandos with SOF techniques to better defend their own country.  Operation “Chromium” provided the perfect live action scenario to put the Iraqis’ practice to the test.  Reliable intelligence pinpointed Abu’s location in Samarra.  He and about 10 to 12 other insurgents were inside a small farming compound comprised of several buildings.  The raid took place at night, and three U.S. SF operators (Staff Sgt Halbisengibbs, Sgt 1st Class Lindsay, and Capt Chaney) led the assault as supervision.  Black Hawk helicopters carried the U.S. and Iraqi teams separately.  When the American chopper tried to land at the designated Landing Zone (LZ), the surface was filled with water prompting the pilot to set down closer to the target buildings.  The closer landing alerted the hostiles to the Americans’ presence.  The Iraqis were too far away to help, so the three SF operators did the only natural thing: continue the mission alone.  They systematically and quickly swept the first building, clearing it of hostiles until they entered the second house, where the bulk of the insurgents were.  Each Green Beret sustained injuries while killing the hostiles, but they proved victorious and killed Abu Obaeideah with a quick three-round burst.  The mission was a complete success, providing the fledgling Iraqi commandos with a prime example of the effectiveness of SOF.  All three SF soldiers were awarded medals for their courage (the Distinguished Service Cross and two Silver Stars).  Operation “Chromium” is one of many missions SOF have been involved with, including other operations like “Vigilant Resolve” and “Awakening,” where SOF battled enemies that vastly outnumbered them and emerged victorious.

Right now, America is leading the charge against the War on Terror.  Within the American effort against terrorism, no military group is used more heavily than SOF.  Their success is unparalleled by any other military unit world-wide, but their contribution comes at a price.  SOF resources are stretched thin, and men within these special groups are often deployed at least six months out of every year.  “When it comes to equipment, aircraft, intelligence, and other support, they say, they don’t get their fair share.  As one senior Special Forces officer put it: ‘We have a world-class capability for direct action.  We need the same world-class, well-resourced capability to do unconventional warfare’” (Robinson 2).  Unconventional warfare is the same as Irregular Warfare.  The soldiers within the Special Operations community do the brunt of the fighting because the war is exactly what they trained for.  The only problem is there are not many of these soldiers, so often it is the same men completing all the missions time after time, year-round.  With increased funding better facilities, increased access to weapons and aircraft support and SOF intelligence will all be more available to SOF, increasing missions completed each year.  Even government officials are starting to take notice of the power of SOF.  Rep. Jim Saxton, the chairman of the special operations subcommittee, while praising direct-action successes, says, “I believe the key to our military efforts rests in the unconventional capabilities.  It is vital that policy makers in the Department of Defense not lose sight of the strategic importance of unconventional warfare and ensure that we capitalize on those capabilities” (3).

Three arguments against creating incentives and providing more funding for SOF training and equipment are the assertions SOF are uncontrollable, ineffective and unnecessary, and fiscally irresponsible.  These arguments are unsubstantiated and based on faulty premises.

First, the uncontrollable argument maintains SOF are “Pariah Cowboys,” undisciplined and trigger-happy.  Trigger-happy describes one who wildly shoots anything that moves.  Special Operations Forces are anything but trigger-happy.

One of the hardest of the hard-liners was the group’s chief, Dick Clarke.  (Clark’s philosophy was to preemptively attack the terrorists.)  Asked if that meant using SOF, he replied: “Oh yeah.  In fact, many of the options were with special mission units.” … Such measures worried the senior brass, who proceeded to weaken those officials by treating them (SOF) as pariahs.  That meant portraying them as cowboys, who proposed reckless military operations that would get American soldiers killed.…  (The officiating generals didn’t like the idea of SOF and attacked Clark.)  Some generals had been vitriolic, calling Clarke “a madman, out of control, power hungry, wanted to be a hero, all that kind of stuff.”  In fact, one of these former officials emphasized, “when we would carry back from the counterterrorism group one of those SOF counterterrorism proposals, our job was to figure out not how to execute it, but how we were going to say no.”  By turning Clarke into a pariah, the Pentagon brass discredited precisely the options that might have spared us the tragedy of September 11, 2001.  And when Clarke fought back at being branded “wild” and “irresponsible,” they added “abrasive” and “intolerant” to the counts against him (Shultz).

Clark’s entire philosophy of taking the fight to the terrorist was completely ignored by military officials because of his use of SOF and their skepticism about SOF’s ability to take orders.  This prejudiced belief was directly responsible for the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Centers, who could have been stopped sooner if military officials listened to Clark.  SOF has the highest success rate out of any military group in the world.  The casualty rates comparing standard military forces and SOF is 26 to 2.

Advisor Dick Clarke is often pointed out by bureaucratic military advisors as being extreme and unstable.  The reality is Dick Clarke and men like him who serve as SOF are the most obedient soldiers available to America.  SOF go through intense training programs where they are only taught how do the job of SOF and are expected to follow every order to the letter.  Failure to follow orders during these programs means automatic dismissal from the program, sometimes without the option to even start over (Powers).  The notion of uncontrollable SOF is invalidated through the constant training and discipline these men go through.  The uncontrollable counter-argument has no base or evidence to support their claims.  SOF has creeds and prayers said on a daily basis to reaffirm the type of men they are: intelligent and effective.

The second major counter-argument SOF is ineffective is irrational.  When addressing the ineffectiveness of SOF, the incident that usually surfaces is the UN mission in Somalia where “Operation Irene” turned into a deadly 16-hour shootout with hostiles in downtown Mogadishu.  SOF members were pinned down and sustained heavy casualties when two Black Hawk helicopters were shot down in Mogadishu.  Since this mistake, SOF trainers and officials have taken great steps forward in the Special Operations department.  Better and more intensive training, higher awareness of situations, and increased use and responsibilities have honed SOF into highly effective soldiers.  The fight in Mogadishu has given SOF a black eye that quickly healed but was never forgotten by SOF.  Every member of SOF knows of Somalia and goes through specific courses designed to ensure the mistakes made there will never be repeated.  After this incident in 1993, many Pentagon officials were hesitant about using SOF in any capacity.  “Some senior generals had expressed doubts about the Mogadishu operation, yet as it had morphed from a peacekeeping mission into a manhunt for Aidid, the new national security team had failed to grasp the implications.  The Mogadishu disaster spooked the Clinton administration as well as the brass, and confirmed the Joint Chiefs in the view that SOF should never be entrusted with independent operations” (Shultz).  Since the firefight in Mogadishu, there have been at least 24 successful missions, including Operations “Chromium” and “Vigilant Resolve” during the War on Terror, in which SOF was directly involved and made a significant contribution.  These missions involved hunting down terrorist training camps, targeting high profile Taliban/Al-Qaeda leaders, infiltrating and destroying terrorist drug productions, and more (North).  The Mogadishu incident was only one mission gone wrong.  The talents and benefits SOF bring to America’s military are indispensable and shouldn’t be shoved aside because of one bad mission.

