House Demands Report from Army on LTC West Investigation

HASC Press Release | 21 Nov 03

[O6ret]

PRESS RELEASE

U.S. House of Representatives

Committee on Armed Services

Duncan Hunter (R-CA), Chairman

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 21, 2003

HOUSE ARMED SERVICES LEADERS DEMAND INFORMATION CONCERNING LT. COLONEL WEST

Actions to Save Soldiers Were Proper Based on Available Information

WASHINGTON, DC - U.S. Reps. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) and John M. McHugh (R-NY)are calling on U.S. Army leadership to immediately provide a report on the investigation of Lt. Col. Allen West. West is charged with improperly interrogating an Iraqi prisoner.

Based on the information currently available to them, Hunter and McHugh believe that West's actions may well have been necessary to protect the lives and safety of his fellow soldiers and not the actions of a criminal, as he is charged. Hunter is Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and McHugh is Chairman of the Subcommittee on Total Force, which has jurisdiction over military personnel matters.

According to news accounts, the incident in question took place this pastAugust near Tikrit, Iraq, when guerrillas attacked U.S. soldiers underWest's command. An informant told U.S. authorities that a local policeman was involved. West ordered the policeman brought in, though he proveduncooperative. West has testified that he fired his pistol near the head ofthe Iraqi, threatening to kill him in an effort to obtain information to protect his troops. As a result of the tactic, the Iraqi provided information regarding a planned sniper attack on U.S. soldiers. Two insurgents were arrested, a third fled and there were no attacks in the area. West immediately informed his commanding officer of the incident. He is currently facing an inquiry to determine if there is cause for a court-martial.

"We are highly disturbed by media accounts that the Army is beginning criminal proceedings against Lt. Col. Allen B. West for taking actions in Iraq that he believed were necessary to protect the lives and safety of his men," stated the Congressmen in a letter to Les Brownlee, Acting Secretary of the Army. "To us, such actions if accurately reported do not appear to be those of a criminal," the letter continues.

In addition to the information previously requested, the Congressmen are asking to see a new report. "We are aware the Army has completed a preliminary inquiry regarding whether to proceed to a court martial and would like to review that report," said Hunter and McHugh in a joint statement. "Our interest is in justice. Based on what we know right now, it is more than reasonable to assume that Col. West acted in a manner proportionate to the threat against his soldiers."

[AndyJackson]

An Article 32 Investigation is not a GCM. There is ample precedence for the results of a "32" to cause the GCMCA to withdraw the charges.

I did not say it was a GCM. What I said was that in this case the decision to hold an article 32 proceeding is in fact a decision to take LTC West to a court martial because he has clearly exercised his right to trial by court martial. If the CG believed the charges should be dropped he already can do so administratively before holding the hearing. It is not clear what additional facts he would learn at the article 32 hearing because he should already be familiar the matter because it is a crucial operational matter under his command.

[William Terrell]

I told you what I was told, LTC West lost his discipline, that doesn't imply he was never or is no longer disciplined.

You said, "But the overall consensus is that he can no longer lead, he failed to set the standard and lead by example."

But he's still diciplined, he just can't lead.

Ok.

I never told you the troops think he should have let the detainee go unthreatened. Quit trying to add words to my statement.

I just plugged in the words that had to be there to make sense out of the troops' syllogism. If the consensus is that he can't lead and lost his dicipline, and he lost such dicipline by frightening the collaberator as he did, then the only thing he could have done is not do what he did because he got no results until he did what he did. Therefore, he might as well have let the callaberator go.

[Ispy4u]

No he simply could have used the information he already had and let the real interrogators do their job. Interrogations sometimes take more than 1 trip to the room. (Please don't come back with that crap about high pressure Johnny on the spot decision he "had" to make, because it wasn't and he didn't)

You are truly boring me with your "plugging" in things that make it fit for your frame of reference. Before this exchange I held some regard for your ability to debate. Now I believe you're no better than a liberal who injects outrage to an argument because they infer a slight were none exists.

Have fun pestering someone else.

[AndyJackson]

Don't try your tricksy hobitses logic on ISPY4U. He won't fall for it.

