Posted on 12/01/2003 11:58:35 PM PST by JohnHuang2
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:10:57 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The attorney for Army Lt. Col. Allen B. West says a just-completed investigative hearing in Iraq showed a weak link in the U.S. military's ability to interrogate and get information from Saddam Hussein's fighters.
"All of the intelligence witnesses regularly expressed the fact that detainees bragged they know they don't have to talk because we can't do anything to them," attorney Neal Puckett said in an interview yesterday.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
This makes me sick.
There is NO PROOF that Col. West was in danger beyond the everyday danger that every Officer or Enlisted soldier is in. To whom did he report this "assassination plot" ? Was this threat corroborated by ANYONE outside West's command? What were his orders following this report IF he made one?
Sorry, it smacks of the same panicked BS we have been hearing from the beginning. To all those supporting the Colonel, do you people think Rumsfeld has lost his marbles? This prosecution would not be happening AT ALL if their were satisfactory answers to the questions I just raised. And still, yet another story that only mentions SOME of the charges against West.
The Col. knows that his men are at risk 24 hours a day, not only when they are surrounding him, and it shows poor bearing to hide behind their lives in defense of his actions. If West is not prepared to risk the lives of the men he commands, then he has no business leading them into combat.
Col. West needs to tell his lawyer to shut up, then he needs to simply admit his guilt, and accept whatever penalty comes his way. I don't know what is worse: his behavior during the time he committed his errors in judgment, or now when he and his attorney continue to bring his case to the public when it never should have made it out of his superiors' office.
This case will effect morale, primarily because Col. West has now at least twice panicked and forgotten his responsibility.
Shoemaker is going to clean house, and it cant happen fast enough.
Pukin Dog, I just love your self righteous grumbling!
#1, West and his men were probably pissed off that a man who was supposed to be on their side of the fence was in fact a traitor.
#2, When I look back at the rules of combat, treatment of POW's. etc, these rules are what EVERY other country we have been in battle with has totally ignored . They shoot at us while hiding behind their own women and kids and we refuse to shoot back in self defense if there is foreign women and kids in danger.
When you're flying high in the air, war's tough but get down on the ground with the grunts who have had pieces of their buddy's face blown back into their face. Get down where you can smell the guts of a five day old corpse rotting upwind from where you're positioned and then tell me you are so friggin smart and lawful 100% of the time.
Pilots screw up and drop bombs on civilians and their own troops once in while. Where's the difference in that from smacking a POW or trying to scare the shit out of him?
I'm not accusing you of anything other than flying up where you can't taste the smell of death. Has your uniform ever stunk so bad from dried blood and guts that you jumped in a creek to try to wash it off? Have you ever spent a few of hours hauling dead and wounded GI's off of the Med choppers?
Are you sticking up for Rumsfeld becausde he was a pilot also? Have you ever flown a slow go 0-1 Birddog off the runway while receiving ground fire from both sides, or is all your experience in jets? Give me some of your on the ground experiences and I might let up on you.
As I have mentioned many times, this episode with Col. West means a lot to me, because an old friend of mine, one Capt. Scott Spiecher is still missing, and if still alive, I am VERY concerned about how he is being treated. I don't care what other countries do, OURS will adhere to the UCMJ and Geneva Convention with regard to the treatment of prisoners, end of story. When that is no longer true, our men are at more risk than they already are.
I don't need to defend the dangers of my profession or compare them to what our men face on the ground, but I think I could compare horror stories with you all day long. The crushed-in skull of Hank Kleeman comes to mind when his Hornet flipped over at Miramar, to the fish and eels poking at Kara Hultgren's dead flesh as she lay on the bottom of the ocean still strapped in her ejection seat.
The difference between a pilot missing his target and killing civilians and what Col. West is guilty of is a difference in intent, and what can also be attributed to winds aloft or even poor tactics. Smacking a prisoner is not an accident, it is a willful violation of the laws that officers swear to uphold.
None of this blood and guts talk is anywhere near the point here, my friend. Many of the jobs in our business can kill you quickly. That's not the point. What is needed here, is a discussion on why those laws are there in the first place. They are not arbitrary rules that we can get around when they don't suit us. They are a standard of Military behavior. They are what set our services apart from the rest of the world.
I don't think you understand what about West upsets me. I am much less concerned about West's actions as I am about how he is using the media to promote a story that has not been confirmed by anyone but his own attorney. I am angry that you and I are even discussing this matter, for it should never have been in the public arena.
I stick up for Rumsfeld because he displays a brilliance that is not seen often anywhere. The man is smarter than everyone else in the room, no matter what room, and is hated for it. My experience is in jets, but I fly my own KingAir these days. My ground experience is limited to training in the BombCat. No, I was never down in the mud and the blood, and I don't suggest for a moment that my job was more or less dangerous than any other.
Having seen the damage done to my line of work by the Tailhook incident and others less public, I have a great appreciation for the Professional Officer. The one that takes responsibility, follows the rules, or gets the hell out when he no longer can. If you think I am self-righteous, that is your business. I can only ask you what kind of treatment you would wish upon Spike, and if you would accept any excuse from an Iraqi who admitted to treating him outside the rules of the Geneva Convention.
Our Forces are feared only because of the technology behind them.
You and I both know 'off the books' missions are carried out every week. Why are these necessary? None of Geneva Convention "standards" are followed during these missions. "Terminate" with silenced weapons and a quick scat back to the LZ are common.
Our boys who worked Laos and Cambodia were 'off the books' because they permitted the NVA to use 300 miles of their land.
None of the missions were 'authorized', the men were suppied and told to go. Air America planes and mercenares were common where I was on the DMZ.
Most of these missions are explicity forbidden by President Executive Orders, so all discussion of Geneva Convention 'standards' is for troop control and the mass media as far as I'm concerned.
There was more than one Mi lai as we both know.
Spike Spiecher, whom I don't personally know, isn't anywhere where the Geneva Convention Rules are being followed I'm sure. My reaction to him being mistreated would be to make sure we removed the offenders entire family tree from the world and left copies of the Pledge of Allegence over their bodies.
Take any pilot from any enemy nation, put him in a Tomcat while I fly his bird, and I will whip his ass because I am trained to know his bird too.
Col. West aint "off the books" so I don't see the point. Black ops are black ops. Different strokes.
Look, I understand where you are coming from. I'll repeat once more. West screwed up twice. Once by what he did, then by running his mouth publically about it. The Army could have taken care of him, but he did not trust the process. In the end, he let himself down. He should have known that when he punished others it was coming back at him. He showed very poor judgment. If he would only just shut up...
If he HAD only shut up until someone came looking ......
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.