Lastly is the assertion funding and incentives for SOF are fiscally irresponsible and unnecessary, and the funding would be better spent elsewhere in the military or even on programs like government-provided health care.  When the safety of America is at risk, other programs such as socialized health care must be put on hold.  The government does not, and has never had the responsibility to, provide health care to all citizens according to the U.S. Constitution.  The Constitution does say the government has the obligation to protect America’s citizens from all powers both foreign and domestic.  The real fiscal irresponsibility would be to provide funding to any program but the Special Operations program.   Government funding for the U.S. military was dramatically cut in the beginning of the year 2011.  Cutbacks due to the recession cost many in the military their jobs.  Congress currently is projecting to cut the military’s overall budget by even more, potentially up to 500 billion dollars.  With budget cuts as dramatic as these, America’s military is going to be significantly smaller, thus weakening the defense of America.  With America as a super-power turned invalid, other countries won’t hesitate to take advantage of a weakened America and attack.  The remaining soldiers guarding our country must be the best of the best, properly trained to fight the changing style of war: Irregular Warfare.  Our military must adapt its personnel and tactics in order to not be swept aside by enemies more prepared than America.  The soldiers best trained for this warfare are SOF soldiers.

There are many men just like Staff Sgt. Walding, men who will fight until they can’t fight anymore, ready to give their lives in defense of the freedoms we as Americans hold so dear, and more can be similarly trained to follow suit.  Through increased funding and incentives for SOF programs, the efficiency and expertise can increase even more to ensure even greater protection and strategic advantages against enemies of America.  For your own safety and a desire to see America combat fanatical aggressors, please promote my thesis, to rightly fund more SOF programs to other forms of funding.  Our very existence and way of life is at stake.

Works Cited

Baseops. “US Special Operations — Navy SEALs, Delta Force, Special Forces, Army Rangers.” Baseops.net. Web. 12 Dec. 2011.

Cannady, Bryan H. “Irregular Warfare: Special Operations Joint Professional Military Education Transformation.” Thesis. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, 2008. Web. 12 Dec. 2011.

Couch, Dick, and Robert D. Kaplan. Chosen Soldier: the Making of a Special Forces Warrior. New York: Crown, 2007.

Martin, Joseph J., and Rex W. Dodson. Get Selected! for Special Forces: How to Successfully Train for and Complete Special Forces Assessment & Selection. Fayetteville, NC: Warrior Mentor, 2006.

North, Oliver, and Chuck Holton. American Heroes in Special Operations. Nashville, TN: Fidelis, 2010.

Powers, Rod. “Special Operations Forces — U.S. Military.” United States Military Information. About.com. U.S. Military, 2011. Web. 11 Dec. 2011.

Robinson, Linda. “U.S. Special Forces Are Walking Point in the War on Terror. Here’s Their Plan.” US News & World Report. 3 Sept. 2006. Web. 11 Dec. 2011.

SOC. “U.S. Special Operations History.” Special Operations.Com. 2000. Web. 11 Dec. 2011.

Southworth, Samuel A. U.S. Special Forces: a Guide to America’s Special Operations Units. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo, 2002.

—. U.S. Special Warfare: the Elite Combat Skills of America’s Modern Armed Forces. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo, 2004.

The Glorious History of the Dolphin

Leave a reply

Erik Lang

Consider the dolphin.  We’ve all seen Flipper, the loveable rescue dolphin who fights crime and injustices upon his reef.  We love the cheerful chips, whistles, and crackles made by this playful creature and oftentimes dream of blithely tossing fish into their appreciative open mouths.  At least I do.  But do we know everything about the dolphin?  How has this animal impacted cultures of the past?  How does the dolphin behave with the rest of the world?  What is the dolphin exactly?  Let’s find out.

To begin this adventure, we must go back to ancient times.  Dolphins make their way into many different societies like Greece, Hawaii, India, and the rest of the world.  Dolphins are considered by many to be magical creatures, friends of the gods, and highly intelligent.  The classic Greek myth of the dolphin begins when Dionysius, the god of wine and debauchery, is abducted by Etruscan pirates thinking him a rich prince whom they could ransom.  After out at sea for a time, Dionysius caused grape vines to grow on the ships’ riggings he then used to make an obscene amount of wine.  The wasted pirates were at the mercy of the god of wine.  He turned the oars into serpents, frightening the pirates into the water where Dionysius left them to drown.  The pitiful cries of the pirates softened Dionysius’ heart, so he changed them into dolphins.  Ever since then, dolphins have been helpful creatures and friends of man, seeking to redeem themselves for angering Dionysius.  The seafarers during the age of exploration considered the dolphins to be good fortune in travels.  Dolphins oftentimes would leap around ships and guide them through unknown waters into safe harbors.  In Minoan and Maori (Pacific Islander) myths, the dolphin was a messenger of the gods and is oftentimes seen on reliefs, murals, and pottery being ridden by ancient deities.

The average dolphin weighs between 440-660 pounds and is around eight feet in length.  These specifications are pertinent to the bottle-nose dolphin, the one that is all gray and featured in the Flipper television series.  There are actually forty different species of dolphins, all of which have differing weights and lengths but are close to the bottlenose dolphin.  The smallest dolphin weighs about 90 pounds and is four feet long.  About five species of dolphin live in fresh water sources; the rest in oceans.  Dolphins are carnivores, eating mostly fish, squid, and some crustaceans.  Luckily for the dolphin, no other ocean predator really pursues the dolphin as a food source.  An occasional shark may get in a skirmish with one, but other than these few and far between instances, the dolphins lives a peaceful life free from worry.  The largest cause of dolphin death is the human, in reality.  Dolphins near Japan are killed for eating.  The Japanese decimate Pacific dolphin populations frequently.  Near the Balkan countries, native fishermen see dolphins as a competition for fish and a nuisance.  Hundreds of dolphins in the area are killed and their fat used for oil.  Dolphins are killed inadvertently by humans, too.  Many get trapped in fishing nets, and some dolphins choke on waste thrown in the ocean.

Many scientists believe dolphins possess intelligence to rival men.  This is dumb.  It’s probably the same people who say monkeys are our cousins.  Who’s in the cage/tank, then?  But dolphins do have a higher intellect than most animals, capable of compassion, playful interaction, even vanity.  Dolphins have a brain size relatively big for their body, bigger than a chimpanzee’s, for instance.  Dolphins are able to mimic human gestures like waving.  They also recognize commands and many words humans use after much repetition and respond by chirping, whistling, or whatever they do.  There are countless cases of dolphins saving humans from drowning or even sharks.  These heroic creatures seem to have an affinity for humans and crave their attention.  In an experiment to test dolphin intelligence, marine biologists placed a mirror in a dolphin tank and watched the reactions of the animals.  The dolphins immediately noticed their reflections and made faces at the mirror, blowing bubbles and doing somersaults.  In a further experiment, scientists marked a dolphin with a marker its side and put it back in the tank.  The dolphin immediately swam over to the mirror and stared at its new tattoo.

