The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
The Guns of Singapore

An interesting question — to me — is whether Middlebury professor Allison Stanger being hospitalized by the violence of anti-science / anti-free speech thugs enraged at her attempting to argue with Charles Murray rather than to screech at him qualifies as a hate crime.

As far as I can tell, this hasn’t occurred to anybody else, however, which seems rather revealing about America’s priorities and paranoias in 2017.

So far nobody has been suspended, much less arrested, for the assault.

Here’s Middlebury College’s official policy:

Community Bias Response Team Policy

Overview

Middlebury is committed to maintaining a diverse and inclusive campus environment where bigotry and intolerance are unacceptable.

It would initially seem like inflicting concussion and whiplash on Professor Stanger would qualify as bigotry and intolerance, but, reading further, it’s not clear if anybody at Middlebury was concerned with this kind of bigotry and intolerance. Some kinds of bigotry and intolerance are less equal than others.

The Community Bias Response Team (CBRT) is charged with assessing and communicating an appropriate and comprehensive institutional response to bias incidents and acts of intolerance involving students….

The CBRT’s goal is to take appropriate measures in responding to bias incidents and to provide educational interventions to the Middlebury community. …

What is bias?

Middlebury defines a bias incident as a single act or multiple acts directed toward an individual or group on the basis of actual or perceived race, creed, color, place of birth, ancestry, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, service in the armed forces of the United States, positive-HIV-related blood test results, disability, culture, socio-economic status, spirituality or any combination of these or other related factors, with the purpose or effect, from the point of view of a reasonable person, of negatively impacting another.

Bias incidents include, but are not limited to: slurs, degrading language, epithets, graffiti, vandalism, intimidation, symbols, and harassment; that are directed toward or affect the targeted individual or team. Incidents of bias may contribute to a hostile campus environment and can occur even if the act itself is unintentional or delivered as a joke, prank, or having humorous intent.

It’s not clear whether this applies to poor Ms. Stanger, who was beaten up because she believes the First Amendment applies to Charles Murray.

But if this incredibly long list doesn’t apply to not beating up liberals who believe the First Amendment applies to Charles Murray, then isn’t that rather revealing?

This ought to be a Guns of Singapore moment when we realize that we’ve been obsessing over the wrong concern for our time.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
110 Comments to "The Guns of Singapore"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Progots, smugots, globogots, and thugots.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-guns-of-singapore/#comment-1803424
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    They can’t tolerate honesty, conviction, and truth.

    Radicalism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Preference of formula over reality.

    Read More
  3. Even Professor Stanger blamed Trump for the violence so why should the university prosecute anyone unless they can get their hands on Trump?

    Read More
  4. Tolerate all except the intolerant, it’s not hate if they have good intentions, punching up is not bias, etc

    Principles like free speech do not really exist in the leftist mind except when they can make use of it, otherwise it’s an impediment to their compassion uber alles and other shit ideas.

    This is why the west’s autistic devotion to free speech is overall not a good thing, it just lets society’s problem elements occupy more space than they deserve. In most places the right would not be crying free speech, they’d be moving to shut down the left twice as hard.

    Everytime I say this some white guy goes: “B-b-but what if it happens to me someday?”

    It’s already happening to you. For there ever to be ideological liberty (assuming you want that), the right has to be in power because the left does not value liberty.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    This is why the west’s autistic devotion to free speech is overall not a good thing, it just lets society’s problem elements occupy more space than they deserve. In most places the right would not be crying free speech, they’d be moving to shut down the left twice as hard.
     
    Free speech is like liberty and the pursuit of happiness and freedom of religion and equality and brotherhood. These are the kinds of dumb ideas that only intellectuals could come up with, and only intellectuals could believe.

    Unfortunately they were the kinds of that were popular among 18th century intellectuals, especially the ones who considered themselves to be dangerous and edgy. The kinds of intellectuals who thought that rebelling against the lawful government of the rightful king would be a really cool thing to do. That's why the US is burdened with a completely unworkable system of government - it was devised by intellectuals.

    Let's face it, the great minds of the Enlightenment, men like Voltaire, were the urban hipsters of their day.
    , @ussr andy
    I think even a make-believe commitment to free speech, with dildo reservations and qualifications ("freedom of speech, not consequences of speech" etc) is better than no free speech at all. Even imperfect free speech is better than institutionalized truth, religious councils etc.

    French revolutionaries and early 20th century socialists had it about right - freedom is always the freedom of the dissident. The problem is the West is confused about which side is the dissident.

  5. qualifies as a hate crime

    You should not play their game — ‘hate crimes’ per se should not exist — the term was invented by ‘libtards’ — ‘hate crime’ laws designate (explicitly and implicitly) protected classes — as Holder openly testified, Whites are not a protected class, and this was more or less accepted — what happened at Middlebury was a simple case of free speech and intellectual freedom — of civility and the willingness to engage in honest debate rather than mob violence.

    Read More
  6. This ought to be a Guns of Singapore moment when we realize that we’ve been obsessing over the wrong concern for our time.

    Right: you mean the Russians? I’m really, really worried about the Russians, and nobody else seems to be. The Russians are terrifying!

    That’s what you’re getting at, right?

    Read More
    • Agree: L Woods
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    slumber, what a great time to reprise the comedy gem..."The Russians are Coming, The Russians are coming."
  7. “Hate crimes” are an abomination of the law that were enacted based on a false premise.

    Read More
  8. Always make a clear distinction between goodhate crimes and badhate crimes. Goodhate crimes are superior and not triggered by or influenced by bias but are meant to correct bias by whatever means appropriate.

    Read More
  9. @slumber_j

    This ought to be a Guns of Singapore moment when we realize that we’ve been obsessing over the wrong concern for our time.
     
    Right: you mean the Russians? I'm really, really worried about the Russians, and nobody else seems to be. The Russians are terrifying!

    That's what you're getting at, right?

    slumber, what a great time to reprise the comedy gem…”The Russians are Coming, The Russians are coming.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Carl Reiner, of all people, doesn't make the connection. https://twitter.com/carlreiner/status/839746308361478145
    , @Ivy
    There happens to be a fortuitous intersection of Russians and the Irish theme of the day, as Alan Arkin led his stranded submariners marching along singing "It's a long way to Tipperrary".
  10. “Middlebury is committed to maintaining a diverse and inclusive campus environment where bigotry and intolerance are unacceptable. ”

    Here is the triumph of Diversity-Speak, a sub-genre of Orwellian Newspeak — “War is Peace,” etc.

    Every campus now has a high-paid Commizar, employed full-time to produce the Diversity-Speak agitprop, program the woman studies and black studies majors to recite the lingo for maximum effect, and intimidate those few remaining whites on the campuses who try to resist the bullying and intimidation.

    See:

    http://fosterspeak.blogspot.com/2017/03/diversity-speak-animal-farm-at-wright.html

    Read More
  11. I notice in the list of offending behavior is bias toward “HIV-positive-test results.” A bill has been introduced into the California Legislature that would reduce KNOWINGLY infecting some one with the HIV virus from a felony to a misdemeanor. The bill’s sponsor notes that advances in science and the treatment of AIDS warrants a revisit to the criminality of transmitting the disease to an unaware partner. I read this at the Sacramento Bee and the comments were close to 100% against this bill. The people are waking up, but the elected officials still think they are so much smarter than the populace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    That's of course rape by deception (aggravated rape, in fact), so the existing provisions, far from being too harsh, are not harsh enough. By liberals' own moral standards, even. Sure, who/whom, but the victims as well as the perpetrators are mostly gay men. My guess is the (silent?) majority of gay men would be against this if they heard about it.

    On the other hand the majority of new HIV infections are among NAMs, and the ones who lie about it before having unprotected sex with unsuspecting victims are almost exclusively NAMs, so I guess it is a who/whom thing.
    , @Ivy
    That HIV legislative absurdity has the same "don't embarrass them" quality as the Rotherham policy. After all, wouldn't want some patently obvious criminals acting of their own volition, with malice aforethought, to have a moment's pause. Those common threads represent the notions of capitulation, a hallmark of blue states of whatever nationality.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    They are doing the victim _sarc_on_ a favor because they are ushering them into a privileged class. In fact, a sainted class of authentic, genuine and really real people. _sarc_off_

    We live in a sick culture.

  12. It’s affluent heterosexual white people attacking an affluent heterosexual white person. Does not compute for the race obsessed left.

    Although personally, I think Stanger was collateral damage, the real hate crime was committed against Murray.

    Read More
  13. OT:

    JD Vance is getting ready to run for office. He’s moving to Columbus, because Ohio is home, but is concerned about his wife adapting to the weather and the quality of the schools. Just started skimming and already found a couple of good comments:

    NA is a trusted commenter NYC 1 day ago
    Next, we’ll hear from a conservative who grew up in a small town in west Texas, went east for an education, west for business opportunities, and who then pats himself on the back for moving “back home”–to Austin.

    HT is a trusted commenter Ohio 1 day ago
    Thank you! I found this article laughable. The Columbus area is booming, there are plenty of good public schools in the Columbus area, and thanks to the difference in housing prices between Silicon Valley and Ohio, Vance will see an immediate uptick in their standard of living.

    Catherine New River Valley, Virginia 1 day ago
    Sorry, Vance, but I’m not the least bit impressed. Columbus, Ohio, where I lived for the better of the 1990s is a lively, progressive city. The evolution from cow town, conservative bastion to a Democratic stronghold with bumping, artsy neighborhoods north and south of the downtown was emerging even as I was leaving. A strong corps of local investors and principled leaders were at the helm of the transition. Not to say there isn’t work to be done, but the transition over the two decades can be seen as one of the most laudable in the state and region. I would LOVE to move back. Why not “return” to a deeply challenged town and put your talents to work there? Youngstown, my beloved home place, comes to mind. Or, since you claim the Hillbilly mantle (your words, not mine), consider someplace like East Liverpool or Ironton. To someone doing community and economic development work in small rural towns of Virginia, your risky flight to a thriving metropolis rings hollow.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/opinion/why-im-moving-home.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=Moth-Visible&moduleDetail=inside-nyt-region-1&module=inside-nyt-region&region=inside-nyt-region&WT.nav=inside-nyt-region&_r=1

    Read More
  14. After reading Stanger’s essay in the NYT, I confess dismay that she got off so easy. It’s hard to say if she’s just a coward or if she really is delusional, but her essay was nauseating.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    After reading Stanger’s essay in the NYT, I confess dismay that she got off so easy. It’s hard to say if she’s just a coward or if she really is delusional
     
    The truly remarkable thing is that people like Stanger are totally incapable of learning from experience.
    , @BB753
    She's both a coward and delusional. Like cult followers, liberals can't escape from their delusions. Also, deep down, she was glad Murray couldn't deliver his speech.
  15. OT: http://greyenlightenment.com/the-alt-right-punches-way-above-its-weight/

    I was reading voat.co identitarian, which I do every now and then since reddit’s r/altright forum got shoahed, and came upon that article.

    But media isn’t talking about the at-right much anymore. Now they are focused on healthcare. The media overgeneralizes the alt-right to mean anything to the right of National Review and newer than Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul. Twitter follower counts don’t mean much anyway, unless your following is organic. Most of these corporate media accounts have a lot of useless/bot followers and little engagement relative to the number of followers. 1.6 million followers and 99% of them inactive or robots. Steve has only 13k followers, but 1/2 the number of ‘retweets’ and ‘favorites’ as Ezra, who has 1.6 million. Steve’s Unz columns generate massive page views and comments…more than a typical New York Times columnist. He usually writes three posts a day, and each one gets dozens or even hundreds of comments, making him one of the most influential columnists alive.

    Certainly reading identitarian, it’s obvious that a lot of the posters there read iSteve, because many of the posts mirror the things that Steve has written about. It makes me proud that I learned about Steve indirectly I think it was through Instapundit’s blog roll (maybe via GNXP?), back around the time Reynolds attempted to unperson Steve, a long time ago. Since that time, this site has been the most fun to follow and comment on, far more so than any other blog. It’s a feeling kind of like buying Intel stock at IPO and then holding, but without the millions of dollars of net worth, the hookers and the blow. Still pretty cool though.

    Read More
  16. http://island-footprint.appspot.com/images/fort_siloso.jpg

    The guns of Fort Siloso were pointed due south, in anticipation of a seaborne assault by the Japanese. The Japanese swept through the Malay Peninsula and attacked Singapore 180 degrees from where the guns were pointed, and came in through the short causeway connecting the north of Singapore island to Malaya.

    For any who visit, Fort Siloso and the other war museums are worth a look.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Pilotdown Man:

    The surrender of Singapore under General Percival's white flag of truce was the largest surrender of British-led forces in history.

