LTC Al West Responds to FR Article

Personal Correspondence | 13 November 2003 | Jeff Head

[Jeff Head]

I recently wrote an article an published on FreeRepublic entitled Colonel West...you've got my back anytime.

That article haas received a lot of attention and became a very good thread with people inside and outside the military analyzing and commneting on the episode in Iraq where this fine Lt. Colonel acted on his own volition in a time-sensitive, combat environment to extract information from an enemy spy within the coalition fomred and supported Iraqi Police Force.

The method of intimidation Colonel West used to extract the information has become the center of controversy and is leading to military legal proceedings against the Colone...despite the fact that the information panned out, other enemies conspirators were caught and an enemy ambush against American forces was averted.

It has been my own position that while Colonel West's actions may have violated general rules concerning enemy detainees or prisoners, his dicretion and initiative in accomplishing his mission (securing and pacifying the area of operation) while minimizing American casualties should be applauded and should lead to subtle changes in the rules to ensure that such successful initiative and disretion is not punished in the future.

Colonel West did not harm the prisoner and had no intention of doing so.

Having been given Colonel West's military email in the course of discussing that initial article on FreeRepublic, I emailed him informing him of the article and of the strong support he has amongst the public. I presumed (as it turned out correctly) that he was receiving hundreds of emails a day and that I would probably not hear from him.

To my surprise, I did hear from him and have now carried on an exchange of emails with him regarding his circumstances and plans. He has given me permission to post the email he responded to me with in the hopes that people will understand his position, his plans and his feelings regarding this episode.

Here is that email:

Mr Head,

You honor me greatly and your words have made this ordeal a bit more palatable. I am humbled by the support and care of the Americanpeople and tell them all I love my Land and my Army.

However, my road has ended and I accept that and will gladly take the reward and commendation of a hug from my wife and daughters.

Please remember our family in your prayers and God bless you and all of America!

Regards,

LTC Al West

Lt. Colonel Al West is a great leader who exhibits that rare quality of being willing to take great personal risk in the accomplishment of his mission and the protection of the troops under his commmand in doing so. He also has been and remains willing to take personal accountability for the risks.

At almost any other time in history we would call that type of action in a combat zone "service above and beyond the call of duty".

He deserves our support and our prayers. I pray that he will not be marked by this incident, that he will be allowed to retain his full military honor and retirement and that he will write his story for all Americans to read. I have encouraged him to do so.

[Travis McGee]

Incredible. No wonder we don't teach this history.

[Vermont Lt]

Hi Archy...Yup...Four years at Aldens school for boys.

[Vermont Lt]

Travis,

OK, you are right, he didnt kill him. I'll grant you that. However, a field grade officer should not be pulling guns and firing near the heads of anyone who is a prisoner. How do we know it saved lives...'cause he said so. Thats a weak argument.

And those who are comparing this guy to Patton should do some more reading. Patton was such a rules guy he would have tossed this guy out on his ass. The movie was only part of the man. He was popular 'cause he didnt allow his guys to get killed senselessly. He was popular because he trained his guys to do their jobs.

He was not a shoot from the hip kind of leader...he was a real leader.

[Travis McGee]

I didn't bring up Patton. And LTC West did the job himself so that if there was blowback, he would shoulder the blame...and he did. He could easily have told a Sgt. "take this guy out back and find out what he knows...any way you have to." And then he could have expressed shock and surprise if if blew into a flap, denying all knowledge. That's what could have happened, but LTC West did what he thought he had to do to save his troops, and he took the blame himself, personally. That's a stand up guy.

I assume you will be protesting now, as the SAS begins a campaign of assassinating "unarmed civilians" in Bagdad? Or will you just pretend that they are not?

If you try to keep lilly white hands in a dirty war, where an Iraqi "policeman" is at the same time shooting down helos or organizing bombings, then you will surely lose. You will be all full of pride in your lilly white hands at the end of the day, but your men will die, you will lose the war, and the enemy will drive us out next year or the year after. If that's what you want, fine.

[Jeff Head]

No one disputes that the bad guys who were planning an attack against Americans were caught before they could execute their plans. This is the information the LTC got out of this spy and he did it in the middle of a time-critical, combat environemnt. He used his judgement and his descretion.

Then, the LTC reported himself to his superiors and knew that he had violated that rule.

He's a man who was willing to put his own career on the line, at 19.5 years, for the benefit and welfare of his mission and his men. And he was and is willing to be accountable for his own actions.

I don't care what you may believe, and you are certainly entitled to it...but for me and my house, this is the mark of a real leader and an individual I would be proud to have my own sons serve under...any time.

