A Rational Thinker’s Guide to Climate Change and Related Policies – Video Series

Part One: Diagnosing the Problem and Issue

In Part One of the “A Rational Thinker’s Guide to Climate Change and Related Policies” trilogy, Nick argues that the most pressing issue of our time is the inept policies being pushed upon society by the climate alarmist movement. When it comes to climate, energy, and environmental policy, we need to get back to rational thought as to what we know and what math and science are telling us. Nick examines Earth’s historical sea level and temperature changes, puts carbon dioxide emissions in perspective, discusses the carbon footprint of renewable energy sources (as well as their energy density and ecological impact), and more.

Part Two: Consequences of the Experts’ Cures

The “Rational Thinker’s Guide” trilogy continues in part two as the conversation turns to “what the elites and the expert classes are forcing upon society and economies when it comes to the cures or the medicines to help us deal or cope with climate change,” explains Nick.

Topics in part two include:

  • The supply chain and manufacturing of wind turbines, solar panels, and electric vehicles.
  • Higher energy costs fueling inflation.
  • The geopolitical ramifications of present climate policies.
  • The developing world’s need for reliable and affordable energy.

Part Three:Forces Driving Present Climate Policies

The “Rational Thinker’s Guide” trilogy concludes in part three as Nick discusses what’s driving present climate policies: “When you think them through, from a chemistry or a physics or a math or an economics perspective, they make absolutely no sense,” says Nick.

Nick examines two sets of stakeholders benefitting from today’s climate policies, one being external and the other internal.

Topics in part three include:

  • OPEC and Russia benefiting from the U.S. and the West’s energy policy.
  • Venezuela’s aggression toward Guyana.
  • China’s stranglehold on every imaginable supply chain component of wind, solar, EVs, and batteries.
  • By controlling the availability and cost of energy, individuals lose individual freedom and their own decision-making ability.

 

 

For daily insights and commentary from Nick Deiuliis, follow Nick on Twitter at @NickDeiuliis and on LinkedIn.

Mission Impossible: Ranking the Top Ten John Hughes Films from the 1980s

By Nick Deiuliis

Sports have great dynasties: the Yankees of the 1950s, the Steelers of the 1970s, the Islanders of the 1980s, the Bulls of the 1990s, Tiger Woods during the 2000s, to name a few.

There are also dynasties in the motion picture industry. If you came of age in the 1980s (or the 1990s thanks to an older sibling), there’s a strong likelihood that John Hughes movies were a companion on your journey. Although you may not recognize his name nor face, you know his movies, from start to finish.

During the 1980s, only Steven Spielberg’s work rivaled the Hughes catalogue. John Hughes achieved a remarkable, dynastic run through the decade.

His career began writing for National Lampoon magazine. Then opportunity on the big screen came knocking.

Coming-of-age and comedy were his specialties. He was a master at capturing the culture of the ‘80s, teenage and family life, and the great American suburbs. Most of his movies took place in and around Chicago.

Acting careers were started and catapulted by Hughes films: Michael Keaton, Molly Ringwald, John Candy, Chevy Chase, Macauley Culkin, Mathew Broderick, and just about the entire Brat Pack (Emilio Estevez, Judd Nelson, Anthony Michael Hall, and Ally Sheedy). He was especially close to Candy and was devastated when the actor died.

Hughes could be prickly, and he abruptly broke off all contact with Molly Ringwald and Anthony Michael Hall after the mid-1980s. He became somewhat of a recluse in the ‘90s, and we lost Hughes to a heart attack in 2009 at a too-young age of 59. But his legacy endures with his memorable films.

The best way to summarize the allure of Hughes movies: if it’s a Saturday and you start surfing through channels to get to what you’re looking for and you come across one of his films, forget about what you were planning to do for the next hour or two.

Such an extensive body of work raises an intriguing question. If one applied a clinical and scientific (ok, not really) process to Hughes films from the 1980s, what would the top-ten look like?

Well, something like this:

Honorable mention: Mr. Mom (1983)

A movie that features Michael Keaton coming into his acting prime alongside 1980s movie icon Terri Garr has to garner at least an honorable mention. Yeah, the storyline stereotypes gender roles to where it comes across as thick-headed today. But it’s a solid, funny movie. Yet it doesn’t crack the top-ten, which is an ode to the depth of Hughes’ work. Favorite line: “You don’t feed a baby chili!” Hughes didn’t direct Mr. Mom, because he wanted to film in Chicago rather than LA.

#10: Uncle Buck (1989)

John Candy…loved that guy. And who didn’t love his character Uncle Buck? Smoked like a chimney, drinker, degenerate gambler, and cruising around Chicago in that beat-up tuna-boat of a car (a Mercury). Uncle Buck was warning us about the future of helicopter parenting and obsessing over kids’ achievements with: “I don’t think I want to know a six-year-old who isn’t a dreamer, or a sillyheart. And I sure don’t want to know one who takes their student career seriously.” Favorite scene: when Uncle Buck beats up the drunken clown (Pooter the Clown) hired for the kids’ party.

#9: Weird Science (1985)

Gary (Anthony Michael Hall) and Wyatt come up with the ultimate computer hack to turn the tables and put the outcasts in the driver’s seat. Hughes was quite a technology visionary, giving us a look into AI before anyone knew what it stood for. Bill Paxton delivers one of the greatest roles of the 1980s as evil, big brother Chet: “Feeling queasy? How about a nice greasy pork sandwich served in a dirty ashtray?” Kelly LeBrock garnered attention from the teenage male demographic. But it almost didn’t happen. LeBrock initially turned down her role so she could spend time with Sting in the south of France.

#8: Home Alone (1990)

The blockbuster that launched young Macauley Culkin. Yes, it was released just after the conclusion of the 1980s, but close enough to be considered as a 1980s-era movie. I suspect many will rank Home Alone higher. No doubt this is a great film, and one that multiple generations can watch together during holiday get-togethers. And it gave us one of the great Hughes lines of all-time with a black-and-white gangster film young Kevin was watching on the VCR in his Windy City suburban home: “Keep the change, ya filthy animal.” Do you recall where the McAllisters were flying off to when they forgot Kevin? Paris, France. Placing Home Alone in only the eight-spot might be controversial, but read on and decide what classic gets displaced if you were to move Home Alone up in the ranking.

#7: Pretty in Pink (1986)

Perhaps the most underrated cast of all the Hughes films. Molly Ringwald in the lead role, Jon Cryer (Duckie!), Andy McCarthy, James Spader, and don’t forget Henry Dean Stanton as the dad. Song-for-song, the best movie soundtrack of the 1980s this side of Purple Rain, with an alt-rock dream lineup of INXS, New Order, Echo and the Bunnymen, Joe Jackson, OMD, and The Psychedelic Furs. Duckie was a quote machine in this movie, with the best line being his response when Andie asked him what he wanted to drink: “Oh you know, beer, scotch, juice box… whatever.” Another Hughes film centered in the greater Chicago area (but filmed in LA).

