Journeys and Holidays

Newport, Rhode Island

Over thirty-eight years ago I stepped on a plane at Manchester, New Hampshire that would take me to San Antonio, Texas, where I would begin my career in the United States Air Force. That adventure would last for 24 years. Until the day 14 years ago when I stepped off another plane at Windsor Locks, Connecticut. Whereas twenty-four years before I had begun the adventure alone, now I was accompanied by a wife, three children and a much beloved cat. (Who was rather displeased with all this traveling!)

So in one sense I had come full circle. I had left my beloved Vermont for a life which would literally take me around the globe. But one day I knew that I would return to New England. It is the land of my people. My forefathers are buried here. It's where I belong.

Now I live in Rhode Island. Oddly enough, in the twenty-two years I had lived in New England before the Air Force I had never visited Rhode Island. I lived in Vermont, my grandparents lived in New Hampshire, we vacationed in Maine and we had friends we would visit in Massachusetts. I went to Connecticut on business a number of times, but never had I traveled to Little Rhody. Until I went down for a job interview, post-Air Force.

The Missus Herself and I fell in love with this smallest state in the union. The views of Narragansett Bay, the lovely towns on Aquidneck Island and Bristol Neck called out to me. This was to be home in this new phase of my life.

What does all this have to do with holidays you might ask. The title after all is "Journeys and Holidays". All the above is a brief outline of the journeys it took to get me to this point in my life, but where is the "holiday" part? Patience, we're getting there. For me it's all about the journey. Or tangent if you will. I'm always off on those. Digressions, my stock in trade if you will.

So I'm a New Englander by birth and by choice. That and my time in the Air Force has given me a rather peculiar view of holidays. And what brought all this on is that my blog pal Suldog has kicked off his annual "Thanksgiving Comes First" Campaign. This year there's a pledge involved.

Well, I hadn't planned on shopping on Thanksgiving anyway. I would encourage others not to do so either. But that's not what I'm here to talk about.

Some of you (the one's who use an actual computer to follow the blog) will have noticed that I have a new thingee over there on the sidebar. It looks like this:

Now this whole "Thanksgiving Comes First" thing stems, I think, from an observation I made in my local grocery emporium the other day. Others have noticed this, that's no doubt how this whole campaign started.

In the "seasonal" aisle there is, as one might expect, Halloween candy. As Halloween approaches and the little munchkins will be out and about extorting soliciting candy from the neighbors. Therefore the stores have it in bulk quantities. Prominently displayed.

An aside: back about a decade ago, the wee ones stopped coming to our neighborhood. Seems the parents were now caravaning their progeny over to the rich neighborhoods as the pickings were better. Bloody mercenaries! Of course, it does save me some money, not having to buy all that candy to give away. Though I do miss the wee ones in their costumes.

Now where was I? Oh yes, the pledge to not shop on Thanksgiving. I will be joining that whole Thanksgiving Comes First thing soon. Like on or about November first. You know, AFTER HALLOWEEN!

But in my local grocery emporium, on the shelves up high, there was, ISYN*, Christmas stuff. Candy canes and a few assorted decorative items.

Perhaps the store is prepositioning this stuff for when the Christmas stuff completely takes over the seasonal aisle. Much like we prepositioned military equipment in Europe back in the bad old days. (What? It's not like that? Oh, but I thought... Yes, yes I see. An M1A1 Abrams and a box of candy canes have naught in common. Sure okay, got it!)

So yes, the Christmas stuff is starting to appear. Halloween isn't even here yet and Thanksgiving is a month away!

Sigh...

But for your edification, here's what Yours Truly counts as "holidays". First off, a holiday is something where you enjoy yourself with family and friends. It's a celebration. So what I count as holidays are, as follows, in chronological order:

1. Easter
2. The Fourth of July
3. Halloween
4. Thanksgiving
5. Christmas

Yup, that's it. Five holidays total.

What about Memorial Day and Veterans' Day you ask?

On Memorial Day, I remember those who gave their lives for my freedom.

On Veterans' Day I remember those who fought for my freedom. And survived.

Memorial Day commemorates our hallowed dead. Veterans' Day commemorates those who honorably wore the uniform of the United States.

No celebrations there. Just somber reflection. I don't count those as "holidays".

What about Labor Day and Columbus Day?

Nope, won't touch those. One celebrates socialist labor the other a guy who was lost and "discovered" something that the First Peoples already knew about and that the Vikings had already visited.

