Mixed brigade

A mixed brigade () was a tactical military formation of the Spanish Republican Army following the coup of July 1936 and the onset of the Spanish Civil War.
It was the basic military unit of the Republican People's Army after its war-dictated 1936 reorganization.
History.
The initial structure of this kind of brigade, approved in October 1936, was composed of four infantry battalions of five companies each, a mixed sapper battalion and a Service Corps company that included a medical corps group. Certain brigades had also a cavalry section. A division was composed of two or three mixed brigades.
The mixed brigade was based on a model that would replace the columns ("columnas") and militias of the pre-coup Spanish Republican Army. The first six Mixed Brigades were created on 18 October 1936. The first was led by Communist colonel Enrique Líster, the second by Jesús Martínez de Aragón, the third by José María Galán, the fourth by Eutiquiano Arellano, the fifth by Fernando Sabio and the sixth by Miguel Gallo Martínez. By December 1936 there were fifteen brigades in full service (1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 11th and 12th International Brigades, 35th, 37th, 39th, 40th, 41st, 43rd, 44th, 50th and one unnumbered). By the spring of 1937 there were forty active brigades and another fifteen were undergoing training; these brigades were swiftly placed in divisions.
Mixed brigades were typically infantry units of the army. However, the 151 Brigada Mixta, among a few others, was a mixed brigade composed of Spanish Republican Navy Marines "(Infantería de Marina)" led by Commander Pedro Muñoz Caro. Photographer Robert Capa took pictures of the 151 Brigada Mixta in the Battle of the Segre.
All the units ended up being disbanded after the defeat of the Republican military and the subsequent dismantling of the Spanish Republican state by the Francoist regime. The final fate of some of the mixed brigades and their members is unknown.
Mixed Brigades.
The Mixed Brigades of the International Brigades are in Roman numerals.


Governor of Upnor Castle

The Governor of Upnor Castle was a military officer who commanded the fortifications at Upnor Castle, part of the defenses of the Medway estuary. Upnor became largely obsolete as a fortress after 1668, but it continued to serve as a magazine and ordnance facility until 1945.


List of captains of Deal Castle

Deal Castle is a defensive artillery fortress in Deal, Kent, England, which was built in 1540 by order of Henry VIII. The successive Captains of Deal Castle originally commanded a garrison based at the fortress, initially from quarters within the keep but later from purpose built quarters in a block between the keep and the outer wall. The accommodation block was demolished and rebuilt in 1802 and demolished a second time in 1943 following enemy action during the Second World War.
From the early 1700s the post of Captain became an honorary position benefitting from the residential accommodation provided by the castle's living quarters. After the wartime demolition the accommodation was provided elsewhere.
List of captains.
<br>


Kentucky War Memorial

The Kentucky War Memorial is a memorial to Kentuckians who have died in all wars. On a high-point called the "State Mound" in Frankfort Cemetery in Frankfort, Kentucky, the memorial consists of a 65-foot-tall monument erected in 1850, nine low stone monuments built in a semi-circle, and two low straight monuments. The 1850 monument honors men who died up until 1850 and it lists the battles and the officers who fell. The semi-circular area to the south of the tall monument lists the wars, and the straight monuments list the names of all of Kentucky's fallen. The wars mentioned include: War of Independence, War of 1812, the Texas War of Independence, the Mexican War, Civil War, Spanish–American War, World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, and Persian Gulf War.
In 1848, an act passed by the state legislature appropriated $15,000 for its construction. The 65-foot-tall granite monument, topped by a statue of Victory, was unveiled in 1850.
The monument was erected to stand over the graves of 17 Kentucky soldiers who had fallen at the Battle of Buena Vista. Their interment in Frankfort Cemetery on July 20, 1847 was marked by a eulogy from John C. Breckinridge, a supporter of the war. According to a popular story, this mass funeral inspired Mexican-War veteran, Theordore O'Hara, to pen his famed poem, "Bivouac of the Dead". However, O'Hara was still with the army in Mexico in July 1848.
Inscriptions.
The 1850 monument is decorated on all four faces. Each face has a display on the base. The column is decorated with bands depicting battles, followed by names of officers who fell in those battles.


The class the stars fell on

"The class the stars fell on" is an expression used to describe the Class of 1915 at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York. In the United States Army, the insignia reserved for generals is one or more stars. Of the 164 graduates that year, 59 (36%) attained the rank of general, more than any other class in the history of the Academy, hence the expression. Two reached the rank of five-star General of the Army. There were also two four-star generals, seven three-star lieutenant generals, 24 two-star major generals, and 24 one-star brigadier generals. Dwight D. Eisenhower, one of the five-star generals, went on to become the 34th President of the United States. The other, Omar Bradley, became Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Presidents Harry S. Truman and Eisenhower.
The term "the class the stars fell on" had previously been applied to the class of 1886, which produced a large number of general officers for World War I. Of this class, which included John J. Pershing, Charles T. Menoher, and Mason Patrick, 25 out of 77 (32%) became generals.
About the class.
Some 287 cadets entered the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, in 1911, the largest plebe (entering or most junior) class up to that date. That year, the United States Congress changed the rules regarding appointment to the Academy. Previously, Congressmen had been allowed to make one appointment every four years. This was now increased to one every three years. Fourteen more cadets received appointments to the class, which they joined six weeks late, in August 1911, thereby missing out on the infamous period of hazing known as Beast Barracks. They were known as the "Augustines" after the month on which they joined. Among their number was Omar Bradley. Only 164 cadets graduated and were commissioned as second lieutenants on 12 June 1915, but that was still the largest graduating class up to that time, and the US Army had only 105 positions available for them.
The class First Captain (the cadet brigade commander) was Roscoe B. Woodruff. The top 19 graduates all went into the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Ranking first in the class was William E. R. Covell, who edged out Edwin R. Kimble by the narrowest of margins. Covell went on to become a general during World War II. Kimble served during World War I as a major in France, where he died on 9 April 1918 of sepsis after a surgical operation. The youngest graduating member of the class was Clyde R. Eisenschmidt, who was born on 30 July 1894. He retired as a lieutenant colonel on 30 June 1940.
The oldest member of the class was Robert B. Lorch, who was born on 18 December 1888. After serving in France as a major during World War I, he was honorably discharged from the Army on 8 December 1922. Recalled during World War II, he reached the rank of lieutenant colonel in 1950. In a class with many superb athletes, Thomas B. Larkin won the physical fitness contest and was designated "strong man" of the Corps. The lowest ranking member of the class, known as the class "goat", was Charles C. Herrick. After service in France as a major, he was honorably discharged on 15 December 1922, and became an investment banker. Recalled to active duty during World War II, he reached the rank of colonel. Also among the class was Luis R. Esteves, the first Puerto Rican to attend West Point, and the first to graduate. He was the first member of the class to be made a general.
Sixteen members of the class were sons of West Point graduates. Three were both sons and grandsons of graduates. Alexander P. Cronkhite was the son of Major General Adelbert Cronkhite, from the class of 1882, and the grandson of Brigadier General Alexander C. M. Pennington, Jr., of the class of 1860. Ranked 7th in the class, Cronkhite died in a mysterious shooting accident on 25 October 1918. John F. Conklin was the son of Colonel John Conklin of the class of 1884. His maternal grandfather was Major General William H. French of the class of 1837. Oscar Straub was the son of Colonel Oscar I. Straub of the class of 1887, and the grandson of Brigadier General E. Van A. Andruss, from the class of 1864. In addition, John R. Mendenhall's father John Ross Mendenhall had attended the Academy but dropped out in 1881 without graduating, and his grandfather, Colonel John Mendenhall, was a graduate of the class of 1851. Pearson Menoher was the son of Major General Charles T. Menoher, who was a member of the class of 1886, and served as the first chief of the United States Army Air Service.
Of the others:
Harmon was preceded by his two older brothers, Kenneth B. Harmon, of the class of 1910, and Millard F. Harmon, Jr., of the class of 1912. Hubert Harmon was ejected when it was discovered that he had two brothers at West Point, as it was felt that the taxpayers would not be getting their money's worth educating three sons of the same family. He was readmitted in June 1911 after his father lobbied numerous government officials. He now only had one brother at West Point, as Kenneth had graduated the year before. Both Millard Jr., and Hubert subsequently became three-star generals.
Due to its origins as an engineering school, the West Point curriculum emphasized mathematics and other technical subjects of relevance to that specialty rather than education in military topics. Much of the military training that was provided concerned close order drill and equitation. Of the top 25 graduates of the class of 1915, 24 were commissioned into the Corps of Engineers. The exception, James A. Lester, who was ranked 23rd, chose to go into the field artillery instead. He would become a major general.
Careers.
Of the 164 graduates in the class, 102 (62 percent) served overseas during World War I before the armistice of 11 November 1918, although only 56 (34 percent) saw actual combat. This was not unusual; nearly 60 percent of the Army's regular officers did not serve overseas. A widespread belief that those who had served overseas would receive preferential treatment, including faster promotion, was not borne out by subsequent events. Promotion was by seniority, and glacially slow. Officers commissioned between November 1916 and November 1918 made up 55.4 percent of the Army's officers in 1926. This "hump" constituted a major personnel problem that was solved only by the Army's rapid expansion after 1940 in response to World War II. Much of the success of the class is attributable to the coincidence of being just ahead of the hump, but not too old to assume positions of great responsibility during World War II.
Omar Bradley, for example, was promoted to first lieutenant on 1 July 1916, captain on 15 May 1917, and major on 17 June 1918. He had been returned to the grade of captain on 22 January 1920, and promoted to major again on 1 July 1920, only to be returned to captain again on 4 November 1922. He was promoted to major a third time on 25 June 1924, and remained one for twelve years before becoming a lieutenant colonel on 26 June 1936. He skipped the rank of colonel entirely, and was promoted to brigadier general in February 1941.
In the inter-war period, officers led a "country club existence". They had a high social standing, equivalent to that of an upper-middle-class professional. They normally worked a 30-hour week, which gave them plenty of time to spend with their families, and for sports. They and their families had access to free medical and dental care. They had free life insurance, and an adequate salary, which could be stretched because Army commissaries and post exchanges sold many everyday goods tax-free. They invariably lived on-base in good housing, and in tight-knit and supportive communities. When posted overseas, they took their families with them. A secure and steady job was highly prized during the Great Depression years from 1929 to 1939, and resignations were rare.
There were two levels of advanced schooling. The first was the Command and General Staff School at Fort Leavenworth, which concentrated on teaching officers both command and staff duties related to corps and divisions. Although viewed as competitive, nearly all officers eventually attended. A 1937 survey showed that 97 percent of the Army's colonels and 95 percent of its lieutenant colonels were graduates. There were two senior schools, the Army War College and the Army Industrial College. The Army War College taught the handling of higher formations. The Army Industrial College taught industrial mobilization.
The Army's training program attracted criticism, both at the time and subsequently. In 1937, Brigadier General George C. Marshall felt that in merging instruction on command and staff duties, the Command and General Staff School had neglected the former in favor of the latter, with officers being prepared for staff duties in peacetime rather than the chaos of command in wartime. Brigadier General Lesley J. McNair conducted a survey of graduates in 1939 that found that most felt that there was too much emphasis on obsolete skills like equitation. For this reason, the staff rides were disliked. While most considered the map exercises the most valuable part of the curriculum, some noted that students spent time discovering for themselves things that they could have been told.
Writing in 2011, Jörg Muth concluded that "At Fort Leavenworth, school solutions were always the norm. Ineffective courses were led by instructors who sometimes lacked knowledge of their fields and usually failed in didactics and pedagogics ... It seems in general not to have been a good idea to challenge the instructors at Leavenworth in any way if an officer student wanted to leave the school with a respectable grade." While the education system undoubtedly failed in some key areas, it did create a body of competent division and corps commanders.
The first member of the class to wear a star was Esteves, who was appointed adjutant general of Puerto Rico with the rank of brigadier general in February 1939. During World War II, Eisenhower and Bradley rose to four-star rank. They made decisions that dramatically affected the careers of their classmates. Concerned that Major General Roscoe Woodruff, whose VII Corps was scheduled to spearhead the Normandy landings, had no amphibious experience, Bradley replaced him with Major General J. Lawton Collins. Woodruff returned to the United States. He later distinguished himself in command of the 24th Infantry Division in amphibious operations in the Philippines campaign.
A worse fate befell Major General Henry J. F. Miller, who leaked details of the invasion date at a dinner party in April 1944. He was reduced to his permanent rank of lieutenant colonel and sent home. Eisenhower wrote a letter to him explaining that, "I know of nothing that causes me more real distress than to be faced with the necessity of sitting as a judge in cases involving military offences by officers of character and good record, particularly when they are old and warm friends." Miller retired due to physical disability on 30 November 1944. In December 1948 he was promoted to brigadier general on the retired list. He died on 7 January 1949.
Apart from those who became generals, the best known member of the class is Louis A. Merrilat, who played college football with the Army Black Knights alongside Bradley and Eisenhower, and was selected as a first-team All-American in both 1913 and 1914. He was wounded in battle while serving in France during World War I, and later played in the National Football League for the Canton Bulldogs in the 1925 NFL season. He became a soldier of fortune, training Iran's Persian Guard, working with the Chinese Army in the 1930s, and serving in the French Foreign Legion. During World War II, he returned to active duty with the US Army, reaching the rank of colonel.
The last surviving general of the class was James Van Fleet, who commanded the 4th Infantry Division, 90th Infantry Division and III Corps during World War II, and the U.S. Eighth Army in the Korean War. Celebrations for his 100th birthday on 19 March 1992 included a parachute drop by the Army's Golden Knights. A West Point Cadet, James Ward, remarked that: "Everything we aspire to be, he's already done. He's the epitome of the Long Gray Line." Van Fleet died on 23 September 1992, at the age of 100.
The last surviving member of the class was Edmund De Treville Ellis. Commissioned in the cavalry, he later transferred to the Quartermaster Corps, with which he served in the European Theater during World War II and during the 1948 Berlin airlift. He retired from the Army as a colonel on 31 March 1950. He became the oldest living graduate of West Point in October 1990, and the last surviving member of the class of 1915 on the death of Van Fleet. He died at the age of 104 on 22 January 1995. Like Van Fleet, he was interred in Arlington National Cemetery.


