How the Pentagon Got Its Shape 473
Pcol writes "The Washington Post is running a story on the design process for the Pentagon building and why it ended up with its unusual shape. In July 1941 with World War II looming, a small group of army officers met to consider a secret plan to provide a permanent home for War Department headquarters containing 4 million square feet of office space and housing 40,000 people. The building that Brig. Gen. Brehon Burke Somervell, head of the Army's Construction Division, wanted to build was too large to fit within the confines of Washington DC and would have to be located across the Potomac River in Arlington. "We want 500,000 square feet ready in six months, and the whole thing ready in a year," the general said adding that he wanted a design on his desk by Monday morning. The easiest solution, a tall building, was out because of pre-war restrictions on steel usage and the desire not to ruin Washington's skyline. The tract selected had a asymmetrical pentagon shape bound on five sides by roads or other divisions so the building was designed to conform to the tract of land. Then with objections that the new building would block views from Arlington National Cemetery, the location was moved almost one-half mile south. The building would no longer be constructed on the five-sided Arlington Farm site yet the team continued with plans for a pentagon at the new location. In the rush to complete the project, there was simply no time to change the design."
One page version rather than five pages ... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Animated gifs, a dynamic JavaScript title bar, icons that follow the mouse, a confusing layout, AND embedded background music?
BEST. WEBSITE. EVAR.
I bet it would get 6 stars from Bob's Top 50 List of Super-Cool Intartube Webpages.
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Principia Discordia reference (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Principia Discordia reference (Score:5, Insightful)
impressive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Principia Discordia reference (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Principia Discordia reference (Score:5, Interesting)
The Illuminatus Trilogy is a humorous work of non-fiction. It successfully tries to explain everything. It is a comedy novel, like Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, except about conspiracies instead of space-travel. It finds an audience in the post-LSD era, because it is still relevant.
("Both of the preceding statements are true. Both of the preceding statements are false. Both of the preceding statements are irrelevant.")
The passages on Celine's Laws [slashdot.org] are particularly relevant today. You don't need a conspiracy to explain Gulf War II. You just need Saddam's lieutenants swearing up and down that the WMD projects are going well -- because they know they'll be shot if they tell the truth. Nor do you need a conspiracy on the American side -- you just need a bunch of paranoids listening in on the conversations between Saddam and his lieutenants.
Saddam: "How are my nukes?"
Lieutenant: "What nukes?"
Saddam: *BANG*
Lieutenant #2: "Gulp... umm, actually, they're going very well, sir!"
Lieutenant #3: "Yes, it's going very well!"
America: "What's Saddam up to?"
Spies: "Well, every one of his lieutenants say his nukes are almost ready, sir!"
America: "Launch the missiles!"
Some folks might even find the following little snippet of dialogue to be relevant.
Not bad for the 1970s.
It's not true unless it makes you laugh.
But then, to bring us back on topic, my first thought on 9/11 was to wonder if he got out of the Pentagon. Unfortunately, it looks like he did.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Back around 1975, I read an interview with those two drug-addled bozos. They'd propound some lame conspiracy theory. The interviewer would point out some obvious flaw in t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Hail Eris!!
All Hail Discordia!!!
Cheney's House (Score:5, Funny)
Really in the Middle of the Basement Was... (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Cheney's House (Score:5, Insightful)
What a bunch of superstitious bullshit.
Devils don't exist.
Everyone knows it is a captured shoggoth from the 1930s Miskatonic University Antarctic expedition...
Re:Cheney's House (Score:4, Insightful)
The shoggoth's Antarctic iceblock is in the Disney Concert Hall [about.com] in LA, keeping Walt's head frozen.