#6: Planes, Trains and Automobiles (1987)

The Steve Martin and John Candy combo created comedic gold. One of the few Hughes films that doesn’t take place around Chicago (but the script centers on the journey to get to the final Turkey Day destination of…Chicago). Favorite scene: Del (John Candy) talking his way out of paying for breakfast in Wichita by going back and forth with the waitress about a human hair in the oatmeal. Del had a great life motto: “You know, the finest line a man will walk is between success at work and success at home. I got a motto – like your work, love your wife.” Del was a salesman; do you remember what he sold? Shower curtain rings. Great movie with a heart-tugging ending for Thanksgiving Day if your crew tires of football.

#5: National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation (1989)

Where do you even begin to break down this holiday masterpiece? The Griswold clan returns and comes close to besting the original effort. This installment of the family chronicles is dominated by Randy Quaid’s performance as Cousin Eddie. There are so many awesome one-liners in this epic that it is impossible to select a single best. I will go with when Cousin Eddie tells Clark his older boy couldn’t make it because he is “preparing for his career” in the carnival. Chevy Chase perfected the lovable loser in this film, with Clark in reflecting the worries and doubts of many middle-aged professionals back in the day.

#4: Sixteen Candles (1984)

Who didn’t love Chicago-area high schooler Samantha ‘Sam’ Baker? Big family, big upcoming wedding, and everyone forgets it’s her birthday. To top it off, she is constantly pestered by an annoying admirer (Ted) and loses her room to the visiting exchange student and her grandparents. But wait! Just when there appears to be no hope for Sam…Jake Ryan saves the day, riding in on his red Porsche (for you Jake Ryan fans, one can purchase a t-shirt of him in front of his Porshe with the words ‘yeah, you’ underneath). The iconic line of the movie is, of course, Sam with, “I Can’t Believe It. They…” (you can finish that line on your own). Many consider this movie to be Hughes’ finest. It’s up there, but not quite at the top.1

#3: National Lampoon’s Vacation (1983)

Magic. The screenplay was written by Hughes when he repurposed his short story, “Vacation ’58”, which appeared in National Lampoon. When Vacation hit big screens (and then appeared on a new, mysterious thing called cable and on an exotic platform known as HBO), it had the ability to make multiple generations of viewers laugh, but each at different scenes. Grandparents found one cut especially funny while their adult kids or younger grandkids were laughing at entirely different scenes.

That gorgeous, green, and wood-paneled Family Truckster should be considered part of the official cast (“50 yards”). The Christie Brinkley and Chevy Chase scene at the rest stop became cinematic legend, without a single word spoken by either actor. And who among us hasn’t quoted from this movie? My favorite is from that sage foodie, Cousin Eddie, with, “I don’t know why they call this stuff hamburger helper. It does just fine by itself.” Amen to that. And a close second is John Candy’s character delivering the bad news to the Griswolds with, “Sorry folks, the park’s closed. Moose out front should’ve told you.”

#2: Ferris Bueller’s Day Off (1986)

This absolute gem of a movie is in a class of its own. Exceptional character acting across the entire cast. Matt Broderick as Ferris is as good as it gets in this genre, from his dialogue to his demeanor; he came across as the King of Sophisticated Cool for suburban high school chic. And Mr. Rooney, played by Jeffrey Jones, was a superb comedy villain (I can still hear him saying, “Les Jeux Sont Faits. Translation: The Game Is Up. Your Ass Is Mine.”).

Alan Ruck was so convincing as a neurotic sidekick in his role of Cameron (who in the movie wore the jersey of Hughes’ favorite hockey player, Gordie Howe, despite the movie taking place not in Detroit but in the rival town, Chicago) that a trained psychologist would have trouble seeing through the acting. Don’t forget Jennifer Grey’s excellent performance as Ferris’ ill-intentioned sister. Another Hughes movie and another red sports car – this time a vintage Ferrari taken out on a joy ride by the parking garage attendants and then suffering a fate worse than one could imagine. This classic provided two all-time great quotes, a pair that tens of millions can instantly repeat on demand. First, Ben Stein as an econ teacher droning on with, “Bueller…? Bueller…? Bueller…?” And, of course, Ferris himself coming down the movie’s home stretch laying down a little life philosophy with, “Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.” Back then most of us didn’t realize how true that was. But we get it now, Ferris.

#1: The Breakfast Club (1985)

Nothing, and I mean nothing, sums up what high school and coming of age were like more than this movie. The Breakfast Club is on some level relatable to just about anyone who matriculated through “The Lord of the Flies” world that we call high school. You knew that kid. You had that teacher. You felt that peer pressure. That girl was in your class. That’s your school. You…were…there. This is a movie about you, not fictional characters.

The subject matter scope is vast despite the movie taking place almost exclusively in an empty high school library on a Saturday. The Club starts detention as separate individuals with nothing in common, ends the day as united group, and walks away as individuals with better perspectives. Everything they thought they knew about high school going into the day of detention was upended by late afternoon. Judd Nelson’s performance as the delinquent Bender is excellent. So many quotes to choose from. The eccentric Allyson to the jock Andrew: “You do everything everyone tells you to, and that is the problem.” Disciplinarian Mr. Vernon, in that glorious suit, saying to Bender: “Don’t mess with the bull, young man. You’ll get the horns.” Claire lamenting, “I hate having to go along with everything my friends say.” And finally, Bender closing the movie out, reading from the Club’s assigned essay: “You see us as you want to see us, in the simplest terms with the most convenient definitions. But what we found out is that each one of us is a Brain…and an Athlete…and a Basket Case…a Princess…and a Criminal. Does that answer your question? Sincerely yours…The Breakfast Club.” Cue the Simple Minds.

Hughes and his films dominated the 1980s. Don’t you forget about him.

[1] Like scores of movies from the past, many of Hughes’ films have scenes that are objectionable today. It would be remiss to not specifically mention two disturbing aspects of 16 Candles. The first was the treatment of Jake Ryan’s intoxicated girlfriend and the aftermath. It came across as creepy back then and it comes across worse today. The second is the extreme stereotyping of the exchange student. It was cringeworthy then and more so today.

The Ten Greatest Live Rock Performances

By Nick Deiuliis

In the early 1950s, legendary disc jockey Alan Freed first used the phrase ‘rock and roll’ on his Cleveland radio show.  Rock was born.  We’ve been discussing and debating it ever since.

Rock music is a contradiction.

On one hand, it is a pasted-together mosaic of musical styles; blues, country, jazz, folk, pop, gospel, and even classical.  Old things presented in new ways. Not revolutionary as much as evolutionary.

On the other hand, rock is unique and stands apart from other music. Particularly when its energy is projected on stage when performed live.

Yes, the true essence of rock is best captured live, separating it from other musical styles. And sometimes a confluence of events captures a rock performance that stands the test of time and elevates beyond the norm of other musical genres.

I’ve often thought about, after viewing or experiencing a great live rock performance: where does it rank? And what would be the ten greatest exemplars of the live rock performance? Ten gems that hit a note above all the others?