Hales rifle grenade

The Hales rifle grenade is the name for several rifle grenades used by British forces during World War I. All of these are based on the No. 3 design.
Operation.
To fire the No. 3, the user would fit the grenade into the rifle, insert the detonator, lay the rifle on the ground in the correct position, remove the safety pin, pull back the safety pin collar, insert a special blank round into the rifle, then fire.
Operation variants.
With variants that lack the vale, the grenade was activated in exactly the same way as the ones that have a vale, but the user did not need to remove the safety pin collar, as it lacks one.
History.
In 1907, Martin (sometimes Marten) Hale developed the rod grenade. "A simple rod was attached to a specialized grenade, inserted into the barrel of a standard service rifle and launched using a blank cartridge." However, the British did not immediately adopt the idea and entered World War I without any rifle grenades. As soon as trench warfare started, however, there was a sudden need for rifle grenades. The British government purchased a rodded variant of the No. 2 grenade as a temporary solution.
By 1915 Hale had developed the No. 3, which is commonly known as the Hales rifle grenade. The Hales grenade was improved throughout World War I to make it more reliable and easier to manufacture. However, production of the grenade was slow. In order to speed rod grenades to the front, the British also made rodded versions of the Mills bomb.
Although a simple approach, launching a rod grenade "...placed an extreme amount of stress on the rifle barrel and the rifle itself, resulting in the need to dedicate specific rifles to the grenade launching role, as they quickly became useless as an accurate firearm. This led to the search for an alternative and resulted in the reappearance of the cup launcher during the latter years of World War I." After World War I, the rod-type rifle grenade was declared obsolete and the remaining Hales were replaced with Mills bombs shot from a rifle via a cup launcher.
Variants.
The Hales went through many variations in order to make it more cost effective and effective.
No. 3.
The No. 3 started off as the No. 3 Mk I. It has an externally segmented body and a wind vane designed to help activate the detonator in mid flight. It uses either Tonite or TNT as its explosive.
The No. 3 had several problems; it was difficult to manufacture, as it required precision and was made up of many parts. Another problem occurred with the detonators; like the No. 1 grenade, the No. 3 needed a special detonator that was difficult to manufacture. This detonator was also used in the No. 2 grenade and was very similar to the one in the No. 1 grenade, which made it harder to mass-produce.
Practically, the vane was a significant problem; it was hard to align properly and adverse weather, such as rain, strong winds or even a particle of dust could prevent the vane from operating correctly, which caused a failure.
The No. 3 also had an overly sensitive percussion cap, which caused many premature detonations.
Once these problems became well known, further development was begun. The No. 20 was the result of these refinements.
No. 20.
The No. 20 was similar to the No. 3, but its main difference was that it lacked No. 3's vane. In theory this was supposed to make it more reliable than the No. 3 and the main problem of the design was the choice of explosive used. Instead of Tonite or TNT, the No. 20 used ammonite, which tended to corrode the brass parts of the grenade, which created several failures when it was fired.
While an improvement over the No. 3, the No. 20 still had design flaws, and the No. 24 was introduced to address some of the remaining problems.
The No. 20 had two variants, the Mk I and II. The Mk I had a solid steel cylinder body, very similar to the No. 3, while the Mk II used a weldless steel tube and had circumferential grooves for fragmentation.
No. 24.
The No. 24 was essentially a No. 20 with a less sensitive percussion cap and refined ammonite that did not corrode the brass parts of the grenade.
There were two variants of the No. 24, the Mk I and II. The Mk I used the No. 20 Mk II's body, while the Mk II incorporated a cast iron body that has no external grooves.
No. 35.
In 1918 the No. 35 was introduced. This was a No. 24 MK II that had a detonator holder that used a small arms cartridge and a shorter striker.