Re: (Score:2)
How the Pentagon Got Its Shape (Score:4, Funny)
This vividly reminds me of "the time when the milkman was 47 minutes late" [wikipedia.org]
Re:How the Pentagon Got Its Shape (Score:5, Funny)
The "War Department" (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
why math (Score:2)
the names of the chief alternative designs (Score:5, Funny)
Re:the names of the chief alternative designs (Score:5, Funny)
Re:the names of the chief alternative designs (Score:5, Funny)
Nah, it was just they thought the discussion would go on for ever
Re:the names of the chief alternative designs (Score:5, Funny)
What!? (Score:4, Funny)
why fight it? (Score:2)
I'm not trying to pooh-pooh the article, but it's just kind of...well...you know, my shoe is shaped kind of oblong and rounded because, well, that'
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When the bureaucracy worked (Score:5, Insightful)
The lessons were learned in WW1. When that war started, the British officer corps was incompetent. They were in charge of the empire's troops and there were massacres of Canadian, Australian, Newfoundland etc. troops. The colonies weren't about to put up with that. In fact there is a story that the Canadian prime minister hauled the British prime minister out of his chair by his lapels and made it very clear that, if there was another such massacre, the Canadians were going home. The incompetent British officers were replaced by competent colonials. By the time the Americans arrived, they had some very good models of military efficiency to copy. (You could also make the argument that they weren't that stupid in the first place.) In any event, when WW2 came along, the lessons learned in WW1 were still living memory.
Sadly, given enough peace time, the fat bloated bureaucracy rears its ugly head again. The meritocracy is suppressed. If we had to build another Pentagon today, it would cost too much and take too long, and some company close to certain politicians would get rich. In fact, looking at the corruption and waste of money in Iraq, I'm feeling very depressed.
Lessons Learned, and Forgotten (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There was definitely corruption and inefficiency on the part of the U.S. during WWII (as in any war I know of). However, there were people in government dedicated to finding such corruption, exposing it, and resolving it. That's specifically how Harry Truman came to public fame. If only our current administration allowed such a thing!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Canada didn't actually get a constitution until 1982. During WWI, there was talk of implementing conscription to fill the war need, and there actually was some conscription going on in Quebec and parts of the prairies, but there was a huge backlash against that. Thankfully, the war ended before any of those conscripts were sent overseas.
After the war, we didn't update our constitution, becaus
It was incompetence! Criminal incompetence. (Score:3, Informative)
The English and French leadership used their own men as cannon fodder thought out WWI.
Tactics simply hadn't caught up with weapons. Modern infantry tactics are all about mobility and flanking. America learned that in the Civil War. England and France had not learned it in WWI.
General Pershing was a hero for telling the English and the French that there was no way in hell American troops would be put under the incompetent English and French officer corps.
the onion had it right (Score:2, Funny)
Prison of Yog-Sothoth (Score:3)
Sounds vaguely familiar (Score:3, Funny)
Ah, never mind, I'm sure they'll get it right in rev 2.
Pentagon is traditional for military buildings (Score:4, Informative)
A pentagon is a very traditional shape for fortifications. Reason is very simple. If you have a pentagon shaped fort then each side of the fort can provide supporting fire to its two adjacent sides.
A sides on a square fort cannot provide supporting fire at all. Sides on a hexagonal fort can but with a hexagonal fort you can only get 50% of the defenders firing against an attack on a side. With a pentagonal fort you can get 60%. This basic fact makes a pentagon the most effective shape for a fortification, assuming no terrain features to change the situation.
It would be an amazing coincidence if The Pentagon was pentagonal for any reason but this.
