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

To: MikeEdwards; Melas; hchutch; Pukin Dog
My comments below are based solely on Lt. Pantano's own statements. Said statements illustrate, BTW, why there is a right to remain silent.

1. Lt. Pantano violated standing orders (Note: not "regulations," orders) for handling prisoners that were put in place to safeguard the lives of the Marines in his charge. That showed appallingly bad judgement.

2. Said violations of standing orders, in all likelihood, led directly to the deaths of prisoners in Lt. Pantano's charge. If they were innocent, then said deaths were negligent homicide at best. If they were actual terrorists, then Lt. Pantano's poor judgement ensured that there would be no opportunity for interrogating the prisoners. Dead men tell no tales, but prisoners can become downright chatty.

When I was in the Marine Corps, we were taught to handle prisoners as follows:

  1. Secure the prisoners so that they would have no opportunity to escape or pose a threat to yourself and other Marines;
  2. Search the prisoners and ensure they were not concealing weapons or destroying/hiding items of intelligence value;
  3. Silence the prisoners to prevent them from communicating among themselves, whether said communication be to facilitate an escape attempt or an effort to deny accurate intelligence;
  4. Segregate apparent leaders from their subordinates, to prevent them from exercising command and control;
  5. Safeguard the prisoners from hostile fire or enemy attempts to free them;
  6. Speed them to the rear so that they could be interrogated while any information they had was still of intelligence value.

None of the above is rocket science. When Pantano uncuffed the prisoners, he engaged in felony-grade stupidity.

By not adhering to standing orders for handling prisoners, Lt. Pantano recklessly endangered his Marines' lives. The Marine Corps is not known for tolerating that sort of conduct from its officers. When simple common-sense orders get ignored and somebody ends up dead when they shouldn't be, the USMC gets rather bloody-minded about it, and someone will wind up with a broken career at a minimum.

13 posted on 02/28/2005 2:19:05 PM PST by Poohbah ("Hee Haw" was supposed to be a television show, not a political movement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Poohbah
When Pantano uncuffed the prisoners, he engaged in felony-grade stupidity

I can't count the times I've said the exact same thing in these threads. However, I can say that it's been ignored 100% of the time. I used to think that emotionalism before reason was a liberal trait, but this particular incident is leading me to believe that a lot of conservatives are no different.

14 posted on 02/28/2005 2:34:10 PM PST by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Poohbah

Good luck trying to make the point. Don't get me wrong, I understand the urge to want to support our troops without reservation, but this Marine has indicted himself...doesn't sound like he's got much hope of getting off entirely. I'm not sure how lenient they should be, considering what MIGHT have happened instead.

I feel for him, though. Hindsight is always 20/20.


16 posted on 02/28/2005 2:42:47 PM PST by exnavychick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

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