Tabora Offensive

The Tabora Offensive (April – September 1916) was an Anglo-Belgian offensive into German East Africa, which ended with the Battle of Tabora in the north-west of German East Africa (modern-day Tanzania), it was part of the East African Campaign in World War I. The forces of the Belgian Congo crossed the border with German East Africa and captured the port city of Kigoma and the city of Tabora (the largest town in the interior of the German colony). In August a smaller Lake Force under the command of the South African brigadier general Crewe, launched a parallel attack from Uganda, also aimed at taking Tabora. The completion of the Tabora Offensive not only left much of the Ruanda-Urundi territory under Belgian military occupation but gave the Allies control of the important "Tanganjikabahn" railway.
Prelude.
The German colony in East Africa was a threat to the neutral Belgian Congo, but the Belgian government hoped to continue its neutrality in Africa. The "Force Publique" was constrained to adopt a defensive strategy until 15 August 1914, when German ships on Lake Tanganyika bombarded the port of Mokolobu and then the Lukuga post (soon to be known as Albertville) a week later. On 24 September 1914 the Germans occupied Kwijwi Island, in this way taking control of Lake Kivu. On 23 October 1914, the ship sank the Belgian "Alexandre Delcommune" on Lake Tanganyika, near Mtoa. In November of that same year, two German ships boarded and sank the Tanganjika lake steamer "Cecil Rhodes".
After the British offensive in the north-eastern region of German East Africa and the landing at Tanga in 1914, the west of the colony was deemed more urgent as a theatre of operations in 1915 by the German command. General Lettow-Vorbeck had three vital strategic interests vested in controlling the west; the navigation of Lake Tanganyika, the head of the central railway at Kigoma and the security of the army's main food supplies in the Neu Langenburg area.
Regaining control over Lake Tanganyika.
As early as March 1915, General Charles Tombeur asked the Belgian government for a small fleet, a submarine and seaplanes, initially Belgian minister Jules Renkin denied this request, but in June the British committed to supporting the Belgians in regaining control of the lake. HMS "Mimi" and "Toutou" —two British motorboats, which were transported to South Africa and from there by railway, by river, and by being dragged through the African jungle, to Lake Tanganyika— were launched onto the lake in late December 1915. Two naval engagements took place between elements of the Royal Navy, "Force Publique" and the "Kaiserliche Marine". In the first action, on 26 December 1915 "Kingani" was damaged and captured, becoming . In the second action, early February 1916, the small flotilla overwhelmed and sank . The German Empire maintained a third large and heavily armed craft on the lake, "Graf von Goetzen".
From the Belgian airbase on the western shore near Albertville, on 10 June 1916, the Force Publique sent amphibious aircraft —Short Admiralty Type 827 planes — for a bombing raid on "Graf von Goetzen" as she sat in the harbour of Kigoma. "Graf von Goetzen" was attacked by one of the Belgian floatplanes, but didn't suffer severe damage. The war on the lake had reached a stalemate by this stage. However, the war on land was progressing, largely to the advantage of the Allies, who cut off the railway link in July 1916 and threatened to isolate Kigoma completely.
Capture of Ruanda, Urundi and Kigoma.
In April 1916 two columns of the "Force Publique" advanced on Tabora. The first column ("Brigade Nord"), under the command of colonel Molitor, crossed the German East African border north of Lake Kivu and occupied Kigali on 6 May 1916. After the conquest of Ruanda in May 1916 by the Belgo-Congolese forces, the brigade advanced to Biharamulo on 24 June. It reached Lake Victoria near Mwanza on 30 July 1916, after heavy fighting in the Ussuwi region, including a bloody skirmish in Kato on 2 July. St. Michaël fell on 21 August 1916.
The second column ("Brigade Sud") occupied Usumbura on 6 June and Kitega on 16 June. In early July they advanced southwards from Usumbura along the eastern shore of Lake Tanganyika. The Belgian ship "Netta" sailed along the northeast coast in support of the land offensive, this naval presence led to the coastal towns of Rumonge and Nyanza being abandoned by the Schutztruppe. On 18 July the fortifications at Kigoma were bombed by two of the Belgian floatplanes and a petrol depot was set alight. On 19 July aerial photographs were taken and airborne leaflet propaganda was dropped over the old town of Ujiji, printed in Swahili, to prepare the local population for the arrival of the Allied troops. "Brigade Sud" took the fort at Kasulu on 24 July. In order to avoid "Graf von Goetzen" falling into Allied hands, General Lettow-Vorbeck ordered that the ship be scuttled.
On 27 July "Netta" shelled targets south of Kigoma. Later that same day, the Allies had captured a railway bridge near the port, advancing from the north and the east, which threatened to isolate Kigoma completely. This led the German naval commander on the lake, Gustav Zimmer, to retreat from the town and head south via railway and using "Mwami", a steamer sent from Dar-es-Salam by rail. On 28 July "Netta" surprised the German boat "Wami", while she was unloading troops and supplies, she was scuttled by her crew after being locked in. On 29 July "Brigade Sud" captured the port of Kigoma, terminus of the strategic railway line from Dar Es Salaam passing through Tabora to Kigoma and on 2 August Ujiji was under Allied control. After the German withdrawal from the lake, control of the surface of Lake Tanganyika passed to the British and Belgians.
In early August 1916 both columns started their converging marches to Tabora. The smaller British force, commanded by the South-African Brigadier General Charles Crewe, took Mwanza on 14 July 1916 and Shinyanga on 28 August. Crewe was in a race with the Belgian forces to reach Tabora but the British Lake Force was slowed down because of severe supply problems.
Battle of Tabora.
The southern brigade commanded by Colonel Frederik Valdemar Olsen advanced to Tabora following the Tanganyika Railway ("Tanganjikabahn"), which the Germans destroyed as they withdrew to the east. Tabora was an open plain surrounded by hills, which German Major General Wahle had used to build his defences. The southern brigade took control of the German railway station at Usoke on 30 August 1916, in response Wahle sent reinforcements from Tabora to Usoke by train.
The German "Schutztruppen" launched the counterattack on Usoke 2–3 September, which was repelled by the "Force Publique". On 7 September, General Wahle launched another counterattack on the train station of Usoke, this time a naval gun was mounted on one of the railway wagons. Both sides suffered heavy losses, the train station was bombarded, the "Force Publique" launched an attack, and the Germans were pushed back.
When the last resistance in Usoke (west of Tabora) was broken, the Belgians advanced to reach the German defences of Tabora at Lulanguru on 8 September. The southern brigade led the offensive actions for the next four days, closing in on Tabora from the west. Wahle established his main positions at Itaga, north of Tabora. From 10–12 September the northern brigade encountered heavy German resistance in the hills of Itaga, where they suffered considerable casualties. By this time Wahle's forces were reduced to 1.100 rifles and the desertion of his askari soldiers multiplied. He disbanded the naval unit under his command and redistributed these soldiers among the field companies.
On 16 September the Germans intercepted a letter from Crewe for Colonel Molitor ("Brigade Nord"), which stated that the main offensive from the north was planned for 19 September. After heavy fighting, the German army retreated in three columns to the southeast, two initially following the railway and one to go due south from Tabora to Sikonge.
The civilian authorities of Tabora surrendered to the troops of the "Force Publique" on 19 September 1916. The Belgians liberated around 200 Allied prisoners of war (mainly Belgians and British) and 228 German soldiers were captured. The "Force Publique" lost 1,300 soldiers. On 3 October, after the Allies had established control of the African Great Lakes region, Lake Force was disbanded. Wahle's three columns, in anticipation of an Allied pursuit, were retreating at a rapid pace to Iringa and Mahenge, in a bid to reunite with Lettow. General Wahle found himself in unexplored and uninhabited terrain, with no water and food at his disposal.
Aftermath.
Following the Tabora Offensive, the British and Belgian governments agreed on 19 January 1917 that the latter would retreat the majority of its forces to Rwanda and Urundi —2,000 soldiers remained to secure the occupied territories, as proposed by General Smuts— and to bring its military campaign in German East Africa to a conclusion. On 25 February 1917 the British were granted control over Tabora.
Because of the continued German resistance and their growing experience in guerrilla warfare tactics, the troops of the "Force Publique" were moved to the Dodoma-Kilosa region in July 1917, at the request of the British government and marched on Mahenge in September 1917. After the Mahenge Offensive and the capture of Mahenge in October 1917, the Belgian Congolese army controlled roughly one-third of German East Africa. At the end of 1917, part of the units that took Mahenge were sent to the central railway for redeployment to Kilwa and Lindi.
Military analysis.
The strategy of the German forces, led by "Generalmajor" Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck, was to divert Allied resources from the Western Front to Africa. His strategy achieved only mixed results after 1916, when the Allied forces were reinforced by the South Africans, the Belgo-Congolese "Force Publique" and Portuguese colonial troops. The campaign in Africa consumed considerable amounts of money and war material that could have gone to other fronts. Lettow-Vorbeck returned to Germany in early March 1919 to a hero's welcome, he led 120 officers of the "Schutztruppe" on a victory parade through the Brandenburg Gate, which was decorated in their honour. The Belgian government's main aim was to defend the Belgian Congo and to take control of Lake Tanganyika, Charles Tombeur was awarded the title of baron for his service in World War I. Jan Smuts became Prime Minister of South Africa in 1919 and South Africa was given a Class C mandate over German South-West Africa (later Namibia).
International Politics.
The Tabora offensive increased the bargaining power of the Belgian government in exile and was to ensure the restoration of Belgium after the war. During the post-war negotiations of the Paris Peace Conference, the Belgian Colonial Minister, Jules Renkin, sought to trade territorial gains in German East Africa for the Portuguese allocation in northern Angola, to gain Belgian Congo a longer coastline.
After the war, as outlined in the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was eventually forced to cede "control" of German East Africa to the Allied Powers. Apart from Ruanda-Urundi (assigned to Belgium) and the small Kionga Triangle (assigned to Portuguese Mozambique), the territory was transferred to British control. Tanganyika was adopted by the British as the name for its part of the former German colony in East Africa.


Governor of Galway

The Governor of Galway was a military officer who commanded the garrison at Galway in the west of Ireland. The post became a sinecure and in 1833 was to be abolished from the next vacancy.


Falkenberg (fort)

Falkenberg ("Falkenbergshus") was a fort located at Falkenberg in Halland County, Sweden. The fortification was located on the south strand of the river Ätran, about from the southern abutment of Falkenberg Bridge. It would later give name to the town
of Falkenberg which was previously known as "Ätraby".
History.
Falkenberg was first mentioned in 1298.
In the early part of the 13th century the province of Halland was part of Denmark. The Danish kings had built a fortification on the east shore of the Ätran river in the community of Falkenberg. The fort was the site for several Nordic treaties during the fourteenth century. It was burnt down by Count Erik Magnusson (c. 1282 – 1318) in 1356 during his revolt against his father King Magnus IV of Sweden.
The fortification was thereafter rebuilt.
The army of Swedish rebel leader Engelbrekt Engelbrektsson (1390s–1436) besiege the town in 1434, under the leadership of Herman Berman. The action took place during the Engelbrekt rebellion against King Eric of Pomerania. The defenders managed the first attack successfully. They did however realise that they would not be able to continue to hold the fort. Therefore, they choose to put the fort on fire and leave it by water. The fort was destroyed and was not rebuilt.
Excavations took place in 1885, as a railway was run through the area. The fort consisted of a tower. It had an inner area of , while the outer area was at the base. The walls are at the thickest at the base, and becomes thinner towards the top. Above the lower, partially intact, parts were brick walls. The group which performed the excavations found remains of brick all over the excavated area. The group also found some loose remains such as weapons, tools and household goods as well as two finger rings and a silver coin.