What many don’t realize is that the Orca (Killer Whale) is a member of the dolphin family.  Orcas are more aggressive than dolphins.  They hunt seals and even sharks and tend to swim in more open waters.  These great mammals have absolutely no predators.  Nothing hunts them, not even humans.  Orcas have a similar relationship to humans as dolphins do.  In SeaWorld, the Orca Shamu interacts with human trainers and members of the audience in fun shows.  They do have a sort of affinity for humans, not to the extent of dolphins — but still very playful, nonetheless.  Orcas are bigger and more powerful animals, and orcas do know it.  Sometimes, orcas attack humans thinking them seals or out of frustration from excessive human dominance.  There have been several cases of SeaWorld orcas attacking human trainers with some cases resulting in fatalities.  The Killer Whale Kilitik has had three documented cases of killing trainers.

So I encourage all to find a dolphin somehow and play with it; the same for an orca, although that one may be more difficult.  Wild dolphins don’t even run away from you, so there’s really no excuse, unless you can’t swim.  Right here in the James River there are a veritable plethora of porpoises, a close cousin of the dolphin.  They can be a viable substitute for the dog of the sea.  It is an experience that cannot be rivaled.  Pursue your passion, and experience the amazing companionship of the dolphin.

Military Technology for Irregular Warfare

Leave a reply

Erik Lang

Since the beginning of man, war has existed.  With each passing time period, the weapons, armor, and overall technology improve, become more sophisticated and deadly.  Open declared war between country and country has been non-existent for the past thirty years.  Taking its place is irregular warfare: warfare adapted to specifically combat terrorism.  This has been adopted by America as well as many other prominent countries.  Developing military technology, such as weaponry, armor, and defensive machinery has better paved the way for better executing irregular warfare as well as reduced military and civilian casualties.

In Afghanistan, the military situation has remained constant, constant meaning fragile and dire.  American soldiers’ lives are still being lost, and efforts to instill democracy in the region are being fought every step of the way politically and forcefully.  Since 2001, over 1,000 military fatalities have occurred.  Currently we have 33,000 American soldiers deployed in Afghanistan (Dwyer and Martinez).

Open, drawn out warfare between countries not an option for terrorists.  Their military strength is absolutely no match for open combat, case in point being the Persian Gulf War, which lasted only several hours and resulted in the near annihilation of Saddam Hussein’s military.  Terrorism is essentially extremely brutal guerilla warfare that tries to shock its enemies into either submission or giving in to the requested demands.  Terrorists in the Middle Eastern countries are no exception.  Their methods of opposing military forces are very simplistic, yet if directed properly, devastating to American forces.  When the Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan, they introduced their weaponry as well.  After the dramatic fall of the Soviet Empire, the struggling Communists sold much of their military equipment to the rebel Afghanis.  Of that equipment, two weapons are so readily used by terrorists they have become nearly synonymous with them: the AK-47 and the RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade).  The AK-47 was developed by a Soviet national named Kalashnikov, who desired to design a standard Soviet assault rifle that was durable and powerful.  The only drawback for this weapon is it isn’t very accurate.  The RPG was used by the Soviets as an anti-tank weapon.  This lethal projectile weapon is commonly used against American convoys, helicopters, etc.  Upon impact and detonation of the target, the warhead will fragment into hundreds of metal shards and tear through the target.  The most detrimental weapon that has killed most American soldiers, however, is the IED (Improvised Explosive Device).  These home-made bombs come in various forms such as a standard package, a suicide bomber, or disguised in a vehicle.  Protection and effective retaliation against these three threats is vital to effectively combat terrorism (Terrorism Team).

As a counter to the IED, vehicles such as the ILAV, the “Bull,” and the EM Tronic have been created to repel such attacks.  The ILAV (Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle) is a troop transport that so effectively handles IED detonations, reports show more deaths in ILAVs are contributed to the vehicle rolling over than the IED itself.  The ILAV is eight feet tall and weighs a total of 33,000 lbs. (Brown).  A second vehicle called “The Bull” also repels such attacks as effectively as the ILAV.  As well as withstanding IEDs, “The Bull” also resists EFPs (Explosively Formed Penetrators).  This armored vehicle is being evaluated by the Marine Corps currently (Brook).  Finally, the EM Tronic is a light reconnaissance vehicle used for detection of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear materials (CBRN).  The Tronic can also be set up via a standalone system (a Tronic controlled through a computer on an onsite location) or a deployable chemical and biological laboratory (EM Tronic).

Although vehicles provide exceptional defense against insurgent threats, the human body itself needs individual protection as well.  Body armor has been the subject of many military experiments.  What type of body armor can the standard American soldier wear that will completely protect him yet give him freedom of movement?  This technology will not be seen for years down the road, but increased torso protection has been made available.  Dragon Skin Armor, made by Pinnacle Armor, can withstand nearly any small arms fire.  The vest is composed of ceramic composite discs overlapping each other to spread the shock of impacting bullets and prevent penetration.  After a grueling 120-round test with mp5, m4, and AK-47 rounds, absolutely no penetration showed through on the other side of the vest or damage to the dummy wearing the Dragon Skin.  This is especially exciting, because rounds from the AK-47 usually pierce standard body armor (Discovery Channel).  Enhanced Kevlar vests will soon be made ready to the military known now as Liquid Body Armor.  Essentially, Liquid Body Armor is Kevlar treated with a polyethylene glycol embedded with millions of nanoparticles.  This covers the Kevlar in a relaxed state, but when aggravated, instantly becomes rigid.  This causes the bullets to bounce off the soldier wearing the armor, not penetrating the Kevlar.  This technology is not perfected but is very close to completion (Scien Central Inc.).  Not quite body armor but just as helpful is the Lockheed and Martin HULC exoskeleton.  The HULC exoskeleton consists of robotics applied to the wearer’s body that conforms to it, sensing and reacting appropriately to its movements.  Such technology greatly enhances a soldier’s ability to carry more equipment, possibly heavier.  The HULC exoskeleton takes the strain of carrying equipment and transfers it to the ground a soldier walks (Lockheed Martin).

For the average American soldier, ease of access is a valuable thing, especially in a firefight on the battlefield when every second is crucial.  Technology has improved enough to reveal the SDR, the fuel cell, and the Dräger rebreather system.  The SDR (Software defined Radio) will greatly improve combat communication.  The SDR is viable for nearly any type of radio frequency.  This is vital, because for joint-forces operations, meaning missions where Marines, Army, Air Force, and Navy all are coordinating together constantly, instead of normally communicating on radio wavelengths unique to each branch of the service, information can be passed directly between services increasing the mission’s potential for success (Thane).  Another less complicated yet efficient machine is the fuel cell that may eventually replace the battery.  A fuel cell is like a battery, performing the same functions except with superior durability and easier access.  A fuel cell can last much longer than the typical battery.  Fuel cells come in cartridge form and are far lighter than batteries, allowing soldiers to carry more fuel cells and making swapping expended fuel cell cartridges for fresh ones quicker and easier, giving that soldier the extra few precious seconds he needs.  As a bonus, fuel cells are biodegradable and can assimilate into the environment, unlike batteries (Hawkes).  In some Special Forces missions, it is required for the infiltrating Special Forces team to be submerged and scuba dive to a point to complete the mission.  A scuba system leaves a trail of bubbles on the surface of the water, which may alert hostiles to the soldier’s presence.  The Dräger rebreather (LAR 5000) allows for a soldier to be completely submerged and leave absolutely no bubble trail.  This occurs because the rebreather mixes gases in the system to filter oxygen out of the water alone and not from an oxygen tank (Dräger).