    This abject surrender signified the demise of the myth of the White Man's invincibility in the Far East.

    Interestingly, Percival had been accused of committing war crimes in the Irish War of Independence. As one can well imagine, there were few Irish tears shed over Percival's (and England's) abject humiliation in Singapore.
    , @res
    Thanks for the info. It was even worse than that picture looks. Those are 8 and 9 inch guns. The big guns were 15 inches and apparently no longer exist: https://www.navyhistory.org.au/the-guns-of-singapore/
    Remember shell mass is proportional to the square (or more? see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_(projectile)#Sizes ) of diameter (i.e. 15^2 almost 3x 9^2).
    For more details including a link to more about the guns used see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johore_Battery

    I also did not know they only had armor piercing shells for anti-ship service rather than explosive shells for softer (land) targets.

    P.S. Steve, I love the way you make connections. Does this analogy also convey something based on the Japanese decision to attack from the direction where the guns were not pointed?
    , @Ivy
    The Singapore gun story is reminiscent of the Maginot Line. That might lead one to speculate about some early 20th century focus (after all, N=2!) to the detriment of other considerations, like whether other points of the compass should be defended, and by which methods and armaments. Of course, the British would deny any connection with the French, as Sandhurst and St. Cyr are miles apart.
  17. An interesting question — to me — is whether Middlebury professor Allison Stanger being hospitalized by the violence of anti-science / anti-free speech thugs enraged at her attempting to argue with Charles Murray rather than to screech at him qualifies as a hate crime.

    But that’s not hate.

    Hate is yucky feelings plus the privilege/power to act on them and Middlebury students are underprivileged/powerless.

    Wait.

    Read More
  18. @Buffalo Joe
    I notice in the list of offending behavior is bias toward "HIV-positive-test results." A bill has been introduced into the California Legislature that would reduce KNOWINGLY infecting some one with the HIV virus from a felony to a misdemeanor. The bill's sponsor notes that advances in science and the treatment of AIDS warrants a revisit to the criminality of transmitting the disease to an unaware partner. I read this at the Sacramento Bee and the comments were close to 100% against this bill. The people are waking up, but the elected officials still think they are so much smarter than the populace.

    That’s of course rape by deception (aggravated rape, in fact), so the existing provisions, far from being too harsh, are not harsh enough. By liberals’ own moral standards, even. Sure, who/whom, but the victims as well as the perpetrators are mostly gay men. My guess is the (silent?) majority of gay men would be against this if they heard about it.

    On the other hand the majority of new HIV infections are among NAMs, and the ones who lie about it before having unprotected sex with unsuspecting victims are almost exclusively NAMs, so I guess it is a who/whom thing.

    Read More
  19. I have read that the guns of Singapore actually could be turned to face the jungle from which the Japanese attacked, but that almost all of the ammunition was armor-piercing in anticipation of attacking ships, and not high-explosive to defeat infantry and vehicles. To continue the artillery metaphor, asking the collegiate authorities to punish the people who attacked the professor is like asking the county sheriff to arrest the artillerymen who fired on Fort Sumpter. We’re moving past “rule of law” into “whose side are you on?”

    Read More
  20. Based on a strict interpretation of the rules you quoted, bias and intolerance against people based on their political beliefs is not included in the list of prohibited activities. Therefore shutting down Charles Murray was permissible by their rules and no disciplinary action was called for.
    I would hazard a guess that physically assaulting Professor Stranger might violate a college rule, but perhaps the college never bothered to promulgate rules against criminal acts because that would be an issue for the justice system. Unless Stanger files a police complaint against her attackers, likely nothing will happen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    Do they know the identities of the people who assaulted her? It's hard to charge someone with a crime if you can't identify them.
    , @Ivy
    I'm guessing that Prof. Stanger will not likely file a police report. There are various organizations that discourage such behavior as drawing unwelcome attention to management, among other reasons. I know of a boardroom assault that was hushed up for just that. The victim was dissuaded with the tacit understanding that pursuit of the matter would be a career-limiting act. The only good news in that example was that the perpetrator got fired later for other egregious behavior.
  21. It’s not clear whether this applies to poor Ms. Stanger, who was beaten up because she believes the First Amendment applies to Charles Murray.

    Technically it’s Dr. Stanger or Professor Stanger as she has a Harvard PhD, but what the hell, we’re all sexists here (well, I am, anyhow) so let’s call her Mrs. Kaus, as she’s married to Michael Kraus, Professor of Political Science at Middlebury and has two children.

    Her Wikipedia page is semi-interesting…she’s actually not the type to be caught up in this kind of dust-up — or if she were, she’d be batting for the other side.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    she’d be batting for the other side
     
    She is batting for the other side. She's on video participating enthusiastically in the shutdown. She and the President egged the crowd on prior to Murray trying to speak.
  22. @PiltdownMan
    http://island-footprint.appspot.com/images/fort_siloso.jpg

    The guns of Fort Siloso were pointed due south, in anticipation of a seaborne assault by the Japanese. The Japanese swept through the Malay Peninsula and attacked Singapore 180 degrees from where the guns were pointed, and came in through the short causeway connecting the north of Singapore island to Malaya.

    For any who visit, Fort Siloso and the other war museums are worth a look.

    Pilotdown Man:

    The surrender of Singapore under General Percival’s white flag of truce was the largest surrender of British-led forces in history.

    This abject surrender signified the demise of the myth of the White Man’s invincibility in the Far East.

    Interestingly, Percival had been accused of committing war crimes in the Irish War of Independence. As one can well imagine, there were few Irish tears shed over Percival’s (and England’s) abject humiliation in Singapore.

    Read More
  23. The fall of British Singapore to the Japs in Feb 1942 was a pivotal moment in WW2 and British history.

    This unnecessary defeat by a much smaller Japanese force, was down to the, all too common, hubris of the British Military, led by Lt Gen Arthur Percival, who surrendered to the Japs in the most significant British military defeat since the Norman conquest in 1066. Over 80,000 British and Commonwealth troops were captured.

    The book to read on this is Sinister Twilight – by Noel Barber.

    Noel Barber was a Daily Mail Correspondent, he was a prolific author of both fact and fiction.

    It’s also worth reading The War of the Running Dogs an account abut the Malayan ‘Emergency’ – The jungle war against the Communist Terrorists, which ran parallel with the Vietnam war and in which the British acquitted themselves rather better than they had against the Japanese.

    I lived in Singapore for just over 4 years as a child from 1970-75. It made a massive impression on me. I later cycled right through Malaysia in 1987.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Whoever
    In addition to the general histories of this episode, the personal accounts of participants are enormously interesting.
    Off the top of my head, two that stick in my mind are You'll Die in Singapore by Charles McCormac, an Englishman who fought in the campaign, was captured and imprisoned by the Japanese, escaped and made his way to freedom, taking five months to do it.
    Another is Last Flight from Singapore by Arthur Donahue, an American who volunteered to serve with the RAF and fought in the Battle of Britain (his other book is Tally-Ho! Yankee in a Spitfire) and then flew Hurricanes against the Japanese. His book is of particular interest if you care about the history of air combat, as he flew two of the classic fighter planes of the early war in two of the most significant events of those days.
  24. The prugs* turned on one of their own. Zero ****s given.

    * progressive thugs

    Read More
  25. If I were Murray, I’d sue the University. After all, Stanger was assaulted because she was escorting Murray to a different building. From that it follows that Murray was also assaulted on campus.
    What’s Murray got to lose?

    Read More
  26. Isn’t the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare. I read it in a WW2 history book quite recently.

    Obviously the myth is useful in this case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    It was both the ammo and the direction. See the link in my earlier comment. I would say this enhances the analogy rather than detracts from it.
    , @anonguy

    Isn’t the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare. I read it in a WW2 history book quite recently.

    Obviously the myth is useful in this case.
     

    That was my reaction too, but I used up my personal limit of identifying 1 shibboleth a month. Especially one by Steve.

    Good luck with that moderated at whim thing.

    , @Whoever
    Yes, it is. The real story is about the panic and cowardice of the British, coupled with their sheer incompetence, as a result of which our Marines had to face those very same guns of Singapore at Tarawa.
    It's curious how so many myths and misconceptions from the earliest days of the Pacific War persist all these decades later, even though researchers long ago uncovered exactly what actually happened in great detail.
    The episode provides a sort of proof-of-concept demonstration of the Unzian Outlook, as epitomized in one of my favorite quotes from Ron Unz:
    "We assume that our media accurate reflect the events of our world and its history, but instead what we see are the distorted images of a fun-house mirror, with small items transformed into large ones and large ones into small. The contours of historical reality are warped into unrecognizable shapes, with important elements disappearing and others appearing out of nowhere."
    , @Johann Ricke

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare.
     
    They can fire both armor-piercing and canister (i.e. anti-personnel) rounds. An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both, the second of which would typically be fired at point-blank range in the nearly horizontal (zero elevation) position against assaulting enemy troops.
    , @NickG

    Isn’t the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?
     
    Yup it is.

    The naval guns were a relatively small part of the story. The sea straits between Singapore Island and the Malay peninsular are only between 800-1500 metres wide and too shallow for large ships. The Japs started coming over in small boats before storming the causeway - the 1 km road across the straits built on an earth berm.

    The right kit to stop that was rifles, machine guns and mortars, which the British had. There should have been multiple reserve demolitions on the Causeway . This should have been covered with interlocking and overlapping machine gun fire as well as pre registered DF- Defensive Fire -artillery, from guns set back. Singapore is a diamond shape Island only 50 km by 25 km, so three 25 pounder artillery locations (the standard British field artillery piece of the era, range about 12-13 km) could cover the whole island and all the straits with indirect fire.

    A 15 inch WW2 era British naval gun had a range of about 30 km. There were 2 in the West battery and three in the East Battery on Singapore. These guns could cover the whole island, as well as the straits between Malaya and Singapore, and well into Jahore to the North in peninsular Malaysia together with the sea approaches to Singapore fro the West, South And East. The 2 Western guns had mounting mechanism that could not traverse to allow the guns to direct fire missions to the North. This is where there is a little truth underlying the myth. The 3 gun battery to the West, by the Sembewang naval base, could traverse 360° and indeed fired to the North, into Jahore. It is also true that the Royal Navy only had anti-shipping armour piercing shells and no High Explosives appropriate against troop formations.

    None of this should have been close to critical given British and Commonwealth forces numbered 85,000 and Japanese forces 36,000.

    The Japs had been coming down the Malay peninsular for weeks, having landed in the North East corner of Peninsular Malaya - in Kota Bharu and Kuantan 700 km North of Singapore and just over the Northern border in Thailand. The British and Commonwealth forces - with a few honourable exceptions - just didn't put up much of a fight. They were badly led, had bad moral, and their commander - Arthur Percival - was utterly incompetent and was afflicted by gargantuan levels of hubris.

    Of course this is all besides the point vis-a-vis Steve's analogy.

  27. @PiltdownMan
    http://island-footprint.appspot.com/images/fort_siloso.jpg

    The guns of Fort Siloso were pointed due south, in anticipation of a seaborne assault by the Japanese. The Japanese swept through the Malay Peninsula and attacked Singapore 180 degrees from where the guns were pointed, and came in through the short causeway connecting the north of Singapore island to Malaya.

    For any who visit, Fort Siloso and the other war museums are worth a look.

    Thanks for the info. It was even worse than that picture looks. Those are 8 and 9 inch guns. The big guns were 15 inches and apparently no longer exist: https://www.navyhistory.org.au/the-guns-of-singapore/
    Remember shell mass is proportional to the square (or more? see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_(projectile)#Sizes ) of diameter (i.e. 15^2 almost 3x 9^2).
    For more details including a link to more about the guns used see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johore_Battery

    I also did not know they only had armor piercing shells for anti-ship service rather than explosive shells for softer (land) targets.

    P.S. Steve, I love the way you make connections. Does this analogy also convey something based on the Japanese decision to attack from the direction where the guns were not pointed?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Right, is this analogy really too complex for most readers? Middlebury set up all its institutional defenses to protect itself from an attack coming from the Right and was completely unprepared for an attack coming from the Left?

    Similarly, the Housing Bubble was inflated by the government over a few decades building up all its defenses against the hated threat of not enough mortgage lending to minorities, which led to too much lending to minorities in the mid-2000s.

  28. @Lurker
    Isn't the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare. I read it in a WW2 history book quite recently.

    Obviously the myth is useful in this case.

    It was both the ammo and the direction. See the link in my earlier comment. I would say this enhances the analogy rather than detracts from it.

    Read More
  29. @Lurker
    Isn't the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare. I read it in a WW2 history book quite recently.