South African Youth Revolutionary Council

The South African Youth Revolutionary Council (SAYRCO) was a South African political organisation. SAYRCO profiled itself as a 'third force' in the anti-Apartheid struggle. It was associated with the Black Consciousness Movement.
Foundation and exile.
The group emerged from the non-ANC, non-PAC sector of the Soweto Student Representative Council (SSRC). The group was forced into exile after the 1976 Soweto uprising. They first arrived in Botswana, and later relocated to Nigeria. The group conducted fundraising tours in the United States, Western Europe and West Africa. In July 1979 the presidency of the group was passed from Tsietsi Mashinini to Khotso Seatlhoho. In this process the name SAYRC was adopted. As of 1981 SAYRCO obtained funding from the Nigerian government. Seatlhoho received military training from the Palestine Liberation Organization in Syria and Lebanon. SAYRCO called for more offensive forms of armed struggle against the Apartheid regime, criticizing the established anti-Apartheid movements of being too defensive.
Armed struggle.
The liberation of Zimbabwe open the possibilities for SAYRCO to launch its armed struggle inside South Africa. The ZANU-PF offered military training to SAYRCO cadres. The organisation attempted to enter South Africa and build an armed force there.
Capture of Seatlhoho.
On 18 June 1981 South African authorities arrested Seatlhoho and another SAYRCO member, Masabatha Loate. Seatlhoho was caught whilst in a meeting in Orlando East. They would be sentenced to ten and five years of imprisonment respectively. Seatlhoho's captured was heavily publicized by the regime, the news was carried in many newspapers. "The Daily Telegraph" ran a headline saying "The Scarlet Pimpernel of Soweto arrested!". On 21 June 1981 the South African police claimed to have arrested a total of 8 SAYRCO leaders.
Seatlhoho was jailed on Robben Island. After Seatlhoho's arrest the organisation appeared to have become defunct. The Nigerian government withdrew its support to the group, and returned to its former policy of supporting ANC and PAC (which, unlike SAYRCO, enjoyed recognition from the Organization for African Unity).


Theodore Wint Grave

Theodore Wint Grave is a public artwork by an unknown artist, located at the Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, United States. This sculpture was surveyed in 1995 as part of the Smithsonian's Save Outdoor Sculpture! program. "Theodore Wint Grave" serves as the final resting place for Brigadier General Theodore J. Wint.
Description.
This granite marker feature a profile bust relief of Brigadier General Theodore J. Wint in military uniform with epaulets on the proper left shoulder. The relief is placed in an oval shape with palm fronds extending from the top and bottom. This bronze relief is placed on a tall, column like, multi-tiered unit that has a polished sphere on the top. The sphere rests on top of a rope or chain design. The rear of the base has a plaque of the Seal of Pennsylvania.
The front of the base, below the relief is inscribed:
One side of the base is inscribed:
which is followed by five battle sites and dates.
The other side of the base is inscribed:
which lists his ranks and outfits below it.
The bottom of the Seal is inscribed:
Information.
Born in Pennsylvania in March 1845, Theodore Jonathan Wint served with the 6th Pennsylvania Cavalry during most of the American Civil War; he joined the mounted service as a Private in February 1865. On November 24 of the same year he was appointed to the Army as Second Lieutenant of the 4th Cavalry. On May 9, 1866 he was promoted to First Lieutenant, to Captain on April 21, 1872. After continuing to gain rank, his final title was Brigadier General on June 9, 1902.
Wint served the United States Army in the American Civil War, American Indian Wars, Spanish–American War and the Philippine–American War. He also served in China (1900–1901). He was injured in the Battle of Santiago de Cuba when a Mauser bullet broke his thighbone.
Wint, along with John D. Miles, selected the site of Fort Reno in Indian Territory in July 1874. Situated on the south side of the North Canadian River five miles west of present-day El Reno, Oklahoma, this fort was established after the Cheyenne uprising of 1874 to protect Darlington Indian Agency (located directly north across the river).
Theodore Jonathan Wint married Lydia Porter Bullis in 1880. Dying in Philadelphia in March, 1907, of heart disease, he was buried with full military honors. A train traveled from Philadelphia to Union Station and then proceeded to the cemetery. Lydia is buried nearby and died in 1913. He was scheduled to retire in 1909 and was months away from his final promotion to Major General.
Upon his death William Howard Taft, who was United States Secretary of War at the time, described him as "a quiet man who did things."
Fort Wint in the Philippines was named after him as well as VFW Gen. Theodore J. Wint Post 25 in Scranton, Pennsylvania. A street at Fort Leavenworth is also named after him, Wint Avenue.
Acquisition.
This grave marker, located in Section 2, was erected by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1908 and was fabricated by Worden Brothers Monument Manufacturing Company.
Condition.
This sculpture was surveyed by Save Outdoor Sculpture! in 1995 and was described as needing treatment. In 2004 Ponsford Ltd., a private conservation and restoration group, were commissioned to wash and wax the Wint memorial along with selected other graves by Arlington National Cemetery.


Pless conference

The Pless conference was a conference held at the castle of Prince Pless located in the Duchy of Pless on January 8, 1917. The conference involved the German army and navy arguing which division should take command of German activity in World War I. The German navy under Admiral Holtzendorff desired unrestricted submarine warfare to shut down the North Atlantic trade supplying Britain with food and munitions. The navy felt that it could starve Britain within six months to a year, before American troops could arrive on the Western Front and change the war. A memo was drafted by Admiral Holtzendorff in December 1916 before the Pless Conference, that argued for unrestricted submarine warfare. Pressure mounted on Kaiser Wilhem II to agree with the memo, which he had previously disagreed with due to his commitment to a policy of moderation.
The Kaiser relented following the Allied rejection of the German offer for peace in Dec 1916 and agreed with the memo. The Kaiser announced invitations to both the army and navy for the conference to announce his decision. Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg resigned due to his displeasure with the use of unrestricted sub warfare. Unconditional submarine warfare was then set to begin Jan. 31 attacking all ships within the British coastal zone and Atlantic.
Text of the Holtzendorff Memo.
The Chief of the Admiralty Staff of the Navy Berlin, 22 December 1916
B 35 840 I
To the
Royal Field-Marshal
Chief of the General Staff of the Army
His Excellency v. Beneckendorff und v. Hindenburg.
Great Headquarters
Most Secret!
I have the honour to respectfully submit to your Excellency in the attachment a memorandum on the necessity for the commencement an unrestricted campaign of submarine warfare at the earliest opportunity. The memorandum is essentially a continuation of the memorandum Ref. No. 22 247 I of 27 August 1916: The Merchant Tonnage Issue and the Supply of England in 1916, which has previously been submitted to your Excellency.
Based on the detailed information attached to this memorandum, I would like to ask your Excellency to kindly follow the line of argument laid out below, and I hope to achieve agreement that it is absolutely necessary to increase our measures against England as soon as possible to the very limit of our abilities in order to exploit the favourable situation and to obtain a swift victory.
I.
The war requires a decision before autumn 1917, lest it should end in the mutual exhaustion of all parties and thus in a disaster for us. Of our enemies, Italy and France are already so severely weakened in their economic foundations that they are kept in the fight only through England's energy and resources. If we succeed to break England's backbone, the war will immediately be decided in our favour. England's backbone is the merchant tonnage, which delivers essential imports for their survival and for the military industry of the British islands and which ensures the [kingdom's] ability to pay for its imports from abroad.
II.
The current situation in respect to the merchant tonnage has already been mentioned in the memorandum of 27 August and is laid out in further detail in the attachment. In all brevity the situation is as follows: The [shipping] rates have reached outrageous levels, often as much as ten times as much [as in peacetime] for many important goods. We know with certainty from a variety of sources that merchant tonnage is lacking everywhere.
The current English merchant tonnage can safely be assumed to be in the order of 20 million gross register tons. 8.6 million tons of these are requisitioned for military purposes, and 1/2 million is employed in coastal trade. Approximately 1 million [tons] are undergoing repairs or are otherwise temporarily unavailable. Approximately 2 million tons are sailing for other allies, which leaves about 8 million tons of English merchant tonnage to provide for the supply of England. An analysis of statistical figures of ship movements in British ports suggests an even lower figure. In the months of July - September 1916 only 6 million tons were employed in the trade with England. In addition to that, other tonnage sailing in the trade with England can be assumed to amount to around 900,000 tons of enemy - non-English - and approximately 3 million tons of neutral tonnage. Hence, no more than 10 million GRT are at the disposal for the supply of England.
III.
If the achievements in our battle against merchant tonnage have been encouraging thus far, then the exceptionally poor world harvest of grain, including feed grain, this year provides us with a unique opportunity, which nobody could responsibly reject. Both North America and Canada will probably cease their grain exports to England in February. Then that country will have to draw its grain supplies from the more distant Argentina, but since Argentina will only be able to deliver very limited quantities, because of the poor harvest, England will have to turn to India and mostly Australia. In the attachment it is explained in detail how such an increase in the length of the grain routes will require an extra 720,000 tons of tonnage for the grain shipments alone. In practice, the implications will be that, until August 1917, 3/4 million tons of the available 10 million tons will have to be employed for a service, which had hitherto not been required.
IV.
Under such favourable circumstances an energetic blow conducted with all force against English merchant tonnage will promise a certain success in a way that I have to reiterate and emphasize my statements made on 27 August 1916 that "our clearly defined strategic objective is to force a decision in our favour through the destruction of [enemy] sea transport capacity" and also that "from a military point of view it would be irresponsible not to make use of the submarine weapon now." As things stand at the moment, I cannot vouch that a campaign of unrestricted submarine warfare will force England to make peace within five months time. This reservation needs to be made in respect to the unrestricted submarine warfare only. Of the currently conducted submarine warfare under cruiser a decisive result cannot be expected, regardless of the circumstances, even if all armed merchantmen are designated as legitimate targets.
V.
Based on a monthly rate of destruction of 600,000 tons of shipping through a campaign of unrestricted submarine warfare, as pointed out previously, and on the well grounded expectation, elaborated upon in the attachment, that at least two fifths of the neutral tonnage sailing in the trade with England will be deterred by such a campaign, it stands to reason that the current volume English sea borne trade will be reduced by 39% within five months. This would not be bearable for England, neither in view of her future position after the war, nor in view of her ability to continue the war effort. Already, the country is at the verge of a food crisis, which will soon compel it to attempt to undertake the same food rationing measures, which we, as a blockaded country, have been forced to adopt since the outbreak of the war. The preconditions for implementing such measures are totally different and infinitely more unfavourable than in our case. They do not have the necessary administration and their population is unused to submitting to such privations. Then there is another reason why the uniform rationing of bread for the whole population will not be possible in England at this point. It was possible for Germany at a time in which bread could be substituted by other foodstuffs. That moment has been missed in England. But with only three fifths of the current sea borne trade, the continued supply with [alternative] foodstuffs cannot be maintained unless a severe rationing of grain is imposed—provided the war industry is to be maintained at its current output level. The objection that England could have sufficient domestic stockpiles of grain and raw materials has been disproved in detail in the attachment.
In addition to that, the unrestricted submarine campaign would cut off England from the trade with Denmark and the Netherlands, which would result in an immediate shortage of fats, since one third of all butter imports and the entire margarine imports to England originate in Denmark and the Netherlands respectively. Moreover, by threatening the sea routes to Scandinavia and intensifying activities against the Spanish iron-ore trade, it would result in a scarcity of iron-ore and wood. This will automatically reduce the coal production for lack of wood. In consequence it would also reduce the output of pig iron, steel, and subsequently the production of munitions, which depends on both. Finally, it gives us the long hoped for opportunity to strike at neutral munitions shipments, and thus it will also provide a relief for the army.
By contrast, a submarine campaign according to cruiser rules, even assuming the possibility of indiscriminate attacks on armed merchantmen, would only yield a reduction of the tonnage sailing for England by 5 × 400,000 tons—about 18%--or less than half of what could be achieved by unrestricted submarine warfare. Experience so far does not suggest that the authorization to torpedo armed merchantmen would improve upon the result of 400,000 tons of destroyed merchant tonnage, which has been achieved over the past two months. In fact, it is likely to merely compensate for a decline, which has to be expected in the course of progressing arming [of merchantmen]. I am aware that even a reduction of one fifth of English sea borne trade will have a severe impact on the English supply situation. However, I consider it unthinkable that the current English leadership under Lloyd George, who is absolutely determined, could be forced to make peace on these grounds, particularly since the constraints of fat, iron-ore, and wood scarcity—and the latters' impact on the munitions production—would not come into effect. Furthermore, the psychological effects of panic and terror cannot be exploited. These effects, which can only be achieved by a campaign of unrestricted submarine warfare are, in my view, an indispensable prerequisite for success. Just how important they are, can be judged by the experiences made when we initiated submarine warfare in early 1915, or even during the brief period of the submarine campaign in March and April 1916, when the British believed that we were serious about it.
A further precondition [for success] is that the beginning and the declaration of unrestricted submarine warfare should coincide in a manner that leaves no room for negotiations, particularly between England and the neutrals. Only then will the effect of shock have the most profound impact on the enemy and the neutrals.
VI.
Upon the declaration of unrestricted submarine warfare the United States government will once more be compelled to make a decision whether or not to take the consequences of its previous position vis-à-vis the unrestricted submarine warfare. I am absolutely of the opinion that war with the United States is such a serious matter that everything has to be undertaken to avoid it. Fear of a diplomatic rupture however, should not lead us to recoil from the use of a weapon that promises victory for us.
At any rate, it is realistic to assume the worst case as the most probable one and to consider, which impact an American entry into the war on the side of our enemies would have on the course of the war. In respect to the merchant tonnage this impact is likely to be negligible. It cannot be expected that more than a fraction of the interned central power tonnage in American—and perhaps in other neutral ports—can be put into the trade with England at short notice. The overwhelming part of it can be rendered useless in a manner that it will be unable to sail during the first, critical months. All preparations in this respect have been made. Also, there would be no crews available in the initial stages. The American troops would be of equally little import, if only for the lack of bottoms to carry them over here in great numbers; the same applies to American money, which cannot compensate the lack of tonnage. The only question that remains would be how America would react to a peace, which Great Britain would be forced to accept. It is unlikely that it would decide to continue the war against us, since it has no means to strike at us decisively, whereas its sea borne commerce would suffer from our submarines. Indeed, it is to be expected that it will join England in making peace, in order to restore healthy economic conditions.
Therefore my conclusion is that a campaign of unrestricted submarine warfare, launched in time to produce a peace before the harvest of the summer 1917—i.e. 1 August—has to accept the risk of American belligerence, because we have no other option. In spite of the diplomatic rupture with America, the unrestricted submarine warfare is nevertheless the right means to conclude this war victoriously. It is also the only means to this end.
VII.
Since I have declared the time come to strike against England in autumn 1916 the situation has even improved tremendously in our favour. The crop failure, in conjunction with the impact of the war on England up to now, gives us the opportunity to force a decision before the next harvest. If we do not make use of what seems to be the last chance, then I see no other option than that of mutual exhaustion, without our succeeding to bring the war to an end on terms that will guarantee our future as a world power.
In order to achieve the required results, the unrestricted submarine warfare has to commence no later than 1 February. I request from your Excellency an indication, whether the military situation on the continent, particularly in regard to the remaining neutrals, would allow this schedule. The necessary preparations can be completed within three weeks time.
(Signed) von Holtzendorff


