Posted on 05/10/2004 12:55:20 PM PDT by Republican Red
As an American citizen, Im ashamed of the atrocities committed by Americans in Iraq. As a former professional soldier, Im appalled not only by what has happened in the prisons there, but also by our military leadership. From the very top of the Pentagon down to the 320th Military Police Battalion, the brass have spent months covering up obscene behavior while placing the sole blame on Joe and Jill Grunt.
The damage to our country and our just war on terrorism is already devastating. And these war crimes not only diminish the sacrifices of our gallant soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, they place the troops at even greater risk. But Im certain that these abhorrent acts wouldnt have occurred had the right kind of leadership been exercised by the chain of command.
In 1951 in Korea, I was told by my commanding officer to kill four POWs and refused his direct order. I well remembered the Nazi generals sorry rationale for their despicable conduct: We were just following orders. I would get booted out of the Army before I went that route.
In 1965 in Vietnam, I saw a very connected intelligence captain torturing a POW with a field-telephone wire attached to his testicles and decided my personal belief system outweighed his fathers four stars. When I told him Id shoot him if he didnt cease and desist, the atrocity came to a screeching halt.
On both occasions, I knew I had the moral right. Id been taught from the first day I put on a U.S. Army uniform that American soldiers dont follow unlawful orders and that it was my duty to stop or report an illegal act. I also believed strongly that when dealing with POWs, There but for the grace of God go I.
The vast majority of our regular soldiers today are likewise well-trained, well-disciplined and have similar values. And theyve conducted themselves during the occupation of Iraq in a manner that aptly reflects what America is all about.
But, unfortunately, this is not always the case with many Army Reserve and National Guard units that have been deployed overseas since 9/11. In fact, Ive worn out several drums beating the readiness issue during face-to-face meetings with the top brass. As far back as 1989, I warned Secretary of the Army Mike Stone about the generally sad shape of our Reserve and Guard components. But while he listened up, little was done to correct the systemic problems.
And now, because Mr. Rumsfeld and too many of his generals are into a fast-fix mode, the Pentagon has been dispatching Reserve and Guard units to combat zones even when they arent good to go. For example, I know of two enhanced infantry brigades that were rated as not combat-ready by Training Center commanders but were still sent to Iraq because boots were needed on the ground.
Retired Master Sgt. William Lawson, who brought the atrocity story to SFTT.org, says the 800th Military Police Brigade is a prime example: My nephew Chip, whos been charged with war crimes, wasnt trained to be a prison guard. He was a part-time soldier marginally trained for even conventional military police (MP) work. But Chip was such a good soldier that he was selected to escort Gen. Myers, the chairman of the Joint Staff, when Chip was guarding the vice president right after 9/11. Myers gave him both great reviews and his personal coin.
The bedrock truth about the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison is that they were so easily preventable, adds SFTT (Soldiers for the Truth) Vice President Roger Charles, who researched this story for CBS News. But that prevention required a recognition that the top people in the 800th were ill-prepared, incompetent and uncaring. The evidence clearly shows that the Department of the Army mafia was more concerned about protecting the image of the brigade commanding general, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, than holding her and her officers accountable for the terrible situation, which they allowed to fester for months.
Speaking of Karpinski, shes received only a mild slap on the wrist as the brass were circling the wagons. Not a good sign that our countrys commanders intend to own up to their respective roles in this catastrophic breach of human rights, which will have consequences we all will have to pay for many years to come.
Col. David H. Hackworth (USA Ret.) is SFTT.org co-founder and Senior Military Columnist for DefenseWatch magazine. For information on his many books, go to his home page at Hackworth.com, where you can sign in for his free weekly Defending America. Send mail to P.O. Box 11179, Greenwich, CT 06831. His newest book is Steel My Soldiers Hearts. © 2004 David H. Hackworth. Please send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.
In 1965 in Vietnam, I saw a very connected intelligence captain torturing a POW with a field-telephone wire attached to his testicles and decided my personal belief system outweighed his fathers four stars. When I told him Id shoot him if he didnt cease and desist, the atrocity came to a screeching halt.