Re:Pentagon is traditional for military buildings (Score:5, Insightful)
Um... other than the fact that the Pentagon is NOT a fortified facility, and that fortifications of pretty much anything bigger than a bunker were already old news by the time the building was designed. It could be a bit of an homage to the old fort designs, but in the middle of WWII, they weren't feeling particularly arty at the time. Occam's Razor goes to the story in the article: the very rushed designs were drafted around a roughly pentagonal plot of land in Arlington, and construction was quickly moved a bit at the last minute, without time or inclination to redesign it. It's hard for people today to even begin to know what it felt like to be truly wrapped up in a period like WWII... we know nothing (as civilians) of that degree of nationwide effort and expense aimed at combatting forces intent on our subjugation/destruction and how much that tends to dimish things like architectural squabbles and design life cycles.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You could have at least SKIMMED the article... (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway, if you read at least the first page of the article you would have learned that the Pentagon was originally sited close to Arlington National Cemetery on an oddly shaped tract of land bounded on five sides, thus necessitating the five-sided nature of the building. When members of Congress and other officials protested that the monolithic design would obscure the vi
This is not true. (Score:4, Funny)
TLF
Screw the pentagon (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Screw the pentagon (Score:5, Informative)
the Nazi swastika is "right-facing", with the arms of cross bent clockwise or to the right. The Hindu swastika is also usually right-facing, although you can sometimes see right and left facing mirror image swastikas in Hindu art. The Jain in India also use that right-facing bend usually.
WWII looming? (Score:4, Interesting)
Can we please get rid of the attitude that WWII started on 7 December 1941. I always find it interesting that the British (and even the occupied Dutch) declared war on Japan the same day the Americans did, but not only did the Americans take two years to declare war on Germany, they didn't even declare war on Germany first--Germany declared war on the US [wikipedia.org]! Looming indeed!
Re:WWII looming? (Score:4, Informative)
In the United States, World War II was looming in July 1941. Many countries were involved, Germany was on the move, the Pacific was looking to heat up, and here in the U.S. there was much debate between isolationists and non-isolationists about our potential involvement.
We weren't directly involved yet, so for us it did still LOOM in 1941. I expect someone in Russia would describe it much differently, with different dates. Similarly, Russians call it something like the "Great Patriotic War" rather than "World War II".
It's the old "three blind men describe an elephant" problem.
Re:WWII looming? (Score:5, Funny)
Then I realized -- the new "pro-active" America bothers me a LOT MORE.
July 1941?! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:July 1941?! (Score:4, Informative)
The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its Government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack.
It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese Government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.
The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.
Yesterday the Japanese Government also launched an attack against Malaya.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam.
Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.
Last night the Japanese attacked Wake Island.
And this morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.
Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.
But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.
I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.
Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.
With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounded determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.
I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire."
skyline??? (Score:3, Interesting)
Hold up... skyline!! What skyline? DC has laws stating that no buildings may be over 20 feet taller than the width of the street they face. What DC has is a profound lack/i> of skyline!
Poor urban planning and laws like this have, of course, caused many of the city's problems. The sprawl around DC is absolutely unbelievable.
bad shape for aerial attack (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:bad shape for aerial attack (Score:5, Insightful)
A pilot would easily find it even without a map.
Uh, yeah. I think that actually happened. Heard about it on the news or something.
Re:Pentagon or Pentagram? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Pentagon or Pentagram? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Pentagon or Pentagram? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Pentagon or Pentagram? (Score:4, Funny)
This is proof that the Flat Earth Society was working in league with the Satanists and the Teamsters to create the cold war. Stalin was in on it, and so was Eisenhower and Truman. Pudge knows, but he's not saying. He's avoiding military service, because if he were caught by the terrorists in Iraq and the secret got out, it would be the end of our way of life. I salute you, Pudge, for keeping our secrets safe within the borders of the nation, and away from the terrorists in Iraq. Such a brave man.
Re:Pentagon or Pentagram? (Score:5, Funny)
I totally agree. Like all open source ventures, the quality just isn't there. The proprietary masons would have done it properly.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you are in IT, construction, or just about any other business where one has to deal with stringent project deadlines, you know exactly how true this situation is.
But simple truth is way too mundane when compared to the rich fantasy available with conspiracy theories, Freemason plotting, The New World Order, Zionist global domination, Extraterrestrial influence, etc.etc. ad nauseam!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most of the Slashdot community? Most of Americans? Most of Government? Most of humanity?
Just who are you trying to dehumanize with that statement?
Earlier up this thread you said "The symbols are important, only because our population is comprised mainly of poor fools who know how to respond to nothing else."