Battle of Rakkestad

The Battle of Rakkestad was a battle fought in the Swedish–Norwegian War of 1814, at the village of Rakkestad, Norway, between a 3,000 strong Swedish force under Eberhard von Vegesack, and a slightly smaller Norwegian force, led by Frederik Wilhelm Stabell. The Swedish forces drove the Norwegians back from their fortified positions with a disciplined bayonet-attack and dealt them considerable losses. This battle crippled the morale of the Norwegian defenders, and especially their leader, King Christian Frederik, which contributed to a rapid end of the war, eight days later, with the Convention of Moss.
Background.
As Swedish forces blockaded the Norwegian town of Halden with its fortress Fredriksten, the Swedish Crown Prince Charles John received word that the Norwegians were gathering an army of between 5,000 and 6,000 men under King Christian Frederik, and marched towards von Vegesack from Kjølen to break the Swedish blockade of the town. Prince Charles John then ordered von Vegesack to gather his forces and counterattack the Norwegian main army at Rakkestad. Christian Frederik, however, called off the Norwegian advance after receiving news of the Swedish capture of Fredrikstad; the Norwegian south flank was now seriously threatened, for which reason he withdrew closer to the Glomma river, to keep his escape route open and avoid encirclement. He established his headquarters at Spydeberg, while a Norwegian force of between 2,000 and 3,000 men with 4 guns, under Frederik Wilhelm Stabell, destroyed the bridge at the village of Rakkestad and fortified themselves in an advantageous position behind the river.
Battle.
Vegesack and his troops struck camp at 6 August and marched towards the Norwegians with about 3,000 men and 4 guns. After some reconnaissance, the Swedish commander decided to force his way over the river, on the Norwegian right flank. A bridge was quickly established under the cover of 2 six-pounder guns — the Norwegians could only answer with 2 one-pounder guns of their own — and some Swedish Jägers, mainly from the Värmland Jäger Regiment, who exchanged fire with the Norwegian center across the river. Once the bridge was completed, one battalion each from the Värmland Jägers and Skaraborg infantry Regiment, led by Vegesack, quickly crossed and launched an all-out bayonet attack on the Norwegian right flank, who were forced back. This action relieved the pressure on the center, where the 2nd battalion of the Värmland Jägers and Kalmar Regiment could now cross on another temporary bridge and join the fight, which forced the Norwegians to abandon their positions and flee. Some Norwegian reinforcements under P. H. Butenschøn arrived and, with the cover of a forest, managed to temporarily halt the Swedish onslaught; they were soon, however, quickly thrown back by the Swedish Jägers, and so the battle was decided in favor of the Swedes, as more troops crossed the river and pursued the fleeing Norwegians.
Aftermath.
The victory had been total, with as few as 11 to 15 men killed and 36 to 45 wounded Swedes, to 100 or 150 killed and wounded and 40 captured Norwegians, among them a captain. The Värmland Jägers and Skargaborg infantry regiment distinguished themselves especially. Vegesack soon marched on towards Flåtestad, where he joined forces with Bror Cederström, before continuing towards Trømborg, where another Norwegian force was repulsed. Once they reached Askim, the Swedes encountered another Norwegian entrenchment a distance away, at Langnes, where another battle took place. Vegesack then advanced as far as Trøgstad and there captured about 200 Norwegians soldiers (the rest withdrew over the Glomma), on 11 August; the Swedes had thus became masters of the eastern side of the Glomma, south of Øyeren. At the same day as the Battle of Kjølberg Bridge, on 14 August, the Convention of Moss was signed, in favor of Sweden.


List of armed conflicts involving the United States

The history of armed conflicts involving the United States of America spans a period of more than four centuries. A period ranging from the early era of European colonization and the formation of the new national polity that would become the United States, to its evolvement through technological and political upheavals into a decisively modern republic and military force, and ascent onto the world stage, through the calamities of the 20th century, as the largely unrivaled hegemon that it is today.
Colonial and early national period.
The lines of conflict demarcating the wars, rebellions, and revolutions in the North American colonial and national period can be traced far back into early pre-Columbian times. However, due to the scarcity of written sources, not least resulting from the Spanish colonizers destroying a sizable amount of original Maya writings, deeming them to be heretical, historians typically make the early European settlements as their initial point of departure, of which sources are more plentiful.
A further concern highlighted by historians, relating to the history of slavery and colonialism in particular, is the inherent unevenness of the terrain in which conflicts erupt, and often tremendous disproportionality of means by which they are fought and settled. As historian Ira Berlin points out slavery, by its very definition, poses a profound asymmetry of power: "For three centuries, slave masters mobilized enormous resources that stretched across continents and oceans and employed them with great ferocity in an effort to subdue their human property. Slaves, for their part, had little to depend upon but themselves."
As such, four distinctive lines of conflict can be identified weaving through the colonial and early national period. Firstly, the conflicts between the European colonists and the Native American tribes. Secondly, the rival conflicts between the European states over control of the Americas. Thirdly, the mounting tensions and armed conflicts between the settlers and their rulers in Europe. And lastly, as violence between the white people grew, so too did the revolutionary fervor of the African slaves in their quest for freedom through armed insurrection.


