[PDF] “SUPPLIED FLAG TO MARINES TO FLY FROM MT. SURIBACHI”

View - Download “SUPPLIED FLAG TO MARINES TO FLY FROM MT. SURIBACHI”

Previous PDF

Next PDF

169
“SUPPLIED FLAG TO MARINES TO FLY FROM MT. SURIBACHI"

LST-779

by Christopher B. Havern Sr. 10

CHAPTER

On 19 February 1945, U.S. naval, land, and air

forces launched Operation Detachment, the amphibious assault to seize the Japanese-held island of Iwo Jima. Though the battle would last 36 days, it is largely remembered for the

23 February events during just a few hours on

the extinct volcano Mount Suribachi at the island's southern end. That morning, as John

C. Chapin wrote in

The Fifth Marine Division in

World War II, "a patrol from Company E of

the 28th Marines did discover a path up the mountain which they were able to ascend, and at 1037 that morning of D plus 4 [23 Febru-

Mt. Suribachi."1

nessed by Secretary of Navy James V. Forrest- al, that prompted him to remark to Lieutenant

General Holland M. Smith, commanding

general, expeditionary troops for the invasion, means a Marine Corps for the next 500 years."2 Ironically, it was not the raising of this partic- what Forrestal had predicted. It was the second photographer Joseph Rosenthal and Sergeant

William H. Genaust, that would serve as the

embodiment of the Marine Corps and its ethos in the eyes of the American public. The image that recorded 1/400th of a second in human itous photograph to an exemplar of American iconography.3 is more than cultural, occupying a position that is arguably unequaled in American history (see event is bounded in even greater irony, as the the 2d Battalion, 28th Marines' action report.

As James Bradley, author of Flags of Our Fa-

thers, wryly noted, "The Action Report made sic]. It was, 4

Some participants saw these events as a

moment in the performance of their duty, while some sought celebrity from their involvement.

Others proclaimed association with the event,

yet had either only the remotest connection 170
or were not even present; as if being associat- transitive property, a degree of status upon them. Given this phenomenon, the event's stat- ure generated not only an insatiable interest, but a corresponding controversy. The years subsequent to the battle saw the emergence of a vast literature. Most readers might expect that most matters regarding various aspects of the multifaceted battle would have, in the years doxy. 5

More particularly, the narrative of the

established. After all, it was the subject of sev

Keller C. Freeman's Shadow of Suribachi: Rais-

ing the Flags on Iwo Jima. The authors conducted interviews with many of the participants and timed the publication of their book to coincide with the event's 50th anniversary in 1995. 6

The aforementioned sources state that the

landing ship, tank USS LST-779 provided the by Company E, 2d Battalion, 28th Marines,

Lieutenant Colonel Chandler W. Johnson, the

Lieutenant Albert T. Tuttle, assistant opera-

go down to one of the ships on the beach and the other end of the island will see it. It will lift their spirits also." 7

Lieutenant Tuttle went

on board

LST-779

, beached near the base of the volcano, and obtained a larger set of colors.

LST-779 that

Harbor. Tuttle returned to the command post -

Gagnon, the runner from Company E who was

headed up the hill with replacement batteries for First Lieutenant Harold G. Schrier, Com

Rosenthal was just beginning his ascent of the

mountain.

This narrative was further bolstered in

2000. As part of the commemoration of the

55th anniversary of the assault on Iwo Jima,

World War II magazine published an article by

R. C. House for the January issue wherein he

interviewed Alan S. Wood, the communica

Wood detailed his having provided the replace-

8

Later in May that same year, James

Flags of Our

Fathers-

macist's Mate Second Class John H. Bradley in and subsequent events. After spending 46 weeks as a New York Times bestseller, 6 of which were spent at number one, the events of 23 February 9

Soon thereafter, however, a dissenting ver-

sion of what transpired emerged. In August

2001, Coast Guard Quartermaster Robert L.

Resnick, who had served at Iwo Jima on board

the Coast Guard-manned LST-758, attended as fact by many of the attendees and the pres ident of the 5th Marine Division Association, who later made Resnick an honorary member of the reunion group. In a 2004 interview with 171

Class Judy L. Silverstein for the July 2004 issue

of the Reservist Magazine, the former quartermas- ter stated, "‘It never occurred to me to seek glo ry for Bob Resnick,' he said. ‘But the ( LST- 779

I wanted to set things right'."

10

Resnick's claim

which was recognized by the U.S. Coast Guard, caused considerable consternation among Ma rine Corps veterans. It even prompted the Ma rine Corps History Division to make a request disavow Resnick's assertions and to remove ma terial related to his claims from their website. 11

The contention between the two Services was

even reported in the

Army Times

12

Despite the

Marine Corps' request, the Coast Guard did

not withdraw its support for Resnick's claims.

