“The postmillennialist believes that the millennium is an era (not necessarily a literal thousand years) during which Christ will reign over the earth, not from a literal and earthly throne, but through the gradual increase of the Gospel and its power to change lives. After this gradual Christianization of the world, Christ will return and immediately usher the church into their eternal state after judging the wicked. This is called postmillennialism because, by its view, Christ will return after the millennium.”

Even so Lord come quickly.

800 women kept the same secret for over fifty years.

If your Sunday night includes a video tour of CIA headquarters, a secret camp where Bill Donovan trained and the identity of James Bond…

http://www.trueintrepid.com/

Not in America, although the rest of the world remain quite happy to be sheep and go along obediently with hijackers. See Turkey (twice), Moscow, New Zealand and Sudan, and I’m remembering another one or two in the Middle East (Dubai?) but can’t find references right now.

The common startegy only lasted for about an hour into the suicide era, as the passengers and crew of United 93 realized fighting back was the only chance they had. I don’t think hijacking an airplane would be possible anymore, even if you didn’t intend any kind of suicide mission, because you would be swarmed by enraged, terrified passengers.

The 9/11 hijackers knew very well they would be cooperated with and given access to the cockpit so that part of the operation didn’t require much bravery. As for the rest, it’s for others to debate whether committing suicide is a brave act or not.

Well said, sir.

My first training, and primary love, as a USMC grunt, was anti-armor. At that time, the USMC had 2 primary strategic responsibilities. 1st was the Pacific AO in case of hostilities in Korea or from the PDRC. The 2nd was to reinforce Norway in case of hostilities with the USSR.

As a tank breaker, it was assumed from jump that we’d be outgunned, outnumbered and unable to successfully hold a solid line, regardless of which primary we faced.

We trained in the usual infantry skills, patrolling, urban warfare, infiltration, ex filtration, reforming after being over run, etc. But we also trained heavily in close assault anti-armor skills. This type of fight would require us to close with enemy armor while on foot and take out armored vehicles by whatever means at hand. It was assumed, by us, and by our trainers, that such tactics were not survivable so the mindset was to get as much payback as possible while still able.

It was assumed we’d be over-run and would not be able to conduct operations as organized units. Much of the training and barracks discussions revolved around what to do to cause most harm to the enemy as individual Marines or small groups after such an event. I don’t recall the idea of surrendering ever being brought up or even considered.

If the balloon went up, we were dead men and we knew it. That wasn’t something that caused fear or worry or concern. What did cause those things was the idea that we’d spend our lives prior to being able to inflict serious damage on our enemy.

I remember one case in particular. My outfit (2/4) was at Mt. Fuji for high altitude cold weather training. At the end of that training, an alert order was issued and we were all confined to camp. All our personal gear was packed up and stored in the armory. Weapons were issued and we kept them in our quonset huts. Ammo was issued to each company and kept under guard at the Co HQs. We were confined to our huts, fully dressed 24/7. We slept in our cammies.

We were told, while in company formation, that there were issues brewing with the USSR. Our mission was to join up with the Midway fleet for a possible assault on Vladivostok. I don’t know if this was a training event or a real deal but we all treated it as real.

After we’d been told what the deal was, we went back to our huts and did the usual. Played spades and talked about the near future. It was assumed that our ships wouldn’t make it to the landing site. It was assumed that there was no way in hell that we’d be able to land as organized units. The first round of discussions among us grunts was whether or not to stick with the ship as it sank. Some said it would make it easier to recover our bodies at a later date if we did that. But the winning argument was to do everything possible to get to shore. The reason for that was so that we’d still have some hope of harming the enemy.

After that, the discussions revolved around what sort of targets to go after once we made it to shore, as individual Marines or small groups. The idea of surrender never came up. I don’t remember being afraid so much at that time as angry. Not angry that I’d be sent out on such a hopeless mission, but that there was so much probability of going under prior to getting enough payback. I can not say what was in each Marine’s heart at that time, but there were plenty expressions of rage at our enemy, and a simmering hostility toward them that was palpable.

I look back at that time now, and wonder. There’s no way in hell I could muster that kind of iron now. Just thinking about going through something like that again can make my gut turn to water.

Would we be capable of such discipline and restraint today? Ask the editors of the NYTimes.

None whatever. He could be sure of success once on the plane, since his ‘audacious’ oh-so-ingenius carving up of stewardesses would elicit a gallant attempt from the cockpit to save them. He knew that he’d escape ever being held to account, via his choice of death for himself. And he’s still mooning the USA from his nest among the 72 virgins, while his acolytes worldwide sing his praises and rhapsodize about his courage.

Growing up in England in the 70s I was strongly influenced by a British TV history of WWII called “The World at War” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_at_War – some of you may be familiar with it. It pretty much remains the definitive TV history of the war and was the springboard for some glittering UK broadcasting careers – Jeremy Issacs, future head of Channel 4 produced and one of the chief script-writers was the left wing but non the less distinguished newspaper columnist Neil Ascherson. Lawrence Olivier narrated and key players in the war such a Speer were still alive to be interviewed.

However, there was a glaring omission. The whole Bletchley Park/Enigma tale, crucial to victory, was still an official secret when the programme was made. Now, about 3,000 people worked at Bletchley Park during the war and the point is that a quarter of a century later no one, no-one, said a word.

Including, as it turned out, Ascherson’s own sister. Would we be capable of such discipline and restraint today? I like to think that, in the face of an equivalent threat, we would, but I don’t know.

He did indeed maintain the car, faithfully. And then one day he put on a stolen German officer’s uniform, got another prisoner to don a German enlisted man’s uniform to act as his driver. And, displaying the appropriate imperious attitude, they drove that staff car all the way to Switzerland.

Audacity works, if you are very well prepared.