Battle of the Alta River

The Battle of Alta River was a 1068 clash on the Alta River between Cuman army on the one hand and Kievan Rus' forces of Grand Prince Iziaslav I of Kiev, Prince Sviatoslav of Chernigov, and Prince Vsevolod of Periaslavl on the other in which the Rus' forces were routed and fled back to Kiev and Chernigov in some disarray. The battle led to an uprising in Kiev that briefly deposed Grand Prince Iziaslav. That incident supposedly shows the power of the Kiev veche and how common people gathering influenced princely politics in Kievan Rus' (particularly in Kiev as well as Novgorod the Great.)
The Cumans/Polovtsy/Kipchaks were first mentioned in the "Primary Chronicle" as Polovtsy sometime around 1055, when Prince Vsevolod drew up a peace treaty with them. In spite of the treaty, in 1061, Kipchaks supposedly breached the earthworks and palisades constructed by Princes Vladimir (d. 1015) and Yaroslav (d. 1054) and defeated an army led by Prince Vsevolod that had marched out to intercept them. Following the unsuccessful Battle on the Alta River near the city of Pereiaslavl, Iziaslav and Vsevolod fled back to Kiev and their unwillingness to arm the general populace to march out and fight the raiders led to an uprising in the city. A veche (public assembly) was convened on unknown initiative in the marketplace and the people there demanded arms to fight the Kipchaks. When these were not forthcoming, they ransacked the house of voivode Konstantin. The Kievans freed Prince Vseslav of Polotsk, who had been imprisoned earlier by Iziaslav, Vsevolod, and Sviatoslav, and placed him on the Kievan throne in hopes that he could stop Kipchaks. Iziaslav, for his part, fled to his father-in-law, Boleslaw II of Poland, who provided him a military support with which Iziaslav returned to Kiev the following May (1069) and took back the throne.
In Iziaslav's absence, Prince Sviatoslav managed to defeat a much larger Cuman army on November 1, 1068 and stem the tide of Cuman raids. A small skirmish in 1071 was the only disturbance by the Cumans for the next two decades. Thus, while the Battle of Alta River was a disgrace for Kievan Rus', Sviatoslav's victory the following year relieved the Cumans' threat to Kiev and Chernigov for a considerable period.


Bezabde

Bezabde or Bazabde was a fortress city on the eastern Roman frontier. Located in Zabdicene, it played a role in the Roman-Persian Wars of the 4th century. It was besieged two times in 360, narrated in detail by Ammianus Marcellinus. The Sasanians led by Shapur II captured Bezabde, despite adamant resistance from three Roman legions and local archers. The Roman counterattack led by Constantius II failed, but it returned in Roman hands after the Sasanians withdrew. Bezabde was ceded to the Sasanians by the Perso-Roman Peace Treaty of 363, after which it disappeared from historical records.
James Crow notes: "It was formerly thought that Bezabde stood close to modern Cizre, on the west bank of the Tigris. However archaeological survey has located a major Late Roman site at Eski Hendek, 13 km (8 miles) north-west of Cizre. The outline of the city is trapezoidal and was aligned above the river. It may be seen to be divided into two distinct enclosures, with an annexe to the west and clear traces of projecting towers and multiple defences".


National Salvation Front (South Sudan)

The National Salvation Front (NAS) is a South Sudanese militant group lead by Thomas Cirillo which has been fighting against the government of South Sudan since March 2017. The group is the largest still fighting after the end of the South Sudanese Civil War. NAS mainly operates in the Equatoria region of South Sudan. Its goals are the removal of the President of South Sudan, Salva Kiir, from office and the establishment of federalism.
On November 25, 2017, Major Gen. Lawrence Amitayo Legge, the Operations Commander for the SPLM-IO Western Mundri Command announced his resignation of the SPLM-IO army with his officers to join NAS under the leader of Gen. Thomas Cirillo.
NAS was not a party to the Revitalized Agreement in South Sudan and thus continues to engage in fighting despite the ceasefire mostly holding in the rest of the country. There was, however, a minor faction of NAS that split from Cirillo's forces and signed the Agreement.
On 2 February 2019 NAS soldiers claimed to have repulsed SSPDF from Senema village near border with Democratic Republic of Congo.
Etymology.
While written in all caps, NAS is not an acronym, instead it is derived from the Arabic word ناس ("nas"), meaning "people."
History.
The National Salvation Front was founded on March 6, 2017, by Lt. Gen. Thomas Cirillo Swaka, a member of the Bari ethnic group. Cirillo had been the Deputy Chief of Staff of Logistics for the army of South Sudan, the SPLA, but he resigned on February 11, 2017, in response to what he believed was the "tribalization" of the army under the leadership of president Salva Kiir. On March 9, 2017, the SSDM-Cobra Faction under Khalid Butrous merged with NAS. On March 1, 2018, NAS joined the South Sudan Opposition Alliance (SSOA), a coalition of rebel groups that opposed the government.
On August 5, 2018, Julius Tabule Daniel declared himself the interim chairman of NAS. This led to a split in the movement, and Tabule's group declared Khalid Butrous as its leader, becoming known as NAS-KB. NAS-KB signed the R-ARCSS peace deal in September 2018, while the main NAS group under Cirillo continued to fight. Another group called the Equatoria Non-Allied Forces (ENAF) lead by Moses Yanga Yoana allegedly broke away from NAS; it signed a peace deal with the government in February 2019. On October 23, 2020, Lako Jada Kwajok, a senior NAS official, resigned, citing weak leadership and the lack of a clear vision. He created the Democratic Resistance Movement (DRM) on November 30, 2020, made of former NAS members.
On September 24, 2018, NAS and members of the SSOA that did not sign the R-ARCSS formed the South Sudan National Democratic Alliance (SSNDA), lead by Cirillo. Between December 2018 and March 2019, major clashes between the SSPDF (the South Sudanese army) and NAS in Yei River State displaced around 15,000 people. On August 30, 2019 the SSNDA merged with several other rebel groups to form the South Sudan Opposition Movements Alliance (SSOMA). The SSOMA entered into negotiations in Rome facilitated by the Community of Sant'Egidio, and it signed a Cessation of Hostilities agreement on January 12, 2020. While this declaration initially reduced the violence, NAS and the SSPDF resumed clashes in the summer of 2020.
Funding and Equipment.
NAS receives some funding by mining gold and taxing gold miners around Lobonok in Central Equatoria state, which is then sold in Uganda.
NAS's weapons and ammunition are primarily obtained through ambushing the SSPDF, and the most common weapons are AK-47s and AKM assault rifles.
Timeline.
2020.
August 19 – NAS forces ambush a convoy of bodyguards of Vice President James Wani Igga near Lobonok, Central Equatoria State, killing six and wounding two.
November 9 – Thomas Cirillo's faction of the SSOMA, which includes the National Salvation Front, recommits to the Cessation of Hostilities agreement during talks in Rome.
November 10 – NAS and the SSPDF clash in Lobonok. NAS claims that it was attacked by the SSPDF, and that NAS killed nine SSPDF soldiers and captured several guns while losing two NAS soldiers. The SSPDF claims that it was attacked by NAS, and that two NAS soldiers and four civilians were killed. This clash causes the SSOMA to pull out of the talks in Rome.


Springfield to Fayetteville Road-Elkhorn Tavern Segment

The Springfield to Fayetteville Road-Elkhorn Tavern Segment is a section of historic 19th-century roadway in Pea Ridge National Military Park in northwestern Arkansas. It is a dirt road, about long and wide, that was built in 1835. The first major road through northwestern Arkansas, it connected Fayetteville, Arkansas with Springfield, Missouri. The road was part of the major northern route of the Trail of Tears, the forcible remove in the late 1830s of Native Americans from east of the Mississippi River to what is now Oklahoma. The road was also actively used by both Union and Confederate forces during the American Civil War, and was the major route of advance by Confederate forces leading to the Battle of Pea Ridge, whose battlefield is preserved by the park.
The road segment was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2005.


Battle of Hova

The Battle of Hova ("Slaget vid Hova") was fought in Hova, Sweden on 14 June 1275 between peasants commanded by King Valdemar of Sweden and Danish cavalry commanded by Duke Magnus and his brother Erik. The result was that Valdemar had to flee to Norway and Magnus became king of Sweden as Magnus III. It was a part of a series of conflicts between Magnus and his elder brother Valdemar.


List of wars involving South Africa

This is a list of wars involving the Union of South Africa and its successor, the Republic of South Africa.


Perry Monument (Cleveland)

Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry Monument is a war monument in Cleveland, Ohio that commemorates Oliver Hazard Perry and his victory at the Battle of Lake Erie in the War of 1812. Erected at the center of the city's Public Square in 1860, its Perry statue by sculptor William Walcutt was Ohio's first monumental sculpture.
The monument was relocated several times in Cleveland. After replacing the original marble statues with bronze castings in 1929, the original statues were placed in storage and in 1937 were given to the city of Perrysburg, OH where they resided until 1997 when the originals were replaced with bronze castings. Since 2002, the original statue of Perry has been loaned to the Perry International Peace Monument at put-in-Bay.The original Sailor Boy and Midshipman statues reside in the lobby of the Perrysburg Municipal Building.
Perry's victory.
Perry's victory against the British Navy at the Battle of Lake Erie occurred on September 10, 1813.
Monument.
In June 1857, Cleveland City Council unanimously adopted resolutions to erect a monument to Commodore Oliver Perry in the city's Public Square. By October, Thomas Jones & Sons Marble Works, of Cleveland, was selected as contractor. The project had a budget of $6,000, to be raised from contributions by the citizens of Cleveland. Prominent sculptors Hiram Powers, Thomas Ball, and E. D. Palmer were approached for the Perry statue, but demurred due to the limited budget. The contractor turned to William Walcutt, who produced a new design that was endorsed by the monument committee. City Council granted T. Jones & Sons the power to solicit funds for an additional $2,000 over the project's contracted budget. Fund-raising fell well short of the $8,000 target, and in 1860 City Council appropriated $3,008 to make up the deficit.
Walcutt, a sculptor originally from Columbus, Ohio, had studied in London and Paris, and kept a studio in New York City. In addition to the larger-than-life Perry statue, his design proposed a stepped base with two subsidiary sailor figures ("Sailor Boy", "Midshipman"), and a pedestal featuring a round bas-relief vignette of the battle.
The monument was dedicated on September 10, 1860, the 47th anniversary of the Battle of Lake Erie. Over 100,000 people attended its unveiling, which featured speeches by Harvey Rice, chairman of the monument committee, historian George Bancroft, and the governors of Ohio and Rhode Island (Perry's home state). Following the dedication ceremony, a mock battle was staged offshore, and a grand military parade was held the following day. Public Square became known as Monumental Park, in recognition of the sculpture.
In 1878, the monument was relocated from the intersection at the center of Public Square to the square's southeast quadrant. It was removed in 1892 to make way for construction of Cleveland's Soldiers' and Sailors' Monument. Following two years in storage, it was re-erected in Wade Park in 1894, overlooking Wade Lagoon. The monument was removed in 1913 to make way for construction of the Cleveland Museum of Art, and relocated to Gordon Park. By 1927 winds and rain had deteriorated the statues of Perry, Sailor Boy, and the Midshipman The Early Settlers Association raised $10,000 to replace them with bronze castings, which were unveiled in Gordon Park in 1929. They were relocated within Gordon Park in 1951, and put into storage in 1988. Following restoration, the bronze statues and monument were re-erected in 1991 at a sixth (and current) location – Fort Huntington Park, on the east side of the Cuyahoga County Courthouse, in downtown Cleveland.
Sculptures.
Walcutt's marble Perry statue was completed and installed for the dedication, as was the marble bas-relief on the pedestal. The two subsidiary figures intended to flank the pedestal – a midshipman and a sailor boy – were completed in plaster by 1860, but required additional funds to be carved in marble. They were completed and installed in 1869.
Over the years, the three marble statues and the marble bas-relief panel suffered damage from the weather. Cleveland's Early Settlers Association raised $10,000 to replace the sculptures. In 1929, they were removed from the monument and replaced with bronze copies, created under the supervision of sculptor Herman Matzen. At the same time, a second bronze copy of the Perry statue was made for Rhode Island, and installed on the grounds of the Statehouse in Providence.
The three marble statues and the marble bas-relief panel were donated to Perrysburg, Ohio in 1929, and were installed in Hood Park, along the Maumee River, in 1937. In 1997, Perrysburg replaced the marble statues with bronze copies, and installed the bronzes on a pedestal and base that approximated Walcutt's original positioning of the figures. The marble sailor statues are currently exhibited in the town's municipal building. The marble Perry statue has been on long-term loan to the National Park Service since 2002, and is exhibited in the visitor center at Perry's Victory and International Peace Memorial in Put-in-Bay, Ohio.
A plaster version of the Perry statue, presumed to be Walcutt's full-sized model used to carve the 1860 marble version, is in the collection of the Western Reserve Historical Society in Cleveland.
Walcutt's Perry statue is depicted on the reverse of the 2013 "Perry's Victory" quarter.