Setting aside your hubris and arrogance, the point that you have failed to grasp is that the Pentagon's shape may not be as "Symbolic" as previously surmised. But plea
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Permanent home? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People who accuse the United States of trying to "conquer" Iraq or Afghanistan don't know what true conquest is.
Only those here in the US; those abroad (and especially local to those areas) do know what it is, but don't think we have the balls to outrage the whole world by doing it. The complaints are a political [quotationspage.com] ploy [quotationspage.com].
Re:Permanent home? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We weren't allowed to go after major NV cities/production centers, we weren't allowed to bomb Chinese supply convoys, often weren't allowed to go north of an imaginary line drawn on the map by our politicians.
Yeah, Vietnam is such an example of how unrestrained warfare can't work.
Please note that I don't like some of what happen in vietnam. On the other hand, we could of avoided much of it if it wasn't for politicians running the war. You don't win a war by holding back.
I also feel that part of
Treat the cause, not the symptoms (Score:4, Informative)
Perhaps you aren't old enough to remember the Vietnam war, but I do. The US was never officially at war against North Vietnam, they spent ten years helping South Vietnam fight the Viet Cong insurgents. They dropped a few million tons of bombs in North Vietnam, for sure, just like they did on the Viet Cong supply routes in Laos and Cambodia, but they never attempted to invade North Vietnam.
If the US had wanted to win the Vietnam war they should have invaded North Vietnam. Land there in an amphibious attack and war would have been won in a matter of weeks. Likewise, if they want to win the Iraq war now, they should invade Syria and Iran. If the US Army had stopped at the German border after liberating France from Nazism they would have lost WWII.
Ever since Truman refused the MacArthur request to attack China during the Korea war, the US has had this doctrine of limited wars, fighting proxy armies as if the power behind them did not exist. A very expensive way to obtain limited results.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ahh your solution is to kill everyone who isn't you.
I bet you didn't play very well with others at school, or were you the one they all made fun of and this is what you turned into?
The other way to stop people whose country you royally fucked up from trying to kill you is to simply STOP.
Re:Permanent home? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is true, but it was also a strategic decision. France had a government in exile with an Army and Navy. The maquis and urban resistance organizations were largely directed from the Special Operations Executive in Britain, or directly by the Free French Army depending on the unit. Thir role was clearly d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
If we were really at war with Iraq as a whole, we'd do much better. This was the case early on, when we were fighting Saddam's army. We still tried to minimize hurting civilians; we could have won even q
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Face it, to
Re: (Score:2)
Any amount of civilian casualties are OK, so long as all the "bad guys" get killed and there are "some" civilians left?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Permanent home? (Score:4, Interesting)
Like most people, I'm disgusted by the actions of those guards at Abu Ghraib. However, the suggestion that the guards at Abu Ghraib would have signed up anyway is contrary to experimental data. The prison environment converted normal Stanford undergraduates into abusive prisoners and a well-established professor into a vindictive superintendent.
Das experiment. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I wouldn't say that one should use the ZP Experiment to excuse or condone torture, so much as to explain and avoid it. Simple third-party oversight can do wonders, as the experiment showed. Which was lacking, for example, at Abu Girhab. But it's also common wisdom that you don't have regular army perform police duties.
Reference also the Milgram Experiment [wikipedia.org]. Or even his lesser known one, where he determines how many people, on average, have to be standing on a street corner, staring at nothing in the sk
Re:Permanent home? (Score:4, Insightful)
One could take the cynical route, and say that the Congress is as anti-war as it is anti-corruption. A more realistic read might be that the niceties of actual states carrying out "diplomacy by other means" using uniformed organizations along civilized lines is simply OBE.