Meh.

I may have forgotten something. Oh yeah, Saint Patrick's Day. Well okay, I do kinda sorta celebrate that one. While I'm not Irish, I do love the Irish. As a Scotsman, they're kinda like second cousins, once removed or something. Besides which, the Scots and the Irish share similar tastes in music.

(Turn away Buck, close yer ears! Ye'll no appreciate this tune.)

Ah, now that gets the blood pumping, doesn't it?

And don't get me started on New Year's Eve or Day, or whatever. I used to like that one, sort of, when the best college bowl games were played New Year's Day. They're not anymore. So New Year's Day is a giant waste of time. Besides which, I love Christmas and shortly after Christmas people all start going on about New Year's. Bah, humbug.

So there you have it. Five major holidays and one minor one (St. Paddy's). Two days of somber reflection. The rest of those so-called holidays you're welcome to.

And Halloween is next.

Then Thanksgiving.

So there.

*ISYN = I sh!t you not.

The Road Goes Ever Onward...

Well at least until Monday...

I have been recalcitrant in acknowledging c w's latest masterpiece.

It's asleep at the wheel I am.

Go. Enjoy.

The Friday Flyby - 25 October

한국 전쟁
The Korean War

On the 25th of June, 1950, the North Korean Peoples Army (인민군) came across the 38th parallel into the Republic of Korea (대한민국). The Korean War had begun.

On the 27th of July, 1953 the war "ended" in an armistice. I was 2 and a half months old when the armistice went into effect. From 1978 to 1982 I served in Korea. I'm now 60 years old. Technically speaking, that war never ended. My brothers and sisters in uniform (both U.S. and Korean) are still there, watching, waiting...

I have a particular interest in this conflict as half of my family is Korean, the wife and her relatives. All of whom are very dear to me. Of course, the Naviguesser, the Nuke and the WSO are all half-Korean. Korea is my other country, so to speak. So I guess it's about time that I take a look at the war in the air over the "Land of the Morning Calm".

USAF C-54 Destroyed on the Ground by North Korean Aircraft
25 June 1950.

Many of the US aircraft used early in the war would be familiar to any WWII veteran.

The Corsair

The B-29

The P-51 Mustang

There was also a close cousin of the P-51, the F-82 Twin Mustang.

F-82 Twin Mustang

These birds flew the first US combat mission of the war.

From Wikipedia:

With the outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950, the F-82 was pressed into operational combat duty. On the night of 24/25 June 1950, 68th Fighter Squadron F-82 aircrews standing alert at Itazuke AB were notified at 0400 that FEAF had received a report that North Korea had crossed the 38th Parallel and their mission was to fly to the area and report back on any activity seen on the main roads and railroads. When the alert aircraft reached the area the weather was overcast, with cloud tops at about 8,000 feet. Using their airborne search radar, the Twin Mustangs flew through the clouds and broke out at about 2,000 feet, heading for Kimpo Airfield near Seoul. The pilots observed huge convoys of North Korean trucks and other vehicles, including 58 tanks, which had crossed into South Korea. Heading back into the clouds and turning back to Japan, the crews returned to Itazuke AB, where they were debriefed by a U.S. Army colonel from General Douglas MacArthur's staff. This reconnaissance flight was later recorded as the first combat mission flown in the Korean War.

Some newer aircraft began to make an appearance.

The A1 Skyraider

The F-84D

The F-80 Shooting Star

The F-9F Panther

And of course, everyone's favorite...

The F-86 Sabre

Of course, the bad guys had jets too.

Yak-21

MiG-15

While the enemy spent their time trying to force us from the skies, our guys were involved in: bombing targets behind enemy lines, providing Close Air Support for our troops on the ground and, of course, fighting enemy air. To keep them away from areas controlled by the U.S. and her allies (okay, the U.N. was the overall "command" in this war, but really it was what I said, the U.S. and her allies: Brits, Aussies, Turks, Kiwis, French, Greeks, Koreans, Canadians and more besides).

Close Air Support
F-4U Corsairs and Marines

Now that is close!

MiG-15 Hit Over Korea

Oh, did I forget to mention it? There were carriers off the coast, oh yes there were.

There were a number of aces in the Korean War. If you're interested, Wikipedia has a decent article, here. Unlike recent Flybys I'm not going to go too deeply into the aces of this war. But I will mention a couple of the Americans, personal heroes of mine.