Those questions would be great fun to assess. And irresistible to try to answer.

A Highly Unscientific Approach

Before we count down the ten greatest, here are our screening criteria:

  • We’re ranking single song performances only, not complete concerts.
  • Performance films are excluded. Apologies to Talking Heads (Stop Making Sense), The Band (The Last Waltz), and Prince (Sign O the Times).  All great viewing and performance, but more cinema than live rock.  That doesn’t mean a few of the Top Ten didn’t make it into a concert DVD, but these selections are live performance first, concert film second.
  • DJs and sampling electronic music are not considered. The performer must be playing instruments or singing, live.  Sorry, Daft Punk (’06 Coachella) and Fatboy Slim (’02 Brighton Beach).
  • Super Bowl halftime show performances are not considered. They are more entertainment spectacle than live rock performance.
  • No ‘unplugged’ renditions (forgive me Nirvana and Clapton fans). You know the setup: the performers sitting on stools, surrounded by a small TV studio audience. They’re interesting when done well.  But they are purposely toned down and constructed exclusively for TV/digital media broadcasting.

Special weighting and bonus points are awarded for the following:

  • Outstanding live performances that are not widely known or don’t garner enough attention.
  • A special historical context of when or where the song was performed. Having time and place convene to transform the performance into representing something bigger.
  • Adding a visual and theatrical element to the live performance. Taking the recording and presenting it with supplemental props live can create another level of song experience.
  • Enthusiastic audience participation. Thousands of strangers connecting organically during a live rendition is a sure sign that the performance has achieved greatness.  Which means heavy weighting toward European and South American venues; audiences there are order of magnitude more passionate than American audiences.
  • Amazing live musicianship. In the end, the music matters the most. Always has and always will.

Lest I forget, there is one critical requirement to make the list: a video capturing the specific performance must be readily available for viewing.  What’s the point of including a great performance in the ranking if one cannot easily check it out on YouTube?

To start, we have two honorable mentions, beginning with Veruca Salt, “Seether” (1995; Glastonbury, UK).  What ever happened to Veruca Salt?  They looked to be the next big thing back in the 1990s, but then the Chicago-based band fell off the radar.  Watch them play “Seether” at Glastonbury in ’95 to see what might have been if they kept it going. Funny how time flies, but most of those attendees in the crowd are now well into their 50s running businesses, governments, and maybe even grandkids to and from events.

Second honorable mention goes to Gary Numan with Nine Inch Nails, “Cars” (2009; London, UK).  Numan’s “Cars” was on the first album I owned (one of those K-Tel hits albums) and I’ve adored the new wave song ever since.  Check him out making a special appearance in his hometown to play it live with Trent Reznor and band at a Nine Inch Nails show.

Here We Go: The Ten Greatest

#10: Peter Gabriel (with Paula Cole), “Come Talk to Me” (Secret World Live; 1994; Modena, Italy)

As this list unfolds, it will betray a bias I have long suffered from: favoring concert openers.  There is something magical about the moment when the recorded soundtrack stops, they cut the arena lights, and the act takes the stage. Gabriel used “Come Talk to Me” from the Us album to open his Secret World Live tour in 1993-1994. Us was created at a time of personal turmoil for Gabriel, and this song’s lyrics address his relationship strain at the time with his daughter (after Gabriel moved out of the family home and began cohabitating with actor Rosanna Arquette).

Gabriel has a long history of putting together bands with top-notch musicians and making great use of props (including himself, which trails back to his Genesis days), both of which were on display for this performance.  Gabriel emerges from a phone booth, singing into a telephone, extending the cord as he tries to connect with Paula Cole, who performed the female vocals (Sinead O’Connor provided the vocals on the album track).  A refined, beautiful performance that is both musical and theatrical.  It’s high art.

#9: Megadeth, “Symphony of Destruction” (That One Night; 2005; Buenos Aires, Argentina)

I am not into the thrash metal genre; I lean more toward the Judas Priest/Iron Maiden persuasion when it comes to heavy metal.  But the long-sober Dave Mustaine has emerged as one of metal’s underappreciated thought leaders, and his band managed one of the most awesome displays of live audience participation in rock history when they performed “Symphony” in front of a mass of rabid Argentinians.  The chanting drowns out the guitar, no small feat when it’s a Megadeth show. Repeat after me: “Megadeth, Megadeth, aguante Megadeth!”  No wonder Argentina is Dave Mustaine’s favorite place to play.  If you want another exemplar of Argentinians’ flair for live concert participation, check out AC/DC at River Platte in 2009; “Thunderstruck” and “Whole Lotta Rosie” are epic.

#8: Stevie Ray Vaughan, “Couldn’t Stand the Weather” (Capitol Theater; 1985; Passaic, New Jersey).

The video of this performance essentially ignores the audience.  There are no stage props, other than SRV’s trademark hat, belt, boots, and guitar strap. And you miss none of it because it is impossible not to be transfixed on his playing and singing.  He’s in a performative trance; you could light him on fire, and he wouldn’t notice.

Vaughan is one of those true genius talents that stands out from all others; anything added alongside his live playing becomes wasteful distraction and dilution from the man and his guitar. I ranked Vaughan up there with Hendrix and EVH in the Top Ten Rock Guitarists of All-Time, and SRV may indeed have been the very best of them live.  Still can’t fathom how he simultaneously played guitar and sang like that on “Couldn’t Stand the Weather.”  One of my greatest musical regrets is not having the chance to see him work such magic live.

#7: U2, Intro / “Zoo Station” (Achtung Baby Tour; 1993; Adelaide, Australia).

I wasn’t going to construct a top ten live performance list and not include one of my favorite bands through the years (and another opening song).  I must admit being torn between one of two U2 performances to choose from, with the close runner-up being “Sunday Bloody Sunday” at Red Rocks, aka, ‘This is not a rebel song!’ But I must give the nod to the Dubliners’ early 1990s reinvention of their band and their reimagining the concert as a performance medium.

Achtung Baby was a huge creative and brand risk for U2.  They took the risk, and we reaped the reward. Then the band broke more ground by presenting the album tour as Zoo TV, an innovative digital and visual display to accompany the music.  Zoo TV managed to take the groundbreaking music of U2 found on Achtung Baby and present it in a revolutionary packaging that made it better. You hear the Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy’s “Television, The Drug of a Nation” being played, those massive stadium screens light up, Bono’s outline emerges from the stage, and then Edge hits the intro notes to “Zoo Station.”  Special.  Will U2’s current run of shows covering Achtung Baby at the Vegas Sphere measure up? Hope so.

#6: Metallica, “Enter Sandman” (Tushino Airfield Concert; 1991; Moscow, Russia)

Although not a rabid fan, I like Metallica and have seen them numerous times. When “Enter Sandman” first came out, it was bold and new.  And quickly became old and tired after endless radio play. But looking back, Metallica’s live performance of “Enter Sandman” outside Moscow in 1991 was mind-blowing for three reasons.

