Lt. Col. Allen B. West

Washington Times ^ | November 6, 2003 | Stanley SrA. USAF 91-95

[Calpernia]

Letters To Leaders

All messages are published with permission of the sender. The general topic of this message is Defense/Military:

Subject: Lt. Col. Allen B. West

To: Sen. Charles Schumer

November 6, 2003

Sir,

With all due respect, this is the very first time I have ever written to a Senator. With regards to this fine officer and the plight he is in. I have attached the article below if you are unaware of his situation. As an American, and as a veteran myself, I am utterly disgusted, shocked, and ashamed that our Army is harassing this man and is even considering a court martial. These same people who are requesting this mans court martial would probably have something quite different to say if it were their loved ones lives who were saved by this mans actions. I can not express to you how utterly disgusted and extremely angry I am at this outrageous and unjust treatment of an officer who saves lives by using such tender tactics as these to gain information from an enemy who does not abide by, or respect any code, or human right. I mean are you kidding me! So he fired a weapon near his head and made a threat, BIG DEAL! LIVES WERE SAVED!!!! Hello? Is this thing on? Are you hearing me!!! Are we such a nation of weaklings that we would have our interrogators offer prisoners candy popcorn and maybe a comfortable seat on the couch while they decide if they want to cooperate or not! Consider the tactics of our enemy, yeah, I won't even go there as they are too gruesome and inhumane to even mention. This absolutely ludicrous and unjust action being considered against this American fighting man who saves lives and who gave so many years of his life in that effort is an abhorrent black mark on the face of what is increasingly becoming and embarrassing country to have sworn my allegiance to. And no, I am not ashamed of our president and his decision to go to war. I am NOT one of those. No, in fact I LOVE our president and I am all for sending a message to radical religious groups who have committed so many blatant acts of war against our country in the name of their religion. No Sir, what makes me ashamed is to read of our nation treating it's heroes, like this Man Col. West, like a criminal when his only action was to save lives. It sickens me. Absolutely sickens me and almost makes me wish I had never served. Almost. Let me just leave you with this last thought so that you understand. I say almost as I never served in our country's armed services for you, or any fed. No government agenda was ever a motivating factor in my serving. As though I was subordinate to the government and obeyed the orders thereof, my service was to the people who had gone before me and stood and fought and died for my right to impart this to you now. It is for their sake, and for their honor that I did serve. And it is for their sake, and for their honor that I am still proud to be an American and I will still stand and fight should my country call me to do so. I do not know how to make this any more plain to you Sir, this is an injustice that needs to be rectified. PLEASE do what you can on this honorable mans behalf. Also, thank you Sir for having taken the time.

Sincerely Stanley SrA. USAF 91-95

'Heroic' officer clings to faith Facing charges after foiling ambush plot, 'devastating' to be regarded as a criminal

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35447

Guilderland , NY

[Tailgunner Joe]

till hostilities end? LOL! Sure, that should be around the same time as when we win the war on Drugs!

[A Simple Soldier]

You lost me. I was not speaking on your behalf (I was speaking on behalf of few others though), but I was pinging you. I doubt anyone outside of the 4th ID has a good grasp of the "truth." But I have the benefit of having a former roommate assigned to the DIVARTY of 4ID in Iraq. I'll try to get his perspective and report back.

FYI, I am currently assigned to India. I am not an Indian citizen. I am American, of European descent.

You and I actually share the heritage of being from the Garden State.

[MeekOneGOP]

Bad boy ! :O)

[Conspiracy Guy]

I've got my wifebeater shirt on and I'm getting drunk right now.

[Conspiracy Guy]

True Story

I went to the store the other day, and I was in there for only about 5 minutes. When I came out there was a motorcycle cop writing a parking ticket.

So I went up to him and said, "Come on, buddy, how about giving a guy a break?" He ignored me and continued writing the ticket.

So I called him a pencil-necked Nazi. He glared at me and started writing another ticket for having worn tires!

I called him a piece of horse crap. He finished the second ticket and put it on the windshield with the first. Then he started writing a third ticket! This went on for about 20 minutes.

The more I abused him, the more tickets he wrote. I didn't care. My car was parked around the corner.

I try to have a little fun each day. It's important for good mental health.

[Gunrunner2]

>>I think many/all of us who are so-called "against him" are simply arguing that he does not deserve the sainthood that many on this list are prepared to bestow on him.<<

Fair enough, but do not presume many/all of us who are so-called "for him" are simply arguing that he deserves sainthood.

The conflict between what is moral and what is ethical often conflicts, and when that happens many choose to stand behind the cold letter of the law (what "is" is), versus some who stand and say "this is wrong."

The choice may have been between what is right and what is legal. In that case, it is a bit harsh to jump in and support fully the full weight of the legal system bearing down on him---as some apparently do.

Again, let me be clear on this, because some of us do not support the hang-em high mentality doesn't mean we do not recognize the ethical/legal conflict and issues. We simply choose a different side---especially at this stage.

You admit that the man was in a difficult situation, facing a conflict where the ethical thing to do may not necessarily been the "legal" thing to do. We don't know, yet. That said, in this case, I am loath to fire off and support hanging the man before the facts are in and the situation fully in context.

[Ispy4u]

If I recall correctly isn't his Article 32 hearing supposed to be today in Mosul?

It's almost Midnight there and yet, not one word on the outcome of that.

Maybe I have the date wrong, but maybe it didn't happen.

[Gunrunner2]

Don't know. Busy doing my thing and its just after 1600.

[MainFrame65]

"... West's actions -- which are identical to those used by Castro's thugs, btw -- ..."

Castro's thugs have used severe beatings, mock executions, executions of companions and family members in view of the prisoner, electric shock, suspension for extended periods in contorted positions, burning with various implements, and too many other methods of direct and sustained debilitating, maiming, crippling or fatal tortures to name. Also, this incident happened in a field location, not a detention facility, and during the course of a mission.

Get off your high horse. If the law fails to distinguish Col. West's offense from what you compared him to, then it, not the Colonel, has failed.

I am waiting for all the facts to come out, but in fact Col. West, on his own initiative, provided a detailed (and damning) statement to his commander, along with an acknowledgement that he had been aware of the relevant section of the law. That voluntary statement removed all ambiguity, and probably made the charges impossible to avoid. But the punishment needs to fit the totality of circumstances, and if it comes to more than a letter of reprimand in his file (which would end his career just as certainly) it would be excesssive.

But even that would deprive his command and his Country of the services of an effective, caring field commander who proved that he was willing to show initiative and resourcefulness under pressure. Personally, I would not trade one Col. West for half a hundred General Wesley Clarks, for instance, and I doubt that there are very many combat troops - or commanders - who would not agree.

[r9etb]

Get off your high horse. If the law fails to distinguish Col. West's offense from what you compared him to, then it, not the Colonel, has failed.

In case you missed it, Lt. Col. West is accused of performing a mock execution. I am waiting for all the facts to come out, but in fact Col. West, on his own initiative, provided a detailed (and damning) statement to his commander, along with an acknowledgement that he had been aware of the relevant section of the law.

Lt. Col. West's own description (according to the e-mail account published in the Washington Times) does not indicate that there was any immediate danger; instead, the events suggest that he was merely impatient, and perhaps irritated by the prisoner's attitude.

But even that would deprive his command and his Country of the services of an effective, caring field commander who proved that he was willing to show initiative and resourcefulness under pressure.

Or, by his thuggish actions, West may have poisoned the well for future interrogations, thereby exposing American soldiers to greater danger.

BTW, I fail to see how it's being on a "high horse" to point out that Col. West's actions are of a sort that you would rightly condemn, had they been done by one of Saddam's thugs on one of our guys.

[alpowolf]

It is wrong to characterize our position as a "hang-em high mentality". The military authorities to whom the Lt.Col. is answerable have called upon him to account for his actions. I don't see that as a "hanging". No-one can judge without the facts; if the system is not permitted to function, how will we ever get the facts? I assume you're not suggesting that his superiors just ignore the whole thing?

Many posters on this thread have insisted that the whole thing be dropped, and even that the President or SecDef intervene to stop it.

[sultan88]

Thanks, grizzfan!

[MeekOneGOP]

Regarding #164: Cheers !

Regarding #165: ROFL !! I could never do that. IF I ever did, it would turn out to be someone's car that I know or something like that ! LOL !

