Posted on 12/10/2009 2:10:36 PM PST by polarbear1605
Lieutenant General Natonski (USMC Forces Command) was there... He said EVERY civilian kill, every time, should be investigated -- pretty funny when the Defense asked him if that went for the 2nd Battle for Fallujah and he had to say "No" -- he added that all civilians had been asked to leave so they were "pretty sure" all kills were insurgents Folks, the dictionary will tell you that doctrine is something that is taught; it is a principle or a body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief. Please take my word for it when I say the United States Marine Corps has volumes, shelves, and libraries full of documents that establishes and spell out Marine Corps Doctrine.
(Excerpt) Read more at warchronicle.com ...
"Lieutenant General Natonski (USMC Forces Command) was there... He said EVERY civilian kill, every time, should be investigated -- pretty funny when the Defense asked him if that went for the 2nd Battle for Fallujah and he had to say "No" -- he added that all civilians had been asked to leave so they were "pretty sure" all kills were insurgents"
Folks, the dictionary will tell you that doctrine is something that is taught; it is a principle or a body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief. Please take my word for it when I say the United States Marine Corps has volumes, shelves, and libraries full of documents that establishes and spell out Marine Corps Doctrine.
On the other hand, the dictionary defines dogma, as a point of view, an opinion, or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds. There is no document, order, or directive that establishes Marine Corps “dogma” because dogma is an opinion. Oh, by the way, in the military justice system and most other legal systems, opinion does not substitute for evidence.
I would argue that the other day, at LtCol Jeff Chessani’s BOI, when General Natonski stated “every civilian killed, everytime, should be investigated” you are witnessing the political expedient of switching doctrine for dogma by Marine General Officers.
Everyone needs to remember that general officers, as a group, are really an “old boys” club. They never like to say “no” to one another and they are usually supportive when one of them gets into political trouble. They even have a special communications system call P4 (Personal For) that they use to communicate to one another. I sometimes would thing that a general’s P4 carried more weight than a “Top Secret” messages back in my active duty days. We can see the old boys club at work when General Carpatotto, at the beginning of LtCol Chessani’s BOI, stated his “personal” view is investigating every civilian death is the right approach because “that’s the way to protect Marines”. (Hmmm…are we seeing a pattern here?)
Politics is a tough playing field for a general but it comes with the rank and the job. General officers are the link between the civilian politicians (authority) and the military chain of command. Most people in the military recognize that generals have to play in the political arena. The un-written rule, however, is that general s never play politics with their Marines. This unwritten rule exists because general officers are the only buffer between the politicians and the troops. Generals sometimes forget that and usually there is a smart, and true, Sgt Major that will bring the reality back into the general’s opinioned leadership. The reality, of course, is that Marines, not generals make the split second decisions that keep themselves alive or get reported as a KIA to mothers, wives, children and family.
Unfortunately, it looks like the generals these days are listing more to their lawyers instead of their Sgt Majors.
I know that there is no doctrine or training manual that states every single civilian death must be investigated. I am also sure there is now standing orders, issued by generals, that all civilian deaths will be investigated. I am also sure that those same orders did not exist when LtCol Chessani and 3/1 seized Haditha from the enemy on November of 2005.
Doctrine is based on things like the Laws of War and orders should conform to doctrine and not to the dogma of politics. The Laws of War state that civilian deaths can occur provided they happen under the principle of military necessity. When the enemy uses civilians as shields, and a Marine kills a civilian used as a shield, that Marine is protected under the principle of military necessity and self defense. The Laws of War also state that the person that determines military necessity is the field commander.
The day in Haditha when SSgt Wuterich and is squad of Marines were ambushed, LtCol Chessani was the Haditha field commander. The call, whether or not the civilian deaths fell under the principle of military necessity, was LtCol Chessani’s. Just like it was General Natonski’s call the he was “pretty sure” that the over 2400 enemy KIA’s in the Battle of Fallujah contained no civilians.
I think, General Natonski should get down on his hands and knees and give thanks, that he did not command 3/1 when it went into Haditha in 2005 and he is not subject to the same “after the fact” dogma he is applying to LtCol Jeff Chessani.
Semper Fi,
Bob Weimann LtCol, USMC Ret. Former Commanding Officer of Kilo Company, 3/1
And when social mores and society’s whims become arbiters of truth.
You would like to think that is the truth. But when you actually experience it, it is quite an eye-opener. And after that, you have absolutely no use for any legal system, because the truth is that the "good old boys" win out over trivial and annoying things like justice, evidence, and Constitutional rights.
Thanks for the ping, Fred.
Jury nullification is a clear exception to this premise.
I think that is clearly the case...
From the TMLC...
"The misconduct allegations against LtCol Chessani claim he failed to properly report and investigate the November 19, 2005 Haditha incident. However, the indisputable evidence proves LtCol Chessani immediately reported the deaths of the 15 civilian Iraqis to his superiors."
"Not one of his Marine superiors hearing of the civilian deaths ─ including top generals ─ considered it unusual. Not one ordered a further investigation. Instead, they commended him for a job well done. In fact, LtCol Chessani’s immediate superior told him no investigation was needed because it was a bona fide combat action ─ consistent with orders in effect at the time: no investigation of civilian deaths related to combat action. That order was changed in April, 2006, well after the Haditha incident."
"LtCol Chessani’s commanding general, Major General Huck, reported up the chain of command, “I support our account and do not see the necessity for further investigation.” This same commanding General was allowed to retire without going to a Board of Inquiry, and he was allowed to retire as a Major General."
"Consequently, not one of LtCol Chessani’s superiors faced, nor will they ever face, a court-martial or a Board of Inquiry for their actions in relation to November 19, 2005."
Hopefully the three on the panel are aware of this and uphold the Corps tradition.
Semper Fi!
Well said, MU.
It’s very possible the board will decide today which means the result could come shortly. There’s only one finding the board in fairness should make, let’s hope they find for LtCol Chessani.
Red’s got this posted at DOM now...
http://warchronicle.com/DefendOurMarines/Weimann/SinsOfGenerals_PartSix.htm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.