First, the size of the crowd was conservatively estimated to be somewhere in the 500,000 range (some estimates were as high as 1.6 million!). Second, that audience was pent up for too long under communism and was ready to explode when the band took the stage (another set opener, by the way; this one preceded with Metallica’s traditional playing of Ennio Morricone’s western movie score). Third, the festival (which also included AC/DC, The Black Crowes, and others) served as a symbolic tearing down of the USSR communist state and the start of a more open Russia.

The visuals of some Red Army troops participating in the crowd and other Red Army troops holding back the crowd were poignant.  James Hetfield’s lyrics of “exit light, enter night” reflected the reverse order of how Russians were feeling in 1991.  A band and song in the right place at the most historic of times. Unfortunately, a stark contrast to Russia today.

#5: Depeche Mode, “Never Let Me Down Again” (raw version: One Night in Paris; 2001; Paris, France or polished version: Tour of the Universe; 2009; Barcelona, Spain) 

I’ve enjoyed Depeche Mode for decades, but I always thought they were better in the studio and on record than they were live.  Until I saw them perform the classic “Never Let Me Down Again” toward the end of their shows.  That song has been a personal favorite from the Music for the Masses album and I consider it to be their best single.  The band performing it live further elevates the experience. You can see for yourself with two recommended versions: the Paris installment being rawer and more chaotic, or the Barcelona installment a few years later with a more polished rendition.

The song is a fan staple live for another reason: when the band extends the coda at the end of the number and Dave Gahan waves his arms in the air in unison with the audience.  It is one of the best live rock concert sights to behold, an experience that simply can’t be captured on record.

#4: Rush, Intro Medley / “Spirit of the Radio” (R30 Tour; 2004; Frankfurt, Germany)

Pound-for-pound, Rush is the most talented group in rock history, and that goes for their work in both studio and on stage. Hard to believe that three human beings could be so creative for so long.

Rush was incredibly prolific, sporting a song catalogue stretching over half a century.  So, it’s always tough for the band to construct a live setlist that checks all the boxes for all the fans.  One creative solution was when the band decided to open on the R30 tour with a video from comedian Jerry Stiller kicking off the band’s nearly seven-minute instrumental medley through a portfolio of their earlier masterpieces that included “Finding My Way”, “A Passage to Bangkok”, “Anthem”, and “Bastille Day”. Oh yeah, and then they launch right into a full rendition of “Spirit of the Radio”, the seminal Rush song.  Pure rock and roll heaven and, in my opinion, the best live opener ever.  Happy I was fortunate enough to experience it first-hand.

#3: Rolling Stones, “Sympathy for the Devil” (Altamont Speedway; 1969; Tracy, California)

People ask why I disdain the 1960s.  If I could point to one event to explain why, it would be the Rolling Stones performing “Sympathy for the Devil” at Altamont Speedway in late 1969.  Commentators often speak of it marking the end of 1960s culture.  Wrong; only the date of the performance was indicating the end of the 1960s.

Altamont marked the culmination of what 1960s culture wrought.  It wasn’t pretty. What would one expect when you combine drugged-out concertgoers, drugged-out performers, and drugged-out security attired in the vests of the Oakland chapter of the Hells Angels?

Jagger was assaulted by a fan before he even took the stage (he was lucky to be only punched in the head; earlier the lead singer for Jefferson Airplane was knocked out cold by ‘security’), “Sympathy for the Devil” was interrupted by violence in front of the stage, Jagger’s plea to “brothers and sisters” to calm down went unheeded, and a front row murder happened minutes later (during “Under My Thumb”).  This performance makes the list for its context of time (end of the 1960s), song (talk about lyrics fitting the moment), and history (peace-and-love generation being exposed as something quite the opposite).

#2: Black Sabbath, “Paranoid” (The End; 2017; Birmingham, UK)

For decades, music critics ignored and put down heavy metal. Which meant the pioneering work of Black Sabbath was demoted far too long. That changed with time, and in early 2017 the band wrapped up their final tour, where over its course one million people saw them perform.

The last show of the last tour was a curtain call in the industrial English city where it all began for the band: Birmingham.  Fittingly, the final song, as the encore, was “Paranoid”.  For this musical genre, it was akin to if the Beatles were to hold one last concert in Liverpool and end it with “I Want to Hold Your Hand.” How Ozzy manages to sing fluidly yet be unable to speak a sentence coherently remains one of life’s mysteries.

Another mystery is how Tony Iommi can play those riffs while missing parts of his fingers. But sing and play they did during the encore “Paranoid.” And the hometown crowd in Brimingham, spanning multiple generations of fans, appreciated every word and note. Underrated and underappreciated for far too long; but better the recognition comes late than never.

#1: Queen, “Radio Ga Ga” (Wembley Live Aid; 1985; London, UK)

This should not shock any rock fan. The historical context alone would place it at the top.

Perhaps the slight surprise is with the song selected from Queen’s Live Aid set, “Radio Ga Ga”.  It came right after the truncated version of Bohemian Rhapsody, after Freddie Mercury was comfortable with the setup and fans were focused on the band. And the audience engagement with “Radio Ga Ga” was off-the-charts phenomenal.

Mercury connected directly with every human being in that stadium, from the front row to the nosebleed seats.  And the audience connected right back. Prior to the show, Queen was asked if they agreed to play Live Aid to support the cause of fighting world hunger or because it was an epic event they couldn’t afford to miss.  Freddie replied, “To answer that honestly it’s a bit of both.” Is Freddie the greatest frontman in the history of rock? If not, he is damn close.

And on that day at Wembley, Mercury set the gold standard for live performance at the biggest of moments.  Oh, and if you want another great Wembley performance, check out INXS in 1991 with the intro to the Live Baby Live concert, “Guns in the Sky”; Michael Hutchence was special and no telling what he would’ve accomplished had he lived longer.

Well, there you have it.  An authoritative (not) objective (definitely not) top ten ranking of the greatest live performances in the history of rock.  Happy viewing.

Notes from the Underground: Libertarianism Hiding in Classic Lit

By Nick Deiuliis

Fyodor Dostoyevsky is widely recognized as one of the giants of literature.

Of his most noted works, the first and shortest is the novella Notes from the Underground, published in 1864. It’s also his most underrated and most insightful, particularly for modern times.

Some consider Notes from the Underground classic literature.1 Others say it is more political commentary. Social scientists point to it as a study in psychology.

All correct. Yet Notes is first and foremost something else: a basis for philosophy and policy rooted in the freedom of the individual to choose and the individual’s protection from control by the state and wider culture.

I interpret Notes as advocating for triumph of the ‘I’ over the ‘we,’ the ‘self’ over the ‘collective,’ and the ‘individual’ over the ‘public good.’

I read Dostoyevsky’s classic and contemplate a warning of how the Left (whether manifesting through communism, nihilism, or utopianism) presents a danger to the individual; and how the Left cuts against the grain of human nature. In many ways, Notes from the Underground was serving as a foundation for American libertarianism before the movement took root. And it is a decisive refutation of the modern-day nanny state.