Protection is nothing without great offensive measure.  Since World War II, the technology surrounding guns has quickly ascended to produce more deadly, powerful, and accurate guns.  One particular gun that marked a new era of guns was the Trench gun, first used in Vietnam (Creveld 265).  The 1950s brought on the development of laser-guided weapons and missiles and rockets powered by a small computer chip or electronic signal (268).  The M249 SAW Light Machine Gun (LMG) is the United States variant of the Belgian FN Minimi.  Currently, the SAW is the standard light machinegun for the U.S. Army and Marine Corps.  This gun is used as a suppressive firing rifle.  While engaged in a firefight, American soldiers need to move to take up strategic positions to outmaneuver the enemy and neutralize them.  The SAW lays down a wall of protection as it strafes the enemy position, causing the hostiles to take cover.  During this time, American soldiers move to their desired location of attack and resume fighting (Willbanks 248).

Many of these firefights take place in urban settings.  A perfect assault rifle for urban warfare has recently been developed by the Israeli government.  The Cornershot gun is a shorter gun with a hinge in the middle that can collapse and allow the user to put the end around the corner of a building and neutralize the targets behind it without revealing his own body.  This is made possible due to the small screen on the gun near the handgrip.  A small camera is near the tip of the gun, and images are transferred to the screen in real time so the user can react accordingly.  This Cornershot gun, although small and hinged, comes equipped with night vision.  One of the main worries about this gun was the power behind it and if it would stop an enemy in no more than two shots.  Also, the use of a smaller caliber to accommodate the Cornershot gun’s radical design came into question.  The developers took all this into consideration and designed the gun to have the same power as an M16 assault rifle: the American standard assault rifle (Strategy Page).

As efficient as the SAW is, Heckler and Koch, a German weapons manufacturer, has developed a replacement for the SAW.  The HK IAR is seriously being considered by the American Army to replace the SAW.  Both weapons take the same ammunition; however, the advantage lies with the IAR.  The SAW is box fed ammunition.  This holds a great quantity, but the reload time is very long.  The IAR is magazine fed, like the M4 or the M16.  The IAR still holds 100-150 rounds, which is plenty for a suppressive firing weapon.  In fact, the IAR can even interchange magazines with the M4 assault rifle.  The IAR is gas operated and has a closed bolt system, which is unique to a gun of such purpose.  A closed bolt system allows for rapid cooling to occur inside the gun, which makes firing the weapon repeatedly not a problem for overheating, unlike the SAW (Lamothe).

As critical as good infantry weaponry is needed, the first step to winning a war is to control the skies.  The F117A Nighthawk is a stealth bomber nearly invisible to radar.  This is because the plane was constructed to have no curves anywhere on the craft, only flat planes.  The flat planes as well as the flat black paint with which the craft is painted bounce radar waves off to avoid detection entirely (Berliner 13-14).  The Nighthawk was instrumental in the Persian Gulf War.  The F-117A was used by the United States Military to destroy the Iraqi Army’s anti-aircraft guns before the main attack (6, 9).  On January 17, 1991 during Operation Desert Storm, the F-117A Nighthawk attack became the world’s first mass attack of stealth bombers (10).  The B2 Stealth Bomber is literally a flying wing.  It has no body or tail but has all of the necessary components inside (26).  The B2 is composed of a graphite-epoxy as opposed to steel.  This composition is stronger than aircraft aluminum and absorbs radar waves instead of reflecting them.  The B2 can fly for over 5,000 miles without having to refuel.  For reference points, that’s the length of Missouri to Kosovo, Eastern Europe.  The total cost for a B2 Bomber is one billion dollars (27).

Different from the Nighthawk or the B2 is the F22 Raptor.  The Raptor is the world’s first stealth fighter jet as well as supersonic.  Supersonic is the ability to travel faster than the speed of sound.  Not much has been released about this craft because of its secrecy and new development (28).

A UAV is an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle and comes in several forms.  The American Military uses theses UAVs or “drones” as a way to penetrate enemy airspace in a smaller craft with no danger to the pilot.  The Predator RQ-1 is the most prominent UAV and is equipped with warheads and satellite imaging.  The RQ-1 locates a possible target, analyzes it, and destroys it if the target is indeed hostile.  The Predator RQ-1 can be controlled by a pilot or set on an autopilot (Air Force Technology).

A brand new way to keep convoys safe while en route to a point is through the CHK program (Cooperative Hunter Killer).  The Hunters are small hand-thrown planes that continually circle the progressing convoy monitoring the surroundings searching for potential hostiles.  If located, the Hunter sends a message to the Killer (probably a Predator or a fighter jet) giving it the location of the potential hostile.  The Killer locates the target and neutralizes it before it can affect the convoy.  The Hunters also have the capability to locate IEDs and direct the convoy along a safer route or to take a detour before the IED detonates.  This program uses Air Force/Army/Navy cooperation.  This program is still in its experimental stage, and not all details have been released to the public (JFEX Journal).

Terrorists use their brutal and bent ways to exploit humanity’s fears and leave none of us alive.  Military technology is being developed overall to keep Americans safe, be they civilian or military.  With deadlier, more effective weaponry, the United States Military can bring swift hard justice to those who threaten American livelihood.  Protecting those who risk their lives to keep Americans safe is not easy, but with the application of science, such revelations like the Dragon Skin by Pinnacle Armor can be greatly utilized by our troops.  With America’s superior technology and strategies, Americans can rest assured this great nation will resist terrorism everywhere, and that the United States will win.

Works Cited

Airforce Technology. “Predator RQ-1/MQ-1/MQ-9 Reaper — Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV).” Air Force Technology. 2010. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Berliner, Don. Stealth Fighters and Bombers. Berkeley Heights: Enslow, 2001.

Brook, Tom Vanden. “Military Tests New Armored Vehicle.” USATODAY.com. 28 June 2007. Web. 18 Oct. 2010.

Brown, Crystal Lewis. “New Vehicles Used in Anti-IED Training.” The United States Army Homepage. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Creveld, Martin Van. Technology and War: from 2000 B.C. to the Present. New York: Free, 1989.

Discovery Channel. “FutureWeapons: Dragon Skin.” YouTube. 23 July 2008. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Dräger. “Dräger LAR 5000.” Dräger USA. 2010. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Dwyer, Devin, and Luis Martinez. “Afghanistan War: U.S. Military Exceed 1,000 Deaths in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan.” ABCNews.com. 28 May 2010. Web. 13 Oct. 2010.

EM Tronic. “Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Detection for Light Armoured Vehicles and Stand-Alone Protection.” Army Technology. 2010. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Hawkes, Alex. “Batteries Not Included: The Implementation of Fuel Cells.” Army Technology. 1 Sept. 2010. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Lamothe, Dan. “H&K Is Frontrunner in IAR Competition.” Marine Corps Times. 4 Dec. 2009. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Lockheed Martin. “HULC Exoskeleton.” YouTube. 22 Jan. 2010. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

MacQuarrie, Brian. “Military Situation in Afghanistan Will Get Worse, Petraeus Says.” Boston.com. 22 Apr. 2009. Web. 13 Oct. 2010.