Isn't Hackworth choking the life out of his point here or is it just his usual point not quite fitting with this situation? His usual rant is againt those in command and here he illustrates the same point along with his usual "moral" superiority. He can't possibly argue that those involved in the current situation just didn't know that abusing prisoners and posing with them wasn't wrong.
"LEGACY PROJECT" LAUNCHES SPIN CAMPAIGN TO OBSCURE CLINTON RECORD ON MILITARY READINESS
..."Legacy Project" talking points cannot erase the inconvenient fact that during the Clinton years, military readiness and morale were seriously degraded. Contemporaneous news stories, published with headlines such as these, reported the steady decline:
· "BAND-AID NAVY -- How Shortages are Burning Out Sailors and Wearing Out the Fleet," Navy Times, May 22, 2000
· "Two Army Divisions Unfit for war-- Both Flunk Ratings of Preparedness," Washington Post, Nov. 10, 1999
· "They Werent Ready -- General Says Task Force Hawk Aviators Unprepared for Challenges in Kosovo," Army Times, July 5, 1999
· "Army Says Strained Resources Leave Troops Unprepared for War" -- New York Times, Nov. 10, 1999
· "ROCK BOTTOM -- Training Centers Report They Cant Meet Mission," Army Times, Sept. 11, 2000
· "Workload Swamps Ship Maintenance Depots," Navy Times, May 22, 2000
· "Readiness Hits Lowest Level in 15 Years" -- Air Force Times, May 15, 2000
Defense analyst OHanlon nevertheless claimed that Clintons Administration had "maintained a strong and focused military able to carry out a post-Cold War mission." Pointing to the performance of American forces in the Balkans and in Afghanistan, OHanlon came to the faint-praise conclusion that "Bill Clinton did not squander the legacy" of his predecessors, President Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
To appreciate the fatuity of that claim, just imagine Reagan or either President Bush starting their respective terms as Commander-in-Chief by calling for the acceptance of open homosexuality in the military. By contrast, Reagan delivered on his promise to restore the strength and morale of Americas volunteer force, following four years of "hollowing out" under President Jimmy Carter.
In addition to what was taken away, social burdens were loaded on. High-level Clinton appointees--including an Assistant Secretary of the Army (Sara Lister) who derided the Marines as "extremists" -- turned the Pentagon into a feminist power base. Liberal civilian appointees pursued an "ungendered military," and lavished scarce resources on social engineering that undermined military culture and morale.
In addition to continuous attempts to accommodate homosexuals in the military, despite congressional action to the contrary, Clinton policies became increasingly problematic. His legacy includes co-ed basic training, gender quotas and gender-normed standards, a push to relax personal discipline rules, and a pervasive lack of candor about the consequences of such policies. The result was a widening credibility gap, detected in numerous surveys, which demoralized the troops and caused hundreds of junior officers to leave the service early.
Who's in trouble now, a woman and her subordinates who are bordering on homosexual acts. Clinton's Legacy just keeps on giving.
Not mine. If I heard it from someone else, my respect might go up. Hearing it from Hack himself just re-inforces my opinion of him as a leftist tool shamelessly promoting himself.
If the Abu Ghaid scandal stiffens the spine of the Iraqi opposition and causes, say, 500 more Americans to die, will you still admire Hack?
If the 17 Senators include prominent, vulnerable Democrats who will be embarrassed, and whose "negligence" causes the scandal to start to disipate, will you admire Hacksworth even more for not mentioning them publicly? Maybe perky katie couric told him he won't be on her program anymore if he outed hillary as being one of the 17, would that make you admire Hack more?
Oh brother, do I have a response to that :).
First, check this:
Omholt/Skydrifter, Hackworth Editor
Then, check this:
Then, check for Skydrifter's posts on, for example, www.libertypost.org. Look for the stuff about Israel/Jews.
Because they're "safe". Meaning that if they seem interested in a woman for her company, the woman knows for certain that there are no sexual motivations to the attention.
That, and the fact that they don't spend inordinate amounts of time looking at a woman's breasts.
I thought your point was eminently clear. Hackworth had to sensationalise the photos for his own self agrandisement at the expense of Americans being held prisoner by jihadist whackjobs and the guys in the line units who now have to deal with a bit more "hate".
Wonder if anyone emailing HACKworth are asking him about this.
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.