Bomber Harris Interview on TV (merged - AGAIN!)
It takes little research to find that the 'maroons' (have I spelt that right?) 
who are critical of our tactics in WW2, are the same head banging idiots who will automatically support global warming, anti whale hunting etc etc. Basically, people who will always try to 'wind up' people who respect the way things happened. I feel very sorry that my 30 years of service (not WW2) means nothing, if I'm to believe such people. Maybe one day the guys of Bomber Command will achieve the true respect that they deserve. I know that most ppruners already do. Danny thanks for your input to this thread, you are someone that gave us our right to comment.
Smudge
who are critical of our tactics in WW2, are the same head banging idiots who will automatically support global warming, anti whale hunting etc etc. Basically, people who will always try to 'wind up' people who respect the way things happened. I feel very sorry that my 30 years of service (not WW2) means nothing, if I'm to believe such people. Maybe one day the guys of Bomber Command will achieve the true respect that they deserve. I know that most ppruners already do. Danny thanks for your input to this thread, you are someone that gave us our right to comment.Smudge
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Starring at an Airfield Near you
Posts: 371
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
Party Animal post #17
D'accord!!! +1000
D'accord!!! +1000
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bomber Harris.
Thank you chaps, for the kind words about me. MayI quote:
Party Animal:
"I personally would also love to chat in depth about your experiences and hear all of your stories from those days".
old-timer:
"Well said Party Animal - I'm with you on that".
Downwind Maddi-Land:
"Party Animal post #17 D'accord!!! + 1000"
Gentlemen,
I tell of my experiences on the "Gaining an RAF Pilot's Brevet" Thread, starting #2250 on p. 113 and still going strong. I would be delighted to "chat in depth" , and receive comment, or answer questions - to the best of my ability (on open Post on that Thread) on any of my Posts......D
smujsmith,
I think "moron" is the word you seek...Thank you for the compliments.....D.
Cheers to you all, Danny.
Party Animal:
"I personally would also love to chat in depth about your experiences and hear all of your stories from those days".
old-timer:
"Well said Party Animal - I'm with you on that".
Downwind Maddi-Land:
"Party Animal post #17 D'accord!!! + 1000"
Gentlemen,
I tell of my experiences on the "Gaining an RAF Pilot's Brevet" Thread, starting #2250 on p. 113 and still going strong. I would be delighted to "chat in depth" , and receive comment, or answer questions - to the best of my ability (on open Post on that Thread) on any of my Posts......D
smujsmith,
I think "moron" is the word you seek...Thank you for the compliments.....D.
Cheers to you all, Danny.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back on page 1, Chugalug2 said:
Since Korea, and in every war we've been involved in since, our political leaders seem to have turned away from this premise, a premise that has been starkly obvious to any military man, from Jackie Fisher to Douglas MacArthur and how many since.
I'd be willing to bet my pension that events currently transpiring in Afghanistan, where we will declare 'victory' and then leave our Afghan allies in the lurch, will result in the total defeat of the anti-Taliban forces within two years. For, as has become usual since 1950, our leaders have decided we should semi-fight a war against a succession of enemies who, to borrow a phrase from the American/Japanese Niesi in WW2, 'go for broke' in every way.
The pond life who make up 99% of politicians of all persuasions make use of MEN like Arthur Harris when their own futures are at risk, but are all too quick to abandon them when the danger has passed. I find myself hoping that when (not if) the politicians in the West again realise that they require another Arthur Harris,
(a) they give him full reign to win, whatever that involves, and
(b) we have the military assets, treasure and will to prevail.
The way those same politicians are spending our national treasure on useless vote-buying, I fear, when the time comes, point (b) might be found wanting.
If you have to fight a war, fight it to win or just don't bother fighting at all, for you will lose.
I'd be willing to bet my pension that events currently transpiring in Afghanistan, where we will declare 'victory' and then leave our Afghan allies in the lurch, will result in the total defeat of the anti-Taliban forces within two years. For, as has become usual since 1950, our leaders have decided we should semi-fight a war against a succession of enemies who, to borrow a phrase from the American/Japanese Niesi in WW2, 'go for broke' in every way.
