Top general in Afghanistan expels Marines

The Examiner (Washington, D.C.) ^ | Mar 23, 2007 11:52 A | Rowan Scarborough

[RoadTest]

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - The top American general in Afghanistan has expelled a U.S. Marine special operations company for the way the men responded to an ambush March 4, Marine sources said.

Maj. Cliff Gilmore, a spokesman for Marine Special Operations Command, confirmed to The Examiner that the company of 120 Marines is redeploying.

He said the decision followed an ambush on the company's convoy by a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device. A second Marine source said the Marines retaliated and some civilians were killed.

[miliantnutcase]

Get the JAGS and the PC press out of there...

[madconservative]

Thanks for posting this. My best buddy is the XO of this unit.

I can tell you a bit about this. The Marines were brought in to be a hammer, as the Green Berets have too sensitive of a political relationship with the locals (as is their nature, working with indigenous forces).

For the last year, the leadership has moved mountains to stand up a completely new command, MARSOC. I can tell you that they were not trained to be teaching the locals how to play hopscotch.

I don't know any of the particulars of the attack, but I am not surprised. After all, we clearly do not want to win in the middle east, but rather convert multiple warring factions from a fascist, heathen mentality into that of the populace of Boston circa 1776.

[elfman2]

"They ran and gunned lighting up everything for 6 miles!!"

I'd really like to know what that meant. Not enough information on this thread to second guess the decision.

Thank you for your work.

[jude24]

The problem with this situation isn't that the Marines fought back but "HOW" they did it. They ran and gunned lighting up everything for 6 miles!! No excuse for that.

Very interesting perspective from someone in-country.

[elfman2]

"After all, we clearly do not want to win in the middle east, but rather convert multiple warring factions from a fascist, heathen mentality into that of the populace of Boston circa 1776"

Your post makes sense, but I'm trying to understand that last line. Are you suggesting that we're deliberately not finishing the job in order to promote an indigenous structure that will take ownership of the democracy, the battle and presumably the victory? That's something I've speculated to, but haven't seen addressed.

[freema]

madconservative, meet murron.
murron, meet mad conservative.

common ground, here, with this unit?

[jude24]

Are you suggesting that we're deliberately not finishing the job in order to promote an indigenous structure that will take ownership of the democracy, the battle and presumably the victory?

The problem is that we're not fighting the Afghani (nor, really, the Iraqi) people, but only a small band of insurgents. Were we to take the gloves off against the Afghani (or Iraqi) people, and crack down ruthlessly, it might kill more insurgents, but it will also foster discontent and hatred for the American presence by the population whose support the new government needs. It would also encourage more civilian non-combatants to become insurgents.

That's why, for instance, the Army has ditched the kick-in-the-doors-at-night approach, for a softer approach. It's because Patraeus, the current commander in Iraq, understands counterinsurgencies well (he did, after all, literally write the book on them), and he knows that the hearts and minds of the people are as important as any tactical advantage.

[freema]

Trust but verify, jude. Could be a troll, or at the very least, an idiot.

[elfman2]

A little more informed comments here: http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/03/marine_special_.html

It seems this is the unit that got bad press from shooting though an ambush (SOP) in a civilian area a couple of weeks ago (not sure if involved an inbed reporter).

The more I read about it, the worse Marine General, Eikenberry’s decision looks. Much like the decision to retreat from Fallujah where we traded a short term political gain for a profound enemy victory that still resonates.

[montag813]

Here we go again . . .

Yep, the Pentagon pussies strike again. These armchair faggots aren't fit to wipe the asses of our brave fighting men.

[jude24]

Fair enough.

Even so, it is an interesting wrinkle, if true.

[montag813]

Would we better off expelling all the JAGs instead?

All JAGs should be fired, and the post eliminated. JAGs are the military equivalent of Mike Nifong.

[elfman2]

I understand that. Madconservative's comments however seemed to imply more...

[jude24]

All JAGs should be fired, and the post eliminated. JAGs are the military equivalent of Mike Nifong.

Riiiight. JAGs have been a part of the military since 1783.

If there have been any JAGs that have engaged in unethical prosecution practices, the proper solution is to file a grievance with the state bar into which the JAG has been admitted - not to eviscerate the group of lawyers responsible for maintaining discipline via the UCMJ, defending the interests of the Service and Servicemen, and so forth.

[jude24]

I stand corrected. JAGs have been a part of the Army since 1775, the Navy in some form since 1865 (but formalized as staff officers in 1967).

[OldCorps]

God Bless you! Watch your 6:00 from the jagoffs.

[agincourt1415]

So we can say this Marine Unit, was trained to go in and kill everybody in the house, and was not intended to play nicey nicey with the locals.

So now, they act like Marines,And its, oh, we made a mistake, we didn't want you to really kick ass and take names afterall.

[opbuzz]

Eikenberry is Army.

[Girlene]

Thanks for the ping, jude24. Madconservative provides another interesting perspecitve.

The article tries to be inflammatory using the words "expels Marines". Then using an anonymous "second Marine source" to say the Marines "retaliated" with some civilians killed, just puts another log on the fire.

I'm thinking the military needs to invest in some Depends for all these leaky military sources (if they even exist outside of reporters' imagination).

[madconservative]

I am not certain I would go so far as to say that we are consciously doing as you say, but it is certain that we prioritize setting up democracies over military victory.

I think we underestimate how rare democracy is.