But don’t take it from me; just look at what they do.

Instead of preserving the world’s most effective combat force, the Democrat Party views the U.S. military as a massive source of funding (defense budget cuts), an opportunity to shore up political support through social engineering (allowing openly gay service members), and a means to further their liberal internationalist agenda (so-called “Responsibility to Protect” operations like Libya).

They know that the military community tends to vote strongly Republican, which partly explains their open contempt of the men and women that serve in the Armed Forces – whether falsely labeling them cold-blooded murderers (Rep. John Murtha), comparing them to Nazis, KGB, and the Khmer Rouge (Sen. Dick Durbin), joking about their intelligence (Sec. John Kerry)… the examples of the Democrat Party’s distaste for the military could easily fill an entire article.

But throughout American history, our troops knew at least if they were wounded, in danger of being overrun, or even killed, our military will do everything in its power to get rescue or recover you.

No one gets left behind. At least that’s how it used to be.

That is, until Benghazi, which has become one of the most dishonorable events in American history. When our consulate was attacked and overran, President Obama left Americans to die. Any rescue attempt was cut off – not by our enemies, but by the Obama administration.

Even worse than the tragic and preventable deaths of four Americans, Washington’s reaction over the last eight months shows the utter disregard the Democrat Party and media have for not only the fallen, but for all of our troops and operators.

I am not saying that each and every Democrat politician wanted those men to die. But can you name any Democrat politician that has said we need to get to the bottom of Benghazi? Has any Democrat even so much as distanced themself from their party’s callous disregard for the fallen? Washington can say they support the troops all day, it’s time they show us how they support our troops.

Since day one, the Democrat Party – primarily the Obama administration – and their media allies have sought to make the story go away. Since that didn’t work, they have resorted to distracting the American people and redirecting the focus by claiming Republicans are only making this an issue for political gain.

Just imagine if your son or daughter was killed in the attack and politicians reacted by saying that anyone trying to find out answers was only using the tragedy for political leverage. That really says something about our nation when the majority party can shamelessly stoop so low – and get away with it.

We need to be asking ourselves: what kind of people are we electing when merely investigating Benghazi somehow becomes politicization of a tragedy? After all, the men left to die in the consulate weren’t Democrats or Republicans; they were Americans. In our society, the government serves the people, and therefore owes us answers.

But the aspiring tyrants in Washington view everything – which now includes the lives of our troops – in terms of advancing their agenda and narratives to gain political power.

Information or events harmful to the party or agenda must be rewritten or covered up, as was the case with Benghazi.

With the president only weeks away from a potentially close election, the White House had no options that would serve them politically. A rescue operation could draw attention to the operation in Libya and lead to more questions (such as what were they actually doing in Benghazi) – questions that would likely lead to more problems for the administration.

It already doesn’t look good when al Qaeda-linked militants strike U.S. soil again on 9/11 when you have already declared the War on Terror over. To the Obama administration, they had nothing but bad choices, so to them, the answer was to let the consulate fall, then handle the problem by managing the story.

So, a co-ordinated, heavily armed assault magically becomes protestors angry about an American anti-Islam YouTube video that nobody had actually seen. It is unlikely that anyone in the newsrooms believed that the narrative was anything but outright lies, but they played right along, because their agenda aligns with that of the Democrat Party. The false narrative allowing them to shift the focus as much as possible to keep things in a more manageable and politically palatable light.

The administration bet that their fabricated account on Benghazi would hold out until the news cycle moved on, thanks to a complicit media. Anyone looking into the attack is attacked for politicizing the tragedy. Hope the lies stick, and once the story becomes “old” news, they could just dismiss it.

Fortunately, the story didn’t go away.

As of this writing, no one has been held accountable or has admitted responsibility over Benghazi. There has been no real response to discourage our enemies from further attacks on the United States. Sure, there have been meaningless platitudes and grandstanding, but that is only going through the motions; no one believes that Obama will actually do anything because he clearly doesn’t take our national security seriously.

The Obama administration, the Democrat Party, and their allies in media have indicated by their actions and inactions that they simply don’t care about what happened in Libya – they only care about their political agenda.

What few reporters that are actually looking into Benghazi are being ostracized by their own organizations. Politicians looking into Benghazi are smeared by Democrats and the media. Commanding officers in the military have been fired. State Department employees coming forward are no doubt doing so at the risk of their careers.

Have we, as a nation, fallen to the level that this behavior from Washington is acceptable? Perhaps we have – after all, they have gotten away with it for this long. But what about the individual level; do you find this behavior acceptable? If your answer is no, then are you willing to express your disgust with your elected officials and media sponsors?

Hillary Clinton wants you to believe that none of this matters now, but the Democrat Party and the media have done with this tragedy is far worse than what our enemies did to the consulate. They have disgraced our nation.

The days of “no man gets left behind” are apparently over. And if we the people choose not to take action against the political and media elites who are driving us “forward” then things will only get worse.

Supporters of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) would have us believe that the treaty makes the world a safer place. For 30 years, media, political, and even military elite have all called for ratification of UNCLOS.

But why should the U.S. ratify a treaty that, considering Chinese ongoing territorial aggression against its neighbors, we can see is useless when it comes to maintaining “peace, justice and progress for all peoples of the world,” as the charter states?

Chinese naval vessels recently violated UN law by using their fire control radar to target a Japanese naval destroyer and military helicopters operating near the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands in February.

The rocky, uninhabited islands belonged to the Japanese until after World War II, when the United States assumed temporary control. The islands returned to Japanese administration in 1972, but the Chinese didn’t voice their claim to the islands until a potentially significant oil field was discovered in the region later that decade.

For months, Chinese and Filipino vessels have maintained a delicate standoff over the Scarborough Shoals (Huangyan Island to China). Although 500 miles from the nearest Chinese port, Chinese fishing vessels flaunt the law by harvesting their catch within the UNCLOS-established exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, just 124 miles from their coast.

In 1947, the Chinese government claimed virtually all of the South China Sea in what has become known as the “Nine-Dash Line.” China, a member nation of UNCLOS, refuses to explain the details on how they reached their far-fetching boundary.

A U.S. diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks states that a senior Chinese government maritime law expert admittedly did not know of any historical basis behind the “Nine-Dash Line.”

China knows that if they open the door to international scrutiny, their extravagant claim and ambiguous evidence would not survive and any illusions of a legitimacy would vanish. And so would the massive deposits of oil and natural gas surrounding these desolate islands the Chinese want exclusive access to.

The Philippines even offered to settle the matter of Scarborough Shoal in a UNCLOS tribunal, but the Chinese have stated they will not participate in any of the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanisms – or abide by any UNCLOS ruling.

The Chinese claim to seek bilateral talks because they know that the Philippines will refuse, and the issue will remain unsettled. The Chinese interest is to keep things exactly as they are.

Prior to becoming Secretary of State, John Kerry was one of the strongest supporters of ratifying UNCLOS as a member of the Senate. Confronted with Chinese warmongering however, Secretary Kerry can only spout meaningless platitudes about “forging stronger and deeper relations” with the Philippines.

Not altogether inspiring, considering we have mutual defense pacts with both Japan and the Philippines that go back over 60 years. Perhaps President Obama doesn’t plan on honoring our agreements, but we are obligated to treat an attack on either nation as if it were an attack on the United States.

Kerry’s empty words and the Obama administration’s make-belief world of political narratives may resonate in an Ivy League faculty lounge or with a sycophantic media, but China lives in the real world, where words only mean as much as your ability to back them up.

China can be aggressive because they know that the UN is only out to get paid, President Obama’s “soft power” is big on soft and short on power, and no other nation is capable of doing anything about it.

Demographically and economically speaking, the future belongs to China. They are building aircraft carriers and air supremacy fighter jets while we are grounding and decommissioning ours. The Chinese are expanding their nuclear arsenal while we are unilaterally dismantling our aging weapons. Our economy is going the way of Greece, and the Chinese are financing the demise.

Diplomacy will only weaken the Chinese position, and their political and military leaders are telling their people to prepare for war. No one wants to go to war with the Chinese, but diplomacy tends to work better when one side has significant leverage over the other, both parties can find common ground, or if both parties at least wish to avoid war. Feeble treaties will not stand in their way.

If we could magically cast out corruption from the UN, a Law of the Sea treaty would be a great idea. Internationally agreed-upon laws would rule the oceans and seas, while courts – not fleets – would solve disputes. And the world wouldn’t depend solely on the United States to solve their problems with our blood and treasure.

But any treaty that permits a member to lay claim to an entire sea shared by several nations, and does nothing while a member openly violates provisions of the treaty is absurd. Considering the inability to check Chinese aggression, the trillions of dollars in fees that will be paid by U.S. taxpayers to the UN, and giving control over much of our resources to an unaccountable international organization, the United States is far better off without UNCLOS.

Instead of reducing corruption, however, changing the method of Senate selection provided entirely new avenues of political exploitation by fundamentally transforming our federal government. Most importantly, the amendment destroyed the federalist structure that the Founding Fathers installed to protect state sovereignty.

Today, members of the Georgia state House of Representatives seek to restore state representation to the federal government by reviving the Founders’ original intent. The goal of House Bill 273 is “to protect the sovereignty of the states from the federal government and to give each individual state government representation in the federal legislative branch of government” by repealing the Seventeenth Amendment.

Of course, this resolution would not necessitate any action or response from the federal government should it pass, but it could spark a national debate on the concept of federalism, unconstitutional government, and the Founders’ original intent.

Why was the Seventeenth Amendment ratified?

As the Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution, they understood that free and independent states, fresh from a long and costly war with England, would not approve of a charter that required them to totally surrender their sovereignty to a new federal government. To balance the legitimate concerns of the states with the need to preserve the union and form a national government for mutual protection and prosperity, the Founders chose a federalist system of divided powers between the states and the proposed federal government.

They also passed a Bill of Rights, ensuring that any power not specifically granted to the federal government rested with the states or the people themselves. The Founders clearly wanted a limited federal government which was balanced by the state governments.

Prior to 1913, state legislatures appointed members to represent their state in the federal government while the people directly elected members of the House of Representatives. The House represented the people and the Senate represented the states. This clever design balanced the will of the people and the sovereignty of the states, and the federal government was largely restrained from growing beyond its constitutional limits.

The federalist system was not understood by the people 100 years ago, and certainly isn’t understood today. The Founders sought to craft a system ruled by law – the Constitution – and not a rule of man. That is why the United States is a constitutional republic and not a pure democracy. They knew that just government must have consent of the people, but that total democracy would inevitably lead to a tyranny of majority, which could strip state and individual liberty as easily as a monarch.

“The Constitution does not protect the sovereignty of the States for the benefit of the States or state governments as abstract political entities,” wrote Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, “To the contrary, the Constitution divides authority between federal and state governments for the protection of individuals. State sovereignty is not just an end to itself.”

The people, states, and federal government all checked each other’s power, and the Constitution ruled – and protected – them all.

That is why the members of the House and Senate were originally selected in different manners. A senator would keep his position as long as he served what the state legislatures felt was in their best interest. The senator wouldn’t be encumbered by campaigning for re-election, as did his House counterparts. As soon as that senator betrayed the wishes of the state, he could be recalled and a new senator selected. When the Seventeenth Amendment permitted the people to elect members of both the House and Senate, states lost their representation in the federal government, setting the federal government on a course which would dismantle state sovereignty, individual liberty, and eventually the Constitution itself.

While federalism was effective at balancing state and federal power, those who desire power will eventually find ways to corrupt any system – regardless of the brilliance of its design.

Political battles at the state level often delayed the selection of the senate delegates. Often, months would go by, during which time the state would have no representation in the Senate. Cases of corruption and special interest influence, together with calls for more “democratic” elections, made an easy case for amending the Constitution.

Instead of limiting corruption and special interest influence in Congress, the Seventeenth Amendment magnified what, prior to 1913, was typically local and relatively small-scale problems into a much larger and sometimes international ordeal.

“Direct elections of Senators,” declared former Senator Zell Miller, a Democrat from Georgia, “allowed Washington’s special interests to call the shots, whether it is filling judicial vacancies, passing laws, or issuing regulations.”

Government has always attracted corruption, but political behavior can be managed by effective political structure. Whether it’s 1789 or 1913, a government with few checks on its power is far more corruptible than one that is constrained, and that is the effect that direct elections of senators had on our government.

With the states out of the way, an uninhibited Congress jumped at this opportunity to expand their power, primarily through the Interstate Commerce Clause. The role of defending federalism fell to the Judicial Branch, which proved ineffective as the Supreme Court ruled case after case in support of increasingly expanding federal powers. Incredibly, even the amount of food a farmer could grow for his own personal consumption (Wickard v. Filburn) was somehow under the purview of Congress.

While any bill that encroached on state’s rights would be dead in its tracks prior to the amendment, Congress today can tie virtually every aspect of our lives to interstate commerce, and thus, empowering them to rule however they see fit.

The Founders never intended to provide the federal government with this much power; if they had, there would have been no need for enumerated powers – or a Constitution – in the first place. Instead, they anticipated that public officials wouldn’t preserve federalism for federalism’s sake; they would instead act in their own self-interest. State sovereignty persisted not out of virtue, but because public officials would only retain their position if they served their states.

Why repeal the Seventeenth Amendment?

By directly electing members of the Senate, we removed the only mechanism that forced senators to represent the states and allowed them an entirely new opportunity to increase their personal power, and individual liberty has suffered as a result.

Media and political elites portray any effort to repeal or even debate the effects of the Seventeenth Amendment as crack-pot conspiracy territory, and Georgia’s HB 273 is no different. But the best single thing America could do to preserve state sovereignty, return the federal government to its constitutional role, and protect individual liberty is to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment.

A U.S. Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt II with the U.S. Air Force Weapons School, Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., drops a AGM-65 Maverick missile during a close air support training mission Sept. 23, 2011, over the Nevada Test and Training Range. U.S. Air Force Weapons School students participate in many combat training missions over the NTTR during the six-month, graduate-level instructor course held at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Brett Clashman/Released)

Now those definitions by themselves are largely subjective; my view of the center and how far something is from it may be entirely different than yours.

But let’s consider an example: you are well within your constitutional rights to peaceably oppose partial-birth abortions. Likewise, someone who peaceably opposes the banning of such abortions would be within their rights. One could argue that this free exchange of ideas, for or against abortion, would be the “center.” Since neither group imposes upon the rights of the other, this is how our civilized society properly functions. Each citizen is entitled to his or her opinion and we empower government to express the will of the majority, provided the majority itself doesn’t interfere with the rights of the minority.

Extremists, those at the furthest possible point from the center, would be people willing to break laws and violate the rights of others in order to enact their goals. Someone willing to blow up a clinic that performs partial-birth abortions would be a perfect example of an extremist, as there is no further point from “the center” than taking the life of another in defense of your cause.

But someone who attempts to silence the constitutional rights of those who peaceably protest could also be considered an extremist. Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Democrats across the country have repeatedly used the term “extremist” to marginalize and smear anyone who opposes their agenda.

Don’t believe our elected officials would do that to you? Just type in “extremist” and the name of a politician – of any party – in a search engine and see for yourself how far we have slid down the slope.

By labeling opponents as extremists, the politician creates the illusion that his supporters have moral superiority while portraying opponents as villains. Maybe you’re not quite on board with his agenda, but you don’t want to be one of “them” – the extremists, do you?

This behavior goes far beyond making your case to the people so they may decide the laws which they will live by. By resorting to the “extreme” of labeling their opponents as extremists, politicians show us they know voters won’t willingly support their party platform unless they are deceived.

This is how tyrants behave.

Words have meanings, and their meanings sometimes change over time. But are Americans willing to permit a political party to redefine “extremists” as anyone opposing their agenda? Once we allow them to control the language, they control the debate. And once they control the debate, we no longer control anything.

[Originally published at The US Report]

But in the hands of the bad, anarchy represents chaos. There is no rule of law to deter criminals; no police force to protect the people or their property; no military to repel foreign invaders.

But that is only if we consider the citizens of a state. Expand the focus and consider anarchy of government.

Merriam-Webster defines anarchy as the “absence or denial of any authority or established order.” Ours is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. We the people are in fact the rightful government of the United States, and those we have elected are mere public servants chosen to handle the affairs of the state according to our will and within the constraints of our Constitution.

Considering the history of our federal government in recent years – particularly the behavior of this Congress and administration – we can see an escalating trend of disregard for the established order of our Constitution and an increasing denial of the people’s authority over government.

No different than a robot in a science fiction movie that becomes “self-aware” and wrecks havoc on it’s former human masters, our government has also become self-aware: realizing, seemingly, that it is no longer the servant of the people, but the master. No longer bound by the Constitution, but all-powerful.

In an anarchy of government, the rulers are the ones with absolute freedom. But they know that there is only a few thousand of them in a nation of over 300 million. Therefore, every aspect of the people’s lives must be controlled. Guns are restricted, communications are monitored, private property is confiscated, education is watered down, healthcare and other industries are nationalized.

But tyrants are never satisfied; they also dictate what is in your garden, your lightbulbs, and your kid’s lemonade stand – no longer held to the authority of the people or Constitution, they can now control every aspect of our lives. Not theirs, however: the anarchists in Washington aren’t held to the laws they pass for us.

History is replete with examples of tyrants sweeping themselves into power, then turning on the people. You may say “that will never happen here,” but millions of Russians, Germans, Ukrainians, and so on said exactly the same thing. It never ends well, and sadly, Americans are heading in that direction right now.

We the people must become self-aware and realize that government is only there to do our bidding, that they only have what authority that we give them, and may only operate within the parameters established by the Constitution that they all swore an oath to “support and defend.”

Americans can no longer continue to watch events unfold, such as President Obama’s unilateral gun control agenda, and say “somebody should do something.” We must realize that “somebody” is us, and that we have witnessed the end of our constitutional republic and the dawning of tyranny if we don’t take action.

1770: The little-known but historically significant Battle of Golden Hill erupts in New York City between members of the patriot organization “Sons of Liberty” and a contingent of British soldiers. Several are wounded on both sides and one civilian is killed in what is considered by some historians as the first armed clash of the American Revolution.

1862: Union forces led by Brig. Gen. George H. Thomas defeat Confederates under Maj. Gen. George B. Crittenden in the Battle of Mill Springs (Ky.). The engagement marks the Union’s first significant victory of the war.

Jan. 20

1783: Diplomats in Versailles sign a treaty ending hostilities between the United States and Britain. After eight long years of fighting, the Americans have secured their independence.

1914: A naval aviation unit from Annapolis, Md. consisting of nine officers, 23 men, seven aircraft, portable hangars, and other gear, under Lieutenant J. H. Towers” arrives at Pensacola, Fla. aboard the battleship USS Mississippi and the bulk-cargo ship USS Orion to set up a flying school. The “Cradle of Naval Aviation” is born.

1944: The U.S. 5th Army, commanded by Lt. Gen. Mark Clark, reaches the Gustav Line and clashes with German forces near Monte Cassino, Italy. After four months of bloody fighting, the Allies have Field Marshall Albert Kesselring’s Tenth Army on their heels and in danger of being surrounded.

1968: The North Vietnamese Army tries – and fails – to overrun Marines patrolling the hills surrounding their combat outpost. The Battle of Khe Sanh has begun – the heavily outnumbered and besieged Marines will fight off their attackers for 77 days, shattering two enemy divisions.

1981: 20 minutes after Ronald Reagan is sworn in as president, Iran releases 52 American hostages (including 18 military personnel) after 444 days of captivity.

Jan. 21

1903: The Militia Act of 1903 – also known as the “Dick Act” (Congressman and Maj. Gen. Charles Dick authored much of the legislation) – is passed, establishing federal standards and greater federal control over state militias, essentially creating the modern National Guard.

1918: 12 officers and 133 enlisted men from the Marine Corps’ First Aeronautical Company arrive for anti-submarine duty at Ponta Delgada, Azores. The unit was one of the first completely equipped American aviation units to serve overseas in World War I.

1968: An Air Force B-52 carrying four hydrogen bombs crashes near Thule Air Base, Greenland. The nuclear payload releases, causing widespread radioactive contamination.

Jan. 22

1944: Allied forces, including the U.S. VI Corps under the command of Maj. Gen. John P. Lucas (of Lt. Gen. Mark Clark’s Fifth Army), begin a series of landings along a stretch of western Italian coastline in the Anzio-Nettuno area. Codenamed Operation Shingle, the Allies achieve complete surprise against – and encounter little initial resistance from – the Germans. But the landings kick off what will become one of the most grueling campaigns of World War II.

1954: First Lady Mamie Eisenhower breaks a bottle of champagne across the bow of USS Nautilus in Groton, Connecticut, launching the world’s first nuclear-powered submarine. The following year, Nautilus gets underway, begins breaking numerous sea-travel records, and becomes the first “ship” to cross the North Pole.

1968: The U.S. Air Force begins Operation Igloo White, it’s state-of-the-art electronic warfare operation utilizing a network of sensors to detect and interdict communist infiltration into South Vietnam.

1969: Operation Dewey Canyon, the Marine Corps’ last major offensive of the Vietnam War, begins. Marines under the command of Col. Robert H. Barrow spent 56 days clearing out the North Vietnamese Army’s stronghold near the A Shau Valley.

Jan. 23

1968: North Korean forces seize USS Pueblo (AGER-2) in the Sea of Japan, killing one sailor and capturing 82. The prisoners spend 11 months in captivity and Pueblo is now a museum in Pyongyang.

Jan. 24

1942: A U.S. destroyer division led by Cmdr. Paul H. Talbot engages a Japanese convoy, sinking at least four transports and one of their escorts. The Battle of Makassar Strait is the U.S. Navy’s first surface action of World War II.

1961: A B-52 bomber on an airborne alert mission breaks up over Goldsboro, N.C., killing three of the crew and releasing its payload of two Mark 39 nuclear bombs. One bomb is recovered and another buries itself nearly 200 feet below the ground.

Jan. 25

1856: Marines and seamen from the sloop USS Decatur land at Seattle to protect settlers from an Indian attack. The Battle of Seattle lasted seven hours and the Indians suffered severe casualties, while only two settlers died.

1951: The Eighth Army, inspired by their new commander Lt. Gen. Matthew Ridgway, launches the first UN counteroffensive of the Korean War.

Adapted (and abridged) in part from “This Week in US Military History” by W. Thomas Smith Jr.

Chris Carter is the Director of the Victory Institute. Visit his website here: http://www.victoryinstitute.net/blogs/utb/

1781: Commanding 1,600 British troops, American Traitor – now a British brigadier general – Benedict Arnold captures and burns Richmond, Va.

1855: A landing party from the USS Plymouth skirmishes with Chinese forces near Canton during the Taiping Rebellion.

1875: U.S. Navy Cdr. Edward Lull leads an expedition to determine the best route for the Panama Canal.

1904: Marines arrive in Korea to defend the U.S. legation assembly at Seoul.

1945: Japanese pilots receive their first order to become kamikaze suicide attackers. At Okinawa alone, 1,465 kamikaze pilots destroy at least 30 U.S. warships and kill 5,000 Americans.

Jan. 6

1777: Gen. George Washington sets up winter camp for the Continental Army in the hills surrounding Morristown, N.J.

1861: Florida militia forces seize the Union Apalachicola Arsenal, which is defended by only Ordnance Sergeant Edwin Powell and three laborers. Although hopelessly outnumbered, Powell was prepared to fight if ordered to hold and initially refuses to surrender the keys to the magazines or armory. The militia permits Powell to telegram his command for instruction. Powell reluctantly concedes when he receives no response.

1942: Pres. Franklin Roosevelt informs Congress that he is authorizing the largest armaments production in United States history: 8 million tons of shipping, 45,000 planes, and 45,000 tanks, and 20,000 anti-aircraft guns will roll off assembly lines within the year.

1943: The light cruiser USS Helena (CL-50) uses proximity-fused anti-aircraft shells for the first time in combat, shooting down a Japanese “Val” dive-bomber.

1944: Brig. Gen. Frank Merrill is designated to lead the 5307th Composite Unit (provisional), a long-range penetration special operations unit, now popularly known as Merrill’s Marauders. Of the 2,750 men to enter the unit at Burma, only two were not wounded or killed. Today’s 75th Ranger Regiment is a descendant of Merrill’s Marauders.

1967: 16,000 U.S. and 14,000 South Vietnamese troops enter the “Iron Triangle,” a major Viet Cong stronghold near Saigon, on a massive search and destroy mission. The Viet Cong largely avoided contact with the large force, withdrawing to Cambodia or hiding in tunnels. Operation Cedar Falls will become the largest ground operation of the Vietnam War and marks the first time “tunnel rats” are used.

Jan. 7

1973: An F-4 Phantom flown by U.S. Air Force Capt. Paul Howman and 1st Lt. Lawrence Kullman shoots down a MiG-21 fighter over North Vietnam, chalking up the final USAF air-to-air kill of the Vietnam War.

Jan. 8

1815: U.S. forces (including soldiers, sailors, Marines, pirates, a few freed slaves, Choctaw Indians, and militiamen from several states) under the command of Maj. Gen. Andrew Jackson defeat a numerically superior British amphibious force under the overall command of Vice Admiral Sir Alexander Cochrane in the Battle of New Orleans (La.).