Captain Joseph C. McConnell, USAF
Distinguished Service Cross
16 Aerial Victories
1922 - 1954

From Wikipedia:

Joseph Christopher McConnell, Jr. (30 January 1922 – 25 August 1954) was the top American flying ace during the Korean War. A native of Dover, New Hampshire, Captain McConnell was credited with shooting down 16 MiG-15s while flying North American F-86 Sabres with the U.S. Air Force. He was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross and the Silver Star for his actions in aerial combat. McConnell was the first American triple jet-on-jet fighter ace and is still the top-scoring American jet ace.

During World War II, McConnell entered the U.S. Army Air Forces Aviation Cadet training program. His dream of becoming a pilot was dashed when, instead of being sent to pilot training, he was assigned to navigator training. After completing this course, he flew combat missions in Europe as a Consolidated B-24 Liberator navigator. He remained in the Army Air Forces after the war, eventually entering flight training. In 1948, McConnell finally achieved his goal of becoming a fighter pilot.

After returning to his home in Apple Valley, California, McConnell was stationed at George Air Force Base and continued flying F-86s. On 6 August the people of Apple Valley gave a new home, the "Appreciation House", to Capt. McConnell. The house was completed in 45 hours with all land, material, and labor donated.

In 1954 he was temporarily assigned to the service test program for the new F-86H. This was the last and most powerful version of the Sabre, and was intended to be a nuclear-capable fighter-bomber. On 25 August 1954, while testing the fifth production F-86H-1-NA (serial number 52-1981) at Edwards Air Force Base, McConnell was killed in a crash following a control malfunction. The cause of the accident was attributed to a missing bolt. Then-Major Chuck Yeager was assigned to investigate the crash and replicated the malfunction at a much higher altitude. This height advantage allowed him to safely regain control of the aircraft before it hit the desert floor. The 1955 film The McConnell Story, starring Alan Ladd and June Allyson, chronicles his life story. The book Sabre Jet Ace (1959) by Charles Ira Coombs chronicled his experiences as a fighter pilot in Korea in a fictionalized biography for young readers.

In May 2008 Pearl McConnell, Beautious Butch, died at the age of 86. She had never remarried and was buried with Captain McConnell.

Colonel James "Jabby" Jabara
Distinguished Service Cross
15 Aerial Victories
1923 - 1966

From Wikipedia:

James "Jabby" Jabara (10 October 1923 – 17 November 1966) was the first American jet ace in history. Born in Oklahoma, he lived in Kansas where he enlisted as an aviation cadet at Fort Riley after graduating high school. Jabara attended four flying schools in Texas before he received his pilot's wings and was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant. During World War II Jabara flew two tours of combat duty in Europe as a North American P-51 Mustang pilot. He scored 1.5 air victories against German aircraft.

After World War II, Jabara flew his first jet aircraft in 1948, the Lockheed F-80 Shooting Star before transitioning to the North American F-86 Sabre. Jabara used this aircraft to shoot down multiple Soviet-built MiG-15 jets during the Korean War. He achieved his first confirmed air victory of the war on 3 April 1951. A month later he scored his fifth and sixth victories, making him the first American jet ace in history. He eventually scored 15 victories, giving him the title of "triple ace". Jabara was ranked as the second-highest-scoring U.S. ace of the Korean War. He received the Distinguished Service Cross, Silver Star, Distinguished Flying Cross, Air Medal, and the British Distinguished Flying Cross for his accomplishments in combat.

Following the war, Jabara held a series of commands at various Air Force bases across the United States. He flew the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter and later the Convair B-58 Hustler. In 1966, Colonel Jabara was traveling with his family to their new home when his daughter crashed the car he was in, killing them both. They were buried together at Arlington National Cemetery. In recognition of his contributions to military aviation, an airport outside of Wichita, Kansas was named in his honor and each year the United States Air Force Academy alumni association bestows the Jabara Award upon an Academy graduate whose aerospace accomplishments demonstrate superior performance.

The Colonel's Jet

The Colonel and His Daughter's Final Resting Place
Arlington

I had the privilege of visiting the Colonel's grave at Arlington. I had not known the circumstances of his death until I saw his grave site. When I saw that his 16-year old daughter was buried with him, I had to know the whole story. Here's what I found...