If you think that this is not something that a whole lot more of, and a whole lot worse of was done in winning all-out fights like the second world war...you are kidding yourself. The president himself made a decision to obliterate tens of thosuands of what we might call innocent civilains to end the war (accomplish the mission) save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans andmillions of other Japanese civilians.

So, in answer to your question, when? I would say on occassions such a violation would serve to accomplish the mission, save American lives and even potentially save more enemy lives. I believe personally that Col. West's decision has proven out to do just that.

My own father served with distinction in the Pacific in the seocnd world war and was lined up off the coast of Japan preparing for an invasion when Truman made and implemented his decision. He believes the people prosecuting LTC West have lost their collective minds...as do many, many of that era.

I think they have ot right myself, but that is simply my own opinion.

[cornelis]

I have never understood why "doing the right thing" almost always means committing career suicide.

This occurs whenever the freedom to speak to someone else's responsibility is valued more highly than sticking to your own business. Rank and file has no mercy for wise guys. It can only say, wait until it's your turn.

[Jeff Head]

Well said. Se my post 225.

[Pukin Dog]

Then, the LTC reported himself to his superiors and knew that he had violated that rule. He's a man who was willing to put his own career on the line, at 19.5 years, for the benefit and welfare of his mission and his men. And he was and is willing to be accountable for his own actions.

Jeff, with all due respect, that would be a great story, were it true. It is not. The Col. is spinning the story like a top, my friend. He did not come forward until he was reported on by his own men. This is a fact. It is great that the man wrote to you and all, but people in the JAG office are going to use this 'invention' against the good Colonel if this goes to trial. Dont ask me for my sources; just be careful to get the other side of this before coming down so hard in the Col's corner.

[Jeff Head]

My own sources...outside of the Colonel's own comments to me... say different and are at odds with what you have just said. His own actions...involving himself in this himself instead of ordering one of his non-comms to do it would seam (at least IMHO) to support the story I am hearing.

Either way, the Artcle 32 will be telling...and if it goes to trial after that, it will all come out.

LTC West has indicated that he understands his position and is willing to see his military career end...but he is going to fight for the retirment he spent 19.5 years earning. I believe he will keep it..and hope he does.

I also do not find fault in the decision he made under the conditions he faced.

We shall see.

[Pukin Dog]

You may find out in the end, that Col West did what he did AFTER others refused. All I can tell you is to be careful, and consider that regardless of the negative PR, this would not be happening if not for good and serious reasons. Remember that the Col. is the only one speaking publicly about this. When it all comes out, he will be a lucky man to recieve his retirement. I wish I could share more with you, but it will all come out eventually. Just be careful, buddy?

[Jeff Head]

Thanks for the advise and the concern...I will be sure to check my six and my sources.

Clearly, you trust your own...as I do mine.

If the story is what both my own sources and LTC West have described to me...ie. an enemy spy had time-critical information about an attack on U.S. troops and the Col. used these tactics to initmidate the info out of him which then proved correct...then I side with LTC every time.

If that turns out to not be the story...then it's a different matter.

[Vermont Lt]

The SAS guys are going in with orders to do what they need to do, I am sure. This guy was not under orders to do that.

I will go back to my original argument from another thread: This guy is probably a bad apple who was turned in by his own men. I would guess (and its only a guess) that when the truth--the whole truth--comes out, we will find that he was not acting in a manner consistent with someone of his rank.

Don't go tossing the decision to drop the atom bomb at me. Thats a bad analogy. You are not the only one with people close to them who have fought, or are fighting wars. I am thankful for any saved life. Ours especially, but theirs as well. I am for acting within the established rules of conduct. This guy acted like a loose canon. Thats my opinion.

I deeply respect your right to your opinion, even though I disagree just as deeply. We will see in the end. Have a great night.

Go Pats.

[Braak]

I must second your arguments, and say that the only thing LTC West did wrong was not giving Mr. Iraqi what he richly deserved..a trip to his 72 virgins. Perhaps the SAS and SBS will teach the Iraqi terrorist to be very afraid. I hope so.

I'll leave the board with some advice I got once about confronting a smillar SITREP "Is it better to be alive and able to feel guilty, or dead and pure of heart?" Sure, there are lines we'd rather not cross, but the other side, being who and what they are, aren't giving us the opportunity. Look at what happened in Turkey today. Their war isn't with just America, or the West. It's with anything that they deem as a threat to that thrice-damned religion of theirs, and that includes fellow muslims (the ones unfortunate enough to be Shia), Hindus, Bhuddists and anybody else.