A closer look at (or revisit of) Notes from the Underground is worthwhile to anyone who considers himself or herself a classic liberal and defender of the individual.

The Story

The first lines of the novella read, “I am a sick man…I am a spiteful man. I am an unattractive man.”

Notes from the Underground is not a story for the meek of heart. No sunshine and happy endings. The book is humorous at times, but it is certainly a dark humor.

The main character narrating the story is the anti-hero Underground Man, a miserable bureaucrat who spent his career abusing his position to make life difficult for other people.2 His directional perspective of being ‘underground’ serves as a metaphor for being separate from, an outcast to, society. He falls into some money, quits his job, and writes the notes as a form of confession.

That’s the focus of the first half of the book, titled “Underground”. The narrator observes that utopian society attempts to remove suffering and pain, but that humans desire both and need both to be happy. The narrator confesses his realization that attempting to remove pain and suffering in society takes away an individual’s freedom.

Underground Man realizes human beings are cursed with consciousness; it is what causes us to suffer. But it also allows for our free will and individuality.

He argues that despite humanity’s attempts throughout history to create a utopia where everyone lives in harmony, anyone can decide to act in a way that might not be in their own self-interest as defined by society or government. Some do so simply to validate their existence as an individual and to protest. And no one knows for sure whether the individual will choose a rational or irrational path.

The second half of the book, “Apropos of the Wet Snow”, consists of a series of adventures and events that occurred in the narrator’s life.

One of those stories is central to the book. The narrator tries to help a prostitute by promising to save her. She finds herself enthralled by the Underground Man’s lectures, his confidence, and ends up looking to join him. He then revokes everything he said to her, telling her he was laughing at her all along, and ridicules her miserable life and reality.

Then he breaks down and admits he was only seeking power over her and desired to humiliate her. He starts to self-loathe and focuses on his own poverty and embarrassing life. He doesn’t save her, she leaves and is never seen again.

The concluding sentences of Notes recall themes explored by the narrator in the first part, and he tells the reader directly, “…I have merely carried to an extreme in my life what you have not dared to carry even halfway…”

The Learnings from Notes

In the arenas of policy and classic liberalism, Notes contains a plethora of key passages that resonate more than ever.

Start with perhaps the underlying key premise of the book:

“What has made them conceive that man must want a rationally advantageous choice? What man wants is simply independent choice, whatever that independence may cost and wherever it may lead.”

Dostoyevsky is making a subtle but crucial point here: human nature yearns for the ability to self-select for oneself and to not be chained to the decisions of others (whether ‘others’ are controlling individuals, religion, or the state). Arguing that the state or a third party is better informed to make decisions for the individual than the individual himself or herself misses a key point (and is a dubious assumption when considering the track record of anything run by bureaucrat): the individual’s innate desire to decide for themself cannot be quelled.

Underground Man uses the analogy of humans serving as glorified organ-stops in oppressive societies to illustrate how the individual instinctively longs to decide their own destiny:3

“For who would want to choose by rule? Besides, he will at once be transformed from a human being into an organ-stop or something of the sort; for what is a man without desires, without free will and without choice, if not a stop in an organ?”

Dostoyevsky freely admits that humans enjoying freedom will often choose paths that are irrational, against their self-interests, and that may lead to misery for society. But that doesn’t mean oppressive forms of government that cripple the individual spirit won’t lead to the same or worse (think of Stalin and Mao and how we measure their ‘transformation’ of society to ‘paradise’ in the tens of millions of murdered innocents).

“In short, one may say anything about the history of the world – anything that might enter the most disordered imagination. The only thing one can’t say is that it’s rational. The very word sticks in one’s throat.”

Place those words from 1860s Russia into the context of today; with the war in Ukraine, Hamas terrorism, and Uighur genocide. Or with the breakdown of law in our cities and the epidemic of opioid death in our rural communities. There is no guarantee of rational order in the world, and there never was. Whether it be with democracy, colonialism, communism, socialism, or free will. Truer than ever.

Underground Man provides his thoughts on those who argue moral superiority and wish to superimpose their views or ways onto others. Read the following and try to not be instantly reminded of today’s elite and expert classes:

“There is the odd thing that is continually happening: there are continually turning up in life moral and rational persons, sages, and lovers of humanity who make it their object to live all their lives as morally and rationally as possible, to be, so to speak, a light to their neighbors simply in order to show them that it is possible to live morally and rationally in this world. And yet we all know that those very people sooner or later have been false to themselves, playing some queer trick, often a most unseemly one. Now I ask you: what can be expected of man since he is a being endowed with such strange qualities?”

Most experts in the field point to this passage as Dostoyevsky’s criticism of utopianism and, ultimately, communism. The idea that if you eliminate private property and make everyone equal, it not only makes people happy, but it makes the world neatly rational. Nonsense, of course, as shown by the epic misery brought to humanity by the Left.

And today there is a special refinement to the way of the Left. Leaders of the Left no longer bother to live their lives consistent with their preaching to everyone else as to how to live life in a moral and just way. Hypocrisy is paraded in the open, for all to see. That’s why a Hollywood star who is a self-proclaimed climate activist sails around the world on carbon-spewing yachts. And why a self-anointed Climate Czar who looks to impose travel restrictions on society flies private charter jets at will.

If you wish to think of Notes from the Underground as simply great literature and not policy thought-provoking, consider Dostoyevsky’s analysis of human nature:

“Shower upon him every earthly blessing, drown him in a sea of happiness, so that nothing but bubbles of bliss can be seen on the surface; give him economic prosperity, such that he should have nothing else to do but sleep, eat cakes and busy himself with the continuation of his species, and even then out of sheer ingratitude, sheer spite, man would play you some nasty trick. He would even risk his cakes and would deliberately desire the most fatal rubbish, the most uneconomical absurdity, simply to introduce into all this positive good sense his fatal fantastic element. It is just his fantastic dreams, his vulgar folly that he will desire to retain, simply in order to prove to himself–as though that were so necessary–that men still are men and not the keys of a piano, which the laws of nature threaten to control so completely that soon one will be able to desire nothing but by the calendar.”

Dostoyevsky concisely summarizes why large government, bureaucratic control, and nanny states ultimately fail to improve the standing of people the state policies were specifically designed to help.

I wonder if Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, or Barack Obama read Notes from the Underground. If so, did any of them underline that passage? Because it made an impression on them, they agreed with it, or they disagreed with it?

The narrator then addresses head-on what has become an all-too-common rebuttal of the Left, with:

“You will scream at me (that is, if you condescend to do so) that no one is touching my free will, that all they are concerned with is that my will should of itself, of its own free will, coincide with my own normal interests, with the laws of nature and arithmetic. Good heavens, gentlemen, what sort of free will is left when we come to tabulation and arithmetic, when it will all be a case of twice two make four? Twice two makes four without my will. As if free will meant that!”