From Wikipedia:

While traveling to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, where his family would stay while he returned to combat in Vietnam, Jabara and his 16-year old daughter Carol Anne died in a car accident in Delray Beach, Florida on 17 November 1966. The Jabara family were in two cars that day, on their way to a new home in South Carolina where his wife Nina and their children—James Jr., Carol Anne, Jeanne, and Cathy—would reside during Jabara's combat tour. Carol Anne was driving a Volkswagen with her father as a passenger in the back seat. She lost control of the car going through a construction zone, when she initially veered onto a grass median. She swerved back onto the highway but during the rapid turn, she lost control and the vehicle returned to the median where it rolled several times. Jabara sustained head injuries and was pronounced dead on arrival at a Delray hospital, and Carol Anne died two days later. A memorial service was held for Jabara at Homestead Air Force Base with a missing man formation fly-by. Jabara and his daughter were buried together in a single grave at Arlington National Cemetery. His grandson Lt. Nicholas Jabara, a 2001 graduate of the United States Air Force Academy, was killed during pilot training in a T-37 accident on 31 January 2002.

Some families give so much for our freedom.

The Korean War is sometimes called "The Forgotten War". Not to me, not ever. My wife's parents survived World War II and then the Korean War. Many older Koreans when I was stationed there would nod politely at me when I passed by in uniform. One old grandfather in traditional attire actually stopped me on the street and, with tears in his eyes, thanked me for what my predecessors had done for the Korean people.

I cried with him.

Out of Sync

Oh look, it's a boring graph!

Things are a bit nuts right now. Work is busy, have lots of stuff going on outside of work. (Take that with a grain of salt. If I have one non-work thing scheduled in a week, to me that's a lot. I know, I know, it isn't really but there it is. Forthright and honest, fair and balanced. After a fashion.)

I've noticed lately that I'm not keeping up with my blog reading list all that well. If I do check out a blog it's sometimes along the lines of "Heh, interesting, I'll have to come back and read the whole thing." But that seldom happens. I may think of it a couple of weeks hence, but by then it's too late.

Often times I think of commenting on a fellow human's blog but due to time constraints will think of "doing it later". Again, it doesn't happen.

I also noticed that I did two "political / current events" posts in a row. That is so unlike me. Perhaps what is going on in the outside world is actually pissing me off enough to remark upon. Rather than just grumble and figure "Oh, I'm sure Sal (or someone) has already covered that." Do I go check? Nah.

Sometimes I get a full head of steam and just start ranting. That can be cathartic. Could also be embarrassing I suppose, but I'm good with that. If I can get a couple of folks to comment, I'm happy.

Also the page views have been pretty good lately. Last week (Wednesday to Sunday, inclusive) I was averaging a thousand hits a day. I used to be thrilled with 200 a day. So I had that going for me.

But I guess the NSA is no longer interested. The page views have dropped out of the stratospheric 1000's back down to the "good-for-my-ego" 500's. Still better than I'm used to and for that I thank you all, my loyal readers.

I guess this post is my way of saying, "I've got nothing right now." Out of sync, so to speak. But there is a Flyby in the works. I was straining the brain on that one but I think I have something worth your while for tomorrow.

Here's a hint...

Soldiers of the King

Since back in February, when reports came out that the Department of Homeland Security was buying millions of rounds of ammunition, I've been a little worried about where law enforcement in this country is headed. Just a bit concerned, that's all.

Now I'm not an alarmist who is convinced that the government is arming more and more police units (particularly at the Federal level) because they don't trust the military if it becomes necessary to put down a revolt by the American people.

But when even the IRS has a SWAT team? Yeah, that freaks me out just a little. WTF, over?

Then there was the bombing at the Boston Marathon back in April...

Have we turned into Northern Ireland, back in the bad old days?

What the heck is going on out there?

I'm a big believer in law enforcement. I have friends in law enforcement. The streets in the big cities are very dangerous. Many gangs have the type of firepower that an infantry squad might have. So yes, the days of the cop on the beat armed only with a .38 Police Special are gone. Police forces in the major cities absolutely need heavily armed  and well trained SWAT teams, and yes, they probably should have a few semi-armored vehicles.

Mayberry RFD? Not so much...

Witness the riots in Los Angeles in 1965 and 1992. Things can go crazy in a very big hurry out there. Our cops need to be able to protect themselves and get into areas to rescue citizens who might be in danger. But that's the local cops and perhaps even better if the various state police agencies in the U.S. also have that capability. (In my experience, the state troopers of most states are far better trained than the locals. Except perhaps in the big cities where the level of professionalism can be very high.)