89th Mixed Brigade

The 89th Mixed Brigade was one of the Mixed Brigades created by the Spanish Republican Army for the defense of the Second Spanish Republic during the Spanish Civil War. It was present on the Andalusia Front.
History.
At the end of March 1937, the 89th mixed brigade was formed on the Córdoba Front. It was composed of: the 1st and 2nd battalions - from the old Maroto Column - and the 3rd and 4th battalions - which came from the «Cultural Militias of Jaén» column. José Villagrán Ganzinotto was appointed as commander of the brigade, which was soon placed in the 20th Division of 9th Army Corps which had its headquarters in Andújar.
During the war, the Chiefs of Staff were the militia captains Ostalet and Manuel Marín Guerrero, while the political commissar was Alfonso Fernández Torres, from the CNT. In February 1939, José María Aguirre Lobo held command of the brigade, while the Chief of Staff was Guillermo Vázquez Rodríguez.


List of Nike missile sites

The following is a list of Nike missile sites operated by the United States Army. This article lists sites in the United States, most responsible to Army Air Defense Command; however, the Army also deployed Nike missiles to Europe as part of the NATO alliance, with sites being operated by both American and European military forces. U.S. Army Nike sites were also operational in South Korea, Japan and were sold to Taiwan.
Leftover traces of the approximately 265 Nike missile bases can still be seen around cities across the United States. As the sites were decommissioned they were first offered to federal agencies. Many were already on Army National Guard bases who continued to use the property. Others were offered to state and local governments while others were sold to school districts. The left-overs were offered to private individuals. Many Nike sites are now municipal yards, communications and FAA facilities, probation camps, and even renovated for use as Airsoft gaming and Military Simulation training complexes. Several were completely obliterated and turned into parks. Some are now private residences. Only a few are intact and preserve the history of the Nike project.
Belgium.
General Belgian Nike info: The Nike missile system was operational in the Belgian airforce from 1959 until 1990. It was onganized in a Missile Group (the overall staffing); a Support Wing (tech and log support) and 2 (9th and 13th) Missile Wings each with 4 subordinate units. All Belgian Nike sites were in the 2 ATAF part of then West-Germany. Their defending area was the industrial Ruhr area.
Germany.
- In Pforzheim (Hagenschieß/Wurmberg), in Baden-Württemberg there is a missile launch site operated by the US-Army until April 1985.
It was part of the Nike-Belt, a defense system which was created to defend Europe against the then newly invented jets. The site fired Nike missiles at potentially incoming jets as part of the Project Nike.
Japan.
On Okinawa, the 30th ADA Brigade was on Okinawa. On Reversion Day, May 15, 1972, all Nike Hercules missile sites were handed over to the JASDF. Battery 8,8th Battalion,3rd Air Defense Brigade was located on the Chinen peninsula in southern part of the island. The U.S. reverted the islands to Japan on May 15, 1972, setting back a Ryūkyū independence movement that had emerged.
United States.
This list is sorted by state. The "Missile type" code indicates the numbers and types of missiles and other installation details. For example, "2AK/18L-H" means the site contained two Nike Ajax magazines (A), located above ground (K), with eight launchers (8L) being converted to Nike Hercules (H). Many listings will have "FDS" following either the control site or launch site heading, which means that the site has gone through the "Formerly-Used Defense Site" program and has been transferred from DoD control to another party. With the exception of Alaska, in which sites were given a specific name, Nike missile sites were designated by a coding system of the Defense Area Name abbreviation; a two digit number representing the degree from north converted to a number between 01 and 99 (North being 01; East being 25; South being 50; West being 75), and a letter, L = launch site, C = IFC (Integrated Fire Control) site. The Formerly Used Defense Sites (FDS) program processed many former sites and then transferred them out of Defense Department control.
Alaska.
The Alaska Nike sites were under the control of United States Army Alaska (USARAK), rather than Army Air Defense Command.


Battle of Ratisbon

The Battle of Ratisbon, also called the Battle of Regensburg, was fought on 23 April 1809, during the Napoleonic Wars, between the army of the First French Empire, led by Napoleon I, and that of the Austrian Empire, led by Archduke Charles. Scene of the last engagement of the Bavaria phase of the campaign of 1809, the brief defense of the city and installation of a pontoon bridge to the east enabled the retreating Austrian army to escape into Bohemia. During the assault, Marshal Jean Lannes led his troops up ladders onto the walls, and Napoleon was wounded in his ankle by a small artillery round. The shot had been fired at great distance and did not severely hurt the Emperor, but caused a contusion.
Prelude.
Following his victory at Eckmühl on 22 April Napoleon summoned his first ever council of war, which decided to halt the army about 18 kilometers south of the city of Ratisbon (which the Austrians had captured two days earlier).
That night, the main Austrian army (I–IV Korps and I Reserve Korps) began moving its heavy equipment over the city’s vital stone bridge over the Danube, while a pontoon bridge was thrown 2 kilometers downstream to the east for the troops. Five battalions from II Korps defended the city, while 6,000 cavalry and some infantry battalions held the hilly ground outside.
Battle.
At dawn on 23 April the French advance continued in a pincer movement toward Ratisbon, with General Louis-Pierre Montbrun coming from the southwest and Napoleon moving up from the south. Around 9:00 am, 10,000 French cavalry, led by General Étienne Nansouty’s two cuirassier divisions, began to engage the Austrian cavalry, who despite poorly coordinated charges were able to hold them for almost three hours to facilitate the army’s escape, before they slipped away.
Only then did the French discover the pontoon bridge, but its last defenders were able to hold on and cut the securing ropes to prevent the French from using it.
By noon the French infantry had arrived and formed up around the city’s medieval defenses. Lannes was given charge of its capture and opened up an artillery bombardment, while light infantry engaged the Austrian troops in the suburbs. Two infantry assaults on the main gates had already failed with heavy losses, when at 3:00 P.M. General Henri Gatien Bertrand, head of the engineers, smashed a breach in the wall with heavy artillery near the Straubing gate.
Walking to observe the gap, Napoleon was struck by a small canister round in the left foot but was able to mount his horse and ride around, reassuring his anxious troops. Three small parties with siege ladders failed to scale the damaged wall.
Lannes' men could not bring themselves to advance into the maelstrom a fourth time and so, exasperated, Lannes grabbed a scaling ladder and renewed his appeal. Then, amid an embarrassed silence, he angrily shouted: "I will let you see that I was a grenadier before I was a marshal and still am one." He took the ladder and moved forwards, but was physically restrained by his aides. His troops, shamed into action by the despair of their leader, rushed forward. The fourth assault party carried the walls and within minutes French troops were pouring into the now-doomed Ratisbon.
A street-by-street battle raged for several hours until the French could secure and begin looting the southern part of the city. The bridge was determinedly defended by the 1st battalion of Infanterie Regiment 15 from the northern gatehouse until around 9:00 P.M., when they abandoned their positions and the French could reach the northern suburb of Stadt-am-Hof. The last 300 defenders surrendered soon after.
Consequences.
French casualties, including a wounded-in-the-ankle Bonaparte, were between 1,500 and 2,000 while the Austrians lost at least 6,000 men killed, injured or captured. Sending Marshal Louis Davout to guard the north bank across the Danube, Bonaparte was now free to move on Vienna.
In literature.
Robert Browning's poem "Incident of the French Camp" describes a probably fictional incident during the battle.