    Obviously the myth is useful in this case.

    Isn’t the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare. I read it in a WW2 history book quite recently.

    Obviously the myth is useful in this case.

    That was my reaction too, but I used up my personal limit of identifying 1 shibboleth a month. Especially one by Steve.

    Good luck with that moderated at whim thing.

    Read More
  30. Crime is crime. Hate has nothing to do with it. Hate is subjective and cannot be proven. Even admission of hate is not proof. Hate crimes were invented as a weapon against heterosexuals and white people. That’s how they are used.

    Read More
  31. To read the Charles Murray incident at Middlebury as a “tolerance” issue is to miss a far worse aspect.
    In addition to denial of Dr. Murray’s Freedom Of Speech ( which would have occurred had the college cancelled the event in response to “activist pressure” ) , there was blatant violation of the non-activist students Freedom To Listen to a presentation on private property as part of an educational process that they ( or their parents ) were paying for.
    If this is not a clear and unambiguous Civil Rights issue, I am at a loss to imagine what would be.
    This goes way beyond “tolerance”.

    Read More
  32. Yes, we’ve been pointing our guns the wrong way, evidently a common mistake:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Artillery actually worked better on ships than on land because you could float an immensely heavy gun barrel around the world a lot more easily than you could drag it a few miles from a rail line.

    And ships move around so it's hard to get a fix on them for counterfire.

    Land guns tend to be sitting ducks.

    If you dug shore artillery in to protect them from shelling from ship guns, that made them hard to turn around to face inland. There tended to be a real trade off between durability and flexibility.

    One ideal is to mount harbor guns inside caves like on Gibraltar. But that means they couldn't be turned much at all.
  33. Steve, when are you going to stop being surprised by the hypocrisy of the Left?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    In fairness, I think our host is surprised or "shocked" by the Left's hypocrisy in the same way Captain Renault was "shocked" to learn that there was gambling going on at Rick's.
  34. Negatively impacting another by intimidation, harassment appears to meet the bias definition. The CBRT better get the investigation started.

    Read More
  35. @Lurker
    Isn't the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare. I read it in a WW2 history book quite recently.

    Obviously the myth is useful in this case.

    Yes, it is. The real story is about the panic and cowardice of the British, coupled with their sheer incompetence, as a result of which our Marines had to face those very same guns of Singapore at Tarawa.
    It’s curious how so many myths and misconceptions from the earliest days of the Pacific War persist all these decades later, even though researchers long ago uncovered exactly what actually happened in great detail.
    The episode provides a sort of proof-of-concept demonstration of the Unzian Outlook, as epitomized in one of my favorite quotes from Ron Unz:
    “We assume that our media accurate reflect the events of our world and its history, but instead what we see are the distorted images of a fun-house mirror, with small items transformed into large ones and large ones into small. The contours of historical reality are warped into unrecognizable shapes, with important elements disappearing and others appearing out of nowhere.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    Unless the Japanese took the trouble to produce or acquire HE shells for those British guns then it wasn't Marines that had to face those guns later, but USN ships.

    It appears they did not:

    'The Singapore Guns'

    The firing on Betio had barely subsided before apocryphal claims began to appear in print that the four eight-inch naval rifles used as coastal defense guns by the Japanese were the same ones captured from the British at the fall of Singapore. Many prominent historians unwittingly perpetuated this story, among them the highly respected Samuel Eliot Morison.

    In 1977, however, British writer William H. Bartsch published the results of a recent visit to Tarawa in the quarterly magazine After the Battle. Bartsch personally examined each of the four guns and discovered markings indicating manufacture by Vickers, the British ordnance company. The Vickers company subsequently provided Bartsch records indicating the four guns were part of a consignment of 12 eight-inch, quick-firing guns which were sold in 1905 to the Japanese during their war with Russia. Further investigation by Bartsch at the Imperial War Museum produced the fact that there were no eight-inch guns captured by the Japanese at Singapore. In short, the guns at Tarawa came from a far more legitimate, and older, transaction with the British.

    The eight-inch guns fired the opening rounds in the battle of Tarawa, but were not by themselves a factor in the contest. Earlier bombing raids may have damaged their fire control systems. Rapid counterbattery fire from American battleships took out the big guns in short order, although one of them maintained an intermittent, if inaccurate, fire throughout D+1. Colonel Shoup stated emphatically that the 2d Marine Division was fully aware of the presence of eight-inch guns on Betio as early as mid-August 1943. By contrast, the division intelligence annex to Shoup's operation order, updated nine days before the landing, discounts external reports that the main guns were likely to be as large as eight-inch, insisting instead that "they are probably not more than 6-inch." Prior knowledge notwithstanding, the fact remains that many American officers were unpleasantly surprised to experience major caliber near-misses bracketing the amphibious task force early on D-Day.
     
    https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/npswapa/extcontent/usmc/pcn-190-003120-00/sec4.htm
  36. @Buffalo Joe
    slumber, what a great time to reprise the comedy gem..."The Russians are Coming, The Russians are coming."

    Carl Reiner, of all people, doesn’t make the connection. https://twitter.com/carlreiner/status/839746308361478145

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Dave, Wow what a lot of comments on Rachel Maddow, but the best is ..."She's the Edward R Morrow of our times." Rachel wishes she was called Ed.
  37. The British Empire aimed the guns at Singapore the wrong way — Merkel’s aim with the herring is true.

    President Trump refuses to shake hands with Mass Immigration Merkel at the White House. Merkel’s treasonous invitation to the mass immigration invasion of Germany will bring civil war to Germany. There will be Civil War II in the USA. There will be civil war in Germany. Mass immigration will be the cause of the wars in both nations.

    Read More
  38. @Dave Pinsen
    Carl Reiner, of all people, doesn't make the connection. https://twitter.com/carlreiner/status/839746308361478145

    Dave, Wow what a lot of comments on Rachel Maddow, but the best is …”She’s the Edward R Morrow of our times.” Rachel wishes she was called Ed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    "Dave, Wow what a lot of comments on Rachel Maddow, but the best is …'She’s the Edward R Morrow of our times.' Rachel wishes she was called Ed."

    She'd be lucky to be called "Mr. Ed".
    , @Dan Hayes
    Buffalo Joe,

    Both Maddow and Morrow are/were supremely vile and obnoxious people. They deserve to be categorized together although I am unaware of Morrow's sexual proclivities (if any).
  39. @Lurker
    Isn't the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare. I read it in a WW2 history book quite recently.

    Obviously the myth is useful in this case.

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare.

    They can fire both armor-piercing and canister (i.e. anti-personnel) rounds. An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both, the second of which would typically be fired at point-blank range in the nearly horizontal (zero elevation) position against assaulting enemy troops.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both,
     
    No True Scotsman fallacy, dude.

    Anyhow, regardless of the way the guns actually weren't pointed, they still weren't expecting a landward invasion. The British did indeed consider the Malayan Peninsula impassable enough to deter any realistic threat by a landward invader of Singapore.

    Not very good roads/rails, etc.

    So the Japanese Army hopped on bicycles, rode down the Peninsula, then shocked the world by taking Singapore.

    The Japanese were big on shocking the world those days. Just not long before, they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros, thereby decisively ending the battleship era.

    So this, like real life, is a lot more interesting in fact than as a simplified parable for the ages.

    British actually did have the armory adequately provisioned by the military planners of the day, these guys knew a lot about moving armies around, what it takes, it isn't like some bar argument with another uniformed yobbo.

    And they made very reasonable assumption that the threat was seaward rather than landward. Gotta remember, the IJN was yuuuuuge...

    It would have been irresponsible for them to have provisioned for what was a very less credible threat.

    And they would have done the right thing in 99 out of a 100 battles. Unfortunately, their enemy made a leapfrogging military innovation, swung for the rafters, and just happened to nail it.

    yeah, they had used bicycle troops a few years before in China, but apparently there wasn't enough drama with that utilization to alert planners/strategists of a new type of threat. It wasn't until after Singapore that people understood the utility of the bicycle for the Japanese in that campaign.

    Anyhow, the real story is a lot more interesting than dumbing it down to a tale of gin-blossomed Colonel Blimp fools messing up what any respectable blogger would have figured out so we can all feel how smart and superior we are.

    BTW, do you know that impossibly large fraction of Japanese women can ride a unicycle? Some of the dudes can, but is a very common thing for young, like kindergarten or earlier even, to learn. Then you have these really cool elementary school track competion, organized dance performance competitions and herds of little Japanese girls will come riding by doing all kinds of circus tricks.

    Its amazing. There is a deal with accordions like this. And calculus too.

    , @Anon
    This seems sketchy. Even naval guns can fire both HE and AP. I have a hard time believing that the emplacements could fire AP and canister, but not HE. Source please.
  40. Professor Stanger was collateral damage…the intended victim was Charles Murray.
    Will be interesting to see the legal angle taken by professor Stranger..will she sue the School ? For their failure to maintain a safe space on campus to have debates…the school has fostered a hostile workplace for minorities , those who support free speech are now the minority of college students and professors..

    Read More
  41. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Years ago the Heritage Foundation had a guy named Ivor something, who theorized that political alignment was predicated on shared fears of power’s corrupting effects. Can’t find his article but the gist was: whatever a faction is most loudly and stridently complaining about, is a projection of their own gut fear about the vices they’d succumb to. Therefore, watch out for the libertarians…

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy
    I loathe the stupidity and weakness and corruption and disingenuousness of the Left as well as eGOP. I'm not stupid, weak or corrupt and there are lots of people who are the same in these regards.

    Trump would not have been elected without these people. In fact, they are the ones who decided he needed to be elected and ultimately were the people who made it happen.

    So the biggest political revolution in nearly a century - Trump's further out than Reagan and last Democrat that at all upset any apple carts was FDR - and your pet theory was 100% dead wrong.

    You need a new pet political theory, dude, this one aint looking too good. Return to the theory shop and try to return your dead/worthless theory. You could make it a skit, like the Monty Python Dead Parrot one.

  42. @Buffalo Joe
    Dave, Wow what a lot of comments on Rachel Maddow, but the best is ..."She's the Edward R Morrow of our times." Rachel wishes she was called Ed.

    “Dave, Wow what a lot of comments on Rachel Maddow, but the best is …’She’s the Edward R Morrow of our times.’ Rachel wishes she was called Ed.”

    She’d be lucky to be called “Mr. Ed”.

    Read More
  43. Perhaps Steve can bring a lawsuit on behalf of the first amendment or science or hatecrimes or something.

    Sailer vs. Soros, et al

    Read More
    • Replies: @wren
    Dershowitz may be getting ready to do something.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/11/13/alan_dershowitz_on_college_protests_fog_of_fascism_is_descending.html
  44. An interesting question — to me — is whether Middlebury professor Allison Stanger being hospitalized by the violence of anti-science / anti-free speech thugs enraged at her attempting to argue with Charles Murray rather than to screech at him qualifies as a hate crime.

    This is a trick question, right? Of course is isn’t a hate crime. I suspect that it isn’t even a crime. Why would assaulting a bad person be a crime?

    Read More
  45. @Johann Ricke

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare.
     
    They can fire both armor-piercing and canister (i.e. anti-personnel) rounds. An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both, the second of which would typically be fired at point-blank range in the nearly horizontal (zero elevation) position against assaulting enemy troops.

    An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both,

    No True Scotsman fallacy, dude.

    Anyhow, regardless of the way the guns actually weren’t pointed, they still weren’t expecting a landward invasion. The British did indeed consider the Malayan Peninsula impassable enough to deter any realistic threat by a landward invader of Singapore.

    Not very good roads/rails, etc.

    So the Japanese Army hopped on bicycles, rode down the Peninsula, then shocked the world by taking Singapore.

    The Japanese were big on shocking the world those days. Just not long before, they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros, thereby decisively ending the battleship era.

    So this, like real life, is a lot more interesting in fact than as a simplified parable for the ages.

    British actually did have the armory adequately provisioned by the military planners of the day, these guys knew a lot about moving armies around, what it takes, it isn’t like some bar argument with another uniformed yobbo.

    And they made very reasonable assumption that the threat was seaward rather than landward. Gotta remember, the IJN was yuuuuuge…

    It would have been irresponsible for them to have provisioned for what was a very less credible threat.

    And they would have done the right thing in 99 out of a 100 battles. Unfortunately, their enemy made a leapfrogging military innovation, swung for the rafters, and just happened to nail it.

    yeah, they had used bicycle troops a few years before in China, but apparently there wasn’t enough drama with that utilization to alert planners/strategists of a new type of threat. It wasn’t until after Singapore that people understood the utility of the bicycle for the Japanese in that campaign.

