Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Army Probes if Iraq Unit Refused Mission
AP ^ | 15 October 2004 | John J. Lumpkin

Posted on 10/15/2004 7:29:42 PM PDT by binreadin

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Army is investigating up to 19 members of a supply platoon in Iraq who refused to go on a convoy mission, the military said Friday. Relatives of the soldiers said the troops considered the mission too dangerous, in part because their vehicles were in such poor shape.

Some of the troops' concerns were being addressed, military officials said. But a coalition spokesman in Baghdad noted that "a small number of the soldiers involved chose to express their concerns in an inappropriate manner causing a temporary breakdown in discipline."

The reservists are from a fuel platoon that is part of the 343rd Quartermaster Company, based in Rock Hill, S.C. The unit delivers food, water and fuel on trucks in combat zones.

The incident was first reported in Friday editions of The Clarion-Ledger newspaper in Jackson, Miss.

A commanding general has ordered the unit to undergo a "safety-maintenance stand down," during which it will conduct no further missions as the unit's vehicles undergo safety inspections, the military said.

On Wednesday, 19 members of the platoon did not show up for a scheduled 7 a.m. meeting in Tallil, in southeastern Iraq, to prepare for the fuel convoy's departure a few hours later, the military statement said.

"An initial report indicated that some of the 19 soldiers (not all) refused to participate in the convoy as directed," the military statement says.

The Clarion-Ledger, citing interviews with relatives of some of the soldiers, said platoon members refused to go on Wednesday's mission because their vehicles were in poor condition and they had no capable armed escort. They were going to Taji, which is north of Baghdad.

The mission was ultimately carried out by other soldiers from the 343rd, which has at least 120 soldiers, the military said.

Convoys in Iraq are frequently subject to ambushes and roadside bombings.

A whole unit refusing to go on a mission in a war zone would be a significant breach of military discipline. The military statement called the incident "isolated" and called the 343rd an experienced unit that performed honorable service in nine months in Iraq.

U.S. military officials said the commanding general of the 13th Corps Support Command., Brig. Gen., James E. Chambers, had appointed his deputy, Col. Darrell Roll, to investigate. An investigative team under Roll is in Tallil, questioning soldiers about the incident, the military said.

"Preliminary findings indicate that there were several contributing factors that led to the late convoy incident and alleged refusal to participate by some soldiers. It would be inappropriate to discuss those factors while the investigation continues," the military statement said.

Separately, the commander of the 300th Area Support Group, listed on a military Web site as Col. Pamela Adams, has ordered a criminal inquiry to determine if any soldiers committed crimes under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and, if so, whether disciplinary measures are warranted.

Family members told The Clarion-Ledger several platoon members had been confined, but the military did not confirm that.

The platoon has troops from Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina, Mississippi and South Carolina, said Teresa Hill of Dothan, Ala., who told the newspaper her daughter Amber McClenny is among those being detained.

Patricia McCook, of Jackson, Miss., said her husband, Staff Sgt. Larry O. McCook, was also among those detained. She said he told her in a telephone call that he did not feel comfortable taking his soldiers on another trip.

"He told me that three of the vehicles they were to use were 'deadlines' ... not safe to go in a hotbed like that," she said, the newspaper reported.

--


TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: 343rd; army; convoy; iraq; napalminthemorning; taji; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-137 next last
Comments from someone with inside info?
1 posted on 10/15/2004 7:29:42 PM PDT by binreadin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: binreadin
Please Support the GOP 2004 End Game!