Battle of Bondo

During the Uganda–Tanzania War, the Battle of Bondo was fought on 27 May 1979 near the town of Bondo, Uganda, between Tanzanian forces and Ugandan troops loyal to Idi Amin. A band of Uganda Army soldiers opened fire on the Tanzanian Minziro Brigade as it advanced towards Arua, before fleeing in the face of a Tanzanian charge. Several Tanzanians were killed and wounded by their own artillery. It was the last battle of the war. Arua fell without resistance shortly thereafter.
Background.
In 1971 Idi Amin launched a military coup that overthrew the President of Uganda, Milton Obote, precipitating a deterioration of relations with the neighbouring state of Tanzania. Amin installed himself as President and ruled the country under a repressive dictatorship. In October 1978 Amin launched an invasion of Tanzania. Tanzania halted the assault, mobilised anti-Amin militant groups, and launched a counter-offensive.
In a matter of months, the Tanzania People's Defence Force (TPDF) and its Ugandan rebel allies—unified under the umbrella organisation, Uganda National Liberation Front (UNLF)—defeated the Uganda Army in a number of battles, and occupied Kampala, Uganda's capital, on 11 April 1979. With his military disintegrating, Amin's rule collapsed. Having escaped from Kampala, he travelled to a succession of cities in eastern and northern Uganda, urging his remaining forces "to go back and fight the enemy who had invaded our country", even as he prepared to flee into exile. Most Uganda Army units opted to surrender, desert or defect to the Tanzanian-led forces, but some decided to continue to fight for Amin's defunct regime. Amin fled to Arua, where he was picked up by a Libyan military plane and flown to Tripoli into exile. The Tanzanians and the UNLF allies continued their advance to secure eastern and northern Uganda.
Following the occupation of Kitgum by the TPDF, the West Nile District remained the only region in Uganda under pro-Amin control. The two brigade-strong "Task Force" was ordered to secure it. Aside from some small-arms fire at the Ora River, the Tanzanians faced no resistance as they occupied the district. Morale was high, and the Tanzanian troops wished to quickly secure Arua, the last major town under pro-Amin control, where it was widely rumoured Amin was staying.
Prelude.
Major General Silas Mayunga, commander of the Task Force, ordered Brigadier Ahmed Kitete's Minziro Brigade to secure the road to Arua. The brigade's soldiers pressed their officers for a quick advance, as they were eager to finish the war. The Tanzanians felt that the only potential obstacle along the road was the Uganda Army base near Bondo. Positioned 20 kilometres south of Arua, Bondo Camp was one of the largest military installations in the country, serving as the home base for the Kifaru Mechanised Specialist Reconnaissance Regiment. On 27 May 1979 Kitete ordered his brigade to halt five kilometres away from Bondo Camp and rest until the next day, but his battalion commanders urged him to proceed with an attack on the base. Kitete assented, and instructed lunch to be prepared before the operation. The Tanzanian officers quickly drew up plans for the attack while they ate. Since they believed Bondo Camp was probably abandoned, they did not prepare for the employment of their artillery.
Battle.
The Tanzanians advanced in a column towards Bondo Camp in the late afternoon, led by a battalion and three tanks. When they were in the barracks' vicinity, the tanks opened fire on the sides of the roads with their machine guns to clear out any Ugandan troops. Shortly thereafter Ugandan soldiers positioned in front of the Tanzanians fired a 106mm recoilless rifle. The shot went over the column and landed three kilometres down the road, near Kitete's command post. A second shell landed in the same area, followed by numerous Katyusha rockets which landed to the Tanzanians' rear.
The Tanzanian tanks responded with heavy cannon and machine-gun fire, while the infantry sprayed the bush with submachine guns. Kitete could not get a view of the fighting as darkness fell and, considering that artillery had landed near his post and hearing heavy firing, believed that his men had been ambushed. Unable to reach his frontline commanders via radio, he ordered his artillery to bombard the hills immediately behind Bondo Camp. Meanwhile, Tanzanian soldiers at the front of the column charged forward. They secured the abandoned recoilless rifle and Katyusha rocket launcher and spotted about 50 Ugandan soldiers retreating down the Arua road. The Tanzanians pursued them up into the hills when their own artillery began to strike. The first shell dismembered two Tanzanian soldiers, killing them. The pursuit quickly ended as Tanzanian soldiers dived to the ground to take cover. They were unable to reach their artillery battery via radio, and the bombardment continued.
Eventually having been notified that his artillery was striking his own troops, Kitete dispatched his chauffeur to the battery to instruct it to cease firing. The battle lasted approximately 90 minutes. Six Tanzanians were killed and 14 critically wounded by their own artillery. Ambulances arrived at dark to collect them. There were no Ugandan casualties.
Aftermath.
The clash at Bondo was the only resistance the TPDF faced as it advanced on Arua, and was the last battle of the Uganda–Tanzania War. On 28 May the TPDF's Task Force reached the outskirts of Arua. Intelligence reports indicated that Uganda Army troops maintained a large presence in the town, but a civilian informed the Tanzanians that all pro-Amin soldiers had fled. The Task Force's 206th Brigade conducted a light bombardment of the surrounding area and launched star shells into the town. Arua was subsequently seized without resistance. Several high-ranking Uganda Army officers and officials in Amin's government who surrendered in Arua told the Tanzanians that after the fall of Kampala thousands of Ugandan soldiers had fled to Sudan and Zaire with the stated goal of launching an insurgency and retaking Uganda. From Arua the Minziro Brigade advanced to Uganda's western border with Sudan and Zaire. It secured the frontier on 3 June 1979, thus ending the war.
Remnants of the Uganda Army subsequently reorganised in the northwestern border regions and launched a rebellion against the new Ugandan government in 1980. Government officials reported that by October both Arua and Bondo Camp had been seized by the rebel troops. Tanzanian troops assisted in the recapture of the camp. When the last Tanzanian troops left Uganda in October 1981, the rebels made larger incursions into the West Nile District. Subsequent fighting caused significant damage to the area, and the Ugandan government was not able to contain the insurgency until 1982.


Battle of Matrand

The Battle of Matrand () was a military battle on 5 August 1814 between Norwegian and Swedish forces as part of the Swedish-Norwegian War of 1814. The battle took place near the village of Matrand in Eidskog and at Skotterud. It was the bloodiest battle of the entire war, in which the Swedes lost more than 340 men, of which 270 were captured; the Norwegians lost around 50 men with 90 wounded
 and 36 captured.
Background.
After the defeat at Lier the Swedish army retreated first to Malmer and from there back to Matrand, where the rest of the army was stationed. At Matrand they took care of the wounded and it is said that they used the local church there as a field hospital.
At Matrand, Major General Carl Pontus Gahn (1759–1825) would let the troops rest and resupply themselves with new ammunition, before they again should attempt an offensive towards Kongsvinger Fortress in Hedmark. But on 4 August, Gahn received a message that Norwegian reinforcements were sent from Høland to Kongsvinger in order to reinforce the Norwegian positions. Gahn therefore decided to withdraw back across the border to Sweden instead of attempting an offensive.
Norwegian Plan.
From Norwegian farmers who visited the Swedish camp at Matrand, Lt. Colonel Andreas Samuel Krebs (1766- 1818) had received reliable information about the Swedish plans. When he got the message that Gahn intended to march his troops back across the border, he decided to strike against the Swedish in the early morning of August the 5th.
Norwegian forces.
Reserve:
Total: 3,822 men (not including the reserve)
Swedish forces.
Total: 1,200 men
The Battle.
On 4 August, Krebs started his march against the Swedish forces at Matrand. The troops marched together to Åbogen in Hedmark where Captain Dons, with about 1,000 men, was sent to Pramhus, from where he could attack the enemy from behind at Skotterud. Lt. Colonel Krebs with his remaining troops continued to Malmer, where he sent off 250 men to Skinpungrud to attack the enemy flanks. The rest of his troops continued on to Matrand, but it was a weak force of only about 700-800 men.
The Norwegian and Swedish vanguards met quickly close to Matrand, and the Swedes were forced to retreat back to stronger defensive positions. There, the Swedish vanguard also got reinforced, and they managed to keep the Norwegian troops back for about an hour. Gahn used this opportunity to try to speed up the withdrawal and get the Swedish troops safely back behind the border, but they were eventually quickly pushed back towards the rest of the brigade, which had taken positions on both sides of the road, east of the river at Matrand.
After being reinforced by the column that had passed by Skinpungrud, Krebs' forces continued their advance under heavy fire. Krebs did, at this time, not know if Dons and his troops were in position at Skotterud, and for this reason he would not continue to move forward against the enemy. But after a while the Norwegians had grouped themselves so that they were about to encircle the Swedish defenders, and Gahn therefore decided to withdraw to Skotterud with one battalion and two cannons to keep the escape route open. While all this was going on, Captain Dons and his troops were on the march towards Skotterud. When they heard musket fire coming from Matrand, they were concerned that they would not arrive in time to take part in the battle and the last few kilometers they ran. Many of Dons' soldiers could not keep up and thus did not participate in the early stages of the attack on the withdrawing Swedes. When Dons' troops reached the main road at Ilag, which the Swedes used for their withdrawal, some Swedish supply troops were about to pass. Many of their horses were killed by the Norwegians so that the road was blocked for those who followed.
Dons had intended to create a roadblock by Ilag to prevent the Swedish withdrawal, but arrived too late for this. The Swedish forces were now under attack from two sides and were also about to run out of ammunition. Gahn saw that they would be captured unless they managed to break through Norwegian lines. With only their bayonets, the third battalion of the Västerbotten Regiment managed to penetrate the Norwegian lines, after several attacks, which allowed the Swedish force to retreat back to Sweden. The Norwegians had lost 50 men killed, 60 wounded and 36 prisoners, most of which were captured as the Swedes broke out. The Swedes had 60 men killed and about 258 captured and or wounded. An additional 30 men, all wounded, made it back to the Swedish army at a later stage.
The battle had been very intense, and both sides were praised afterwards; the Swedes in particular were surprised by the Norwegian fighting spirit. The successful Swedish outbreak, from an otherwise hopeless situation, was foremost thanks due to the Västerbotten Regiment and the Swedish commander, Carl Pontus Gahn, who remained calm – despite being encircled by overwhelming numbers of enemies. This was not the first time Gahn had faced such difficulties; his entire Dala Battalion was forced to surrender in a similar situation, in 1808, in the Battle of Trangen.
Aftermath.
Lt. Colonel Krebs was hailed as a hero and promoted for the victory at Matrand as well as the prior Battle of Lier ("Slaget på Lier"). His victories were the only ones in an otherwise despondently led campaign. It obtained for the Norwegian envoys a valuable starting point for the negotiations leading to the Convention of Moss. The terms of that cease-fire required Norway to enter into a personal union with Sweden, while Sweden agreed to recognize the Constitution of Norway as an independent state, adopted by the Norwegian Constituent Assembly at Eidsvoll on 17 May 1814.