The pond life who make up 99% of politicians of all persuasions make use of MEN like Arthur Harris when their own futures are at risk, but are all too quick to abandon them when the danger has passed. I find myself hoping that when (not if) the politicians in the West again realise that they require another Arthur Harris,
(a) they give him full reign to win, whatever that involves, and
(b) we have the military assets, treasure and will to prevail.
The way those same politicians are spending our national treasure on useless vote-buying, I fear, when the time comes, point (b) might be found wanting.
Whenever I read uncritical adulation of the Red Army, and the oft-stated view that the Russians won the war for us, with events in the West being a mere sideshow, I remember that that were it not for the relentless efforts of Bomber Command (and the USAAF 8th Air Force from 1942) the Russians, who took virtually no part in the strategic bombing offensive, would have been invading a very different Germany with its defences and industries intact, as of course would the allied armies coming in from the West.
TTN, I would go further than that. If Bomber Command and its USAAF counterparts had not conducted their campaigns with the determination, courage, and sacrifice that they did, there would in all probability have been no Red Army advance to the West and no corresponding Allied advance to the East. Unhindered, German tank production could have matched the Russian one, and the strategically important close run Battle of Kirsk could have swung the other way, with the advancing done by the Wehrmacht. Equally the close run Allied D-Day Invasion of France would have been a rout if the Luftwaffe had been present in force, had we been foolish enough to launch it under such conditions. It was of course elsewhere though, defending the skies of the Reich.
If Hitler had succeeded in the East I doubt if we would ever have managed to invade him in the West. Both fronts depended on that third vital front, the Battle of Germany from above. It is a scandal that it was never given the recognition that it deserved.
If Hitler had succeeded in the East I doubt if we would ever have managed to invade him in the West. Both fronts depended on that third vital front, the Battle of Germany from above. It is a scandal that it was never given the recognition that it deserved.
Last edited by Chugalug2; 13th Feb 2013 at 09:53.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Japan
Age: 71
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something I've always wondered about. For the French/Belgians/Dutch/Danes, 1940 and 1941 all the heavy metal was heading west. Then there came a change. What was the effect for those in occupied countries when the bomber streams were heading for Germany? It must have been proof (despite any propaganda) that the allies weren't losing. I'd have found that cheering.
The BBC produces the world's best TV and radio programmes, but mention Bomber Command and they lose it completely.
Last year I watched a pair of "experts" wander around Hamburg and bleat that all this vast civilian area had been destroyed in the devastating firestorm of 1943. There was no mention of the fact that Hamburg was the main centre for U-boat production, that Churchill said after the war that the U-boat campaign was the one that worried him more than any other, and that 1943 was the height of that campaign. Speer said later that the Hamburg raid had a very severe effect on U-boat production.
I wrote to the BBC pointing this out but of course was ignored because it wasn't what the "experts" wanted to hear. Likewise more lamentation on the Today programme this morning on the anniversary of Dresden, even a description of the bombing techniques, but of course no mention of how those techniques were developed by the Germans and introduced in the skies above Coventry a few years previously. And of course it was all the RAF's work, no mention of the American daylight raids which followed the RAF's night attacks. As Harris said, Germany had sown the wind and would reap the whirlwind.
Agreed that the Dresden raid was terrible, as were the raids on countless other cities. War has no winners except the arms manufacturers. The losers included more than 55000 Bomber Command aircrew who gave their lives so the BBC would not have William Joyce, Lord Haw Haw, as its director-general, and we and the Beeb would have the freedoms we enjoy today.
Last year I watched a pair of "experts" wander around Hamburg and bleat that all this vast civilian area had been destroyed in the devastating firestorm of 1943. There was no mention of the fact that Hamburg was the main centre for U-boat production, that Churchill said after the war that the U-boat campaign was the one that worried him more than any other, and that 1943 was the height of that campaign. Speer said later that the Hamburg raid had a very severe effect on U-boat production.
I wrote to the BBC pointing this out but of course was ignored because it wasn't what the "experts" wanted to hear. Likewise more lamentation on the Today programme this morning on the anniversary of Dresden, even a description of the bombing techniques, but of course no mention of how those techniques were developed by the Germans and introduced in the skies above Coventry a few years previously. And of course it was all the RAF's work, no mention of the American daylight raids which followed the RAF's night attacks. As Harris said, Germany had sown the wind and would reap the whirlwind.