Save that passage for every time one hears the bureaucrat’s defense of onerous control of the individual by the state with the position that government knows what is best on the topic(s) and that the individual remains largely free. Hogwash, as Dostoyevsky’s narrator articulated.

In the first part of the book, “Underground,” the narrator marks the supremacy of the individual to choose whichever path desired, even if the path is illogical or irrational when compared to the norms of society. Check out:

“You, for instance, want to cure men of their old habits and reform their will in accordance with science and good sense. But how do you know, not only that it is possible, but also that it is desirable to reform man in that way? And what leads you to the conclusion that man’s inclinations need reforming? In short, how do you know that such a reformation will be a benefit to man?”

Humans are inherently driven, albeit to different levels. Being truly satisfied is a state many never reach. What makes one think that providing economic security at the cost of surrendering freedom is desirable? We are not sheep.

Consider this sentence from the book:

“Man is sometimes extraordinarily, passionately in love with suffering: that is a fact.”

Society cannot be organized in a way that guarantees the happiness of citizens.

And one may argue that being in love with suffering is nothing more than human nature associated with achievement. Someone earns a million dollars, and they immediately desire two million dollars. Someone wins a championship in sports and immediately desires another title. Someone climbs Mount Everest, and they want to start planning to summit K2. The drive to achieve cannot be extinguished by a forced contentment injected by policy.

Concluding Thoughts

Notes is a short book, but an incredibly dense one, packed with passages that speak to so many contemporary policy and current events issues. Invest in a highlighter to mark key sentences, and then place Notes from the Underground close by for easy access in the future. It’s something you will pull off the shelf and reference more than you think.

This is one of those books that every college student should read before graduating (I would argue every high school student should read it, but that might be stretching things in this day and age of failing public education). Notes warrants a place on the syllabuses for English Lit, Civics, Psychology, and Philosophy.

There is something for everyone to take away from Dostoyevsky’s first classic. Now more than ever.

[1] And a bleak one at that!
[2] Dostoyevsky often portrays his protagonists as unattractive and the characters opposing them as more likable. Perhaps he felt doing so made his messages more impactful.
[3] Organ stops are buttons that are manipulated (pulled out or pushed in) by the organ player to send compressed air through a specific organ pipe.

The Battle of Hurtgen Forest: Costly Failure and Lessons Learned

By Nick Deiuliis

Those with a keen interest in World War II are familiar with the European Theater’s famous Allied campaigns: Italy, D-Day and Normandy, Market Garden, Battle of the Bulge, and the final thrust over the Rhine River and into the heart of Germany. Movies, books, and series have been dedicated to them.

Yet there is a battle nestled in the middle of that chronology that gets little attention.  It was the worst performance and drubbing the US Army suffered in World War II.  A famous infantry division with Pennsylvania lineage played a central role and paid an epic price in the debacle.

The late 1944 campaign was the Battle of Hurtgen Forest.

Revisiting and analyzing the battle provides insights on leadership, strategy, and tactics that remain relevant both on battlefields and in board rooms.

Background

The Allies were pushing up against the German border in September 1944.  In sight were the gateway to the industrial Ruhr and the heart of Germany, and possibly the end of the war.

Farther to the south on the frontline sat a heavy forest just inside western Germany, the Hurtgenwald, occupied by German forces and cut by a stream, the Kall. The region is enclosed by a triangle, with corners of the cities of Aachen and Duren, and the town of Monschau.

The Hurtgen Forest area was part of the Siegfried Line and had been prepped by German engineers for prolonged battle. Trees were carefully cultivated for decades into neat, straight rows providing clear fields of fire.  Mines were densely laid on trails, paths, and breaks. Pillboxes were built and set up to create kill zones.

39th Inf. passes through the dragon`s teeth north of Roetgen.

American leadership believed that for the advance to the Roer and Rhine Rivers and deep into Germany to continue, the forest had to be entered and the far high ground, the town of Schmidt, had to be seized.

The Allies quickly learned that wasn’t going to be easy.

Leadership Woes

American leadership was inept during the Battle of Hurtgen Forest.  Much of the blame can be attributed to 1st Army commander, Lieutenant General Courtney Hodges.

HIRTEEN COMMANDERS OF THE WESTERN FRONT photographed in Belgium, 10 October 1944. Front row, left to right: General Patton, General Bradley, General Eisenhower, General Hodges, Lt. Gen. William H. Simpson. Second row: Maj. Gen. William B. Kean, Maj. Gen. Charles E. Corlett, Maj. Gen. J. Lawton Collins, Maj. Gen. Leonard P. Gerow, Maj. Gen. Elwood R. Quesada. Third row: Maj. Gen. Leven C. Allen, Brig. Gen. Charles C. Hart, Brig. Gen. Truman C. Thorson. Source: U.S. Army Center of Military History.

Hodges’ career up to the Hurtgen was out of a Hollywood script. A southerner who didn’t make it through West Point (geometry class flummoxed him), he rose through the Army ranks the hard way, starting his soldiering career in 1905 as a private.

He earned two Purple Hearts in World War I but discarded them and considered them “sissy.”1  Hodges’ boss during the Hurtgen ordeal was the legendary Omar Bradley, who prior to the war was Hodges’ subordinate, and who still addressed Hodges as ‘sir’ despite the reversal in who reported to whom.

Although Hodges competently led the 1st Army through France after D-Day, he was by late 1944 mentally exhausted and spent. The scale of duties overwhelmed him; he made decisions slowly and micromanaged.  Worse, he would not visit the front line and tended to command from the rear, with little information (or worse, misinformation).

Hodges would brutally demote subordinate officers, sacking them at the first sign of setback.  That made those reporting to him extremely cautious in decision-making, to the point of being paralyzed. It didn’t help that his staff and other direct reports were constantly infighting.

He was archaic in tactics, favoring a mentality more representative of World War I than the current conflict.  Hodges favored the tactics of “straight on” and “smashing ahead” over flanking.2  Hodges and his staff believed the Germans were close to collapse, convincing him more of the need for blunt and direct frontal tactics.

Hodges saw the Hurtgen Forest as a threat to his flank in his drive east toward the Roer River and, ultimately, the Rhine River.  Yet the density of the forest made it highly unlikely that the Germans could amass enough armor and infantry to serve as a credible threat to the Allied advance.

Historian Russell Weigley summed it up best: “The most likely way to make the Hurtgen a menace to the American Army was to send American troops attacking into its depths.”3

That’s exactly what Hodges did.  And no one under him had the confidence or courage to question him.4

Early Phase of Battle

Thus, in late September 1944, the US 9th Division entered the Hurtgen, hoping to outflank the city of Aachen to the northwest. After a few weeks, little ground was gained at enormous cost; 4,500 causalities were suffered to advance 3,000 yards.  That’s a casualty for every two feet of gained ground, an attrition rate that soon depleted the fighting strength of frontline battalions.