    Anyhow, the real story is a lot more interesting than dumbing it down to a tale of gin-blossomed Colonel Blimp fools messing up what any respectable blogger would have figured out so we can all feel how smart and superior we are.

    BTW, do you know that impossibly large fraction of Japanese women can ride a unicycle? Some of the dudes can, but is a very common thing for young, like kindergarten or earlier even, to learn. Then you have these really cool elementary school track competion, organized dance performance competitions and herds of little Japanese girls will come riding by doing all kinds of circus tricks.

    Its amazing. There is a deal with accordions like this. And calculus too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy
    And they did all this on stolen bicycles, they didn't even bring their own but knew there were ample indigenous supplies in Malaya and once landed, they went around stealing all the bicycles for the journey south to Singapore.

    They did this to keep the gear load down and it worked perfectly.

    Ride to Singapore on stolen bicycles.

    Oh Steve, why did you ever fall for that old wives tale than one of the Japanese army invading on stolen bicycles.
    , @Whoever

    they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros,
     
    The Zero is a fighter plane, cute or otherwise, and not a bomber. And no Zero took part in the attacks on the Prince of Wales or Repulse.
    The two ships were sunk by G3Ms and G4Ms armed with either 500 or 250 kg armor-piercing bombs or Type 91 torpedoes. This is not esoteric knowledge. The BuNos of the aircraft and the names of their crews have been known for decades, along with personal accounts of the attack by many of them.
    We also have the eyewitness accounts of the crew of 8 RAAF Squadron Lockheed Hudson A16-76 NN-F, who observed the attacks from start to finish. And we have the account of the attacks by the pilot of the Repulse's own Walrus R6587, airborne at the time, who also witnessed it.
    The rest of your post is equally ill-informed. This episode, as well as the entire Malay campaign, is enormously interesting at many levels and you can easily drill down as deep into the details of what happened as you want to go. If you care enough about this subject to write such a long post about this subject, why wouldn't you also care enough to actually learn about it?
    , @dfordoom

    Just not long before, they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros,
     
    I'm fairly sure they sank the Prince of Wales and the Repulse with Mitsubishi Ki-21 "Sally" bombers and Mitsubishi G4M "Betty" torpedo-bombers. The Zero fighter wouldn't have had the range, apart from the fact that it was a fighter.

    Don't you just love nit-pickers? And now someone will undoubtedly nit-pick my reply as well!
  46. @wren
    Perhaps Steve can bring a lawsuit on behalf of the first amendment or science or hatecrimes or something.

    Sailer vs. Soros, et al

    Read More
  47. Perhaps Charles Murray ought to sue Middlebury? Some very nasty scenes there, obviously directed at him. The lynching of visiting scholars is not to be tolerated by society and Middlebury apparently lacked the capability of controlling the student body even to a minimal extent.

    Might as well bring the student bodies behind the attempted lynching into the light too while we’re at it.

    Read More
  48. @anonguy

    An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both,
     
    No True Scotsman fallacy, dude.

    Anyhow, regardless of the way the guns actually weren't pointed, they still weren't expecting a landward invasion. The British did indeed consider the Malayan Peninsula impassable enough to deter any realistic threat by a landward invader of Singapore.

    Not very good roads/rails, etc.

    So the Japanese Army hopped on bicycles, rode down the Peninsula, then shocked the world by taking Singapore.

    The Japanese were big on shocking the world those days. Just not long before, they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros, thereby decisively ending the battleship era.

    So this, like real life, is a lot more interesting in fact than as a simplified parable for the ages.

    British actually did have the armory adequately provisioned by the military planners of the day, these guys knew a lot about moving armies around, what it takes, it isn't like some bar argument with another uniformed yobbo.

    And they made very reasonable assumption that the threat was seaward rather than landward. Gotta remember, the IJN was yuuuuuge...

    It would have been irresponsible for them to have provisioned for what was a very less credible threat.

    And they would have done the right thing in 99 out of a 100 battles. Unfortunately, their enemy made a leapfrogging military innovation, swung for the rafters, and just happened to nail it.

    yeah, they had used bicycle troops a few years before in China, but apparently there wasn't enough drama with that utilization to alert planners/strategists of a new type of threat. It wasn't until after Singapore that people understood the utility of the bicycle for the Japanese in that campaign.

    Anyhow, the real story is a lot more interesting than dumbing it down to a tale of gin-blossomed Colonel Blimp fools messing up what any respectable blogger would have figured out so we can all feel how smart and superior we are.

    BTW, do you know that impossibly large fraction of Japanese women can ride a unicycle? Some of the dudes can, but is a very common thing for young, like kindergarten or earlier even, to learn. Then you have these really cool elementary school track competion, organized dance performance competitions and herds of little Japanese girls will come riding by doing all kinds of circus tricks.

    Its amazing. There is a deal with accordions like this. And calculus too.

    And they did all this on stolen bicycles, they didn’t even bring their own but knew there were ample indigenous supplies in Malaya and once landed, they went around stealing all the bicycles for the journey south to Singapore.

    They did this to keep the gear load down and it worked perfectly.

    Ride to Singapore on stolen bicycles.

    Oh Steve, why did you ever fall for that old wives tale than one of the Japanese army invading on stolen bicycles.

    Read More
  49. @Buffalo Joe
    Dave, Wow what a lot of comments on Rachel Maddow, but the best is ..."She's the Edward R Morrow of our times." Rachel wishes she was called Ed.

    Buffalo Joe,

    Both Maddow and Morrow are/were supremely vile and obnoxious people. They deserve to be categorized together although I am unaware of Morrow’s sexual proclivities (if any).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Dan, Maddow expends a lot of energy on being outraged. Unhappy person I think.
  50. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Johann Ricke

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare.
     
    They can fire both armor-piercing and canister (i.e. anti-personnel) rounds. An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both, the second of which would typically be fired at point-blank range in the nearly horizontal (zero elevation) position against assaulting enemy troops.

    This seems sketchy. Even naval guns can fire both HE and AP. I have a hard time believing that the emplacements could fire AP and canister, but not HE. Source please.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    I was just looking online - it's on Wiki!

    The coastal batteries were intended for engaging warships not defending Singapore against land attack. Thus most (all?) the ammunition was AP, with little or no HE and certainly no canister. I'm sure such rounds could have been produced for the guns in question but weren't available in Singapore.

  51. @Anon
    Years ago the Heritage Foundation had a guy named Ivor something, who theorized that political alignment was predicated on shared fears of power's corrupting effects. Can't find his article but the gist was: whatever a faction is most loudly and stridently complaining about, is a projection of their own gut fear about the vices they'd succumb to. Therefore, watch out for the libertarians...

    I loathe the stupidity and weakness and corruption and disingenuousness of the Left as well as eGOP. I’m not stupid, weak or corrupt and there are lots of people who are the same in these regards.

    Trump would not have been elected without these people. In fact, they are the ones who decided he needed to be elected and ultimately were the people who made it happen.

    So the biggest political revolution in nearly a century – Trump’s further out than Reagan and last Democrat that at all upset any apple carts was FDR – and your pet theory was 100% dead wrong.

    You need a new pet political theory, dude, this one aint looking too good. Return to the theory shop and try to return your dead/worthless theory. You could make it a skit, like the Monty Python Dead Parrot one.

    Read More
  52. @res
    Thanks for the info. It was even worse than that picture looks. Those are 8 and 9 inch guns. The big guns were 15 inches and apparently no longer exist: https://www.navyhistory.org.au/the-guns-of-singapore/
    Remember shell mass is proportional to the square (or more? see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_(projectile)#Sizes ) of diameter (i.e. 15^2 almost 3x 9^2).
    For more details including a link to more about the guns used see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johore_Battery

    I also did not know they only had armor piercing shells for anti-ship service rather than explosive shells for softer (land) targets.

    P.S. Steve, I love the way you make connections. Does this analogy also convey something based on the Japanese decision to attack from the direction where the guns were not pointed?

    Right, is this analogy really too complex for most readers? Middlebury set up all its institutional defenses to protect itself from an attack coming from the Right and was completely unprepared for an attack coming from the Left?

    Similarly, the Housing Bubble was inflated by the government over a few decades building up all its defenses against the hated threat of not enough mortgage lending to minorities, which led to too much lending to minorities in the mid-2000s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Right, is this analogy really too complex for most readers? Middlebury set up all its institutional defenses to protect itself from an attack coming from the Right and was completely unprepared for an attack coming from the Left?
     
    You're still making the mistake of thinking that Middlebury was a target of an attack instead of an instigator of an attack. Seems to me their defense mechanisms have worked perfectly.

    What accounts for the continued insistence on attributing good faith where none is offered?
    , @L Woods
    I think the analogy may be escaping many of us because it implies that Middlebury et al are actually interested in repelling an attack from the left. The analogy would make more sense if the British commander was a Japanese double agent.
    , @PiltdownMan
    It appears, given their relatively low key reaction, that Middlebury is willingly and approvingly providing a stage for attacks from the left. Hence the confusion over the analogy, in this instance.
    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    I can see the analogy, but I agree with the other commenters here. To pose another analogy, I think many colleges and universities see their anti-fa student protesters as antibodies or white blood cells: they may make a bit of a mess as they work, but they're repelling and neutralizing the real enemy.
  53. Based on a strict interpretation of the rules you quoted, bias and intolerance against people based on their political beliefs is not included in the list of prohibited activities.

    https://creed.askdefine.com/

    Creed
    Noun
    1 any system of principles or beliefs [syn: credo]

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Creed
    Noun
    1 any system of principles or beliefs [syn: credo]

    Murray's libertarianism might qualify as a "creed," but are the 100 pages of footnotes to The Bell Curve a "creed" or are they scientific evidence? The mob attacked Murray less for his libertarianism than for his science.

  54. @Steve Sailer
    Right, is this analogy really too complex for most readers? Middlebury set up all its institutional defenses to protect itself from an attack coming from the Right and was completely unprepared for an attack coming from the Left?

    Similarly, the Housing Bubble was inflated by the government over a few decades building up all its defenses against the hated threat of not enough mortgage lending to minorities, which led to too much lending to minorities in the mid-2000s.

    Right, is this analogy really too complex for most readers? Middlebury set up all its institutional defenses to protect itself from an attack coming from the Right and was completely unprepared for an attack coming from the Left?

    You’re still making the mistake of thinking that Middlebury was a target of an attack instead of an instigator of an attack. Seems to me their defense mechanisms have worked perfectly.

    What accounts for the continued insistence on attributing good faith where none is offered?

    Read More
  55. @Svigor

    Based on a strict interpretation of the rules you quoted, bias and intolerance against people based on their political beliefs is not included in the list of prohibited activities.
     
    https://creed.askdefine.com/
    Creed
    Noun
    1 any system of principles or beliefs [syn: credo]

    Creed
    Noun
    1 any system of principles or beliefs [syn: credo]

    Murray’s libertarianism might qualify as a “creed,” but are the 100 pages of footnotes to The Bell Curve a “creed” or are they scientific evidence? The mob attacked Murray less for his libertarianism than for his science.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    They attacked him for neither his actual creed nor his science, neither of which were they aware.

    They attacked him because he'd been maliciously defamed in strenuously bad faith by their professors, their administrators, and institutions such as the SPLC.

    They needed a scapegoat to distract the students from the scam of an education (sic) to which they'd been subjected, and Murray was handy.
  56. @celt darnell

    It’s not clear whether this applies to poor Ms. Stanger, who was beaten up because she believes the First Amendment applies to Charles Murray.
     
    Technically it's Dr. Stanger or Professor Stanger as she has a Harvard PhD, but what the hell, we're all sexists here (well, I am, anyhow) so let's call her Mrs. Kaus, as she's married to Michael Kraus, Professor of Political Science at Middlebury and has two children.

    Her Wikipedia page is semi-interesting...she's actually not the type to be caught up in this kind of dust-up -- or if she were, she'd be batting for the other side.

    she’d be batting for the other side

    She is batting for the other side. She’s on video participating enthusiastically in the shutdown. She and the President egged the crowd on prior to Murray trying to speak.

    Read More
    • Replies: @celt darnell
    According to her comments in the NY Times, she supported Murray's right to speak while disagreeing with what he said.

    That puts her on the opposite side of the SJWs. They deny the right of free speech if they disagree with what you are saying.

  57. @Jack Hanson
    Steve, when are you going to stop being surprised by the hypocrisy of the Left?

    In fairness, I think our host is surprised or “shocked” by the Left’s hypocrisy in the same way Captain Renault was “shocked” to learn that there was gambling going on at Rick’s.

