Posted on 11/19/2003 5:04:41 AM PST by joesnuffy
Sure, Bob. It's an American standard that we make the enemy surrender by attacking our own soldiers, I suppose. (/sarcasm)
No my friend. I was addressing the ACLU and ACLU lawyer Bob Barr - the ACLU that defends NAMBLA. One gets the impression that the ACLU has infiltrated the military.
That punishment, if any, is yet to be determined. I have corrsponded directly with West. Understandably he does not wat his rank or retirement impacted. He will use all of the legal resource at his command to prevent that and he has a right to it and I do not blame him. But, he is willing to accept rersponsinility and accountability and is before the court now to determine that. We'll all see where it leads.
I do not consider what he did...depsite the violation of a written SOP, to be a misdeed, based on my earlier post. Had the information not panned out, or had any type of saddistic torture been involved...that would be different.
As it was, the info did pan out and the mission was accomplished and American casualties minimized. I do not believe you can stand on absolute letter of the law at all times. We train officers to use their judgement and their discretion. When one does...and it goes bad...he should be accountable and feel the weight of the consequences. When one does, and it pans out...he should be extolled and the cirumstances surrounding it should be anaylized and then incorporated back into the rules so that others may perform as well.
At any rate...I have confidence that the proceedings will cut through all the chatter, get to the root of the situation and render the proper ruling.
This was the same week that FOX obtained those brutal videos of Saddam's manner of dealing with malcontents. If the "End Justifies the Means" then I suppose saving American lives would justify chooping off this detainee's fingers, cutting out his tongue, binding him and throwing him off a building to his death or chopping his head off!
In Viet Nam there were incidents where two Viet Cong would be taken aloft in a Huey. One Viet Cong was thrown out the door at about 1000' and THEN the other was questioned. Geneva Convention? What's that?
We are better than them. We can't stoop to their level. Case closed.
As you well know, I concur with your view.
Best Regards,
What West did in no way stoops to their level or can be compared to it. Any comparison to Saddam is rediculous and misleading.
West did not harm the prisoner, he scared him.
Yes, it was not SOP and West is willing to accept responsibility and accountability for that (another glaring area where the ludicrous comparison ends), but it was also questioning of a spy in a time-critical combat situation where an attack was imminent.
Atrocities are when people do these things for the sake of the barbarity and then lean on the cructh of getting information as an excuse. West has not done anything like that. It is not rationalizing to say that things in such situation were done to accomplish the mission and save lives...it is reality. Truman did it on a much larger scale to end WWII...and he did horribly incinerate, kill, maim and injure tens of thousands...and we are still better than them because there is no moral equivolance possible when comparing the deeds of the Japanese, the Nazi's, the Stalinists or these Islamo-fascists with the motivations and results our Republic has rendered to the world.
Do we make mistakes? Yes.
Should evil, criminal actions be prosecuted? Yes.
What West did was not evil...and it is being determined now whether or not it was criminal. They have charged him and we shall see. If we determine that it was criminal...then I disagree and mourn for our nation which is losing its collective mind and common sense in a war that pits us up against people who want nothing more than to see us all dead. But, Like West, will have to accept it.
Either way...I support what he did and would be proud to have my own sons serve under an officer4 like him.
Hey Bob, send Michael Spann's widow some flowers, okay?
I think that the fact that he reported his actions are a powerful mitigating action. Personally, I think that the Army should have acted better.
Had a friend who told this war story. He led a flight of F-105s on a raid near Hanoi. The rules of engagement that week were that airfields and Migs on the ground were not to be attacked. He fragged the mission so that their escape route would be over a Mig airfield and then out over the Gulf of Tonken. His rational was that the North Viet Nam air defense would know of our rules of engagement and the Anti Aircraft weapons around the airbases would be minimal.
The F-105s dropped their bombs and then went low over this airfield. The last 105 was the new kid on the block. As he exited his bomb run and dropped to low level he was presented with a Mig-21 in his gunsight taking the runway and accelerating for take-off. The pilot did what fighter pilots do! He squeezed his trigger but his gun sight was set wrong and his Gatling shells hit the end of the runway and went skipping down the runway. The Mig appeared to take off and then erupted in a ball of flame. Since airborne Migs were fair game the pilot claimed the Mig at his intelligence debriefing. Gun camera film was evaluated and then this new pilot was ushered in to see the squadron commaneder. The commander explained that a close look at the guncamera film showed that his bullets had taken out the Mig's undercarriage and the Mig had settled onto its belly tank and exploded! The aircraft was never airborne and the commander would have to court martial the pilot for failing to follow the rules of engagement!!!
Then, the commander advised the pilot, "If you care to revise your intelligence debrief the gun camera film will "disappear".
Long story, but maybe this is the manner in which Col west should have been handled.
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.