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

[Calpernia]

I said that? Where?

[Poohbah]

OK, Mister Clinton. And I suppose you didn't inhale. <finger wagging> And I suppose you didn't have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky. </finger wagging>

[Polybius]

It's really bizarre to see "conservatives" saying that officers should be allowed to pick and choose which orders they want to obey.

I have argued that point in other threads upholding accountability in the Canadian firing range friendly fire incident and the strangling of the Iraqi prisoner in his cell.

When I started my replies to these threads, I believed that the Rules of War regarding illegal combatants was clear enough to justify Lt. Col. West's actions. I have since read that he admitted knowing that there was a specific order that prohibited him from taking those actions.

That does change the nature of the matter.

Be that as it may, I still believe that the rules of engagement are too strict for the situation. Yes, leave it up to the professional interrogators but there must be some middle ground between treating illegal combatants with kid gloves and sending illegal combatant to Egypt for torture interrogations.

[Conspiracy Guy]

I am lilly white. I was born in Alabama in 1954. I was here during the fire hoses, the church bombings, the cross burnings etc.. When I read back through your posts I can't help but think you have some issues. In war there is no black and white. There are men and now women fighting to protect each other and defeat the enemy. This man saved lives. It's called saving lives. I hope if you or your child or your grandchild is ever in harm's way, that their are men and women like Lt. Col. West to protect them.

[Calpernia]

You cannot say "You show up spouting nonsense, I'll call you on it," like you did in post 192 to me; when I just showed you I didn't.

You are a very assumptive person. You just demonstrated that. There are correct ways to support an issue without jumping to conclusions or being dismissive.

I, and others, can be supportive of the West Family without dismissing wrongful actions. We can show support for this family without turning a blind all to all facts involved.

Showing public support for this man does not give a nod to dismiss something if it was unforgivable. But when a man stands alone he is more vulnerable to political action rather than legal action.

[Calpernia]

blind all to all facts involved = blind eye to all facts involved

[StarCMC]

Great poem -- it was forwarded to my brother along with most of the thread. I wanted them to QUICKLY see that most of us are with them and not against them. Thank you for your support!!

[Wait4Truth]

Many here have made disgusting comments. Just want you to know that you are not alone. I signed the petition and did some emailing..also emailed my support for Lt. Col. West. Keep fighting the good fight. Sometimes FR can be a real disappointment, I know.

[Poohbah]

I am lilly white.

Sierra Foxtrot Whiskey?

I was born in Alabama in 1954. I was here during the fire hoses, the church bombings, the cross burnings etc..

Oh fercryinoutloud...

When I read back through your posts I can't help but think you have some issues. In war there is no black and white.

Was that your point? All that poppycock, to get to those two sentences?

Beware playing the race card, sir. You have no idea who's on the other computer, and you have just made a complete horse's ass of yourself.

There are men and now women fighting to protect each other and defeat the enemy.

And not become the enemy in the process. Kind of important, that.

LTC West took the first step onto a very slippery slope.

This man saved lives.

Not conclusively proven. And the more one hears about this, the less urgent the situation becomes.

It's called saving lives.

It's called hyperbole and repetition. Repeating hyperbole does not make it any less hyperbolic.

I hope if you or your child or your grandchild is ever in harm's way, that their are men and women like Lt. Col. West to protect them.

You've nominated him for sainthood without paying attention to the facts.

Fact: this came to light during a "command climate" investigation. These are conducted by the Inspector General, and are NOT conducted on a lark.

Fact: two soldiers in LTC West's battalion were punished for beating this Iraqi prisoner in violation of lawful orders. The fact that they have already been punished indicates that they received Article 15s, most likely from either their battery commander (who reported to West) or LTC West himself. In short, they were punished under the authority of LTC West.

Fact: Now, "conservatives" demand that LTC West not even face a hearing into his own violation of lawful orders.

Fact: It is a double standard. It is unacceptable.

[Dajjal]

BTTT

[cowgirlcutie]

This is infuriating! I signed the petition, sent letters to our state senators and congressman from Texas. I'm still reading the threads to find out what else to do.

[Travelgirl]

But he didn't HURT the guy and he DID get the information he needed and this is WAR, right???

[Gunrunner2]

>>But many of his supporters here seem to accept that he did it; they just think that it's ok.<<

And others think he did it and regardless of the context and circumstance ("situational ethics"), should be hung.

(Side bar: “situational ethics” do apply. If you shove an old lady with the aim of knocking her down, that is wrong, but if you shove and old lady with the aim of knocking her down to avoid being hit by someone swinging a shovel and not paying attention, that is right. Situation ethics.)

>>Some have even suggested that he get a medal, or be promoted.<<

Most posters understand the human element, the ethical dilemma and err on the side of compassion and understanding.

Those that recognize the complexities of the situation and the conflict between ethical, moral and legal, those are the posters that encourage a human aspect to this.