[Calpernia]

[AndyJackson]

I think of all of us you alone have found the appropriate response.

[Calpernia]

I didn't always stoop to the 5 year old level. I have tried to actually interactively debate before.

I've learned:

-I'm dealing with personality disorders (Narcissistic with antisocial traits)

-They don't listen to anything anyone else says and lend NO credibility to the information

-They just want to distrupt the thread

So, 5 y.o. response it is ^-^

[AndyJackson]

And what do you do for those who were clearly traumatized in potty training?

[Calpernia]

>>>>And what do you do for those who were clearly traumatized in potty training?

Pot 'em

[William Terrell]

You seem to be using information not found in the article. Where were the real interrogators located?

[mdmathis6]

Man you are tough aren't you? Oh I understand English very well enough to know arrogance when I see it. And I understand name calling and insults when I read them. I doubt most posters on this site wpould be judged "masters of the English art of Literature and Rhetoric".

By the way, you completely ignored my points about justice for West and the fact that I acknowledged that he is probably in a lot of trouble. In civilian life, cops who did that kind of thing, when the manure hits the fan, would have been fired, arrested, and sent to prison as civilian courts take a dim view of that sort of thing.

My "stupid" point I was trying to make is the initial choice they gave West,(leave or be court martialed). If what he did was so egregious, forget the niceties....arrest the guy pending investigation and give him the full works. The officer in question demanded his right to a full court martial... and made it into a cause celebre.

Granted, they may have offered what they thought was the "gentleman's way out", but the man is a LT Colonel with a lot of years in, ready to retire. As a matter of fact, he was up for retirement just a few short days of springing this "chinese finger trap" of a choice on him. He has a lot of years in and still young children and a family to support. Retirement in disgrace and no benefits was not an option for him. These are the issues that strike regular civilians such as my self as being egregious. This is why many congressmen are looking at the case now.

I don't care what you claim your "contact" says about it. It stinks...if he did what you said under duress and lost discipline, you bust him back a pay grade or two, re-assign him or retire him. You don't force him to leave the service as though the last twenty years meant nothing to him or the service. You don't leave a bear wounded and you don't let a man leave the service wounded that way!

Civilian society would have much to fear from such a man...religious man or not!

Is that clear enough for you...or am I "too stupid" a taxpayer...to question what the military and the government does with my money and its people?

[verity]

Seems as though we are arguing as to how many angels can stand on the head of a pin which is not really relevant to the outcome of West's future.

If you ever get access to transcripts of the proceedings and w/o divulging the source, please apprise me via private reply.

[31stInf]

I find it surprising that so many postings refer to the pistol being unloaded. Unloaded means it contains no ammuntion. Very difficult to fire an unloaded firearm.

[Ispy4u]

"Real Interrogators" are all over Iraq. In fact Tikrit isn't far from Baghdad, the center point for operations in country. The two female interrogators are real interrogators. They are most likely assigned to the MI Bn for 4th ID. 4th ID's higher headquarters, the Corps that they are operating under, the CENTCOM Headquarters, and some Defense Agencies in Baghdad have interrogators with more than 30 years experience in their craft. And those are just the ones in uniform.

Proper interrogations sometimes take weeks and months to gain credible, reliable, truthful information that can be collaborated with intelligence. LTC West believed that he should be able to get an answer in a few hours, he did, but it is probably not the truth. And the fact that he arrested someone based on it still doesn't prove that the informant who fingered the policeman was being truthful.

To prevent action taken on faulty information is exactly why the rules for prisoner treatment are in place. Intelligence comes from information, but information is not intelligence. Bad information, just like bad intelligence, gets our guys killed. But since information hasn't been reviewed by those with the full data set to produce intelligence, bad information is far more dangerous to our guys.

[Ispy4u]

...you bust him back a pay grade or two, re-assign him or retire him. You don't force him to leave the service as though the last twenty years meant nothing to him or the service.

Officers in our military are held to a higher standard, once they are found to have breached the awesome trust granted to them their career is over. There have been cases where favors were called in to preserve a career or two but many more officers have lost their careers for far less than what LTC West has done. Busting a rank or two and being allowed to continue service is extremely rare for officers.