The RNC: runs the all-around ground-game on Election Day (e.g., Get Out The Vote) AND the legal effort (anti-vote fraud measures)

https://www.donationreport.com/init/controller/ProcessEntryCmd?key=X1I6V1C9E8

John Thune for Senate: Daschle must go, but Thune needs $ for that final push against a well-financed, fraud-cushioned incumbent.

https://www.rapiddonor.com/JohnThune/

Majority Fund for America's Future: Funds/runs the campaigns in the tightest Senate races that need the most last-minute resources

https://donate.majorityfundforamerica.org/index.cfm?mode=account&category_meta_id=433

National Republican Senatorial Committee: Ground Game for the close Senate races + Presidential

https://donate.nrsc.org/index.cfm?mode=account&category_meta_id=150

National Republican Congressional Committee: Ground game for the close House races + Presidential

https://www.donationreport.com/init/controller/ProcessEntryCmd?key=K6X4V6F8B6

STOMP, the Strategic Taskforce to Organize and Mobilize People is a nationwide network of dedicated volunteers who have committed to assisting Republicans in our most competitive areas. By strengthening our Party in the most competitive areas, we will lead all of our Republican candidates to victory.

https://www.donationreport.com/init/controller/ProcessEntryCmd?key=Y6Y6P2I5B0

And, of course, GELAC, the Bush-Cheney '04 Legal Compliance Committee (fighting vote fraud, e.g.)

https://www.donationreport.com/init/controller/ProcessEntryCmd?key=I5B7P3F2B6

2 posted on 10/15/2004 7:31:42 PM PDT by jmstein7 (A Judge not bound by the original meaning of the Constitution interprets nothing but his own mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: binreadin

I'd be curious to know if the platoon commander refused also. This sounds very "fishy".


3 posted on 10/15/2004 7:32:40 PM PDT by hiredhand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: binreadin
"Family members told The Clarion-Ledger..."

My guess is it's a political stunt.

4 posted on 10/15/2004 7:36:13 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: binreadin

Imagine what would have happened if all "dangerous" military missions from 1776 to present were refused.


5 posted on 10/15/2004 7:38:51 PM PDT by edpc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edpc

I guess that other soliders in the same unit had the balls to do their job. This platoon must have some leadership and NCO problems. I think the Army needs to look at the makeup of some of its reserve and guard units. Some problems seem to exist with some units.


6 posted on 10/15/2004 7:43:54 PM PDT by Bombard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: binreadin

I have no inside info. I also severely restrain criticisms of military matters since I didn't serve myself. I have the utmost respect, admiration, and appreciation for the U.S. military. With that said, I've also found myself wondering if things like this aren't inevitable in a "kinder, gentler" military. I watched a show a few days ago about the "new" atmosphere at the Air Force Academy. No more yelling in faces. No more "being mean" to incoming cadets. Increasing integration of men and women. To my thinking, which I consider logical and objective, none of these things are conducive to the long-term optimum readiness of a military.

Thoughts from those with a stronger inside perspective?

MM


7 posted on 10/15/2004 7:47:25 PM PDT by MississippiMan (Americans should not be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: binreadin; mystery-ak
The Army is investigating up to 19 members of a supply platoon in Iraq who refused to go on a convoy mission, the military said Friday. Relatives of the soldiers said the troops considered the mission too dangerous, in part because their vehicles were in such poor shape.

The general ordered a "safety standdown." That sounds to me like he agreed with the complaint of the reserve squad of soldiers.

Soldiers have been permitted and trained in our modern army to refuse two types of orders:

1. Foremost, they MUST refuse any ILLEGAL order.

2. The can refuse an order when A CRITICAL SAFETY ISSUE comes to the fore.

It sounds like this is what that unit did. It does not sound like mutiny to me, given the general's response of a SAFETY STANDDOWN.

A. 19 soldiers is not even a whole platoon, much less a whole unit.

B. This is not a breach of military discipline; it is an example of astute soldiers doing what they're TRAINED TO DO!!

C. This IS AN EXAMPLE of media trying to injure the president and the military.

8 posted on 10/15/2004 7:47:36 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proudly Supporting BUSH/CHENEY 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Shalom & Blessings!

Hi...Mr. Robinson,

You wrote: "My guess is it's a political stunt."

How RIGHT You Are!

That's the First thing that I thought as well.