In the succeeding years, the intensity of the dis

pute subsided though was never fully resolved.

To further muddy the waters, Marion Noel, a

member of

LST-779

's crew, was interviewed by the Roanoke Times on the 60th anniversary of view, Noel stated, "The ship's log says that our 13

Further, he recalled that he and Donald

W. Noel, his Navy veteran son, had "obtained

the ship's log from

LST-779

, which contained an entry from Feb. 23, 1945, stating that the 14

It was Noel's interview that prompted fur-

ther consultation of

LST-779

's logbooks for more information on the subject. In the inter- est of diligence and to ensure corroboration of the historical record, the relevant primary doc umentation found in archived logbooks, war di aries, action reports also required attention for not just information on

LST-779

but also that for LST-758; the 2d Battalion, 28th Marines; the 5th Marine Division; and the Haskell-class attack transport Talladega course of conducting this research, the author intends to lay the matter to rest.

LST-779

AND

LST-758

Historians often claim that the landing craft, ve- "won the war" because of its integral role in transferring men and materiel from ship to shore. 15 however, was no less important in the conduct designs were built in Commonwealth shipyards in England, Ireland, or Canada, while only the

Type II was exclusively built in U.S. shipyards.

Originally conceived in the United Kingdom

design was brought to the United States by a delegation from the Admiralty and submitted to the Navy's Bureau of Ships in November 1941. concurrence of the Allies, the design was ap proved and the type designator was changed to

FIGURE 10.1

LST-758.

172

1,052 Type II vessels built during World War II,

117 were transferred to either the Royal Navy

or the Royal Hellenic Navy under the Lend-

Lease Act of 1941.

16

Still other LSTs were com

missioned in the U.S. Coast Guard and crewed by their servicemembers. According to the ships and service craft titled to the U.S. Navy, there were seven classes of Type II LSTs. The war years were all of the same design and built simultaneously on both coasts and in shipyards along the Ohio and Mississippi River systems.

The LST-542-class was essentially similar to the

LST-1 and

LST-491

-classes. 17

As members of the LST-542-class, both

LST-758 and LST-779 displaced 1,625 tons

light and 4,080 tons under full load. 18

With a

speed of 11.6 knots, they had a complement of

117 sailors and could accommodate 163 troops.

they were armed at commissioning with eight

40mm guns and twelve 20mm guns. Aside from

their type and class, these ships were further the Ohio River, within miles and weeks of each other. LST-779 was laid down on 21 May 1944 poration, while LST-758 was laid down on 5

June 1944, 10 miles downriver, at Ambridge

by the American Bridge Company. The for- mer was launched on 1 July 1944, while the latter launched on 25 July 1944. 19

LST-779 was

commissioned into the Navy on 3 August 1944

A. Hopkins in command, while

LST-758 was

placed into commission in the Coast Guard, then under the Navy Department, on 19 Au gust 1944, with Coast Guard Lieutenant Felix 20 Continuing in parallel, both ships made their way down the Ohio and Mississippi riv- ers to the Gulf Coast, where they conducted loading the tank deck with heavy construction main deck,

LST-779

departed New Orleans, Louisiana, on 7 Sep ship steamed to San Diego, California, visit ing Acapulco, Mexico, en route. On 8 Octo- ber, LST-779 departed San Diego unescorted

Territory, on 18 October. During that time,

LST-758

departed Gulfport, Mississippi, on 11

September, loaded with equipment for deploy

ment in forward areas and proceeded via the

October. Having unloaded their materiel, both

ships undertook a period of intensive training with units from the Army and Marine Corps in

Hawaiian waters.

It was not until January 1945 that both

LSTs embarked their combat loads of men

and materiel in preparation for the Iwo Jima assault. LST-779 was loaded with ammunition, gasoline, equipment, the Marines of the 2d

155mm Howitzer Battalion, and eight amphib

Amphibian Truck Company. On 22 January,

assigned to Task Group 53.3 (Tractor Flotil-

LST-779 departed Hawaii, setting a course

for the Marianas. 21

LST-758 also was assigned

other Coast Guard-manned tank landing ships and was underway by 1 February 1945 en routequotesdbs_dbs35.pdfusesText_40

[PDF] mort d'un soldat républicain

[PDF] raising the flag at ground zero

[PDF] vj day in times square

[PDF] le drapeau rouge sur le reichstag

[PDF] ira hayes

[PDF] raisonnement par l'absurde maths

[PDF] raisonnement par contraposée

[PDF] raisonnement par l'absurde français

[PDF] cadhérine

[PDF] fonction des récepteurs membranaires

[PDF] matrice extracellulaire

[PDF] molecule arn

[PDF] principe de raisonnement ? partir de cas

[PDF] phase de raisonnement synonyme

[PDF] raisonnement par cas