But do the Feds need this kind of capability? And why? After all, the military is at their beck and call, right?

Oh wait, what if the military decides to uphold their oath? You know, the one where we swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. Yeah, that oath.

Are you wondering about the title to this post?

Think about it...

War Crimes? Seriously?

So I saw this headline on Google News today: "Rights groups: Some US drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen may be war crimes". Really? Are you serious?

Okay, I have mixed feelings about drones. Let's be up front about that. I have issues with a weapons system being remote-controlled from hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away being used to kill people and blow things up. But that's not what I'm going to rant about.

This particular rant is due to this story over at Fox (and other places, like CNN).

Amnesty International may be a swell bunch of folks whose only wish is to protect us from evil. Then again they may just be a bunch of meddling liberal do-gooders who only rant and rave about the wrong-doings of the United States and her allies. My jury is still out on that. But here's a bit from Wikipedia:

Amnesty reports disproportionately on relatively more democratic and open countries, arguing that its intention is not to produce a range of reports which statistically represents the world's human rights abuses, but rather to apply the pressure of public opinion to encourage improvements. The demonstration effect of the behavior of both key Western governments and major non-Western states is an important factor: as one former Amnesty Secretary-General pointed out, "for many countries and a large number of people, the United States is a model," and according to one Amnesty manager, "large countries influence small countries." In addition, with the end of the Cold War, Amnesty felt that a greater emphasis on human rights in the North was needed to improve its credibility with its Southern critics by demonstrating its willingness to report on human rights issues in a truly global manner.

Well of course they report "disproportionately" on what most of us would consider to be "the good guys". Those countries they don't report on have the worst human rights abuses and they generally don't give a flying fire truck what some international organization thinks.

But I'm not really here to rant about AI as I am here to rant about the concept that war can somehow be regulated or controlled once war breaks out.

All you can really do is lay down some ground rules which pretty much state: "these are the things you shouldn't do, and if you lose the war, you'll be punished for it by the folks who won the war". Truthfully, those sorts of ground rules only work if everyone agrees with them and abides by them.

If every nation did that there would be no war.

The majority of the planet's population would no doubt agree that 1) war is bad and 2) starting a war should be illegal. Of course, people only agree to this if everything is hunky-dory in their country and they have no claims to any territory which may (or may not) have been held by their country in antiquity.

I'm sure any Argentine would immediately point out that Las Islas Malvinas used to belong to Argentina, Britain should give them back. Unfortunately (for Argentina I suppose) the inhabitants of the Falkland Islands are quite content to be subjects of the British Crown and have no wish to be ruled from Buenas Aires.

One could view the current state of the world as a game of musical chairs which has ended. The people who managed to get chairs have made rules indicating under what conditions the people who didn't manage to grab a chair when the music stopped can get one now. It's all very convoluted and complicated but the bottom line is that the territories now controlled by the big powers will tend to stay controlled by the big powers. Those territories not controlled by the big powers will be controlled by whomsoever the big powers decide should control those territories. Whether the people who live there like it or not.

I'm quite sure the Narragansetts, Niantics, Pequots, and Wampanoags would love to have Rhode Island back. The Europeans took it away from them, basically by killing those who objected or otherwise overpowering those who didn't really care to lose their ancestral homelands. But that was a long time ago. No one would seriously want to give the original inhabitants their land back. Though I, for one, would be ecstatic if we put them back in charge of Rhode Island. The current bunch of ee-jits in Providence aren't doing such a great job of running the place.

So back to this drone thing (as I see I've gotten way off track).

We are fighting a war. Many in the U.S. and around the world seem to have forgotten this little piece of information. It seems that there are a group of people who don't like us and wish to kill us given the opportunity to do so.

So we kill them first, given the opportunity to do so. Sometimes we use drones. Sometimes the wrong people get killed. And yes, that's a bad thing.

I'm pretty sure the Pakistani grandmother mentioned in the Fox news article had nothing to do with 9-11 or the bombing of the USS Cole. I'm sure she was a very nice lady who was just minding her own business. I think it's terrible that she was killed.

Now I'm not going to say that all of those folks killed on 9-11 were minding their own business and had nothing to do with infidels sullying the Holy Lands or the alleged suppression of the "Palestinian" people. But they died anyway. (But I did mention it, and though "two wrongs don't make a right", it's also true that "what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander". Insert your own favorite platitude here.)