The Demon-Rats will Stop at NOTHING.

May GOD Help US that Kerry Never Gets Into Our Whitehouse.

GOD BLESS our TROOPS and GOD BLESS AMERICA...The Land of The Free and The Home of The Brave.

9 posted on 10/15/2004 7:49:12 PM PDT by Simcha7 ((The Plumb - Line has been Drawn, T'shuvah/Return for The Kingdom of HaShem is at hand!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xzins
It does not sound like mutiny to me, given the general's response of a SAFETY STANDDOWN.

You hit it on the head.

10 posted on 10/15/2004 7:55:55 PM PDT by Terp (Retired living in Philippines were the Mountains meet the Sea in the Land of Smiles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: binreadin
The mission was ultimately carried out by other soldiers from the 343rd

Thus proving that not only was the mission not a "suicide mission" it wasn't even especially dangerous.

This, my friends, is the smoking gun. This is the indefensible. If others carried out the mission quickly and safely, then these soldiers complaints were completely unjustified and their inaction cowardly.

11 posted on 10/15/2004 7:59:01 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Terp

Just like in Haz Mat work I guess. A worker can refuse to do work if they deem it too dangerous. Often the worker on the ground knows the situation better than the one telling him to do the work.


12 posted on 10/15/2004 7:59:06 PM PDT by geopyg (Peace..................through decisive and ultimate VICTORY. (Democracy, whiskey, sexy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Excellent post.

I concur with you: C. This IS AN EXAMPLE of media trying to injure the president and the military.

What makes it very bad is the wife of McCook is doing the PR with the presses. That's the cue card for political activism. Media sure hopes to blow this one up big. And based upon a civilian who isn't there, but here and using hearsay.

13 posted on 10/15/2004 7:59:26 PM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Thanks for the ping...this additional info makes more sense...the safety standown would be normal though, until an investigation is completed....it's too bad the troopers panicked and had their families call Reps in DC...but I can understand their fear....there are still a lot of unanswered questions, but the Army will investigate and I hope clear these guys.


14 posted on 10/15/2004 8:04:20 PM PDT by mystery-ak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: geopyg
A worker can refuse to do work if they deem it too dangerous.

A soldier cannot.

15 posted on 10/15/2004 8:05:28 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Simcha7
from the "Clarion Ledger"....

"I would not want any member of the military to be put in a dangerous situation ill-equipped," said Thompson, who was contacted by families. "I have had similar complaints from military families about vehicles that weren't armor-plated, or bullet-proof vests that are outdated. It concerns me because we made over $150 billion in funds available to equip our forces in Iraq.

"President Bush takes the position that the troops are well-armed, but if this situation is true, it calls into question how honest he has been with the country," Thompson said.

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041015/NEWS01/410150366/1002

It smells like a political stunt to me....!!!

16 posted on 10/15/2004 8:07:45 PM PDT by dj_animal_2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Yep, PROPAGANDA from pravdaAP. I'll wait to get the real scoop.


17 posted on 10/15/2004 8:08:38 PM PDT by greeneyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Also note the article mentions 3 vehicles were "deadlined"..

I.E., they were not safe to drive under ANY conditions..
Much less taking them into a combat environment...

18 posted on 10/15/2004 8:08:53 PM PDT by Drammach (Freedom; not just a job, it's an adventure..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

Your argument is exactly the same as my 1sg hubby's....the mission was completed without these 19...


19 posted on 10/15/2004 8:10:30 PM PDT by mystery-ak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins
That sounds to me like he agreed with the complaint of the reserve squad of soldiers.

No, he didn't order the stand down because the soldiers were correct, he ordered it so that the vehicles could be inspected to see if they were telling the truth or lying.

A commanding general has ordered the unit to undergo a "safety-maintenance stand down," during which it will conduct no further missions as the unit's vehicles undergo safety inspections, the military said.

20 posted on 10/15/2004 8:25:23 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-137 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson