Interesting use of web design here to explain this painting. But the pieces misidentifies the man in green, who is (my opinion) the key to it. I wrote about him in my book DISAPPOINTMENT RIVER. Warraghiyagey, the bridge between whites and the Iroquois. 1/ nytimes.com/interactive/20…
"Warraghiyagey" was Sir William Johnson, named by the Mohawk as "One Who Does Much." In the painting, he is the only main figure doing anything, running into the scene while everyone else sits and watches General Wolfe die.
Johnson was a British aristocrat who created a fur trading empire in the Mohawk Valley of upstate New York in the mid-1700s by partnering with Hendrick, the Mohawk chief.
Johnson had two families from two wives, one white and one Mohawk. He painted his face as an Iroquois warrior when he led a column of Mohawk fighters into battle during the siege of Fort Niagara. He was buried as an Iroquois chief. He truly adopted both cultures.
You can see this in the painting - not only is he placed next to the Mohawk warrior, and is wearing moccasins and beaded garments, he is in a green coat to separate him from both the blue of the French and red of the English. He is something separate.
There is something distinctly American (or North American) in his co-opting/assumption/appropriation of multiple cultures. This was a trend on the American frontier. The Seven Years War was a world war, but this is a very American painting.
Just some thoughts for the day after Thanksgiving. Shameless plug: lots more on this in my book.
First tweet typo: *piece
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
On my run today, listening to @Tmgneff on this podcast, I thought about the various discussions I've been having with veterans since the Afghanistan Papers story came out.
I realized I had been conflating two things: was this wrong, and was this news? (1/?-book list to follow)
I realized I have almost skipped past the wrongness, long ago having become accustomed to the official dissembling, what @AdrianBonenber1 calls "the absurdity and cravenness of this chartified process." It makes me angry, but it no longer surprises. newrepublic.com/article/155918…
So it is surely wrong for the gov't to lie & mislead for decades. But is it news? This is the part I had focused on, and on this score, I stand firm. Anyone paying attention (everyone should be) knew the US military has been disingenuous since...well, let's say the post-WWII era.
Over the last week, protesters in Baghdad have died with some absolutely gruesome injuries. Every doc we talked to said it's trauma like they've never seen.
Listen, there are videos out there of these horrific injuries at the moment of impact. Do yourself a favor and don't watch them - your sleep will thank you. The CT scans from hospital afterward are bad enough, as you can see.
Why such awful trauma? Less-lethal weapons can always kill when used incorrectly, and police should never fire grenades directly at people. But this is a new level of damage. Not only are Iraqi security forces firing at point blank range, they are using a heavier kind of grenade.
We made it to 33 strikes, on both sides of the front line: Tarhouna, Qasr Bin Ghashir, Wadi al-Rabie, al-Swani, etc. Some of the craters were a month old. Others, like a slaughterhouse hit on Eid, were just struck that day. I managed to pull fresh frag out of nearly every spot
Not surprisingly, old inaccurate Gaddafi-era rockets and artillery caused the majority of civilian casualties. But we saw A LOT of Blue Arrow 7 strikes - in the vacated buffer along the front lines, lots of cheap burned out technicals hit by v. expensive guided missiles.
First, the facts: on 18 March 2019, the US launched an airstrike against 3 men driving in a Toyota SUV on their way back to Mogadishu. Everyone agrees on that.
This word "terrorist" is important. After 18 years of war, it no longer means what you think it means.
The US isn't talking about operatives planning international attacks. AFRICOM told us they hit "lower level al-Shabaab" or "affiliates" ahead of a ground operation.
This senior French artillery officer says from inside the Coalition what many of us have been saying from outside: the destruction of ISIS didn't have to mean the rubblization of eastern Syria and northern Iraq. /thread thenational.ae/world/mena/top…
Here are some choice quotes: "Yes, the Battle of Hajin was won, at least on the ground but by refusing ground engagement, we unnecessarily prolonged the conflict and thus contributed to increasing the number of casualties in the population." 2/
Also: "We have massively destroyed the infrastructure and given the population a disgusting image of what may be a Western-style liberation leaving behind the seeds of an imminent resurgence of a new adversary." 3/
Last night, the US admitted publicly that they killed al-Asiri in a drone strike. He was NOT a master bomb maker, & speaking now as a former EOD tech, the US obsession with al-Asiri embodies everything misguided about US natsec "strategy." (thread/)
Quick recap: al-Asiri is the reason we have body-scanners and laptop checks in airports, though he was fundamentally a failed bomb designer. He was the "mastermind" of plots that didn't work, but he was on the FBI's Most Wanted List for years. (2/)
His first target was the Saudi royal family - in 2009, he recruited his brother as a suicide bomber and inserted a device in his rectum, who activated it when meeting a minister. His brother died, the minister received minor injuries. (3/)