Although the German defenders also paid a heavy price, the German high command in mid-October was confident the Americans would not be foolish enough to attempt another assault through the Hurtgen Forest. Field Marshal Model understood how the forest neutralized Allied advantages in mobility, armor, and airpower.

But the Germans misread the extent of ineptitude and stubbornness of American leadership.

The 28th Division Enters the Forest

The US 28th Infantry Division was originally a Pennsylvania National Guard organization.  Its original nickname, the Keystone Division, was derived from its keystone insignia on uniforms (the keystone is the emblem of Pennsylvania).5

The 28th had done it all in Europe leading up to the Hurtgen Forest: fighting and dying through the impenetrable hedgerows of France following D-Day, marching through Paris triumphantly, and breaking through the famous fortified defenses of the Siegfried Line.  The 28th crossed from France onto German soil in September 1944, having learned valuable lessons from prior campaigns but paying a high price in casualties.  A rest was badly needed.

So, in late September, the 28th was moved into reserve in Belgium.  Major General Dutch Cota, who enjoyed a stellar reputation till the Hurtgen, rested the 28th while rebuilding the ranks with inexperienced replacements and preparing for the next fight.

General Eisenhower and Major General Cota at the 28th Div. C.P. Rott.

But the 28th Division was the only corps in reserve after the failed attempt of the 9th Division to give the Hurtgen a go.  Thus, in late October it was hastily brought forward and ordered back into action.

Ironically, the 28th Division’s motto was “Fire and Movement.”6 The Battle of Hurtgen Forest presented a situation where the former was challenging while the latter was often impossible.

The assault into the Hurtgen commenced on November 2 after a few days of delay due to cold, cloudy, and wet inclement weather; conditions that would be the norm for the duration of the campaign. Cota deployed three infantry regiments, the 109th, 110th, and 112th, in the attack.  Tanks were attached to each regiment but were often useless in the terrain and weather.

American plans were for the 109th to aim for the village of Hurtgen to the northeast, the 110th targeted Raffelsbrand/Simonskall to the southeast, while the 112th was to head east to Kommerscheidt and then to the key objective of Schmidt.

That’s three separate lines of attack.  And due to delays in launching attacks at other points across the wide front, the 28th in the Hurtgen would be the only attack occurring those first few days of November, meaning the Germans could dedicate full attention to the battle.

The first day of attack on November 2 devastated the 110th; as they attempted to advance to the southeast they were mowed down by machine guns and artillery.  Zero progress was made and by the end of the week the 110th had lost effectiveness as a fighting force.

The 109th made limited progress until it encountered a dense minefield, stopping short of Hurtgen village and suffering heavy casualties.

The best American progress on November 2 was by the 112th in the middle, having reached the village of Vossenack on the way to the ultimate objective of Schmidt.  By the next day, the Americans in the 112th traveled down the ravine to the Kall stream, traversed the stream, and climbed the opposite bank toward Schmidt.  Germans in the town were taken by surprise, and the Americans surprisingly held Schmidt by late afternoon on November 3.

But snipers made movement in and around Schmidt impossible. And it was tough to reinforce the position with 30-ton Sherman tanks due to the muddy, narrow, and steep Kall trail.

Field Marshal Model and the Germans were initially surprised by the attack, thinking the Americans would be too smart to try an assault into the impenetrable forest. Ironically, at commencement of the 28th’s attack, Model and his staff were conducting map war game exercises to play out a hypothetical American campaign in the area.

Model responded quickly. He sent some officers to the front and kept others back at his headquarters to monitor and manage the battle.  Cloudy weather negated Allied air power and the Germans were able to quickly move troops and tanks to the outskirts of Schmidt and Hurtgen village.

The Americans in Schmidt were too few to handle the coming counterattack.  They were oblivious to the threat, felt the Germans lacked enough remaining armor to mount an attack, and were short of anti-tank equipment and mines. General Cota remained far from the front lines, out of touch with developments and thinking the battle was already won.

The morning of November 4 delivered a strong dose of reality.  German artillery opened on Schmidt, tanks blew apart the town, and screaming German infantry surged toward the undermanned Americans.  The Americans, routed and in disarray, fled.  Schmidt was back in German hands by noon.

Some of the routed American forces regrouped at Kommerscheidt (between the Kall stream and Schmidt) and a few Shermans arrived up from the nearly impassable Kall trail.  The Kall trail was the only avenue for reinforcement and supply, but it was a muddy, narrow mess.  Engineers worked continuously to make it barely passable for tanks and antitank equipment.  A tank broke down on the trail and impeded progress for days until it was shoved over the ravine. The pace to traverse the trail was excruciatingly slow, and the route was lightly defended and vulnerable to continuous German attack.

At the time when the desperate Americans needed leadership the most, they didn’t get it.  General Cota remained far from the front and was confused.  General Hodges showed up at Cota’s command post and went on a tirade.  An intimidated Cota was sending orders to the front line for Schmidt to be retaken at once and to “roll on.”7 Obviously, the detached American generals had no clue as to the critical state of their troops or the battle.

By November 7, Kommerscheidt had fallen. The Kall trail was under heavy attack, making an attempted night retreat deadly and difficult.

It wasn’t until the next day that Generals Eisenhower and Bradley became worried enough to show up at Dutch Cota’s headquarters.  Eisenhower commented, “Well, Dutch, it looks like you got a bloody nose.”8

The first winter storm hit on November 9. A truce allowed US wounded to be evacuated across the Kall stream and up the trail.  Finally, the decimated 112th was off the front line.  The 110th was possibly in worse condition, reduced to less than sixty infantry, including reinforcements.

Sherman tanks mounted with 105mm. howitzers open fire in a muddy field amid the Hurtgen Forest on November 17, 1944.

Of the over two thousand Americans who set foot east of the Kall stream during the battle, only three hundred managed to make it back to the western bank.  In about a week of battle, the Americans suffered over 6,000 casualties, to the Germans 3,000.

The reputation of General Dutch Cota went from hero prior to the Hurtgen to inept leader after.  The most likely explanation as to why he was not relieved of command was that prior purges by Hodges and the recent Hurtgen combat losses drained the depth of officers.  There was no one able enough to replace Cota.

Costly Third Attempt

But the American generals, including Hodges, did not learn, and for months continued to throw troops into the meatgrinder of the Hurtgen Forest.  Next up was the 22nd Infantry Regiment.

The regiment was commanded by Colonel Charles Lanham.  Lanham led from the front to the point of recklessness.  Many considered him brilliant but crazy.  No one questioned his courage.

He expected much of his officers and told them, “As officers, I expect you to lead your men. Men will follow a leader, and I expect my platoon leaders to be right up front. Losses could be very high. Use every skill you possess. If you survive your first battle, I’ll promote you. Good luck.”9

A German bunker in the Hurtgen Forest (2018).

The 22nd started eighteen days of hell in the Hurtgen on November 18.  After three days, the regiment lost its three battalion commanders, and the attrition rate among rifle company leaders was over three hundred percent. By the end of the sixth day, the regiment suffered fifty percent casualties.