People die in wars. It sucks but it happens. Modern generals (and admirals) like to call this "collateral damage". I suppose if you have to have a handy phrase for that sort of thing, that one will do.

Most of those who died in Dresden in 1945 were not uniformed members of the German Wehrmacht or Waffen SS. They were civilians, trying, no doubt, to mind their own business and praying that the war wouldn't touch them. But it did. Thousands died. In World War II millions of civilians died. Yes, millions. They were "collateral damage" in modern parlance.

What they really were was "in the way". Somebody decided to have a war where they lived. Bullets start flying, bombs start dropping and people die. Sometimes not the ones who are actually fighting in the war, sometimes they're just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It sucks. It's terrible. But it's not a war crime.

Intentionally targeting civilians is a war crime. Killing them accidentally is a tragedy. At least the United States and her allies try to avoid killing civilians. Sometimes at the cost of the lives of our men and women in uniform. And you know what? Many of us who served and are serving now have no problem with that concept. You protect the weak and the innocent as best you can. Sometimes dying instead of putting innocents in harm's way. Think of the pilot of a crippled aircraft who will sacrifice his/her own life to guide the aircraft away from buildings on the ground. They could eject and live but that bird may hit a school or a hospital, so they ride it in. And die.

But sometimes it happens. Especially if you have no one there, on the ground. A drone can't really be relied upon to protect the innocent. It's a machine. And the folks controlling that machine are far, far away.

But I'd rather have the drone there to take out the terrorist leader. Putting troops on the ground would be a mess. Because it would take a lot of them. And pretty soon those local "innocents" aren't going to be happy about these armed foreigners running around killing people and breaking things. They may turn to less than innocent activities. My point of view is that if you support the enemy, you ARE the enemy.

So Amnesty International should S.T.F.U. on this one. As much as I can't stand the current administration, they are NOT guilty of war crimes because of these drone attacks in Pakistan.

One could argue that they are guilty of many things, but war crimes is not one of them.

And that's my two cents.

What do you think?

The Zulu

Modern Zulu Warriors

Some time in the late 1960's I first saw the movie Zulu, this one -

The movie made a rather big impression on Your's Truly, budding military historian that I was. For here were a tribal people who fought in organized regiments, had a fairly standard tactical doctrine and who had managed to destroy the main British column invading their homeland. At a place called Isandlwana.

But this film was the story of a small detachment of that same column at a place called Rorke's Drift who held out against 4000 Zulu warriors. But it was the native warriors I noticed, the Zulu. (The Battle of Isandlwana would be covered a few years down the road in a film titled Zulu Dawn. I liked that one as well.)

On the one hand, you have a large force of "natives" defeating a numerous, well-armed European foe in open battle. On the other, you have a small European detachment, occupying a semi-fortified position, holding out against a "native" force which vastly outnumbers them.

(For those of you who are perhaps more sensitive than me, I have placed the word "native" in quotes as I feel that, while it is perfectly accurate, it is also somewhat pejorative in the usage of the time. I suppose it's in quotes to point out that I don't mean it in it's insulting sense. I also didn't want to use the perhaps more politically correct term "indigenous personnel". I mean the Zulu were, after all, native to the region. But the term, as used in the 1800's, was something of an insult. I don't mean it that way.)

Seems like the modern day Zulu men who participated in the making of Zulu were very much into their roles. Their ancestors would have been proud I think.

But who were these Zulu? How did they make my list of immortal units? Let's go back in time to a chap by the name of Shaka. Ring a bell? No? Well, it should. He was a heck of a warrior and general.

Shaka kaSenzangakhona
(Shaka son of Senzangakhona)

From Wikipedia:

A number of historians argue that Shaka 'changed the nature of warfare in Southern Africa' from 'a ritualized exchange of taunts with minimal loss of life into a true method of subjugation by wholesale slaughter'. A number of writers focus on Shaka's military innovations such as the iklwa – the Zulu thrusting spear, and the "buffalo horns" formation. This combination has been compared to the standardization implemented by the reorganized Roman legions under Marius.

Combined with Shaka's "buffalo horns" attack formation for surrounding and annihilating enemy forces, the Zulu combination of iklwa and shield—similar to the Roman legionaries' use of gladius and scutum—was devastating. By the time of Shaka's assassination in 1828, it had made the Zulu kingdom the greatest power in southern Africa and a force to be reckoned with, even against Britain's modern army in 1879.