    Read More
  58. @Steve Sailer
    Creed
    Noun
    1 any system of principles or beliefs [syn: credo]

    Murray's libertarianism might qualify as a "creed," but are the 100 pages of footnotes to The Bell Curve a "creed" or are they scientific evidence? The mob attacked Murray less for his libertarianism than for his science.

    They attacked him for neither his actual creed nor his science, neither of which were they aware.

    They attacked him because he’d been maliciously defamed in strenuously bad faith by their professors, their administrators, and institutions such as the SPLC.

    They needed a scapegoat to distract the students from the scam of an education (sic) to which they’d been subjected, and Murray was handy.

    Read More
  59. @Alfa158
    Based on a strict interpretation of the rules you quoted, bias and intolerance against people based on their political beliefs is not included in the list of prohibited activities. Therefore shutting down Charles Murray was permissible by their rules and no disciplinary action was called for.
    I would hazard a guess that physically assaulting Professor Stranger might violate a college rule, but perhaps the college never bothered to promulgate rules against criminal acts because that would be an issue for the justice system. Unless Stanger files a police complaint against her attackers, likely nothing will happen.

    Do they know the identities of the people who assaulted her? It’s hard to charge someone with a crime if you can’t identify them.

    Read More
  60. @Buffalo Joe
    slumber, what a great time to reprise the comedy gem..."The Russians are Coming, The Russians are coming."

    There happens to be a fortuitous intersection of Russians and the Irish theme of the day, as Alan Arkin led his stranded submariners marching along singing “It’s a long way to Tipperrary”.

    Read More
  61. @PiltdownMan
    http://island-footprint.appspot.com/images/fort_siloso.jpg

    The guns of Fort Siloso were pointed due south, in anticipation of a seaborne assault by the Japanese. The Japanese swept through the Malay Peninsula and attacked Singapore 180 degrees from where the guns were pointed, and came in through the short causeway connecting the north of Singapore island to Malaya.

    For any who visit, Fort Siloso and the other war museums are worth a look.

    The Singapore gun story is reminiscent of the Maginot Line. That might lead one to speculate about some early 20th century focus (after all, N=2!) to the detriment of other considerations, like whether other points of the compass should be defended, and by which methods and armaments. Of course, the British would deny any connection with the French, as Sandhurst and St. Cyr are miles apart.

    Read More
  62. @Buffalo Joe
    I notice in the list of offending behavior is bias toward "HIV-positive-test results." A bill has been introduced into the California Legislature that would reduce KNOWINGLY infecting some one with the HIV virus from a felony to a misdemeanor. The bill's sponsor notes that advances in science and the treatment of AIDS warrants a revisit to the criminality of transmitting the disease to an unaware partner. I read this at the Sacramento Bee and the comments were close to 100% against this bill. The people are waking up, but the elected officials still think they are so much smarter than the populace.

    That HIV legislative absurdity has the same “don’t embarrass them” quality as the Rotherham policy. After all, wouldn’t want some patently obvious criminals acting of their own volition, with malice aforethought, to have a moment’s pause. Those common threads represent the notions of capitulation, a hallmark of blue states of whatever nationality.

    Read More
  63. @Alfa158
    Based on a strict interpretation of the rules you quoted, bias and intolerance against people based on their political beliefs is not included in the list of prohibited activities. Therefore shutting down Charles Murray was permissible by their rules and no disciplinary action was called for.
    I would hazard a guess that physically assaulting Professor Stranger might violate a college rule, but perhaps the college never bothered to promulgate rules against criminal acts because that would be an issue for the justice system. Unless Stanger files a police complaint against her attackers, likely nothing will happen.

    I’m guessing that Prof. Stanger will not likely file a police report. There are various organizations that discourage such behavior as drawing unwelcome attention to management, among other reasons. I know of a boardroom assault that was hushed up for just that. The victim was dissuaded with the tacit understanding that pursuit of the matter would be a career-limiting act. The only good news in that example was that the perpetrator got fired later for other egregious behavior.

    Read More
  64. NickG:

    One of the main reasons the British acquited themselves better in the Malayan “Emergency” was the fact that most of the insurgents were Chinese and seen as foreigners by the indigenous Malays.

    Read More
  65. @Dan Hayes
    Buffalo Joe,

    Both Maddow and Morrow are/were supremely vile and obnoxious people. They deserve to be categorized together although I am unaware of Morrow's sexual proclivities (if any).

    Dan, Maddow expends a lot of energy on being outraged. Unhappy person I think.

    Read More
  66. @Ivy
    That HIV legislative absurdity has the same "don't embarrass them" quality as the Rotherham policy. After all, wouldn't want some patently obvious criminals acting of their own volition, with malice aforethought, to have a moment's pause. Those common threads represent the notions of capitulation, a hallmark of blue states of whatever nationality.

    Ivy, Nicely stated.

    Read More
  67. @Steve Sailer
    Right, is this analogy really too complex for most readers? Middlebury set up all its institutional defenses to protect itself from an attack coming from the Right and was completely unprepared for an attack coming from the Left?

    Similarly, the Housing Bubble was inflated by the government over a few decades building up all its defenses against the hated threat of not enough mortgage lending to minorities, which led to too much lending to minorities in the mid-2000s.

    I think the analogy may be escaping many of us because it implies that Middlebury et al are actually interested in repelling an attack from the left. The analogy would make more sense if the British commander was a Japanese double agent.

    Read More
  68. @Anon
    This seems sketchy. Even naval guns can fire both HE and AP. I have a hard time believing that the emplacements could fire AP and canister, but not HE. Source please.

    I was just looking online – it’s on Wiki!

    The coastal batteries were intended for engaging warships not defending Singapore against land attack. Thus most (all?) the ammunition was AP, with little or no HE and certainly no canister. I’m sure such rounds could have been produced for the guns in question but weren’t available in Singapore.

    Read More
  69. @Whoever
    Yes, it is. The real story is about the panic and cowardice of the British, coupled with their sheer incompetence, as a result of which our Marines had to face those very same guns of Singapore at Tarawa.
    It's curious how so many myths and misconceptions from the earliest days of the Pacific War persist all these decades later, even though researchers long ago uncovered exactly what actually happened in great detail.
    The episode provides a sort of proof-of-concept demonstration of the Unzian Outlook, as epitomized in one of my favorite quotes from Ron Unz:
    "We assume that our media accurate reflect the events of our world and its history, but instead what we see are the distorted images of a fun-house mirror, with small items transformed into large ones and large ones into small. The contours of historical reality are warped into unrecognizable shapes, with important elements disappearing and others appearing out of nowhere."

    Unless the Japanese took the trouble to produce or acquire HE shells for those British guns then it wasn’t Marines that had to face those guns later, but USN ships.

    It appears they did not:

    ‘The Singapore Guns’

    The firing on Betio had barely subsided before apocryphal claims began to appear in print that the four eight-inch naval rifles used as coastal defense guns by the Japanese were the same ones captured from the British at the fall of Singapore. Many prominent historians unwittingly perpetuated this story, among them the highly respected Samuel Eliot Morison.

    In 1977, however, British writer William H. Bartsch published the results of a recent visit to Tarawa in the quarterly magazine After the Battle. Bartsch personally examined each of the four guns and discovered markings indicating manufacture by Vickers, the British ordnance company. The Vickers company subsequently provided Bartsch records indicating the four guns were part of a consignment of 12 eight-inch, quick-firing guns which were sold in 1905 to the Japanese during their war with Russia. Further investigation by Bartsch at the Imperial War Museum produced the fact that there were no eight-inch guns captured by the Japanese at Singapore. In short, the guns at Tarawa came from a far more legitimate, and older, transaction with the British.

    The eight-inch guns fired the opening rounds in the battle of Tarawa, but were not by themselves a factor in the contest. Earlier bombing raids may have damaged their fire control systems. Rapid counterbattery fire from American battleships took out the big guns in short order, although one of them maintained an intermittent, if inaccurate, fire throughout D+1. Colonel Shoup stated emphatically that the 2d Marine Division was fully aware of the presence of eight-inch guns on Betio as early as mid-August 1943. By contrast, the division intelligence annex to Shoup’s operation order, updated nine days before the landing, discounts external reports that the main guns were likely to be as large as eight-inch, insisting instead that “they are probably not more than 6-inch.” Prior knowledge notwithstanding, the fact remains that many American officers were unpleasantly surprised to experience major caliber near-misses bracketing the amphibious task force early on D-Day.

    https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/npswapa/extcontent/usmc/pcn-190-003120-00/sec4.htm

    Read More
    • Replies: @Whoever
    Thanks. That was interesting. Glad to be corrected.
    I found Bartsch's article. It's in After the Battle #15 "Tarawa and Operation Galvanic." I've read three of Bartsch's books. They are filled with very precise detail and highly recommended.
  70. @Desiderius

    she’d be batting for the other side
     
    She is batting for the other side. She's on video participating enthusiastically in the shutdown. She and the President egged the crowd on prior to Murray trying to speak.

    According to her comments in the NY Times, she supported Murray’s right to speak while disagreeing with what he said.

    That puts her on the opposite side of the SJWs. They deny the right of free speech if they disagree with what you are saying.

    Read More
  71. @Buffalo Joe
    I notice in the list of offending behavior is bias toward "HIV-positive-test results." A bill has been introduced into the California Legislature that would reduce KNOWINGLY infecting some one with the HIV virus from a felony to a misdemeanor. The bill's sponsor notes that advances in science and the treatment of AIDS warrants a revisit to the criminality of transmitting the disease to an unaware partner. I read this at the Sacramento Bee and the comments were close to 100% against this bill. The people are waking up, but the elected officials still think they are so much smarter than the populace.

    They are doing the victim _sarc_on_ a favor because they are ushering them into a privileged class. In fact, a sainted class of authentic, genuine and really real people. _sarc_off_

    We live in a sick culture.

    Read More
  72. Basically then, liberal human rights codes provide no protection for personal beliefs (other than religious ones). Stranger believes in freedom of speech, someone attacked her for defending freedom on speech, and the College’s code of human rights doesn’t protect her, since the attack didn’t have anything to do with her race, religion or gender.

    This is an interesting stance for left liberals to take. According to these rules, if a right-winger were to attack a left-winger for being an atheist or a socialist, then that would be okay since they were attacking them for their political beliefs and not their race, religion or gender. The far left is lucky that the right isn’t as ruthless as they are, as legally their isn’t that much they can do about right-wing violence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    The far left is lucky that the right isn’t as ruthless as they are, as legally their isn’t that much they can do about right-wing violence.
     
    Luck is the residue of design.

    The right isn't ruthless because it's been systematically castrated for generations. Stanger and Patton are beneficiaries of that system. Don't look to them for help righting it.
  73. @anonguy

    An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both,
     
    No True Scotsman fallacy, dude.

    Anyhow, regardless of the way the guns actually weren't pointed, they still weren't expecting a landward invasion. The British did indeed consider the Malayan Peninsula impassable enough to deter any realistic threat by a landward invader of Singapore.

    Not very good roads/rails, etc.

    So the Japanese Army hopped on bicycles, rode down the Peninsula, then shocked the world by taking Singapore.

    The Japanese were big on shocking the world those days. Just not long before, they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros, thereby decisively ending the battleship era.

    So this, like real life, is a lot more interesting in fact than as a simplified parable for the ages.

    British actually did have the armory adequately provisioned by the military planners of the day, these guys knew a lot about moving armies around, what it takes, it isn't like some bar argument with another uniformed yobbo.

    And they made very reasonable assumption that the threat was seaward rather than landward. Gotta remember, the IJN was yuuuuuge...

    It would have been irresponsible for them to have provisioned for what was a very less credible threat.

    And they would have done the right thing in 99 out of a 100 battles. Unfortunately, their enemy made a leapfrogging military innovation, swung for the rafters, and just happened to nail it.

    yeah, they had used bicycle troops a few years before in China, but apparently there wasn't enough drama with that utilization to alert planners/strategists of a new type of threat. It wasn't until after Singapore that people understood the utility of the bicycle for the Japanese in that campaign.

    Anyhow, the real story is a lot more interesting than dumbing it down to a tale of gin-blossomed Colonel Blimp fools messing up what any respectable blogger would have figured out so we can all feel how smart and superior we are.

    BTW, do you know that impossibly large fraction of Japanese women can ride a unicycle? Some of the dudes can, but is a very common thing for young, like kindergarten or earlier even, to learn. Then you have these really cool elementary school track competion, organized dance performance competitions and herds of little Japanese girls will come riding by doing all kinds of circus tricks.