Agreed that the Dresden raid was terrible, as were the raids on countless other cities. War has no winners except the arms manufacturers. The losers included more than 55000 Bomber Command aircrew who gave their lives so the BBC would not have William Joyce, Lord Haw Haw, as its director-general, and we and the Beeb would have the freedoms we enjoy today.
Last edited by Geriaviator; 13th Feb 2013 at 11:39.
Another point often forgotten is that Germany produced over 20,000 of the lethal 88mm cannon and over 4,000 of the fearsome 105mm cannon.
As far as I can tell about 75% of these guns were used to defend the Reich from the RAF / USAAF bomber attacks. There would have been more if it hadn't been for the efforts of my Dad and his fellow aviators who regularly tried to reduce the Krupps works in Essen to rubble.
If these guns had made it to the Western Desert and the Eastern Front then the Allied tank attacks might have had a different outcome.
Geriaviator, I think that RAF Bomber Command "sank" more U-Boats by bombing the shipyards than the RN and Coastal Command combined.
As far as I can tell about 75% of these guns were used to defend the Reich from the RAF / USAAF bomber attacks. There would have been more if it hadn't been for the efforts of my Dad and his fellow aviators who regularly tried to reduce the Krupps works in Essen to rubble.
If these guns had made it to the Western Desert and the Eastern Front then the Allied tank attacks might have had a different outcome.
Geriaviator, I think that RAF Bomber Command "sank" more U-Boats by bombing the shipyards than the RN and Coastal Command combined.
Last edited by LowNSlow; 13th Feb 2013 at 11:49.
Bomber Harris
Why the need to feel any guilt.?
We were involved in total war and the end result justified the means.
Bomber Command has never received the honour which it truly drserved and their reputation has been besmirched by those people who only put their heads above the parapet when the shooting war was over.
Danny, good to see you popping up on another thread
We were involved in total war and the end result justified the means.
Bomber Command has never received the honour which it truly drserved and their reputation has been besmirched by those people who only put their heads above the parapet when the shooting war was over.
Danny, good to see you popping up on another thread
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"We were involved in total war and the end result justified the means."
And what geriaviator said re the Germans.
I've been out of the UK quite a while so don't see everything that
is on TV but see what programs come on pay TV here - often
the same.
Really, even when I was in the UK not much is shown about the effect of the Bombing on Britain, V1's, V2's etc.
It's only because my Grand mother talked to me about it - often
because I asked - and the stories of my mother that I know
about it at all, what it was like to live in a city being bombed
every day, running for the air raid shelter, being machine gunned
shot up by a plane on the way home with my aunt.
I asked my GF's kids the other day, WWII doesn't even rate !
So it's not surprising if all they show is the one sided view.
We have nothing to apologise for.
And what geriaviator said re the Germans.
I've been out of the UK quite a while so don't see everything that
is on TV but see what programs come on pay TV here - often
the same.
Really, even when I was in the UK not much is shown about the effect of the Bombing on Britain, V1's, V2's etc.
It's only because my Grand mother talked to me about it - often
because I asked - and the stories of my mother that I know
about it at all, what it was like to live in a city being bombed
every day, running for the air raid shelter, being machine gunned
shot up by a plane on the way home with my aunt.
I asked my GF's kids the other day, WWII doesn't even rate !
So it's not surprising if all they show is the one sided view.
We have nothing to apologise for.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bomber Harris.
May I heartily support Andu (#24 p.2) in his quotation from Chugalug (#11 p. 1):
"If you have to fight a war, fight it to win or just don't bother fighting at all, for you will lose"
Chugalug has hit the nail exactly on the head here. This weird concept that you can in some way half-fight a war has only appeared in the last 20-30 years. It flowered in the Falklands. When a country invades your sovereign territory, a de facto state of war exists, whether either party likes it or not. You cannot be: "willing to wound, but afraid to strike". (It so happened that we won, as we had in charge the first - and last - statesman we've had since Churchill).