Much controversy still surrounds the character, methods and activities of the Zulu king. From a military standpoint, historian John Keegan notes exaggerations and myths that surround Shaka, but nevertheless maintains:

Fanciful commentators called him Shaka, the Black Napoleon, and allowing for different societies and customs, the comparison is apt. Shaka is without doubt the greatest commander to come out of Africa.

That long, very wide blade immediately above the tape measure is an iklwa.
Nasty looking weapon innit?
I'm sure Nancy Pelosi and that lot would call it an assault spear(and ban it) as it's so scary-looking.

Though the battles at Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift occurred 51 years after Shaka's death, the tactical doctrine and organization of the Zulu impis were his. (The term impi translates, somewhat loosely, as "regiment".) 

From Wikipedia:

The "buffalo horns" formation of the Zulu army.
Parts 1–4 above: 1 "enemy", 2 "horns", 3 "chest", 4 "loins".

As can be seen in the diagram above, Shaka was a pretty sophisticated "native". The horns of his army's fighting formation would be very obvious to a student of military history. And painfully so to a Roman survivor of Cannae*.

The enflanking "horns" are the maneuver elements, the "chest" is the main body or overwatch elements of the Zulu army. The "loins" are, of course, the Zulu reserve. The reserve can be used on either flank or to support the main body. It is said that Zulu commanders would have the men of the "loins" sit with their backs to the enemy so that they would not become overly excited by the events playing out on the battlefield.

The Zulu impis were also distinguished by the way they were raised and organized.

From Wikipedia:

Age-grade groupings of various sorts were common in the Bantu tribal culture of the day, and indeed are still important in much of Africa. Age grades were responsible for a variety of activities, from guarding the camp, to cattle herding, to certain rituals and ceremonies. It was customary in Zulu culture for young men to provide limited service to their local chiefs until they were married and recognized as official householders. Shaka manipulated this system, transferring the customary service period from the regional clan leaders to himself, strengthening his personal hegemony. Such groupings on the basis of age, did not constitute a permanent, paid military in the modern Western sense, nevertheless they did provide a stable basis for sustained armed mobilization  much more so than ad hoc tribal levies or war parties.

Shaka organised the various age grades into regiments, and quartered them in special military kraals, with each regiment having its own distinctive names and insignia. Some historians argue that the large military establishment was a drain on the Zulu economy and necessitated continual raiding and expansion. This may be true since large numbers of the society's men were isolated from normal occupations, but whatever the resource impact, the regimental system clearly built on existing tribal cultural elements that could be adapted and shaped to fit an expansionist agenda. 

After their 20th birthdays, young men would be sorted into formal ibutho (plural amabutho) or regiments. They would build their i=handa (often referred to as a 'homestead', as it was basically a stockaded group of huts surrounding a corral for cattle), their gathering place when summoned for active service. Active service continued until a man married, a privilege only the king bestowed. The amabutho were recruited on the basis of age rather than regional or tribal origin. The reason for this was to enhance the centralized power of the Zulu king at the expense of clan and tribal leaders. They swore loyalty to the king of the Zulu nation.

While Shaka didn't come up with all of these innovations  he perfected the system and wielded it with a savagery which made him master of his domain. (Much like Alexander the Great and Frederick the Great wielded the armies their fathers had created and trained.) Zulu ferocity and courage became a standard under his rule and was maintained by the Zulu kings for a half-century after his death. It would take the might of the British Empire to bring them down. And only after a hard, bloody struggle. (I highly recommend the book The Washing of the Spears by Donald R. Morris if you wish to read more about the First Anglo-Zulu War.)

When the British Army first encountered the Zulu impis, all of Britain was stunned by the outcome. These men are truly worthy of being included on any list of immortal military units. Napoléon's Imperial Guard, Chesty Puller's Marines and Jackson's Stonewall Brigade would have recognized them as fellow elites. Men you want with you, not against you.

Usuthu!

*The Battle of Cannae was a major battle of the Second Punic War, taking place on 2 August 216 BC in Apulia in southeast Italy. The army of Carthage under Hannibal decisively defeated a larger army of the Roman Republic under the consuls Lucius Aemilius Paullus and Gaius Terentius Varro. It is regarded as one of the greatest tactical feats in military history and, in numbers killed, the second greatest defeat of Rome, after the Battle of Arausio. It is also the best example in history of a double flanking maneuver in which the Romans were engulfed between two arms of the Carthaginian army.