    Its amazing. There is a deal with accordions like this. And calculus too.

    they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros,

    The Zero is a fighter plane, cute or otherwise, and not a bomber. And no Zero took part in the attacks on the Prince of Wales or Repulse.
    The two ships were sunk by G3Ms and G4Ms armed with either 500 or 250 kg armor-piercing bombs or Type 91 torpedoes. This is not esoteric knowledge. The BuNos of the aircraft and the names of their crews have been known for decades, along with personal accounts of the attack by many of them.
    We also have the eyewitness accounts of the crew of 8 RAAF Squadron Lockheed Hudson A16-76 NN-F, who observed the attacks from start to finish. And we have the account of the attacks by the pilot of the Repulse‘s own Walrus R6587, airborne at the time, who also witnessed it.
    The rest of your post is equally ill-informed. This episode, as well as the entire Malay campaign, is enormously interesting at many levels and you can easily drill down as deep into the details of what happened as you want to go. If you care enough about this subject to write such a long post about this subject, why wouldn’t you also care enough to actually learn about it?

    Read More
  74. @NickG
    The fall of British Singapore to the Japs in Feb 1942 was a pivotal moment in WW2 and British history.

    This unnecessary defeat by a much smaller Japanese force, was down to the, all too common, hubris of the British Military, led by Lt Gen Arthur Percival, who surrendered to the Japs in the most significant British military defeat since the Norman conquest in 1066. Over 80,000 British and Commonwealth troops were captured.

    The book to read on this is Sinister Twilight - by Noel Barber.

    Noel Barber was a Daily Mail Correspondent, he was a prolific author of both fact and fiction.

    It's also worth reading The War of the Running Dogs an account abut the Malayan 'Emergency' - The jungle war against the Communist Terrorists, which ran parallel with the Vietnam war and in which the British acquitted themselves rather better than they had against the Japanese.

    I lived in Singapore for just over 4 years as a child from 1970-75. It made a massive impression on me. I later cycled right through Malaysia in 1987.

    In addition to the general histories of this episode, the personal accounts of participants are enormously interesting.
    Off the top of my head, two that stick in my mind are You’ll Die in Singapore by Charles McCormac, an Englishman who fought in the campaign, was captured and imprisoned by the Japanese, escaped and made his way to freedom, taking five months to do it.
    Another is Last Flight from Singapore by Arthur Donahue, an American who volunteered to serve with the RAF and fought in the Battle of Britain (his other book is Tally-Ho! Yankee in a Spitfire) and then flew Hurricanes against the Japanese. His book is of particular interest if you care about the history of air combat, as he flew two of the classic fighter planes of the early war in two of the most significant events of those days.

    Read More
  75. @Lurker
    Unless the Japanese took the trouble to produce or acquire HE shells for those British guns then it wasn't Marines that had to face those guns later, but USN ships.

    It appears they did not:

    'The Singapore Guns'

    The firing on Betio had barely subsided before apocryphal claims began to appear in print that the four eight-inch naval rifles used as coastal defense guns by the Japanese were the same ones captured from the British at the fall of Singapore. Many prominent historians unwittingly perpetuated this story, among them the highly respected Samuel Eliot Morison.

    In 1977, however, British writer William H. Bartsch published the results of a recent visit to Tarawa in the quarterly magazine After the Battle. Bartsch personally examined each of the four guns and discovered markings indicating manufacture by Vickers, the British ordnance company. The Vickers company subsequently provided Bartsch records indicating the four guns were part of a consignment of 12 eight-inch, quick-firing guns which were sold in 1905 to the Japanese during their war with Russia. Further investigation by Bartsch at the Imperial War Museum produced the fact that there were no eight-inch guns captured by the Japanese at Singapore. In short, the guns at Tarawa came from a far more legitimate, and older, transaction with the British.

    The eight-inch guns fired the opening rounds in the battle of Tarawa, but were not by themselves a factor in the contest. Earlier bombing raids may have damaged their fire control systems. Rapid counterbattery fire from American battleships took out the big guns in short order, although one of them maintained an intermittent, if inaccurate, fire throughout D+1. Colonel Shoup stated emphatically that the 2d Marine Division was fully aware of the presence of eight-inch guns on Betio as early as mid-August 1943. By contrast, the division intelligence annex to Shoup's operation order, updated nine days before the landing, discounts external reports that the main guns were likely to be as large as eight-inch, insisting instead that "they are probably not more than 6-inch." Prior knowledge notwithstanding, the fact remains that many American officers were unpleasantly surprised to experience major caliber near-misses bracketing the amphibious task force early on D-Day.
     
    https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/npswapa/extcontent/usmc/pcn-190-003120-00/sec4.htm

    Thanks. That was interesting. Glad to be corrected.
    I found Bartsch’s article. It’s in After the Battle #15 “Tarawa and Operation Galvanic.” I’ve read three of Bartsch’s books. They are filled with very precise detail and highly recommended.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    Thanks, I'll be looking out for him. I'd not heard of him before I read that article.
  76. @Buzz Mohawk
    Yes, we've been pointing our guns the wrong way, evidently a common mistake:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZQSpMiaaxk

    Artillery actually worked better on ships than on land because you could float an immensely heavy gun barrel around the world a lot more easily than you could drag it a few miles from a rail line.

    And ships move around so it’s hard to get a fix on them for counterfire.

    Land guns tend to be sitting ducks.

    If you dug shore artillery in to protect them from shelling from ship guns, that made them hard to turn around to face inland. There tended to be a real trade off between durability and flexibility.

    One ideal is to mount harbor guns inside caves like on Gibraltar. But that means they couldn’t be turned much at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Another handy point about horizontal (or near horizontal) shot from cannons asea (though not artillary as such, which describes great arcs as it travels indirectly to its target) is that asea the balls could be skimmed off the water to travel farther than they would across land. Batteries ashore protecting harbours also took advantage of that phenomenon.
  77. @unpc downunder
    Basically then, liberal human rights codes provide no protection for personal beliefs (other than religious ones). Stranger believes in freedom of speech, someone attacked her for defending freedom on speech, and the College's code of human rights doesn't protect her, since the attack didn't have anything to do with her race, religion or gender.

    This is an interesting stance for left liberals to take. According to these rules, if a right-winger were to attack a left-winger for being an atheist or a socialist, then that would be okay since they were attacking them for their political beliefs and not their race, religion or gender. The far left is lucky that the right isn't as ruthless as they are, as legally their isn't that much they can do about right-wing violence.

    The far left is lucky that the right isn’t as ruthless as they are, as legally their isn’t that much they can do about right-wing violence.

    Luck is the residue of design.

    The right isn’t ruthless because it’s been systematically castrated for generations. Stanger and Patton are beneficiaries of that system. Don’t look to them for help righting it.

    Read More
  78. @Steve Sailer
    Right, is this analogy really too complex for most readers? Middlebury set up all its institutional defenses to protect itself from an attack coming from the Right and was completely unprepared for an attack coming from the Left?

    Similarly, the Housing Bubble was inflated by the government over a few decades building up all its defenses against the hated threat of not enough mortgage lending to minorities, which led to too much lending to minorities in the mid-2000s.

    It appears, given their relatively low key reaction, that Middlebury is willingly and approvingly providing a stage for attacks from the left. Hence the confusion over the analogy, in this instance.

    Read More
  79. Did Singapore Have to Fall has an interesting chapter, “The Guns of Singapore,” that discusses the various myths that have become cemented into into this story. Scroll down the PDF to page 87 to begin reading. The section, “Unraveling the Myths,” begins on page 102.
    It turns out that some of the bigger guns, if not the 15-inchers, not only could face inland, they fired on the approaching Japanese. Here’s a description by a Japanese of what that was like:

    When we reached the southeastern extremity of Tengah aerodrome, we
    found that bombs or heavy-calibre shells were blowing large holes in the
    roadway… Abandoning the car the orderly and I continued on foot…. Just
    at that moment there was a shellburst which shocked our eardrums, while
    the blast jarred our spines. The flash seared my eyes, and I was thrown
    into the roadside ditch. In my agitation I thrust myself into an earthenware
    drainage pipe. The heavy shelling continued… Up to this moment I had
    had no experience of such heavy projectiles, which tore holes in the
    ground fifteen or sixteen metres in diameter and four or five metres deep.
    They were probably the fifteen or sixteen-inch [there were no 16-inch
    guns] fortress guns which had been swung round 180 degrees to fire over
    the land instead of over the water out to sea… Crouching like a crab
    inside the earthen pipe, I imagined what would happen if a shell fell on
    me.

    The chapter contains lots of photos and cutaway drawings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    The guns that were turned around, belatedly, inflicted heavy casualties on British forces retreating from the northern, Malaya-facing side of Singapore.
  80. The sooner people on the right realize that the left wants to see us thrown in jail (or worse) for our political views, the better off we are. At least then we can throw out these ridiculous and outmoded “principles” and start understanding that there’s more at stake than just not being invited to the right cocktail parties and social events.

    Read More
  81. @Steve Sailer
    Artillery actually worked better on ships than on land because you could float an immensely heavy gun barrel around the world a lot more easily than you could drag it a few miles from a rail line.

    And ships move around so it's hard to get a fix on them for counterfire.

    Land guns tend to be sitting ducks.

    If you dug shore artillery in to protect them from shelling from ship guns, that made them hard to turn around to face inland. There tended to be a real trade off between durability and flexibility.

    One ideal is to mount harbor guns inside caves like on Gibraltar. But that means they couldn't be turned much at all.

    Another handy point about horizontal (or near horizontal) shot from cannons asea (though not artillary as such, which describes great arcs as it travels indirectly to its target) is that asea the balls could be skimmed off the water to travel farther than they would across land. Batteries ashore protecting harbours also took advantage of that phenomenon.

    Read More
  82. @Steve Sailer
    Right, is this analogy really too complex for most readers? Middlebury set up all its institutional defenses to protect itself from an attack coming from the Right and was completely unprepared for an attack coming from the Left?

    Similarly, the Housing Bubble was inflated by the government over a few decades building up all its defenses against the hated threat of not enough mortgage lending to minorities, which led to too much lending to minorities in the mid-2000s.

    I can see the analogy, but I agree with the other commenters here. To pose another analogy, I think many colleges and universities see their anti-fa student protesters as antibodies or white blood cells: they may make a bit of a mess as they work, but they’re repelling and neutralizing the real enemy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    I think many colleges and universities see their anti-fa student protesters as antibodies or white blood cells: they may make a bit of a mess as they work, but they’re repelling and neutralizing the real enemy.
     
    Which is to say, colleges and universities are fa.
    , @Random Dude on the Internet
    The antifa and just left wing violence in general is a feature and not a bug in our modern society. These acts are condoned, either explicitly (from the cultural brahmins in urban areas who write glowing essays about how we need to stop right wing activity at all costs) or implicitly (slaps on the wrist at best if these people even end up getting arrested). The antifa/black bloc will always find a warm welcome in our modern university system.
  83. @Jason Liu
    Tolerate all except the intolerant, it's not hate if they have good intentions, punching up is not bias, etc

    Principles like free speech do not really exist in the leftist mind except when they can make use of it, otherwise it's an impediment to their compassion uber alles and other shit ideas.

    This is why the west's autistic devotion to free speech is overall not a good thing, it just lets society's problem elements occupy more space than they deserve. In most places the right would not be crying free speech, they'd be moving to shut down the left twice as hard.

    Everytime I say this some white guy goes: "B-b-but what if it happens to me someday?"

    It's already happening to you. For there ever to be ideological liberty (assuming you want that), the right has to be in power because the left does not value liberty.

    This is why the west’s autistic devotion to free speech is overall not a good thing, it just lets society’s problem elements occupy more space than they deserve. In most places the right would not be crying free speech, they’d be moving to shut down the left twice as hard.

    Free speech is like liberty and the pursuit of happiness and freedom of religion and equality and brotherhood. These are the kinds of dumb ideas that only intellectuals could come up with, and only intellectuals could believe.

    Unfortunately they were the kinds of that were popular among 18th century intellectuals, especially the ones who considered themselves to be dangerous and edgy. The kinds of intellectuals who thought that rebelling against the lawful government of the rightful king would be a really cool thing to do. That’s why the US is burdened with a completely unworkable system of government – it was devised by intellectuals.

    Let’s face it, the great minds of the Enlightenment, men like Voltaire, were the urban hipsters of their day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    Indeed, the future is going to be more "fascist" than people care to admit.
    , @PiltdownMan

    Let’s face it, the great minds of the Enlightenment, men like Voltaire, were the urban hipsters of their day.
     