[StarCMC]

Just got email from my brother, currently serving in Iraq. His soldiers have gotten wind of this and are pretty upset, understandably so. Thank you all (or at least most of you) that I could copy this thread and the posts from it in an email to him to show him that they have support.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Saddam's thugs used much much worse methods. West's actions were the type that only work on a coward. I guess there is no point in debating it with you. Have you ever been in the military? In combat? Or in command of others in combat? I was in the military but not in combat during Viet Nam. Had I been in combat then or now I'd want to be surrounded by men like Lt. Col. West.

I am logging out and going home and really don't have anything else to say on the matter. Have a good weekend.

[StarCMC]

This was what he sent to me:

John Weisman: Memo to Army Chief of Staff Pete Schoomaker


November 3, 2003

[Have an opinion on this column? Sound off in John Weisman: Hot Discussions.]

Dear General:

Now let's see if I get this straight. An officer whose Tikrit-based troops have come under attack from Saddam loyalists becomes aware that an Iraqi detainee has information about a planned ambush of his Soldiers, but the prisoner isn't being cooperative.

The officer then goes to interrogate the detainee -- an Iraqi police officer, by the way -- and in the course of questioning, fires his weapon as a way of making the point that he's serious about obtaining straight answers.

The detainee then tells the truth. The ambush is averted, and Soldiers' lives are saved.

The officer is then:

A: given a commendation.

B: promoted to full colonel for showing initiative under pressure and loyalty to his troops.

C: told to resign his commission immediately or face a court martial.

The correct answer, I'm sorry to have to report, is "C."

Lt. Col. Alan B. West, who aggressively interrogated an Iraqi detainee so that he could prevent an ambush and save his Soldiers lives, is being charged with aggravated assault by his unit's JAG officer.

According to published reports, Lt. Col West allowed two of his Soldiers to "physically agress" the prisoner (an act for which they were later fined), and then West brandished his pistol and fired two shots to scare the man into talking.

For this, the Judge Advocate General's office wants to end his 19-year career and possibly send him to prison for eight years. Meanwhile, idiot officers who get their men killed are being given medals and promotions, and generals who have never come under fire are putting themselves in for Silver Stars.

General Schoomaker, this is madness -- and you have to put a full stop to it right now.

Because this is what happens when lawyers, not shooters, run the military.

This is what happens in the politically correct world in which a secretary of the army (Togo West) hires a consultant who actually drafts a report stating that the Army needs to become less aggressive and more in touch with its feminine side.

This is what happens when the Army culture replaces risk-taking and initiative with hundreds of pages of rules and regulations that hamper war-fighting, degrade unit integrity, and place inane limits on how Soldiers can or cannot conduct themselves in battle.

This is what happens when managers and systems analysts replace Warriors in the command structure.

This is what happens when somewhere along the chain of command, the idea that war is about killing people and breaking things gets completely lost. This is what happens when the Army forgets the words of General George S. Patton, Jr.: "We must be eager to kill, to inflict on the enemy -- the hated enemy -- wounds, death, and destruction."

Now, I'm not in favor of hooking prisoners up to field telephones -- although it has certainly happened in the past. Nor am I in favor of taking the Argentine approach to interrogation, i.e., tossing one prisoner out of a chopper 10,000 feet above the South Atlantic and then posing the question to the second prisoner in the chopper.

Moreover, Lt. Col West's actions came nowhere close to anything that can be called torture. Aggressive? Obviously. Outside the box? Absolutely. But aren't those qualities precisely the qualities we want in our officers?

Because if I were a Soldier serving under West's command, I'd say HOOAH, Colonel, and follow him to hell. Why? Because Lt. Col. West demonstrated something that far too few of today's officers are willing to demonstrate to their men and women: loyalty DOWN the chain of command.

Lt. Col. West put his Soldiers' lives above his own career. That sort of behavior deserves to be praised and rewarded, not given eight years and a dishonorable discharge.

[austingirl]

Col. West and all the troops have my full support. They need to do what they have to do to win and save lives.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Tell your brother that most Americans support him and all our troops. Most of us would join them in a heartbeat. God Bless our Troops.

[mathluv]

His wife was just on The Big Story. She seems really nice. She said all her husband wants to do is take care of 'his boys'.

The enemy is the terrorists, and they don't play 'fair'. I think he should get a medal.

[Endeavor]

YES! Thank you for posting this. I just saw his wive interviewed on Fox and I am really angry about this. I'll sign the petition. This is absolutely nuts.