Pentagon Puts Lawyers on Battlefield

NPR ^ | December 15, 2004 | Kristian Foden-Vencil

[Weimdog]

Morning Edition, December 15, 2004 ·

Commanders on the ground in Iraq are forced to weigh the risks of civilian casualties against the need to complete their objective. If they make the wrong decision, they could end-up violating the Geneva Conventions or in front of a military tribunal. To prevent this, the Pentagon has started putting lawyers on the battlefield. Kristian Foden-Vencil of Oregon Public Broadcasting reports.

[matchwood]

The whole idea of war is insane to begin with. Once however that avenue has been taken, restrictions on how you fight a war and what is inclusive or exclusive in executing that war to achieve the disired end result is also insane.

I only wish people would become totally honest and lay out the rules of engagement sans the Geneva Convention. Murders do occur during war and not always nicely and neatly.

America ought to lay out the rules since we don't exactly fit in with the EU and the UN's rules to begin with.

Those rules should say that if America is threatened and takes hostile action to prevent the killing of American citizens, we will do so quickly, and with all the force necessary to quell the antagonist and we will USE OUR OWN RULES in doing so in order to bring the engagement to a quick end and prevent the murder of our armed forces in that engagement.

All I am saying is, it is about time we think about the death of our troops and stop thinking about "hard feelings" by those perfumed international bureaucratic officials who obtain their livelehood from attending meetings.

Furthermore, I am getting sick and tired of hearing of the deaths of our hereos on a daily basis while the men in suits discuss what is proper and what is improper.

[johnb838]

Lawyers running military operations makes as much sense as insurance adjusters practicing medicine.

I'm sorry, but anyone who is a lawyer or a medical insurance person, or anybody who works in the HR group in general is TRASH and really ought to be shunned by polite society. I don't want them as friends. Some of them are nice enough, but they are garbage, parasites of the system. I HOPE a few lawyers get zapped the way a few journalists always do, especially if it means one of the SOLDIERS doesn't.

I HATE Lawyers, Media people, and insurance coordinators. Hate, hate, hate. I'm a hater. Not a helper, a hater. Sue me. Sue you too.

[johnb838]

Absolutely. The worthless, no-good, girly-man Kerrys, lawyers, reporters, and perfumed princes have cost our country far far too dearly in blood for the job that has to be done. It is time for some of them to die instead of the young people they pretend to care about but secretly loathe. Why SHOULD John Kerry get to live and spend his ill-gotten millions after all the pro-terrorist rhetoric he spewed and the scores or hundreds of American lives he cost by giving the enemy comfort and encouragement. It is just so wrong. And I really don't intend this as hate speech. I just wonder where the justice is? This topic makes me so angry I could see red.

[Lancey Howard]

Lawyers are weird enough, but I know that there are also several US Marshalls stationed in Iraq, and I can't really figure out why.

[Dog Gone]

The problem with the call on Omar wasn't that the lawyer nixed it. It was that it took too long to relay in the information to the Pentagon and get that advice, and the opportunity was lost.

This will put the attorney in the command room for the Predators.

[matchwood]

Me too. Don't you cry when you see the smiling faces of those Marines and soldiers who are there doing our dirty work? I am becoming incensed, absolutely incensed when I watch and hear people - politicians, reporters, anchors and "consultants" discuss the issue on a calm and "sensible" manner.

I am becoming an outraged American citizen who insists that Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld take immediate action to kill the rats and their supporters who are killing our young men in Iraq - all action, whatever the cost to our "international prestige."

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Because we really have TWO WARS going on......

Read this:

________________________________________________

_________________________________________________

Unholy Alliance

by David Horowitz
Hardcover - (September 2004) - $27.95

In this tour de force on the most important issue of our time, David Horowitz, confronts the paradox of how so many Americans, including the leadership of the Democratic Party, could turn against the War on Terror. He finds an answer in a political Left that shares a view of America as the ?Great Satan? with America?s radical Islamic enemies.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

See #47!

[matchwood]

Thanks! Just requested it from the library.

[Lancey Howard]

Thanks!

[TomGuy]

Pentagon: 130 Troops Punished for Abuse

[maxwellp]

Get the media and the lawyers off the battlefield. I can't think of any people more dangerous to our brave troops. God Bless our Military!

[Terabitten]

the Pentagon has started putting lawyers on the battlefield.

You know why snakes don't bite lawyers?

Professional courtesy.

[hushpad]

I could not have said it better.

I wonder which is worse, the MSM or Lawyers? Both seem anti-military and always seem to be trying to "get something" on our troops, our country and our president.

Yes, God Bless our troops!

[hushpad]

I know it is a CYA maneuver<<

Which would not be necessary if it were not for the media and lawyers.

[hushpad]

If these guys are an impediment to the troops I see fragging occurring at record levels.<<<

As in. . .Vietnam.

[Airborne1986]

I am a JAG (former active duty/currently USAR). This is nothing new. Every combat arms brigade has an assigned JAG that deploys with the brigade and provides legal advice on military justice and operational law. For the most part, he works out of the Brigade TOC. Just another staff weenie. Under no circumstances does a JAG veto any targeting decision by a commander. The JAG merely makes recommendations and the final call always belongs to the commander.

[Gefreiter]

A,
Having a JAG guy in a BDE TOC would be new to me, but then again I haven't been in one in many years.

Maybe a permanent JAG presence at that level in the field is evidence of how seriously higher commands are taking things.

Personally, I think it's a little ridiculous that we have to go to war and play lawyer-ball while our enemies are playing rugby, but that's not JAGs fault.

Do you ever find it frustrating that our forces go the extra mile to operate within an ROE designed IAW with the laws of land warfare, but when our enemies are free to brutalize whomever they can catch with little outcry from the broader world? Meanwhile some jokers put panties on some guys' heads and it's Armageddon.

[Airborne1986]

We obviously hold ourselves to a higher standard than our enemies ever have. Whether we get any real benefit from that is questionable. I had a ROTC instructor that was a Company Commander in Vietnam tell us that, if for no other reason, he made his soldiers follow the Law of War so they would be able to more easily adjust to civilian life when they got home.

[Gefreiter]

A,
Hmmm. That sounds wise.

I don't know that grossly ignoring established customs of land war would make the force particularly more effective. I doubt it, but am not the expert.

I just will never understand how the global press can sympathize with monsters, but exceedingly rare instances of American forces inconveniencing prisoners is like Watergate to them.

Not that I think you or the JAG Corps have the answers, of course.