    It's safe to say that the converse is not true. Urban hipsters, sadly, are not the Voltaires of our day.
  84. @Whoever
    Did Singapore Have to Fall has an interesting chapter, "The Guns of Singapore," that discusses the various myths that have become cemented into into this story. Scroll down the PDF to page 87 to begin reading. The section, "Unraveling the Myths," begins on page 102.
    It turns out that some of the bigger guns, if not the 15-inchers, not only could face inland, they fired on the approaching Japanese. Here's a description by a Japanese of what that was like:

    When we reached the southeastern extremity of Tengah aerodrome, we
    found that bombs or heavy-calibre shells were blowing large holes in the
    roadway... Abandoning the car the orderly and I continued on foot.... Just
    at that moment there was a shellburst which shocked our eardrums, while
    the blast jarred our spines. The flash seared my eyes, and I was thrown
    into the roadside ditch. In my agitation I thrust myself into an earthenware
    drainage pipe. The heavy shelling continued... Up to this moment I had
    had no experience of such heavy projectiles, which tore holes in the
    ground fifteen or sixteen metres in diameter and four or five metres deep.
    They were probably the fifteen or sixteen-inch [there were no 16-inch
    guns] fortress guns which had been swung round 180 degrees to fire over
    the land instead of over the water out to sea... Crouching like a crab
    inside the earthen pipe, I imagined what would happen if a shell fell on
    me.


    The chapter contains lots of photos and cutaway drawings.

    The guns that were turned around, belatedly, inflicted heavy casualties on British forces retreating from the northern, Malaya-facing side of Singapore.

    Read More
  85. @dfordoom

    This is why the west’s autistic devotion to free speech is overall not a good thing, it just lets society’s problem elements occupy more space than they deserve. In most places the right would not be crying free speech, they’d be moving to shut down the left twice as hard.
     
    Free speech is like liberty and the pursuit of happiness and freedom of religion and equality and brotherhood. These are the kinds of dumb ideas that only intellectuals could come up with, and only intellectuals could believe.

    Unfortunately they were the kinds of that were popular among 18th century intellectuals, especially the ones who considered themselves to be dangerous and edgy. The kinds of intellectuals who thought that rebelling against the lawful government of the rightful king would be a really cool thing to do. That's why the US is burdened with a completely unworkable system of government - it was devised by intellectuals.

    Let's face it, the great minds of the Enlightenment, men like Voltaire, were the urban hipsters of their day.

    Indeed, the future is going to be more “fascist” than people care to admit.

    Read More
  86. @dfordoom

    This is why the west’s autistic devotion to free speech is overall not a good thing, it just lets society’s problem elements occupy more space than they deserve. In most places the right would not be crying free speech, they’d be moving to shut down the left twice as hard.
     
    Free speech is like liberty and the pursuit of happiness and freedom of religion and equality and brotherhood. These are the kinds of dumb ideas that only intellectuals could come up with, and only intellectuals could believe.

    Unfortunately they were the kinds of that were popular among 18th century intellectuals, especially the ones who considered themselves to be dangerous and edgy. The kinds of intellectuals who thought that rebelling against the lawful government of the rightful king would be a really cool thing to do. That's why the US is burdened with a completely unworkable system of government - it was devised by intellectuals.

    Let's face it, the great minds of the Enlightenment, men like Voltaire, were the urban hipsters of their day.

    Let’s face it, the great minds of the Enlightenment, men like Voltaire, were the urban hipsters of their day.

    It’s safe to say that the converse is not true. Urban hipsters, sadly, are not the Voltaires of our day.

    Read More
  87. @The Last Real Calvinist
    I can see the analogy, but I agree with the other commenters here. To pose another analogy, I think many colleges and universities see their anti-fa student protesters as antibodies or white blood cells: they may make a bit of a mess as they work, but they're repelling and neutralizing the real enemy.

    I think many colleges and universities see their anti-fa student protesters as antibodies or white blood cells: they may make a bit of a mess as they work, but they’re repelling and neutralizing the real enemy.

    Which is to say, colleges and universities are fa.

    Read More
  88. @AndrewR
    After reading Stanger's essay in the NYT, I confess dismay that she got off so easy. It's hard to say if she's just a coward or if she really is delusional, but her essay was nauseating.

    After reading Stanger’s essay in the NYT, I confess dismay that she got off so easy. It’s hard to say if she’s just a coward or if she really is delusional

    The truly remarkable thing is that people like Stanger are totally incapable of learning from experience.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Perhaps that is because they believe they already know everything worth knowing.
  89. @anonguy

    An adequately-equipped armory ought to have both,
     
    No True Scotsman fallacy, dude.

    Anyhow, regardless of the way the guns actually weren't pointed, they still weren't expecting a landward invasion. The British did indeed consider the Malayan Peninsula impassable enough to deter any realistic threat by a landward invader of Singapore.

    Not very good roads/rails, etc.

    So the Japanese Army hopped on bicycles, rode down the Peninsula, then shocked the world by taking Singapore.

    The Japanese were big on shocking the world those days. Just not long before, they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros, thereby decisively ending the battleship era.

    So this, like real life, is a lot more interesting in fact than as a simplified parable for the ages.

    British actually did have the armory adequately provisioned by the military planners of the day, these guys knew a lot about moving armies around, what it takes, it isn't like some bar argument with another uniformed yobbo.

    And they made very reasonable assumption that the threat was seaward rather than landward. Gotta remember, the IJN was yuuuuuge...

    It would have been irresponsible for them to have provisioned for what was a very less credible threat.

    And they would have done the right thing in 99 out of a 100 battles. Unfortunately, their enemy made a leapfrogging military innovation, swung for the rafters, and just happened to nail it.

    yeah, they had used bicycle troops a few years before in China, but apparently there wasn't enough drama with that utilization to alert planners/strategists of a new type of threat. It wasn't until after Singapore that people understood the utility of the bicycle for the Japanese in that campaign.

    Anyhow, the real story is a lot more interesting than dumbing it down to a tale of gin-blossomed Colonel Blimp fools messing up what any respectable blogger would have figured out so we can all feel how smart and superior we are.

    BTW, do you know that impossibly large fraction of Japanese women can ride a unicycle? Some of the dudes can, but is a very common thing for young, like kindergarten or earlier even, to learn. Then you have these really cool elementary school track competion, organized dance performance competitions and herds of little Japanese girls will come riding by doing all kinds of circus tricks.

    Its amazing. There is a deal with accordions like this. And calculus too.

    Just not long before, they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros,

    I’m fairly sure they sank the Prince of Wales and the Repulse with Mitsubishi Ki-21 “Sally” bombers and Mitsubishi G4M “Betty” torpedo-bombers. The Zero fighter wouldn’t have had the range, apart from the fact that it was a fighter.

    Don’t you just love nit-pickers? And now someone will undoubtedly nit-pick my reply as well!

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy
    I knew they weren't Zeros, a fighter, when I wrote it. I figured it was Bettys or something.

    I knew it would get nitpicked, purposely didn't look up the type of planes, just a little bit of trolling.

    Fun to pick a fight once in a while....

    But you are such an unusually generously spirited nitpicker you've gone and ruined it for me.
  90. @Jason Liu
    Tolerate all except the intolerant, it's not hate if they have good intentions, punching up is not bias, etc

    Principles like free speech do not really exist in the leftist mind except when they can make use of it, otherwise it's an impediment to their compassion uber alles and other shit ideas.

    This is why the west's autistic devotion to free speech is overall not a good thing, it just lets society's problem elements occupy more space than they deserve. In most places the right would not be crying free speech, they'd be moving to shut down the left twice as hard.

    Everytime I say this some white guy goes: "B-b-but what if it happens to me someday?"

    It's already happening to you. For there ever to be ideological liberty (assuming you want that), the right has to be in power because the left does not value liberty.

    I think even a make-believe commitment to free speech, with dildo reservations and qualifications (“freedom of speech, not consequences of speech” etc) is better than no free speech at all. Even imperfect free speech is better than institutionalized truth, religious councils etc.

    French revolutionaries and early 20th century socialists had it about right – freedom is always the freedom of the dissident. The problem is the West is confused about which side is the dissident.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    many things about what passes for Left today (by many I mean every single one) are morally offensive. But I'd say the desire to fix everything, FAST, and throw things like free speech overboard in the process is autistic and revolutionary itself. I don't want to depend on some group's noblesse oblige even if they are well-meaning.
  91. @ussr andy
    I think even a make-believe commitment to free speech, with dildo reservations and qualifications ("freedom of speech, not consequences of speech" etc) is better than no free speech at all. Even imperfect free speech is better than institutionalized truth, religious councils etc.

    French revolutionaries and early 20th century socialists had it about right - freedom is always the freedom of the dissident. The problem is the West is confused about which side is the dissident.

    many things about what passes for Left today (by many I mean every single one) are morally offensive. But I’d say the desire to fix everything, FAST, and throw things like free speech overboard in the process is autistic and revolutionary itself. I don’t want to depend on some group’s noblesse oblige even if they are well-meaning.

    Read More
  92. @Lurker
    Isn't the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    The guns, being set up to counter warships, had the wrong sort of ammunition for land warfare. I read it in a WW2 history book quite recently.

    Obviously the myth is useful in this case.

    Isn’t the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?

    Yup it is.

    The naval guns were a relatively small part of the story. The sea straits between Singapore Island and the Malay peninsular are only between 800-1500 metres wide and too shallow for large ships. The Japs started coming over in small boats before storming the causeway – the 1 km road across the straits built on an earth berm.

    The right kit to stop that was rifles, machine guns and mortars, which the British had. There should have been multiple reserve demolitions on the Causeway . This should have been covered with interlocking and overlapping machine gun fire as well as pre registered DF- Defensive Fire -artillery, from guns set back. Singapore is a diamond shape Island only 50 km by 25 km, so three 25 pounder artillery locations (the standard British field artillery piece of the era, range about 12-13 km) could cover the whole island and all the straits with indirect fire.

    A 15 inch WW2 era British naval gun had a range of about 30 km. There were 2 in the West battery and three in the East Battery on Singapore. These guns could cover the whole island, as well as the straits between Malaya and Singapore, and well into Jahore to the North in peninsular Malaysia together with the sea approaches to Singapore fro the West, South And East. The 2 Western guns had mounting mechanism that could not traverse to allow the guns to direct fire missions to the North. This is where there is a little truth underlying the myth. The 3 gun battery to the West, by the Sembewang naval base, could traverse 360° and indeed fired to the North, into Jahore. It is also true that the Royal Navy only had anti-shipping armour piercing shells and no High Explosives appropriate against troop formations.

    None of this should have been close to critical given British and Commonwealth forces numbered 85,000 and Japanese forces 36,000.

    The Japs had been coming down the Malay peninsular for weeks, having landed in the North East corner of Peninsular Malaya – in Kota Bharu and Kuantan 700 km North of Singapore and just over the Northern border in Thailand. The British and Commonwealth forces – with a few honourable exceptions – just didn’t put up much of a fight. They were badly led, had bad moral, and their commander – Arthur Percival – was utterly incompetent and was afflicted by gargantuan levels of hubris.

    Of course this is all besides the point vis-a-vis Steve’s analogy.

    Read More
    • Agree: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    NickG,

    Your fact-filled response is just one more example of the many high octane UR responses!
    , @Diversity Heretic
    I have read that the British/Commonwealth loss of Singapore was arguably the greatest defeat ever suffered by the British Empire. Thank you for your detailed commentary.
    , @Lurker
    Excellent!
  93. @AndrewR
    After reading Stanger's essay in the NYT, I confess dismay that she got off so easy. It's hard to say if she's just a coward or if she really is delusional, but her essay was nauseating.

    She’s both a coward and delusional. Like cult followers, liberals can’t escape from their delusions. Also, deep down, she was glad Murray couldn’t deliver his speech.

    Read More
  94. Hate crime is whiteness. Whiteness is white nationalism. White nationalism is racism. Racism is witchcraft. Witchcraft is too serious to be excused by technicalities like whether the accused is innocent.

    The devilish beauty of hate crime laws is that they can evolve into laws against hate, losing the awkward vestigial necessity of proving a crime. They will know who the haters are, and SWAT will come for you.

    Hate crime laws are a temporary expedient. They will be replaced by laws against hate and you are the hate.

    Read More
  95. @dfordoom

    Just not long before, they had sunk the Prince of Wales with their cute little Zeros,
     
    I'm fairly sure they sank the Prince of Wales and the Repulse with Mitsubishi Ki-21 "Sally" bombers and Mitsubishi G4M "Betty" torpedo-bombers. The Zero fighter wouldn't have had the range, apart from the fact that it was a fighter.

    Don't you just love nit-pickers? And now someone will undoubtedly nit-pick my reply as well!

    I knew they weren’t Zeros, a fighter, when I wrote it. I figured it was Bettys or something.