Now consider the Belgrano affair. It would have been legitimate for us to have attacked it in harbour, if we could. When it put to sea, it was not so that the crew could enjoy a sea cruise. It was at sea to do us harm, and for no other reason. But then: "Was it in the "Exclusion Zone" ? (in itself a fatuous attempt to "limit" - ie half-fight - the war) or out of the "Exclusion Zone" ? Was it in, but going out, or out but going in ? Was it actually turning to go out ?
All utterly irrelevant. The Conqueror which had been shadowing it now had it in its sights, in range, torpedo tubes loaded. What would one of Nelson's captains have done ? What did our poor chap have to do ? Signal to HQ at Northwood for permission to fire ! (Nelson must be whizzing round in his grave !)
All this may seem off-thread. But the thinking behind all the weeping and wailing (all those poor Argentinian sailors !) that followed exactly mirrors that of our present detractors of Harris and his heroes (and I use that word advisedly).
Having got that off my chest, I have little to add to the absolutely correct analyses of the situation (and the policy we adopted) which have appeared here. War is terrible for everbody involved, and there is no way to limit its effects. I would only add that the effect of the bombing campaign on our morale must never be underestimated. You can "take it" far more cheerfully when you know you're also "giving it out" hard (that was the main function of the AA batteries, they didn't hit much, but they sure made a hell of a row).
D.
"If you have to fight a war, fight it to win or just don't bother fighting at all, for you will lose"
Chugalug has hit the nail exactly on the head here. This weird concept that you can in some way half-fight a war has only appeared in the last 20-30 years. It flowered in the Falklands. When a country invades your sovereign territory, a de facto state of war exists, whether either party likes it or not. You cannot be: "willing to wound, but afraid to strike". (It so happened that we won, as we had in charge the first - and last - statesman we've had since Churchill).
Now consider the Belgrano affair. It would have been legitimate for us to have attacked it in harbour, if we could. When it put to sea, it was not so that the crew could enjoy a sea cruise. It was at sea to do us harm, and for no other reason. But then: "Was it in the "Exclusion Zone" ? (in itself a fatuous attempt to "limit" - ie half-fight - the war) or out of the "Exclusion Zone" ? Was it in, but going out, or out but going in ? Was it actually turning to go out ?
All utterly irrelevant. The Conqueror which had been shadowing it now had it in its sights, in range, torpedo tubes loaded. What would one of Nelson's captains have done ? What did our poor chap have to do ? Signal to HQ at Northwood for permission to fire ! (Nelson must be whizzing round in his grave !)
All this may seem off-thread. But the thinking behind all the weeping and wailing (all those poor Argentinian sailors !) that followed exactly mirrors that of our present detractors of Harris and his heroes (and I use that word advisedly).
Having got that off my chest, I have little to add to the absolutely correct analyses of the situation (and the policy we adopted) which have appeared here. War is terrible for everbody involved, and there is no way to limit its effects. I would only add that the effect of the bombing campaign on our morale must never be underestimated. You can "take it" far more cheerfully when you know you're also "giving it out" hard (that was the main function of the AA batteries, they didn't hit much, but they sure made a hell of a row).
D.
Last edited by Danny42C; 13th Feb 2013 at 20:34. Reason: Egregious Error.
Danny,
Once again thanks for an accurate and concise assessment of 'modern warfare, and political/ populist' attitudes. It's hard to criticise, and I would not have the temerity to do so, anyone who has never 'been there' when it comes to warfare. For my part I have been involved in only minor stuff compared to what happened in WW2, and, believe that my own experiences are enough to ensure I have no 'creeping attraction' to such activities. Gulf War 1, Sarajevo, Rwanda and other skirmishes leave little to glory in (whatever feelings of 'doing right' one may have). It seems to me that there is always a belief in successive generations, that, they ( a more moral and understanding society) will not succumb to war. This often allows them to feel they hold the moral high ground on preceding generations. But then, here we are again, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria ? Etc.