One of the reasons a "gentlemans way out" is offered in many cases is because their years of honorable service has been considered. If his commander felt that he would endanger other people, his only option would have been court martial. Retirement wasn't offered then because he wasn't eligible to retire. Although he is now.

I'm not about to throw a pity party for his predicament surrounding his wife and children. He disregarded their plight as soon as he made his decision to fire that weapon. It's his responsibility and not mine or yours. He had many other options, he has to live with the consequences for the one he chose. I have stated in previous threads that I hope he won't lose his benefits over this, but if he does, it is his own damn fault.

[William Terrell]

Proper interrogations sometimes take weeks and months to gain credible, reliable, truthful information that can be collaborated with intelligence. LTC West believed that he should be able to get an answer in a few hours, he did, but it is probably not the truth.

"As a result of the tactic, the Iraqi provided information regarding a planned sniper attack on U.S. soldiers. Two insurgents were arrested, a third fled and there were no attacks in the area. West immediately informed his commanding officer of the incident."

Days or weeks, huh? Is that worth the life of one American soldier when it could have been prevented?

[Poohbah]

As a result of the tactic, the Iraqi provided information regarding a planned sniper attack on U.S. soldiers. Two insurgents were arrested, a third fled and there were no attacks in the area.

The arrest of the insurgents and the lack of attacks in the area may or may not be related.

If there were no attacks actually planned, the arrests accomplished nothing.

And that's the problem. Prisoners subjected to abuse will tell the interrogators what they believe the interrogator wishes to hear, not necessarily the facts.

Now, if you're one of Saddam's boys, you don't care about that. But we're not Saddam Hussein's Mukhbarat.

An untrained interrogator will tell a prisoner far more than he or she intends to--and, if dealing with a real, genuine insurgent, far more than the insurgent will ever tell the interrogator. One thing that will ineviatbly happen is that the amateur will ask leading questions that tell the prisoner what the interrogator's biases are, and what the desired answer is.

[mdmathis6]

Just curious, do you think that military theory and discipline as it is being taught to our officers can cope with the 7th century barbarism coupled with 21st century weapons? You've heard about the two soldiers who had their throats cut while sitting in traffic in Iraq the other day.I meant no disrespect when I thought that the officer corps may not fully briefed on the psychology of islamic fascists. If they weren't before, they certainly are now. Shooting with guns and missiles are one thing....so is a fist fight to bring a man to submission. Throat cutting arises from an amazingly personal animus(I not talking about quiet special ops when you have to blow up something and you don't want the guards to alert anyone.)

On the one hand...you have me, a civilian, feeling as though we should applaud a colonel who employs the same types of tactics as these islamofascists are using with us, only with more devestating force and then there is this notion of duty and discipline that only those in the military would really fully know. I agree you just can't go out willy nilly and slaughter and maim everybody who looks at you funny. It's probably too bad, I the civilian will never know the full details of the trial facing Colonel West...It is hard to fully cut thru the spin of charges and counter charge.

The ones I want to see bashed are the terrorists who are laughing their asses off right now over this case or are washing the blood off their hands from those exsanguinated soldiers.

[streetpreacher]

A lot of officers aren't Officer material. I guess you would include General Patton as one who was not officer material when he slapped that G.I. in the head. Welcome to today's Military.

[Pukin Dog]

Unlike Col. West, Patton needed no one to report on him before submitting himself for punishment. Had he not been such a fantastic leader, he would have lost his command. He had two such incidents where he abused a soldier, but in one case, the soldier admitted he deserved it, and shook Patton's hand after recieving the slap; something Patton's detractors always leave out of their stories. Today's military could use more Gen. Pattons' although Patton was an admitted bigot. He would likely have ended up in prison in today's military. Had Patton been here during Iraq, there would have been no need to interogate a prisoner. Few enemies survived Patton's assaults. Those that did, spilled their guts because Patton's reputation preceded him. Now, leave me alone, the Raiders are playin/losin so I have to go.