    I knew it would get nitpicked, purposely didn’t look up the type of planes, just a little bit of trolling.

    Fun to pick a fight once in a while….

    But you are such an unusually generously spirited nitpicker you’ve gone and ruined it for me.

    Read More
  96. @The Last Real Calvinist
    I can see the analogy, but I agree with the other commenters here. To pose another analogy, I think many colleges and universities see their anti-fa student protesters as antibodies or white blood cells: they may make a bit of a mess as they work, but they're repelling and neutralizing the real enemy.

    The antifa and just left wing violence in general is a feature and not a bug in our modern society. These acts are condoned, either explicitly (from the cultural brahmins in urban areas who write glowing essays about how we need to stop right wing activity at all costs) or implicitly (slaps on the wrist at best if these people even end up getting arrested). The antifa/black bloc will always find a warm welcome in our modern university system.

    Read More
  97. Murray’s libertarianism might qualify as a “creed,” but are the 100 pages of footnotes to The Bell Curve a “creed” or are they scientific evidence? The mob attacked Murray less for his libertarianism than for his science.

    Not according to their chants, they didn’t.

    Read More
  98. They attacked him for neither his actual creed nor his science, neither of which were they aware.

    Yeah but that’s like attacking a Sikh because “turban=Muslim”; the motive was anti-Muslim, regardless of whether the victim actually qualified.

    Do they know the identities of the people who assaulted her? It’s hard to charge someone with a crime if you can’t identify them.

    That one uni didn’t even have anyone actually wearing hoods and sheets, much less actual KKK members wearing hoods and sheets, but that didn’t stop them from a mass mobilization to find the hood-and-sheet-wearing KKKers. Don’t hold your breath waiting for a mass mobilization to find the actual suspects who committed actual violence here.

    Read More
  99. Speaking of the poor Sikhs taking the fall for Muslims, The Narrative is always “#(!@ing rednecks,” but I bet a lot of the Sikhs so victimized think, “#(!@ing Muslims.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    I bet a lot of the Sikhs so victimized think, “#(!@ing Muslims.”
     
    They've been thinking that for a few centuries. The Sikh religion was forged in the fire of Muslim persecution. From Wikipedia

    During the Mughal Empire, Sikh gurus were persecuted along with other non-Muslims. The fifth Guru of Sikhs...Guru Arjan was tortured and executed by Mughal emperor Jahangir...
    Guru Tegh Bahadur (ninth Guru) was tortured and beheaded by [Emperor] Aurangzeb at Chandni Chowk in Delhi, for refusing to convert to Islam and for protecting Kashmiri Hindus who were being forced to convert to Islam.His fellow devotees Bhai Mati Das, Bhai Sati Das and Bhai Dayala were also tortured and executed, while Guru Tegh Bahadur was forced to watch.Two of the younger sons of [Tenth Guru] Guru Gobind Singh aged 9 and 7 were bricked up alive by the Muslim governor...in Punjab.

     
  100. The fall of Singapore had nothing to do with guns, their orientation or ammunition, but with Churchill’s selfish decision to hoard nearly all of Britain’s airpower and tanks in the home islands and North Africa, leaving the Asian empire unequipped to defend itself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    It's worth noting that Percival was not allotted a single additional tank. He had about two dozen insufficiently armored light tanks, while the Japanese had about 200 tanks during the Malayan campaign, as the Japanese swept south to Singapore. Percival, for all his weakness during the actual fall of Singapore, had been pretty much crippled by a bloody-minded Churchill, who was following a pattern seen throughout the war-of allocating insufficient materiel to the Asian theater. He relented only somewhat, once the United States got involved in the Burma front, though much of this consisted of men, and not material-volunteers who signed up to the British Indian Army, about 2.3 million in all.
  101. @Svigor
    Speaking of the poor Sikhs taking the fall for Muslims, The Narrative is always "#(!@ing rednecks," but I bet a lot of the Sikhs so victimized think, "#(!@ing Muslims."

    I bet a lot of the Sikhs so victimized think, “#(!@ing Muslims.”

    They’ve been thinking that for a few centuries. The Sikh religion was forged in the fire of Muslim persecution. From Wikipedia

    During the Mughal Empire, Sikh gurus were persecuted along with other non-Muslims. The fifth Guru of Sikhs…Guru Arjan was tortured and executed by Mughal emperor Jahangir…
    Guru Tegh Bahadur (ninth Guru) was tortured and beheaded by [Emperor] Aurangzeb at Chandni Chowk in Delhi, for refusing to convert to Islam and for protecting Kashmiri Hindus who were being forced to convert to Islam.His fellow devotees Bhai Mati Das, Bhai Sati Das and Bhai Dayala were also tortured and executed, while Guru Tegh Bahadur was forced to watch.Two of the younger sons of [Tenth Guru] Guru Gobind Singh aged 9 and 7 were bricked up alive by the Muslim governor…in Punjab.

    Read More
  102. @The Q Entity
    The fall of Singapore had nothing to do with guns, their orientation or ammunition, but with Churchill's selfish decision to hoard nearly all of Britain's airpower and tanks in the home islands and North Africa, leaving the Asian empire unequipped to defend itself.

    It’s worth noting that Percival was not allotted a single additional tank. He had about two dozen insufficiently armored light tanks, while the Japanese had about 200 tanks during the Malayan campaign, as the Japanese swept south to Singapore. Percival, for all his weakness during the actual fall of Singapore, had been pretty much crippled by a bloody-minded Churchill, who was following a pattern seen throughout the war-of allocating insufficient materiel to the Asian theater. He relented only somewhat, once the United States got involved in the Burma front, though much of this consisted of men, and not material-volunteers who signed up to the British Indian Army, about 2.3 million in all.

    Read More
  103. @NickG

    Isn’t the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?
     
    Yup it is.

    The naval guns were a relatively small part of the story. The sea straits between Singapore Island and the Malay peninsular are only between 800-1500 metres wide and too shallow for large ships. The Japs started coming over in small boats before storming the causeway - the 1 km road across the straits built on an earth berm.

    The right kit to stop that was rifles, machine guns and mortars, which the British had. There should have been multiple reserve demolitions on the Causeway . This should have been covered with interlocking and overlapping machine gun fire as well as pre registered DF- Defensive Fire -artillery, from guns set back. Singapore is a diamond shape Island only 50 km by 25 km, so three 25 pounder artillery locations (the standard British field artillery piece of the era, range about 12-13 km) could cover the whole island and all the straits with indirect fire.

    A 15 inch WW2 era British naval gun had a range of about 30 km. There were 2 in the West battery and three in the East Battery on Singapore. These guns could cover the whole island, as well as the straits between Malaya and Singapore, and well into Jahore to the North in peninsular Malaysia together with the sea approaches to Singapore fro the West, South And East. The 2 Western guns had mounting mechanism that could not traverse to allow the guns to direct fire missions to the North. This is where there is a little truth underlying the myth. The 3 gun battery to the West, by the Sembewang naval base, could traverse 360° and indeed fired to the North, into Jahore. It is also true that the Royal Navy only had anti-shipping armour piercing shells and no High Explosives appropriate against troop formations.

    None of this should have been close to critical given British and Commonwealth forces numbered 85,000 and Japanese forces 36,000.

    The Japs had been coming down the Malay peninsular for weeks, having landed in the North East corner of Peninsular Malaya - in Kota Bharu and Kuantan 700 km North of Singapore and just over the Northern border in Thailand. The British and Commonwealth forces - with a few honourable exceptions - just didn't put up much of a fight. They were badly led, had bad moral, and their commander - Arthur Percival - was utterly incompetent and was afflicted by gargantuan levels of hubris.

    Of course this is all besides the point vis-a-vis Steve's analogy.

    NickG,

    Your fact-filled response is just one more example of the many high octane UR responses!

    Read More
  104. @dfordoom

    After reading Stanger’s essay in the NYT, I confess dismay that she got off so easy. It’s hard to say if she’s just a coward or if she really is delusional
     
    The truly remarkable thing is that people like Stanger are totally incapable of learning from experience.

    Perhaps that is because they believe they already know everything worth knowing.

    Read More
  105. @NickG

    Isn’t the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?
     
    Yup it is.

    The naval guns were a relatively small part of the story. The sea straits between Singapore Island and the Malay peninsular are only between 800-1500 metres wide and too shallow for large ships. The Japs started coming over in small boats before storming the causeway - the 1 km road across the straits built on an earth berm.

    The right kit to stop that was rifles, machine guns and mortars, which the British had. There should have been multiple reserve demolitions on the Causeway . This should have been covered with interlocking and overlapping machine gun fire as well as pre registered DF- Defensive Fire -artillery, from guns set back. Singapore is a diamond shape Island only 50 km by 25 km, so three 25 pounder artillery locations (the standard British field artillery piece of the era, range about 12-13 km) could cover the whole island and all the straits with indirect fire.

    A 15 inch WW2 era British naval gun had a range of about 30 km. There were 2 in the West battery and three in the East Battery on Singapore. These guns could cover the whole island, as well as the straits between Malaya and Singapore, and well into Jahore to the North in peninsular Malaysia together with the sea approaches to Singapore fro the West, South And East. The 2 Western guns had mounting mechanism that could not traverse to allow the guns to direct fire missions to the North. This is where there is a little truth underlying the myth. The 3 gun battery to the West, by the Sembewang naval base, could traverse 360° and indeed fired to the North, into Jahore. It is also true that the Royal Navy only had anti-shipping armour piercing shells and no High Explosives appropriate against troop formations.

    None of this should have been close to critical given British and Commonwealth forces numbered 85,000 and Japanese forces 36,000.

    The Japs had been coming down the Malay peninsular for weeks, having landed in the North East corner of Peninsular Malaya - in Kota Bharu and Kuantan 700 km North of Singapore and just over the Northern border in Thailand. The British and Commonwealth forces - with a few honourable exceptions - just didn't put up much of a fight. They were badly led, had bad moral, and their commander - Arthur Percival - was utterly incompetent and was afflicted by gargantuan levels of hubris.

    Of course this is all besides the point vis-a-vis Steve's analogy.

    I have read that the British/Commonwealth loss of Singapore was arguably the greatest defeat ever suffered by the British Empire. Thank you for your detailed commentary.

    Read More
  106. @Whoever
    Thanks. That was interesting. Glad to be corrected.
    I found Bartsch's article. It's in After the Battle #15 "Tarawa and Operation Galvanic." I've read three of Bartsch's books. They are filled with very precise detail and highly recommended.

    Thanks, I’ll be looking out for him. I’d not heard of him before I read that article.

    Read More
  107. @NickG

    Isn’t the Singapore coastal guns story a bit of a myth?
     
    Yup it is.

    The naval guns were a relatively small part of the story. The sea straits between Singapore Island and the Malay peninsular are only between 800-1500 metres wide and too shallow for large ships. The Japs started coming over in small boats before storming the causeway - the 1 km road across the straits built on an earth berm.

    The right kit to stop that was rifles, machine guns and mortars, which the British had. There should have been multiple reserve demolitions on the Causeway . This should have been covered with interlocking and overlapping machine gun fire as well as pre registered DF- Defensive Fire -artillery, from guns set back. Singapore is a diamond shape Island only 50 km by 25 km, so three 25 pounder artillery locations (the standard British field artillery piece of the era, range about 12-13 km) could cover the whole island and all the straits with indirect fire.

    A 15 inch WW2 era British naval gun had a range of about 30 km. There were 2 in the West battery and three in the East Battery on Singapore. These guns could cover the whole island, as well as the straits between Malaya and Singapore, and well into Jahore to the North in peninsular Malaysia together with the sea approaches to Singapore fro the West, South And East. The 2 Western guns had mounting mechanism that could not traverse to allow the guns to direct fire missions to the North. This is where there is a little truth underlying the myth. The 3 gun battery to the West, by the Sembewang naval base, could traverse 360° and indeed fired to the North, into Jahore. It is also true that the Royal Navy only had anti-shipping armour piercing shells and no High Explosives appropriate against troop formations.

    None of this should have been close to critical given British and Commonwealth forces numbered 85,000 and Japanese forces 36,000.

    The Japs had been coming down the Malay peninsular for weeks, having landed in the North East corner of Peninsular Malaya - in Kota Bharu and Kuantan 700 km North of Singapore and just over the Northern border in Thailand. The British and Commonwealth forces - with a few honourable exceptions - just didn't put up much of a fight. They were badly led, had bad moral, and their commander - Arthur Percival - was utterly incompetent and was afflicted by gargantuan levels of hubris.

    Of course this is all besides the point vis-a-vis Steve's analogy.

    Excellent!

    Read More

Comments are closed.

PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.