In every case there will be a political imperative that requires military servants to comply. It's a sad indictment of our society that a soldier, doing his duty, is to carry the burden of responsibility for decisions made by people who will not face the threat of even seeing the enemy, let alone facing the enemy. I can have nothing but contempt for the politicians who so casually both laud, in their solemn repeating of our lost servicemens names every week, and then, announce the redundancies to be applied on their surviving comrades return from theatre. And three years from now the whole thing will be the fault of some General, Air Vice Marshal etc.
Sorry, obviously I'm ranting, but, I wonder why anyone would want to be part of the defence forces of the UK these days, when they are so obviously held,in contempt by many who have no understanding of their situation. End of rant, apologies to all.
dulce bellum inexpertis
Smudge
Once again thanks for an accurate and concise assessment of 'modern warfare, and political/ populist' attitudes. It's hard to criticise, and I would not have the temerity to do so, anyone who has never 'been there' when it comes to warfare. For my part I have been involved in only minor stuff compared to what happened in WW2, and, believe that my own experiences are enough to ensure I have no 'creeping attraction' to such activities. Gulf War 1, Sarajevo, Rwanda and other skirmishes leave little to glory in (whatever feelings of 'doing right' one may have). It seems to me that there is always a belief in successive generations, that, they ( a more moral and understanding society) will not succumb to war. This often allows them to feel they hold the moral high ground on preceding generations. But then, here we are again, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria ? Etc.
In every case there will be a political imperative that requires military servants to comply. It's a sad indictment of our society that a soldier, doing his duty, is to carry the burden of responsibility for decisions made by people who will not face the threat of even seeing the enemy, let alone facing the enemy. I can have nothing but contempt for the politicians who so casually both laud, in their solemn repeating of our lost servicemens names every week, and then, announce the redundancies to be applied on their surviving comrades return from theatre. And three years from now the whole thing will be the fault of some General, Air Vice Marshal etc.
Sorry, obviously I'm ranting, but, I wonder why anyone would want to be part of the defence forces of the UK these days, when they are so obviously held,in contempt by many who have no understanding of their situation. End of rant, apologies to all.
dulce bellum inexpertis
Smudge
Last edited by smujsmith; 13th Feb 2013 at 22:21.
A Great man maybe, but in this film he shows an un-canny resemblance to Albert Tatlock. I kept expecting Minnie Caldwell to bring in a bottle of stout!
Sad thing is, Albert is probably remembered by more people than BH.
Sad thing is, Albert is probably remembered by more people than BH.
The Inside Out West Midlands 11/02/2013 Harris interview starts at 20'30" into the prog. :-
BBC iPlayer - Inside Out West: 11/02/2013
Unfortunately it is about the interview rather than of it, so hopefully we can be allowed to view it one day from start to finish, without the "explanations" interspersed here. That would of course lead to us having to make up our own minds rather than having them made up for us, so perhaps not...
PS, Edited to thoroughly endorse Danny's bestowing the title "our last Statesman" to Margaret Thatcher. No PC drivel there then about statesperson or stateswoman or Ms or whatever. I'm pretty certain she would be touched by the accolade and in full agreement with the sentiments behind it.
BBC iPlayer - Inside Out West: 11/02/2013
Unfortunately it is about the interview rather than of it, so hopefully we can be allowed to view it one day from start to finish, without the "explanations" interspersed here. That would of course lead to us having to make up our own minds rather than having them made up for us, so perhaps not...
PS, Edited to thoroughly endorse Danny's bestowing the title "our last Statesman" to Margaret Thatcher. No PC drivel there then about statesperson or stateswoman or Ms or whatever. I'm pretty certain she would be touched by the accolade and in full agreement with the sentiments behind it.
Last edited by Chugalug2; 14th Feb 2013 at 12:09.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone started a "Dresden Bombing" thread on another forum I frequent and, peacetime Bomber Command ground crew veteran that I am, I leapt to Bomber Harris's defence. The thread starter was man enough to admit that he had not been aware of the facts that I included - especially the involvement of "Ultra" intelligence on the fortification of the city against Marshal Koniev's advance - and acknowledged that he had been wrong to describe the attack as unjustified.
Those who condemn the bomber offensive as a war crime miss the point that WW2 was an all out war that had to be ended as quickly as possible by totally destroying the enemy's ability to wage war. The same applies to the atomic attack on Hiroshima, hundreds of thousands died so that tens of millions might live.