In my opinion and with some presumption, those that focus on the narrow definition of the law, applied without judgment or context, those are the one's that know nothing of the harsh reality of war and, not to be too blunt, hide behind the law because they can't face the truth that in some cases, under some circumstances, the law simply isn't right---especially in a combat scenario.

To judge without a heart is to worship a secular gawd—“the law.” For instance, when Col West stands before God and says he “assaulted” a man in violation of man’s secular law, I am convinced He will understand. Conversely speaking, when an abortionist stands before God and says, “but the law said I could kill babies.. .”, I am sure God will be less than understanding and insist upon His moral, ethical law.

Doing the right thing is sometimes not always the legal thing, and sometimes the legal thing to do is not necessarily the right thing to do. I am NOT saying Col West acted illegally. No sir. I am saying his allegiance is to God, his men and the ethical duty to serve both.

>>I, and some others on the "against" side, as you would say,<<

Stop it, please.

Let's get this straight--I did not introduce the word "against" to describe your position. No sir. That was done by someone that self-identified your side as "against"--- thereby supporting my opinion that those that are "against" have already made a value judgment and convicted him. . .doing exactly what you find objectionable in the "for" side.

I withhold judgment and I also am inclined to tend to the side of compassion and mercy (and respect) to a man of unquestioned honor and dignity, doing a most difficult job.

Have a good night.

[Conservababe]

Allen West should be awarded a medal for saving lives in wartime. Instead he faces a retirement without benefits or a court martial.

He did not kill the man, nor harm him in anyway, except that he perhaps had to change his underwear after the event that saved lives.

Rummy should investigate this incident and take care of his troops. And if he cannot do it, I think the Commander in Chief should handle it personally.

[firewalk]

bttt

[A Simple Soldier]

Have you ever had a firearm discharged inches from your ear?
He also had his soldiers beat the snot out of this guy.

I am a little confused about your point that this is WAR? So, what? We still adhere to the law and uphold a code of civilized behavior.

[A Simple Soldier]

Gunrunner, the first part is to you. The rest is for general consumption. Frankly, I think you and I see this about 97% the same.

As you will see from my original post, I am the one who coined the "against" term. Please note I used quotation marks to identify our position in the context of the majority of those on this thread who seem to want his immediate exoneration, facts and legal procedure be damned. We are not against him, per se. We are against him being granted sainthood.

NO ONE wishes him to be convicted, especially if he is in fact not guilty, but if he is guilty, he must face the consequences. If the facts determine him to be guilty, should some mitigation be involved at sentencing? Yes. And as I posted earlier, I fully believe that he will be allowed to retire, albeit at a lesser grade. There will very likely be a reconciliation of the "law" and what is "right."

But again, looking at some of the facts that have come out, anyone who knows about military law, knows he does not have an easy time ahead of him, but he will have the full benefit of a top-notch lawyer and our constitutional system. And if he is found guilty, it shows how our system of law is superior. And if he is found not guilty, it will show how our system of law is superior.

I am sorry if people on this thread consider what I, and a few others, post as "disgusting." Frankly, there are a lot of "virgins talking about sex" here in regards to how the military runs, as an organization and on active operations, and how military law works. Many arguments are outrageous hypotheticals and emotion-laden.

As conservatives and people who cherish the Constitution, I am bothered at the flip attitude so many have to the law and due process.

His intent was right, I concede that. But as is argued daily on this website and in other media, the left always claims to have our best intent in mind and we routinely debunk it.

[Polybius]

To: Travelgirl

Have you ever had a firearm discharged inches from your ear? He also had his soldiers beat the snot out of this guy. I am a little confused about your point that this is WAR? So, what? We still adhere to the law and uphold a code of civilized behavior

When it comes to illegal combatants dressed in friendly uniforms or engaging in terror dressed as civilians, things are not so cut and dried.

It turns out that West knowingly violated an order he knew he was violating and that has changed my initial impression of the matter. An officer must obey lawful orders.

However, as I linked in Post 191 and below, the U.S. Government is a little bit less squeamish than you are about what constitutes "civilized behavior" when dealing with these individuals:

US ships Al Qaeda suspects to Arab states............."These countries – Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, among them – use torture, which, some officials suggest, extracts information much more quickly than more benign interrogation methods."

Given a choice, I would much rather lose my hearing in one ear and soil myself in fear at the hands of Americans than be shipped off by to U.S. Government to an Egyptian torture facilty.

[RaceBannon]

If he threatened a POW with death to make him speak...so what?

I dont care if he used a nuke. His actions saved lives.

It;s not like his people would have blown themselves up to kill one or two of us or anything, is it? </ sarcasm>

[A Simple Soldier]

Race,

You seem to have a very low threshhold for nuclear release.

Threatening the POW is not the issue here. It never was. That is fully permissible, but up to a point.

At issue is his allegedly staging a mock execution and him legally punishing his own soldiers for actions he himself allegedly took part in, but now seeks to be exempted from judgement. Read through this entire thread.