Scien Central Inc. “Liquid Bullet-Proof Armour.” YouTube. 19 June 2006. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Strategy Page. “The Cornershot Gun.” Strategy Page. 1 Sept. 2003. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Terrorism Team. “Terrorist Weapons Home.” Oracle ThinkQuest Library. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Thane, Phil. “Defining Next Generation Radio with SDR.” Army Technology. 13 Aug. 2010. Web. 14 Oct. 2010.

Willbanks, James H. Machine Guns: an Illustrated History of Their Impact. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2004.

Personal Observations and Contradictions of Islam

Leave a reply

Erik Lang

Islam is one of the fastest growing religions worldwide.  Muslims are settling in every country of the world, some of these countries actively enforcing Muslim customs and laws.  This is unsettling.  Islam is a destructive religion passionately fueled by messages of hate against non-Muslims.  America is fighting wars against terrorism that believes in Islam.  Islam is dangerous, but even more importantly, it is completely wrong.

Islam is an adapted and corrupt version of Christianity.  Let’s examine the facts: Muhammad was born at 570AD.  This was during a period when Christianity was spreading like wildfire.  Evangelists spreading the Gospel witnessed to areas where Muhammad lived.  Muhammad even acknowledged hearing Christian missionaries in his youth.  The Gospel begins with an angel appearing to the Virgin Mary telling her she will have a son.  The angel’s name was Gabriel.  No other angels are associated with the Gospel.  When Muhammad heard the Gospel, he liked many qualities of it.  He incorporated those qualities into his own religion, like alms to the poor, loving each other, etc.  The angel who appeared to Muhammad in the cave was the angel Gabriel.  Could it be Muhammad heard the account of Christ and took elements of it, such as the appearing of the angel Gabriel, and used them to create his own religion that best suited his needs?  Absolutely.

The concept of Allah has been around since ancient Sumerian days.  Muhammad did not create Allah.  He, again, took ideas from other religions and forged them into Islam.  The symbol of Islam is the crescent moon.  The moon has actually been the primary belief of all Arab peoples forever.  The title of the moon god for the ancient Arabs was “the deity,” or in Arabic Al-Ilah.  The epicenter of the worship of the pagan moon god was in Mecca.  The shrine in Mecca was actually a home to 360 other gods but was completely dedicated to Al-Ilah.  Al-Ilah was the beginning of the myth of Islam.  Muhammad took a well known and practiced religion of the Middle East and borrowed the pagan moon god Al-Ilah, or now Allah, and substituted him as the one and only true god.  Conveniently for all new converts to Islam, their pilgrimage was to Mecca, a holy site already well-known to all Arabs thanks to the moon god.  It would be easier for a population to place their beliefs in something they were already familiar with (a moon god) and have easier access to (Mecca).  It’s really just a religious game of mix and match.  Muhammad declaring Allah was the only god is laughable, since the moon god had brothers and daughters in Arab tradition, all of which were deities.

Islam is famous for Muhammad being the last of the prophets sent to complete Allah’s work (again, convenient).  Muslims also teach Jesus Christ was a prophet sent by Muhammad, yet nothing more.  Muslims believe Christ to be a great man and wise.  If they truly believe in the teachings of Christ as the words of Allah, then they must also believe Christ’s claim He is the Son of God.  Here is where Muslims refuse to acknowledge the facts.  Jesus Christ came and fulfilled prophecies.  Here Islam takes part of Christianity again and accepts only the parts they think are worthy or fit their standards better.

Islam teaches abstinence from any alcoholic beverages.  Wine or beer or any other fermented drink is to not be consumed by any good Muslim.  Muhammad even says drinking and drunkenness is an abomination, Satan’s handiwork.  If one were to read through the Qur’an further, though, he would find verses describing the Islamic Paradise.  Paradise for the Muslim is reserved for the righteous, and the rivers are overflowing with wine.  These rivers are described by Muhammad as “a joy to those who drink.”  Other verses state “their (the righteous) thirst will be slaked with Pure Wine sealed.”  For the good Muslim to live a life shunning alcohol, why would he engorge himself with the brew in Paradise?  Muhammad is basically saying abstain from drinking so you may drink in Paradise.

One of the biggest debates raging between the world and Muslims, even among Muslims themselves, is the issue of the Jihad, or holy war.  The Qur’an specifically states several times in order to be a good Muslim and true follower of Allah, one must take up the sword and slay all infidels who will not convert to Islam.  The majority of Muslims agree with the Qur’an on this topic, although most do not actively participate in Jihads against infidels.  The other group of Muslims believes the jihad is a spiritual warfare against the world and within oneself.  Their interpretation of the Qur’an is wrong, strictly speaking.  Muhammad clearly meant for his followers to kill all those who were not of the Muslim faith.  They are fitting religion to meet their needs.  This group of Islamists tries to live civilly with the rest of the world in order to avoid further bloodshed.  Their non-willingness to follow their Muslim brethren drives the orthodox Muslim group to anger.  This issue results many times over in conflicts and civil wars between Muslim countries.  This whole issue is counter-productive to the attractiveness of their own religion.  One side continues to uphold the Qur’an and murder infidels while the other side twists the Qur’an to fit their needs and only angers the true believers of Islam to kill them as well.  This is absurd.

One obvious issue with Islam is it was completely made up by Muhammad so he could order others around.  This is a bold statement, but I believe it’s completely valid.  Muhammad was a nobody.  Then the next day, he is the “chosen prophet” of Allah, appeared to by the angel Gabriel.  Muhammad’s special revelation occurred in a cave secluded from his home town.  Gabriel appeared to Muhammad and gave him his divine purpose from Allah.  Muhammad claimed to have consistent contact with angels and Allah; none of these encounters can be verified by any other sources.  An entire religion based upon the passionate appeals by one man is enough to persuade an entire region of people toward Islam.  Muhammad never had any witnesses to verify his claims of divine interventions.  There was never any proof.  In short, an entire race of people including the millions of others they have deceived follow the teachings of a man who lied about his revelations.

After the birth of Islam, all believing Muslims immediately conquered the surrounding lands under the orders of Muhammad.  Muhammad now had an entire people subjugated by holding the key to Allah.  They had to do his bidding or risk the wrath of Allah.  Muhammad’s home of Medina was under the control of pagan idolaters who had ostracized Muhammad, and he wanted revenge.  Muhammad rousted his new disciples and told them all who do not believe in Allah and worship idols are enemies of Islam and must die under the sword.  His first conquest was his hometown, Medina.  Muhammad continued to use his armies to conquer most of the Middle East until he died and his campaign was continued by other prominent Muslim leaders.  Islam was a get rich quick scheme and a useful tool for brainwashing populations into doing his will.

What can we as countries do against such reckless hate?  Better yet, how should we as Christians respond to their attacks?  Through our faith, our first response should always be out of love.  They need salvation just as much as we needed it.  However, God did say there are times for war and times for peace.  Many of these Muslims do not listen to reason or even listen period.  It is against these types of people our physical struggle is against.  Diplomacy can only take one so far when a guy with an AK-47 is trying to murder him.  This is where the government steps in, and we are required to use force against the Muslims.  Force is acceptable to use when all other options are exhausted.

