Posted on 11/06/2003 4:44:20 AM PST by Jeff Head
The following is Lt. Col. Allen B. West's own candid comment regarding the situation he faced in Iraq, as reported by the Washington Dispatch on November 5, 2003:
"I have never denied what happened and have always been brutally honest," said Col. West. "I accept responsibility for the episode, but my intent was to scare this individual and keep my soldiers out of a potential ambush. There were no further attacks from that town. We ... apprehended two other conspirators (a third fled town) and found out one of the conspirators was the father of a man we had detained for his Saddam Fedeyeen affiliation. "Colonel West takes personal responsibility for his actions. He makes no bones about it, he threatened this Iraqi spy bodliy harm to get information from him. And that is what he was, a spy working within the Iraqi Police Force that has been established and supported by the coalition authority. As a spy, under the so-called rules of war, I believe he could have shot the man. Perhaps that is an angle that should be explored.
In either case, Colonel West's actions no doubt saved the lives of Americans...the lives he is principally responsible for...and that was his motivation.
He understood that while he may have violated the rules (and he admits to and takes responsibility for this as well)...he also understood he was going to do what had to be done, in a war zone, to save the lives of the men under his command.
The rules were written by men and women sitting in safe seats far away from combat and the brutal reality of the moment. For the most part they are good rules and should not be violated. But there are times when the SHTF that you have to do what you must to save the lives of those you are responsible for, American lives, and accomplish the mission. Colonel West knew his greater responsibility and he performed it, regardless of personal cost. The trait of a true leader in my book.
President Truman incinerated tens of thousands of Japanese to save hundreds of thousands of Americans...and in so doing he also saved millions of Japanese. In today's world and PC nomenclature this might be considered a war crime...a violation of the "rules". But back then it was heralded by the soldiers as a God-send...and by Americans back home as what had to be done to end the war. People who had seen for themsleves the cold reality of four years of World War.
That generation is dying out and it seems we have forgottent their experiences and the lessons.
The reality is, that by scaring this man in the fashion he did...West not only saved American lives...he saved the lives of Iraqis as well.
God bless you Colonel West...you've got my back any time!
Charlie Mike.
Retired 06 Navy according to the paperwork on my desk.
You are putting words in my mouth. If, however, they think that they can go into a place like Iraq and everything is going to be nice and neat and clean, as you apparently do, then they are as mistaken as you. But I don't think they think that. I think that there is some Chickens#it commander between them and West who forgot what is going on here.
. You and others here want the chain of command to exert influence on military judicial proceedings.
Boy if you think that military judicial proceedings of this kind are not politically motivated you are wet behind the ears. The officer who has decided to convene a Court Martial in this case is certainly a reed in the political wind, and I and a lot of others want to make sure that the political wind is a huricane blowing in a direction that supports the troops on the ground.
I have been looking for these for a week.
Nothing speaks as loudly as support from tens of thousands when a clear injustice is publicized.
Count me in. 50000 people kicking in $5 a month can work wonders. It's the secret weapon of the domestic enemy.
That feels good.
All three of those email addresses have now received emails of support from one additional American.
Also done.
As I said, 50000 Americans contributing $5 a month, can work wonders.
He has gotten my first 20 months worth.
How does one debate a brick?
Intellect must make choices. Some choices are not worth the bother.
A failing tolerable in civilian life.
Lethal in combat.
Think about it.
This nut seems to be on some kind of a delusional trip. How many years in the military and still a Sgt?
Any guesses as to why?
I vote for copernican syndrome.
Presumptuous twit!
The military has been politicized. I can't believe someone who's serving has not seen that.
I believe there should also be a review of the "rules" as a result of this episode.
Colonel West's actions allowed his unit to fulfill its mission while minimizing the loss of American lives. Adherance to the "rules", in all liklihood, in this case, would not have allowed that to happen. Therefore, his actions represent a beginning point for that review.
His superiors should indeed indicate to him that adherance is important...but then he should also be recognized for the outcome and for his own willingness to put himself on the line (which is exactly what he did) in order to ensure that his mission was accomplished and that the lives of those he was responsible for were saved. Sort of sounds like something "above and beyond the call of duty" to me...and in this case it worked out.
He should be recognized and applauded for that...every bit as much as he would have been prosecuted and punished had it not worked out (ie. had there been no plan to kill Americans that was thwarted).
Just my opinion.
That boils it down to the most fundamental issue, and we should also analyze the circumstance as a whole to see that this is exactly what West was able to do.
Colonel West violated the rules in a relatively minor way in a very time-critical, combat set of conditions. In so doing he not only was able to accomplish his mission (securing and pacifying the area)...he was able to do so while minimizing the loss of American life. He displayed admirable qualitities of discretion, judgement and accountability in the circumstances he was presented with which allowed him to secure the outcome he did in the time frame presented him.
That outcome demands a review of the rules in this case IMHO, because had he adhered, in all likelihood he would not have prevented or thwarted the attack (therefore not fulfilling his mission) and he would most likely have lost more lives than he did (which was zero for this particular set of circumstances).
So, while some verbal reminder to him of the importance of adhereing to the written rules may be in order...he should also be recognized and lauded for his willingness to put himself and his own career on the line in order to achieve the accomplishment of his mission with minimum US losses. Such wllingness to sacrifice and put himself at personal risk in order to accomplish the mission would, at another time, be called "service above and beyond the call of duty".
Had he failed...had he not thwarted the attack or found that there was not attack...then his actions would have potentially warranted a more severe reprimand and a mark on his military record...potentially even a justifiable court martial.
But that's not what happened. If everything is as it appears in all of the reports I have read about this, then he took the risk...and it was a personal one...it panned out and the mission was accomplished and lives were saved. That warrants our respect and our praise IMHO.
All of that pretty much some up my own thoughts on the matter.
At another time, we might call that "service above and beyond the call of duty".
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.