LTC West was a gentleman compared to some of the stories I have heard my grandfather tell about what he and his buddies did to captured Waffen-SS. They found an arm eagle, they'd drive them halfway back to the rear on the hood of a jeep, then tell them to get off and run..then shoot them "while trying to escape". (fittingly ironic, as the SS used that little euphamism all the time). If this is progress, then progress makes me sick.

LTC West, I wish to hell you'd been my ROTC instructor.

[Travis McGee]

Yep, we're both just peaking through a keyhole at maybe 10% of the picture. We'll see how it comes out in the wash.

[Travis McGee]

I've been doing a little reading lately about the US Army's conduct in the Philippines a century ago. Almost one long My Lai massacre, you could say. I'm glad that our military at least has a conscience today, I'd hate to turn back the clock to burning villages and killing everybody down to ten years old in the name of stamping out insurrection.

[Braak]

Not willing to go that far either Travis, but somewhere in the middle...somewhere we have to find the answer. I am not bloodthirsty for the sake thereof, and I do realize, most of the killers aren't Iraqis.

Perhaps the best approach is to outbid the folks paying for the attacks? But we do need to get more of the SOF community involved here, if they could take the Taliban on their own turf, then I suspect these VC-wannabees would have all kinds of trouble.

I just wonder if these rolling convoys of HMMWVs (aka bait) is such a great plan, perhaps we should steal some ideas from the Brits in Yemen?

[Ispy4u]

I have read the rest of your posts and IMO you are absolutely correct in your view of this situation.

I have argued on the other thread many of your same points, only to be called some horrendous things. I can see that you are being treated quite differently by archy than I was. I think it only has to do with your (what I'm assuming) rank in your screen name.

Anyway, pleased to meet you LT! I'm a SSG US Army.

[I got the rope]

Thanks Jeff. BTTT.

[El Gato]

The other 800-pound gorilla in the living room is the discussion that hasn't happened: innocent civilians. Is there such a thing? Particularly in asymmetrical war, to what extent is it possible for terrorists to continue their bloody hobby for months or years without the overt and covert support of the "innocent" population?

Those providing the support may not really be "supportive", but merely afraid. Afraid of what will happen to them when the Americans leave, afraid of what might happen to their families tomorrow if they don't cooperate today. Oh yes I'm sure that the bad guys have some real support, but if they had very much, they'd not be needing to bring in all the foreign fighters to fight their battle for them, would they. It is beginning to appear that Saddam knew which way the wind was blowing and that his hard core supporters, a very small group, was all he really had. So he brought in a bunch of crazies from the "schools" in Pakistan and elsewhere to set up sleeper cells which in turn now provide a nucleus for even more newly arrived foreign fighters to form around. That's pretty much the way it went in Afghanistan after the Russians were kicked out. The Taliban brought in the so called "Arab Afghans" (or is it Afghan Arabs?) to do their fighting for them against the remants of the other factions which were pretty well played out at the time, both from fighting the Russians, and fighting each other. Like the Bohlsheviks before them, they laid back during the real revolution/fighting, and then took over after it was won, although the means were somewhat, but not entirely, different.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

If you try to keep lilly-white hands in a dirty war, you will surely lose.

Agreed Travis. And I might add, trying to have lilly-white hands in a war like this will cause troops to DIE in even greater numbers than we are already seeing.

Lt. Col West is undergoing an Article 32 as I type (which is the military's equivilant of a grand jury investigation). All things considered, we are hoping he will have nothing more than a letter of reprimand and will retire with full benefits (though he doesn't deserve even THAT!) Anything more would further endanger the safety of our troops in a hostile situation. They NEED to be able to find out information in order to PROTECT themselves and in an expedient manner. Time is of the essence when your life and that of the troops is on the line.

What he really deserves is a medal for SAVING his troops. What he is guilty of is quick thinking.

Trust me, the troops are watching this, and know that he has risked everything for THEM. (The fact he is even going through this is ridiculous in the first place! Someone obviously had it out for LTC. West. It won't be the first time this has happened in the military.)

Those that are crying about "laws" and other BS, haven't been in combat or had their life on the line or their sons or daughters lives on the line. I think it would be a different story if the proverbial shoe was on the other foot.

And even if they had, I would argue that what LTC West did was not illegal at all. It will NEVER go to a full court martial.

From the sources we know in the legal system, LTC West has an excellent case. The young officers who "think" this case is a "fine" example of how wars should be fought, are naive. They are the type who end up on grave markers early on in wars. I would suggest that they do not try "reasoning" with a terrorist who is trying to shoot them.

Try telling a terrorist that pointing a gun at you is illegal and I promise you that you WILL BE DEAD!