Islam is riddled with gaps of reasoning and inconsistencies.  The only reason why so many believe it is because the first Muslims already worshipped the same thing as Allah.  Muhammad simply organized them all and pointed them in the direction he wanted.  Muhammad’s religion of Islam was conceived by a greedy man who took parts of religions he liked and combined them all to make his own cocktail of deceit.  There were no witnesses for his revelations.  All he ever said about his divine appearances were lies.  If you examine the pure facts and look at the evidence through an unbiased eye, you can obviously see the flaws of Islam and the ill intentions behind its creation.

The Pragmatic Christian

Leave a reply

Erik Lang

In our culture, the mindset prized above all is else to be logical and efficient.  America was born through hard work and innovation.  As Christians in America, it is easy to twist, ever so slightly, the Biblical teachings of Scripture to fit the new modern version of American Christianity.  We need to recognize the dangers this new way of thinking presents and re-educate ourselves to think and act in a true Christian manner.

Since America was founded, Christian values have been chipped away to leave just a basic form of Christianity that questionably meets the requirements for the faith.  The non-believers of our society have constantly repeated the same messages of hedonism and acceptance of new beliefs so much even Christians are affected by them.  What we are left with is a re-defined religion that is a far cry from Christianity.  Part of that way of thinking has been heavily influenced by the American media.

The morality of movies and television shows has declined dramatically.  America started off with films like Casablanca and Singing in the Rain and is now producing movies like Saw and Sex in the City.  Saw features gratuitous, unlawful violence and hatred, while Sex in the City is a flick about middle-aged women who seduce anyone they can.  Television shows are just as bad, if not worse.  Every episode of every show is at least half an hour long, so the writers need to pack as much as they can into the program.  Each hour of a show is packed with about as much information as a whole movie.  Programs are filled with mindless violence, unashamed sex, and blasphemy.  Such themes in early America would be unthinkable.  The sad part is many Christians view this as the norm.  Most do not speak out against such obvious infractions of the Bible.  Just as American secular values have dropped in the film industry, so have Christian values.  We’ve accepted this change because it came slowly over time.

These decisions not only affect our social life but issues in our government as well.  Operating strictly pragmatically doesn’t always pertain to the governmental budget.  Being pragmatic could entail performing abortions.  Why shouldn’t a woman be allowed to murder her child because she can’t afford to keep it?  She claims it would be an inconvenience, and therefore it would be pragmatic to abort her child.  This is not an extreme example at all.  It happens every day.  This is one of the worst permissible activities in America today.  Surprisingly (yet now unsurprisingly), a fair amount of professing Christians believe abortion is an acceptable, pragmatic alternative to not being a parent.  Right here Christianity has been “sanitized” to the American mindset.

A milder, yet still wrong belief of the Christian-American public is the hoarding of income.  When I say hoarding, I mean the denial of and lack of participation in tithes, donations, charities, etc., all of which are activities Christians are called to participate in by God.  Now, the American culture preaches to save, invest, and spend your income at your leisure.  Many Christians now totally ignore this seemingly insignificant command.  It is not pragmatic to give money to the church; it isn’t pragmatic to give money to charities or organizations.  They want it for themselves.  They want to spend it as they see fit.  It doesn’t matter as long as they are saved, right?  Other Christians realize God has commanded their tithes at least, but rationalize the “problem” of giving away.  These are the ones who always have bills to pay, children to send to college, or whatever.  All are important, but what is possibly more important than following a command from God Himself?  The answer should be absolutely, unequivocally “nothing.”  Those who don’t give to God: why should God give to you?  God says He will provide for you no matter what life may throw at you.  Holding on to income with a loose hand is a Christian virtue, yet sadly ignored, forgotten, or rationalized away by the general Christian-American public.

An example of my personal experience with pragmatism and my Christian walk can be seen in my class’s discussion of the morality of the death penalty relating to Christianity.  For the longest time I fully supported the death penalty.  “Why should recidivist murderers be given yet another chance at life in the public?  It is far more costly to house inmates for sustained periods of time in federal prison than it is for them to be executed.  If they reject Christianity now then they’ll always reject it, and we’ve done all we can as Christians.”  These are the issues circulating in my head.  I’m still undecided what I believe on this point, but let’s take a step back and look at this issue through the eyes of Christianity and Christ Himself.  God commands us to love all, so that applies to recidivist murderers, too.  Have we truly done all we can to persuade these people Christ is the key to salvation?  Does their refusal to accept Christ merit an execution, or should we incarcerate them for life?  These are all questions and observations for abolishing the death penalty.  All are scripturally inspired.  Now, there are similar questions and observations in favor of a death penalty that are scripturally based, and so the debate for this issue continues, but notice how the way of thinking changed from a strictly pragmatic way of thinking to one using only scripture to support ideas and arguments.  This is exactly how we as Christians should think and ultimately act, especially regarding policies dealing with levels of morality.  The death penalty is not an issue to take lightly.  Maybe God frowns upon America’s use of the death penalty, and all we have to do is think not about what would be logical, but what is Christian.

Shifting our mindset from a pragmatic to a truly Christian mindset will be difficult.  It’s not supposed to be easy.  For any issue regarding morality and belief, consult the Bible to see what it says.  It is usually black and white.  Do not steal, do not rape, do not have sex before marriage, let your mind dwell on all that is wholesome and uplifting, etc.  If you ever are participating in something or thinking something you feel any reservation about, you need to examine thoroughly what it is you are doing.  Would God approve?  It sounds trite and overused, but that’s because we don’t follow the advice, no, commands of God and the Bible.  Think about it.

The Promotion of Mediocrity in America’s Youth

Leave a reply

Erik Lang

Our generation is a breeding ground of average.  This sounds harsh, but after much observation I have come to this final conclusion.  This is strictly an opinion and simply a theory.

The promotion, even celebration, of average is the norm for the youth of American society.  Generally, most middle school through high school students lack motivation to truly learn, experience knowledge, and apply themselves.  The mindset now is one of “getting by.”  Students often perform under or just up to the required scholastic standards.  It’s actually a scary prospect if we take a step back and look at this.  I urge you not to immediately and belligerently cry foul and defend your age group but listen to the assertions.

Excellence is discouraged by peers.  Those who are not gifted with intellect or are too lazy to apply themselves scoff at those who do.  This has been a recurring theme in every generation to attend school.  We see it in the old ’50s movies, where the dumb brute makes the smart nerd do his homework.  We see it in the ’70s and beyond where the smart guy stays behind while the popular kids race off in their fancy cars with the insensitive jocks laughing at the poor fellow working ahead.  Now in the 21st century we’re faced with the same problem: being smart is not cool.  Those who are blessed with intellectual talents or even just the desire to work hard at something are put down by the rest of middle/high school society.  Many capable people often abandon their pursuit of excellence to become one of the group, cool, and accepted.

For one to break the bonds of average and rise above mediocreville is something actually looked down upon.  If one is seen working ahead in homework during free time, he is questioned by the group of guys asking, “Why are you doing that?  I didn’t do that and neither should you.  Do you think you’re better than us?”  Excellence is looked on as a fluke and is often shied away from because of the criticism that follows.  People gifted in a certain area, say dancing, singing, musical instruments or even writing, are seen through jealous eyes.  That’s where the real root of the problem is.  Jealousy is what fuels the lazy to ridicule the industrious.  Compliments of talents today are even very discreetly backhanded.  In response to excellence people say, “That’s crazy, man.  That’s insane/ridiculous.  You’re too good.”  These compliments, if one looks at the real meaning, are said as beneficial statements, but at the same time let the one who is excelling know he stands alone in that area.

Many intellectual or excellent events such as Model UN and Boys/Girls State used to be a place where only the smart kids went.  Why would anyone who’s “worth something” go to one of these seminars?  The answer today is, it’s all about the résumé.  Average students toward the end of their high school career are realizing college is the key to success.  Not that they want to go to get a real education; they go only to graduate and have a solid, decent-paying job.  Their goal now is to attend esteemed organizations college interviewers look favorably upon, just to put it on the résumé.  I know this when I attended both mentioned programs: this type of person made up the majority of the attendees.  For example at Model UN, people did not want to contribute to the program in any way; they just wanted to be there and get credit for it.  They sat at the back of the room, joked with each other the entire time, and made fun of those who actually wanted to excel in the organization.  It eventually turned into a social and hook up time for the guys and girls attending.  An important and helpful program has been downgraded to another bullet on the résumé.

A mindset like this that inhibits creativity could present a more grave consequence in the future.  When our generation is grown and produces the then-current decision makers in politics and economics, this way of thinking could be detrimental.  If Americans in the years to come are lax in policies and don’t pursue innovations and new ideas, then America will lose her world dominance.  Our economy is bad enough as it is.  Picture American society comprised of men and women who just didn’t care.  The Model UN people are now adults.  If they continue down the “I don’t care” path, then what type of country will we live in?  A country that has shifted from a booming industrial and creative culture to a lazy, self-serving, average culture.  For an entire society to lose the passion and will to compete, strive, and pursue the unknown is shattering.  Many European countries have lost this very will: Greece is almost a third-world country, any Eastern European country is almost unheard of, and Italy is near bankruptcy.  It’s disheartening to see any once great country fall, but they should serve as warnings to America not to be average.

It all starts with us.  We need to ignore the naysayers and avidly pursue a career and way of thinking that inspires creativity and industry.  The day we stop is the day our country falls down the slippery slope.  Continue to excel and rise above the curse of average.

The Vikings and their Impact on England

Leave a reply

Erik Lang

The year was 793, and Father Declan looked at his progress in copying the New Testament Scripture of Galatians and decided he had earned a break.  It was just nearing nine o’ clock in the morning, and he had already copied well over half of the document.  The morning was cool and sunny, yet slightly overcast, a perfect day for a walk.  He shuffled out into the courtyard, passing Brother James and exchanged pleasantries.  He continued outside past the gate and stopped briefly, gazing at the surf pounding the black cruel rocks that surrounded the island of Lindisfarne.  He took a deep breath and praised God silently for days like these.  As he continued his circuit, something caught his eye on the horizon over the ocean.  It appeared to be four ships with square sails approaching the island.  Stranger yet, their direction seemed to come from the North.  They must be passing by, thought Declan, we have nothing to trade.  The ships didn’t alter course and came straight for the Holy Island.  Father Declan ambled toward the beachhead to greet the travelers and offer lodging.  By now the other monks had noticed the visitors and watched from the monastery walls to see what would unfold.  Father Declan was preparing his welcome speech when flashes of light from the ships caught his eye.  The men were wearing shirts of mail and had steel helmets, many holding bare weapons.  Suppressing pangs of fear he held his ground, confident that no men of God would ever attack a sacred monastery.  The ships grounded on the beach, and the men poured over the sides and sprinted toward the monastery cutting down the Holy Father.  Chaos erupted.  Monks offered themselves to the marauders hoping to be spared, while others ran for their lives or tried to save as many holy relics as they could.  All was to no avail.  The Norsemen slaughtered all, burned all, and stole all.  This was the first Viking raid upon England.

The image of pagan Vikings laughing as they killed is an image set in motion by the English, specifically the Roman Catholic Church.  The Vikings targeted monasteries for the wealth they possessed.  The clergy of Medieval England were exorbitant in their holy taxes upon the people and amassed quite a treasure trove of gold and silver.  The precious metals were either put in their treasuries or used to cover sacred relics or inlay into reliefs, etc.  Before the Vikings started raiding, they were traders and had frequent contact with the English including monasteries.  The Vikings could see the riches that lay in the monasteries and decided they could simply take them.  Thus, the reason for the Vikings receiving the name of godless barbarians who butcher without mercy is partially true, yet also fabricated by the early Catholic Church in order to instill a “divine mission” in the men of England to kill all Vikings whenever they came to the shores of England.

The Vikings weren’t savages.  They were an organized people who had specific military agendas revolving around the acquiring of wealth, but more importantly, the acquiring of honor and a renowned name.  It was common before raids for Norsemen to shout the location of their home village in Scandinavia, as well as their own name and their father’s.  The purpose was to spread their fame.  Fame and honor were just as important as riches, if not more so.  With fame came respect and a larger gathering of men to lead.  In short, Vikings wanted to be like and admired by their countrymen.  A common practice among chiefs was to award arm rings to their men.  Arm rings were symbols of valor in battle and had to be earned.  A chief who provided numerous arm rings to his men was a good chief, and they would spread his fame.

One of the biggest impacts the Vikings had on England was spiritual doubt.  Constant violent raids on settlements and monasteries instilled fear in the populace of England causing doubt in the faith of Christianity.  Many even reverted back to the worship of ancient pagan deities, like the Norse themselves.  They thought if their God wasn’t powerful enough to fight off the Vikings and their gods, then it was time to switch to a hopefully more powerful alternative.  The raid on the monastery of Lindisfarne didn’t help either.  Immediately, the Vikings demoralized the English by desecrating a holy site of worship and looting it.  The attacks only escalated after Lindisfarne.  To the English, they thought that God wasn’t powerful, or that He had abandoned them completely.

Much of Medieval history was lost during the years of the Viking invasions, which has always frustrated historians and literary historians.  Vikings had no use for manuscripts and didn’t understand or care about them at all.  Often times, they burned them or just left them untouched.  The Irish are credited by the entire United Kingdom for being the saviors of literature during that time.  The Irish monks managed to stow away whatever literature they could at the time on the Emerald Isle in the deep recesses of their monasteries.