Yet the regiment fought on, suffering more than 2,800 casualties to advance just over 300 yards a day. One soldier fell for every two yards gained. The casualty rate was a staggering eighty-six percent of normal regiment strength.

The Damned Dams

American leadership spent years after the battle defending the decision to enter the forest.  One of the more popular explanations was the need to secure two forest dams that controlled the water level of the Roer River flowing northward, which sat to the east and between the Allies and the Rhine River. The Allies believed they could not attack eastward to the Rhine as long as the Germans held the dams and could threaten to flood the Roer River Valley.

Yet General Hodges made no plans prior to battle to capture the dams on the Roer, just inside the Hurtgen Forest. The dams were apparently the key to the river, but it would take prolonged battles in the forest by several divisions before Hodges ordered an attack against them.

Hodges did not press for air attacks on the Roer River dams until late November, but they failed. Direct hits were made, but the concrete structures were so massive that damage was negligible.

In mid-December, months after the Americans entered the Hurtgen, a ground assault on the dams was launched. It would not be until February 1945 that the Allies controlled the dams and could land on the eastern bank of the Roer River.

American leadership blundered by not proposing an easier avenue of approach southeast of the Hurtgen Forest, allowing Hodges to seize the dams and then clear the terrain downriver.  The Battle of Hurtgen Forest didn’t have to be.

The Hurtgen’s Bloody Tally

The slaughter and misery dragged into December 1944, when the Americans finally pulled out of the forest.  By that time, Allied attention was fixed on German Field Marshal von Rundstedt’s breakthrough in the Ardennes; what came to be known as the Battle of the Bulge.

American soldiers of the 1st Infantry Division in defensive positions in the Hurtgen Forest, December 1944.

All said, 120,000 American troops were deployed in the Battle of Hurtgen Forest, suffering 33,000 casualties.

Combat fatigue, pneumonia, and trench foot claimed 9,000 of that gruesome toll.  Soldiers lacked sufficient boots and winter clothing.  Hot food and dry cover were almost nonexistent.  Men spent long nights frozen in foxholes.  American domination of logistics and supply enjoyed throughout the war failed in the Hurtgen.

Making Coffee in the Hurtgen Forest, December 1944. By Tony Vaccaro.

The campaign absorbed enormous resources and destroyed morale. It weakened the American front and set the stage for the initial German success in the Battle of the Bulge.  The worst American setback in the European Theater prolonged the war.

Historian Carlo D’Este saw the American performance in the Hurtgen Forest as “the most ineptly fought series of battles of the war in the West.”10  Hemingway referenced World War I by describing the Hurtgen Forest as “Passchendaele with tree bursts.”11  Colonel David H. Hackworth, a battalion commander in the Vietnam War, called the Hurtgen battle “one of the most costly blunders of World War II.”12

Six Lessons

Because it was disastrous, and because we tend to best remember victories, the Battle of Hurtgen Forest has been virtually forgotten.  It is only briefly mentioned in the memoirs of Generals Eisenhower and Bradley and has been overlooked by many historians.

The battle should have been avoided.  Its lessons must be remembered if we are to honor those who paid the ultimate price.

The Battle of Hurtgen Forest provides six key lessons:

  • Leadership matters, and poor leadership negates inherent advantage. Eisenhower, Bradley, Hodges, Collins, and Cota failed to understand the strategic irrelevance of the forest and the ability to reduce it and avoid it by flanking to the southeast.  Hodges applied obsolete tactics and lost composure at the worst times. Hodges and Cota both led from the rear, failing to grasp the frontline situation as events unfolded, compounding mistakes with more mistakes.
  • Preparation and homework are prerequisites to success. The Allied command went into the Hurtgen unprepared and with no clear agreement on why they were there to begin with. A simple reconnaissance of the Kall trail would’ve warned of its challenges.  Much was made of the need to capture the dams on the Roer to the southeast of the Hurtgen as justifying the battles.  Yet there was a lack of clarity, before and during the battle, on intended timing of dam capture, the impact the dams could have on flooding of the Roer River, and on alternatives to address the dams (including flanking or bombing them).
  • Avoid terrain and environment that neutralizes your strengths. Since Sun Tzu, strategists understood the importance of picking the proper field of battle.  Yet the Allies chose the worst place for battle.  The Hurtgen’s thick woods, ravines, steep ridges, lack of roads, mud, and weather eliminated Allied superiority in mobility armor, and airpower.  Tanks were largely useless until late in the battle and airpower was hampered by cloud cover.
  • Supply chain weakness will hamper success in modern warfare and economy. The Kall trail was the primary lifeline for Americans on the frontline for much of the battle. Yet the trail was too steep, too narrow, too muddy, and too prone to German attack.  This crucial artery of movement was far too fragile to feed a victory.
  • Success demands teams have the proper tools and equipment. One of the Allies’ greatest strengths during the war, logistics, failed miserably during the Battle of Hurtgen Forest. Soldiers were deprived of the basics: hot food, winter gear, and boots to protect from trench foot.  The failure to equip troops with the essentials resulted in thousands of avoidable casualties.
  • Underestimate your adversary’s capacity and will at your own peril. The Allies in late 1944 were too overconfident. They ripped across France, were now inside Germany, the industrial Ruhr was within reach, and the fighting spirit of the German army was thought to be poor. A blunt and direct assault into the Hurtgen would be easy and unresisted.  The Germans benefitted from such ignorance and foolishness, which carried on beyond the Hurtgen and bled into the Battle of the Bulge.

History is written by the victors. But if the victors desire to remain on top, analyzing and learning from the failures is essential.

 

[1] Atkinson, Rick, The Guns at Last Light, p. 310.
[2] Atkinson, Rick, The Guns at Last Light, p. 311.
[3] See historynet.com; The Hurtgen Forest, 1944: The Worst Place of Any.
[4] That held true even after the war. Loyal Hodges subordinate General Joe Collins stated post-war, “We had to go into that forest to secure our right flank.” And, “What was the alternative?”  (Atkinson, The Guns at Last Light, p. 314.) How about a flanking maneuver around it?
[5] The Germans in World War II gave the 28th Division another nickname, the Bloody Bucket Division, because of the blood-red color of the keystone insignia and the vicious fighting tactics used by the 28th through Normandy.
[6] https://history.army.mil/documents/eto-ob/28id-eto.htm
[7] Atkinson, The Guns at Last Light, p. 321.
[8] Pereira and Wilson, All Souls Day: The World War II Battle and the Search for a Lost U.S. Battalion, p. 146.
[9] See warfarehistorynetwork.com; The Battle of Hürtgen Forest: A Tactical Nightmare for Allied Forces.
[10] D’Este, Carlo, Eisenhower: A Soldier’s Life, p. 627.
[11 Hemingway, Ernest, Across the River and Into the Trees, p. 218.
[12] warfarehistorynetwork.com; The Battle of Hürtgen Forest: A Tactical Nightmare for Allied Forces.