Re:Permanent home? (Score:5)
Beyond that, you are yet another one of those fools that blames the military for any of this crap. The military does what it is told to do by civilian authority, just like the constitution says. The civilians say they can't do something, and that means they can't do it. You want to fix this, quit bitching and trying to screw over the men that serve their nation, and go fix the men that serve themselves (politicians). Further, while not paying politicians sounds very attractive, it would just further the whole lobbyist problem. When the military DOESN'T do what the civilians tell them, you have a military coop, and I am reasonably certain you would rather have the military continue to follow bullshit directives from idiot civilians that you can replace democratically than have to deal with a military coop (which by the way would probably rather quick once you opted to quit paying them).
The idea that you could fight and win in modern warfare just by grabbing a bunch of untrained people and not paying them is just unbelievably ignorant of what the military does. Beyond that, I seriously doubt you are aware of or give a damn about what the military does that ISN'T part of our idiot politicians agendas. The US military is usually one of the first responders to natural disasters globally, and other humanitarian things. Here [state.gov], this is why we should definitely quit paying them.
Re: (Score:2)
First, most military actions are guided by civilian authority, but controlled by the military. The Presidents recent admonition to the congress that it should not try to micromanage the war. Likewise, I enjoy watching how the military does not torture humans simply because the civilian authority says not to. In reality, when you send a bunch of people to kill other people, there is little that can be done to completely con
Re:Permanent home? (Score:5, Insightful)
Um... it's worth mentioning that at the time we were rebuilding France, Germany, Italy, and every other spot in Europe that got economically and physically trashed during that war, we did NOT have religiously-driven suicidal crazies trying to kill pizza-shops full of their brothers and cousins in order to terrorize them out of wanting a democracy in which evil things like Women Reading Books, Music Being Played In Public, and Daughters Choosing Their Own Husbands might come about. There weren't well-financed groups of hidden Nazis willing to kill themselves and everyone in a vegetable market because a cave-dwelling extremist with buckets of cash has pursuaded them that Allah will open the doors to Virgin-Mart on their behalf if they can cause as much horrifying death as possible to scare people out of wanting a simple democratic, constitutional governement, and scare them back into settling for a brutal, theocratic, medieval-style thugocracy. With nukes.
It's not the same thing. Oh, and neither has it been 7 years since the end of hostilities or even close to it, because the people stoking the current conflict (the Iranians) are still busy DOING it.
Re: (Score:2)
And it looks like, generations later, our army is still volunteer based. Ite nice that they still have a place to call home. As long as people want to stand up and fight for their country there will be an "army". And there needs to be a centralized permanent command structure to count on.
Oh, and just try being effective with the worry your family wont have a house to live in, or food to eat while you are away.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:this reminds me (Score:5, Informative)
More correctly, it was a headline they thought went a little too far, and was not actually used. If memory serves it was something like "America Stronger Than Ever, Say Quadragon Officials."
~Philly
Re: (Score:2)
So be a little less prickly today. And don't forget to perhaps thank a serviceman who
Re: (Score:2)
While they are not responsible for the policies they are being asked to enact, it hardly seems fitting to honor them for their sacrifice when we're looking at over a million dead Muslims by their hand.
A million? Why not use seven million in your delusion, then you'll be able to accuse the U.S. of killing more than the Jewish Holocaust.
Because only NOW counts? (Score:3, Insightful)
Good solid thinking.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Lancet had Iraqi casualties at 655,000 [guardian.co.uk] and that was over a half year ago and doesn't count military.
And of course, that doesn't count what we did in Afghanistan, where we spent months bombing civilian targets that lay along the pipeline routes, bombings that took place long before we went after Tora Bora and bin Laden. And missed.
Add the sanctions under Clinton responsible for at least a half-million Iraqi dead.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"War Departmnet" = Army (this is before the Department of Defense)
"2. navy"
Department of the Navy != War Department (see previous parenthetical)
"3. air force"
Army Air Corps was War Department at the time still.
"4. marines"
Department of the Navy
"5. coast guard"
Department of the Navy during wartime, Department of Commerce during peacetime (at the time)
So, at the time of the building's construction, only two of the five you listed were being considered, and they were the same branch at the time.