Though a decisive victory for the Americans, the battle takes place 15 days after the signing of the war-ending Treaty of Ghent. Communications being what they were in 1815, news of the treaty did not reach New Orleans until February.

1847: A combined U.S. Army-Navy-Marine force under the joint command of Commodore Robert F. Stockton and Gen. Stephen W. Kearny decisively defeat Mexican forces under the command of Gen. José María Flores in the Battle of San Gabriel, California. Within days, U.S. troops are in control of Los Angeles.

Jan. 9

1861: Confederate coastal-artillery batteries open fire on the U.S. commercial paddlesteamer Star of the West in Charleston (S.C.) harbor. The shots – the first of the American Civil War – repel the Star, forcing the ship to abort its mission of resupplying the besieged U.S. Army garrison at Fort Sumter.

1945: Following a devastating naval bombardment, the first of more than 200,000 6th Army soldiers land at Lingayen Gulf. The Battle of Luzon (Philippines) is on, and by March, Allied forces control all strategic locations on the island.

Jan. 10

1847: U.S. Naval forces occupy Los Angeles during the Mexican-American War.

1920: Following months of negotiations, the Treaty of Versailles is signed, formally ending the state of war between Germany and the Allied Powers.

1923: After four years of occupation duty following World War I, Pres. Warren Harding orders all remaining U.S. troops in Germany home.

1927: Marines land at Nicaragua to support the Nicaraguan government during their civil war. The Marines would remain until 1933, supervising elections and maintaining order.

1942: Japanese troops begin their four-month siege of U.S. and Filipino forces at Bataan.

1944: Congress passes the G.I. Bill of Rights, proposed by the American Legion. Following the end of World War II, millions of veterans take advantage of education benefits and home loans provided by the new legislation.

1946: The Army Signal Corps lab at Camp Evans, N.J. reflects radio signals off the moon and receives the return, signifying the beginning of the U.S. space program.

1967: The Mobile Riverine Force, a joint unit consisting of U.S. Army infantry borne by Navy assault craft operating in South Vietnam’s Mekong Delta, arrives at Vung Tau.

Jan. 11

1863: The Confederate sloop-of-war CSS Alabama takes the Union steamer USS Hatteras by surprise (Alabama was flying British colors), sinking Hatteras off Galveston, Texas.

1944: 663 bombers from the Eighth Air Force and nearly 600 fighter escorts attack aviation industry targets in Germany in one of the largest raids to date. Of the estimated 500 Luftwaffe fighters that intercept the group, over half are shot down, and nearly 200 more are listed as probable kills or damaged. 60 American bombers and five fighters do not return.

2002: The first detainees from the War on Terror arrive at the Camp X-Ray detention facility in U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Medal of Honor: On January 6, 1968 in South Vietnam, Army helicopter pilot Maj. Patrick H. Brady conducted multiple medical evacuation missions in dense fog and in the face of heavy enemy fire. Over the course of the day, he rescued 51 soldiers and 400 bullet holes were counted in the three helicopters he flew.

Adapted (and abridged) in part from “This Week in US Military History” by W. Thomas Smith Jr.

A Navy SEAL, carrying a Mk23 5.56mm Machine Gun (Stoner 63), moves through deep mud as he makes his way ashore from a boat, during a combat operation in South Vietnam in 1970. (U.S. Navy photograph by PHC A. Hill)

Happy 51st birthday to the Navy SEALs, who were founded on Jan. 1, 1962.

1863: Union Maj. Gen. William S. Rosecrans’ Army of the Cumberland defeats Confederate Gen. Braxton Bragg’s Army of Tennessee in Murphreesboro, Tenn. Losses were heavy; casualty percentages were higher during the Battle of Stones River than during any other engagement during the Civil War.

1943: The 32nd Infantry Division captures the strategic town of Buna, New Guinea and its airfield in the first major land victory against the Japanese in World War II.

1944: U.S. forces – including the 32nd Infantry Division – land at Saidor, New Guinea, isolating 15,000 Japanese troops.

1967: Col. (future Brig. Gen. and triple ace) Robin Olds leads a flight of F-4 Phantoms over North Vietnam, shooting down nearly half of the North Vietnamese air force’s fighter inventory without a single loss to U.S. aircraft.

Adapted (and abridged) in part from “This Week in US Military History” by W. Thomas Smith Jr. at Human Events.