One thing the Vikings did happen to do in England, if ever so briefly, was to unite England under one king after years of Saxon struggles for rights to the throne.  England was divided into different parts during the years of the Vikings: Northumbria, Wessex, Sussex, and Essex.  Each division would have one or more prominent chiefs who would make their own laws for their lands.  The Vikings preyed upon these divisions one at a time, knowing other chiefs wouldn’t come to their aid.  The Vikings systematically killed each chief and took ownership of the lands he owned.  The Vikings would then incorporate the resources of each kingdom and use them in their invasion of the next one.  The Saxon lords were at a loss but still didn’t want to band together under one ruler, unless they were that king.  The invasions continued until one king remained: Alfred the Great.  Alfred used his title and endorsement by the Catholic Church to bind the remaining Saxons to himself and form an army as well as the first English navy to fight against the Viking fleets.  Under his direction, much of England was reclaimed by the Saxons.  The Vikings were influential in the construction of the first true English monarchy by killing all of the other contenders to the throne.  Yes, this is a good thing.

Some tamer contributions of the Vikings are the addition of names to the modern English language.  Names that end in –thorpe, -by, -strand, or –town are very notable Viking endings for names.  Downtown London is filled with streets with these sorts of names.  The Vikings also introduced the weekly bath to the Saxons, who before bathed usually only twice a year.  Thursdays in the Viking language meant “wash day.”  The Norse were actually thought to be vain of their appearance by the Saxons, because they insisted on being well groomed at all times.

The entire Saxon (Englishmen before Norman invasion) culture was impacted and assimilated into the Norman one after the Battle of Hastings when Harold Godwinson, king of the Saxons, was defeated and killed by the Norman Duke William the Conqueror.  From that point on, royalty was Norman and the serfdom was Saxon.  Over time, the societies began to blend producing the modern day English culture.  This entire process would not have happened had it not been for the Vikings.  The Vikings raided and pillaged all over Europe including France.  Paris was sacked three times by the Vikings driving the French to despair.  In an effort to dissuade further Viking invasions, the French king of the time offered the land of Normandy on the West coast of France to the Vikings.  The terms were acceptable, and the Norwegian Vikings began a new civilization of Normans.  The Normans spoke an odd mixture of French and Norwegian but didn’t lose their taste for battle.  When William the Conqueror invaded England, all of Normandy emptied into England to claim the island as their own.  Without the Vikings, the entire modern British people or Empire would never have come into existence.

Personal Discrepancies with Lost

Leave a reply

Erik Lang

Murder, monsters, unity, and magic are all regularly seen on the exciting show Lost.  Every episode either ends on a maddening cliff hanger or a warm feeling of love and peace among all the stranded people on the island.  While Lost is intriguing and enjoyable to watch, there are many issues I have with the program.

A great deal of events or key things the show makes a point to center on are just not tied in well to the plot or just dropped all together.  When Desmond Hume is first seen on the show, he is working out in the first hatch, makes breakfast, and then injects himself with some sort of serum from a cabinet.  Again in the show, when Desmond runs away from the hatch and leaves the button-pushing to Locke and Shepherd, he grabs food and supplies, including the mysterious serum from the cabinet with a pneumatic injector.  What the serum is used for is completely unknown.  After continuing to watch Lost, no mention of this serum ever arose again.  There was one point where a pneumatic injector was used to treat Claire’s sickness, but the serum used for the treatment was not the same as Desmond’s.  The writers didn’t use the serum again or explain it for the rest of show, which I find annoying because they made such a point to film it and its use.

Michael’s son Walt was another writing error by the staff of Lost.  He was abducted by “the Others” after Michael, Sawyer, and Jin tried to find the shipping lanes after constructing a raft out of bamboo and plane parts.  While the abduction was occurring, “the Others” stated Walt was a special boy, and they had use for him.  Later in the plot after Michael went out into the island alone to look for Walt, he was captured by “the Others.”  They again told him his son Walt was a very special boy.  Michael and Walt left the island soon after that incident, and Walt and his father were gone from the story for a while.  Walt later resurfaced in a vision to John Locke and told him to finish his job.  Why did John Lock see Walt and not someone else?  For Locke to have seen the ghost of Boone would have made much more sense.  Lock was actually close to Boone, not so much Walt.  What was ever special about Walt in the beginning to merit abduction by “the Others”?  These are the kind of gaps in the writing of Lost that reflect the writers’ negligence.

Throughout the Lost series was a main recurring theme: everyone is equal, and we can all get along no matter what our backgrounds are.  Consider the evidence.  In the plane crash is an Iraqi Muslim soldier, an American doctor, an American murderer, a conman, a crippled man, and a Korean couple as the main characters.  As the show progressed, oftentimes the episodes would end playing slow inspiring music showing all of the characters looking out for each other, loving each other, living in harmony.  In and of itself, it’s not a bad message; in fact, the opposite: it’s an inspiring message.  What the writers of Lost were trying to do was show the pettiness of fighting over trifling things like race, background, or preferences.  In the end we’re all human.  The writers went too far when in the final episode of the final season they directly compared Eastern mysticism, Islam, and Christianity as equal.  Jack Shepherd was talking with his father in the back room of the church in front of a stained glass window.  On this window was a Christian cross, the Islamic crescent moon, the yin-yang, and the Star of David, among other religious symbols.  They finally reached the crux of their main point: all religions are the same, and all paths lead to heaven, their heaven being unity and fellowship in their own personal heaven where nothing goes wrong for them.  Christ said “I am the way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father but through me.”  The Bible clearly says that Christianity is the only way to salvation, yet the writers of Lost ignore that.

What is the bright light that must be guarded from misuse by evil mankind?  No one ever knows.  In fact, Jacob doesn’t even know what the bright light is, what it is used for, why it exists, and why it must be protected.  Those same questions were asked enough by the characters themselves, but the customary responses were, “It doesn’t matter,” “We have to keep moving,” or “You’re not ready to know yet.”  Ignoring the question all together was also another response.  Did the writers just not want to explain it, or did they just not know what to make the light be without it being too absurd?  Another loose end in the Lost plot, I suppose.

My biggest issue with the plot of Lost was the portrayal of Jacob’s brother, also the Black Smoke Monster, as evil.  What has he done that’s so evil?  He’s killed people, yes, but only because he was provoked to do so out of necessity.  When Jacob and his brother were born, their mother was murdered by a woman on the island guarding this mysterious light in a cave.  She raised the boys as her own, but then Jacob’s brother discovered the truth about his origins and tried to go back across the sea to his homeland.  His mother’s murderer knocked him unconscious and destroyed his means of getting home.  All that Jacob’s brother wanted to do was go to his real home, be with his real mother (impossible now since the woman killed her, for no reason at all, and if so, left unexplained) and see the world.  Those were never bad things.

Jacob’s brother then killed his mother’s murderer and in turn was murdered by his own brother.  If anyone is evil it should be Jacob.  He was jealous of his brother because his fake mother loved him more than she did Jacob.  Jacob threw his brother into the bright light, which turned him into the Black Smoke Monster (another fact unexplained).  So, the main characters of Lost are being directed and ordered by Jacob, a man who killed his own brother out of a jealous rage because he avenged the death of their real mother and only wanted to go to his real home.

All in all, Lost is enjoyable, interesting, and a fun show to watch.  Six seasons of 45-minute episodes with only these discrepancies is not that bad of a review.  If you can’t stand dropped plot points then don’t watch it, because the end of the series will be a severe disappointment to you, and all the countless hours you’ve spent in watching it will seem like one big waste.