Those who condemn the bomber offensive as a war crime miss the point that WW2 was an all out war that had to be ended as quickly as possible by totally destroying the enemy's ability to wage war. The same applies to the atomic attack on Hiroshima, hundreds of thousands died so that tens of millions might live.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
George Thompson VC
Every couple of years I give a talk to the local primary school about George Thompson VC whose name is on the village War Memorial. The oldest children have WWII Home Front as a project.
To make it more interactive, the children make up flying brevets so we can form them into Lancaster crews - nav, pilot air gunner etc. Halfway through the talk, the children sit in rows in the order the crews sat. I do a bit on RISE, comradeship "can I have your egg if you don't get back" etc.
This year I had 12 "crews" and for a change, to show the sacrifice and the losses, I started whittling the crews down, making the children "shot down" stand at the edge of the sports hall while asking those that were left how they felt about having to carry on after losing friends.
Eventually, to make the point that surviving a tour was well on impossible, we had 50 odd kids surrounding a solitary remaining crew who I used to tell the story of George Thompson VC, 9 Sqn.
Sometimes the brain can't comprehend stats like 55,000 dead, or only 10% who started the war survived the war in Bomber Command. But when you've 50 "dead" 10-12 year olds surrounding the surviving 7 children, it was a pretty effective visual indication of the sacrifice.
Oh - last thing for the BBC etc. When Dresden was ordered, V2's were still landing on London & Holland indiscriminately killing, and my mob, 602 Sqn were dive-bombing the launching sites to try and stop them. You cannot apply modern niceties to historical decisions!
Every couple of years I give a talk to the local primary school about George Thompson VC whose name is on the village War Memorial. The oldest children have WWII Home Front as a project.
To make it more interactive, the children make up flying brevets so we can form them into Lancaster crews - nav, pilot air gunner etc. Halfway through the talk, the children sit in rows in the order the crews sat. I do a bit on RISE, comradeship "can I have your egg if you don't get back" etc.
This year I had 12 "crews" and for a change, to show the sacrifice and the losses, I started whittling the crews down, making the children "shot down" stand at the edge of the sports hall while asking those that were left how they felt about having to carry on after losing friends.
Eventually, to make the point that surviving a tour was well on impossible, we had 50 odd kids surrounding a solitary remaining crew who I used to tell the story of George Thompson VC, 9 Sqn.
Sometimes the brain can't comprehend stats like 55,000 dead, or only 10% who started the war survived the war in Bomber Command. But when you've 50 "dead" 10-12 year olds surrounding the surviving 7 children, it was a pretty effective visual indication of the sacrifice.
Oh - last thing for the BBC etc. When Dresden was ordered, V2's were still landing on London & Holland indiscriminately killing, and my mob, 602 Sqn were dive-bombing the launching sites to try and stop them. You cannot apply modern niceties to historical decisions!
I remember seeing an interview on TV with a German historian regarding the bombing of Germany in WW2. He could not see what the controversy was all about said 'why did the German people think they were immune from the sort of devastation that they had visited on the rest of Europe ?' The real 'War Crime' would have been to have done nothing at all when the only way we had of striking back at Germany was the Bomber Offensive. Reminds me of the Belgrano sinking. Again post conflict one of the Argentinian admirals said if he were in our position he would have done the same. Still it is the nature of these critics to abuse the freedom bought at such great personal expense by other brave men.
DIRECTOR
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Night Bombers
Eastward they climb,black shapes against the grey
Of falling dusk,gone with the nodding day
From English fields.
Not theirs the sudden glow
Of triumph that their fighter -brothers know;
Only to fly through cloud,through storm,through
night
Unerring,and to keep their purpose bright,
Nor turn until,their dreadful duty done,
Westward they climb to race the awakened sun.
Eastward they climb,black shapes against the grey
Of falling dusk,gone with the nodding day
From English fields.
Not theirs the sudden glow
Of triumph that their fighter -brothers know;
Only to fly through cloud,through storm,through
night
Unerring,and to keep their purpose bright,
Nor turn until,their dreadful duty done,
Westward they climb to race the awakened sun.