Posted on 12/06/2009 10:43:37 AM PST by polarbear1605
Sins of the General’s Part 5: Political Equivocation at the BOI http://warchronicle.com/DefendOurMarines/Weimann/SinsOfGenerals_PartFive.htm
“Moreover, defense attempts to disqualify Brig. Gen. Lewis Craparotta, the President and senior member of the Board, who during pre-hearing questioning expressed a personal view that investigating every civilian death is the right approach because “that’s the way to protect Marines,” also failed. Defense attorney LtCol Shelburne had challenged the fact that he was sitting on the Board of Inquiry with a pre-existing opinion of what to do in a similar situation as LtCol Chessani.” Folks, if the defense wanted to disqualify General Craparotta at LtCol. Chessani’s BOI, they didn’t ask the right questions. The first follow up question to General Craparotta’s reply of “that’s the way to protect Marines”, should have been a simple “why?”
“Moreover, defense attempts to disqualify Brig. Gen. Lewis Craparotta, the President and senior member of the Board, who during pre-hearing questioning expressed a personal view that investigating every civilian death is the right approach because “that’s the way to protect Marines,” also failed. Defense attorney LtCol Shelburne had challenged the fact that he was sitting on the Board of Inquiry with a pre-existing opinion of what to do in a similar situation as LtCol Chessani.”
Folks, if the defense wanted to disqualify General Craparotta at LtCol. Chessani’s BOI, they didn’t ask the right questions. The first follow up question to General Craparotta’s reply of “that’s the way to protect Marines”, should have been a simple “why?” “Why, general, is it your “personal view” that investigating every civilian death is the way to protect your Marines? Is it because you know that your command authority will be questioned and investigated, if you don’t do an investigation? When you were the Regimental Combat Team 1, Commanding Officer in al Anbar Province Iraq, from Jan 2008 to Jan 2009, did you have standing orders or SOPs that all civilian deaths will be investigated?“
Now folks this is where the general would start getting himself into trouble. When he answers yes, the defense should then asked; “Then when you were commanding a regiment in Iraq (2008 – 2009) it was not your “personal view” but rather standing orders that required the investigate all civilian deaths?” General’s answer: “Yes” The follow up questions at that point would be; “General did those same orders and SOPs exist in November 2005 when Lt Col Chessani, Commanded 3rd Battalion 1st Marines in Haditha, Iraq?” General’s answer: “No” or, if the general wanted to continue his political equivocations, “I was not LtCol. Chessani’s Commanding Officer in 2005, so I have no idea.”
Folks what the general is really saying here is; investigating every civilian death is not the way to protect my Marines but it is the best way to protect my butt.
Now if the defense really wanted to nail the general with another embarrassing set of follow on questions, here they are: “General isn’t true that DOD Directive 5100.77, titled DOD Law of War Program, states that all reportable incidents (of Law of War violations) “are promptly reported, thoroughly investigated, and, where appropriate, remedied by corrective action” … whether “committed by or against US or enemy persons…". Of course, because this is a DOD Directive, the general has to answer yes or else he will look like a dummy for not knowing basic DOD Orders and Directives.
“General, isn’t true when you were the Commanding Officer, Regimental Combat Team 1, in al Anbar Province Iraq from Jan 2008 to Jan 2009, you reported, on 28 December 2008 the KIA, combat causality of Lance Cpl. Thomas J. Reilly, Jr., a rifleman who served with the C Company 1/3?” General’s answer: “Yes”
“Isn’t true that the causality was cause by an RPG fired during an enemy ambush?” General’s answer: “Yes”
“Did you award Lance Cpl Reilly the combat awards of the Purple Heart, Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, and Combat Action Ribbon for his actions in that ambush?” General’s answer: “Yes.”
Now the trap is set, time for the defense to spring it. “General, it was an enemy combatant that fired that RPG, correct?” General’s answer: “Yes”
“General, is it safe to assume that that the enemy combatant was dressed as an Iraqi civilian?” General’s answer: “Yes”
“General, is it also a good assumption that the reason enemy combatants dress as civilians is to hide within the population thereby using peaceful Iraqis as shields?” At this point our good general will start to get the feeling he is stepping into an L-shaped ambush, but the General will probably answer, hesitantly: “Yes”
“General, is using civilians as a shield a war crime?” Now the hair on the back of the general’s neck starts to rise, as he answers: “Yes”.
Coup de grace! “General, upon LCPL Reilly’s death, did you “promptly reported, thoroughly investigated, and, where appropriate, remedied by corrective action” the war crime commented against LCPL Reilly and your command?” General’s answer: “No”.
“General, was your failure to follow the established DOD Law of War Program Directive the best “way to protect” LCPL Reilly?” At that point I really would not care if he answered either yes, no or gave a politically correct equivocation.
Semper Fi,
Bob Weimann LtCol, USMC Ret.
Former Commanding Officer, Kilo Company 3/1
The real question is does Brig. Gen. Craparotta wish to be a Major General?
Promotion to General Officer is exceedingly difficult. First, you must demonstrate competence and promise at the junior officer level, in competition with many other outstanding officers. You need to do this in order to be promoted Major and to receive the right assignments to enable you to be selected for battalion command.
You then need to excel in battalion command, again in competition with a group of outstanding officers, a herd already culled along the way. If selected for brigade/regimental command, you have to do it again. More importantly, you need to demonstrate that you embrace the goals of the organization and can advance those goals if promoted to the General Officer ranks. Outstanding performance in command during combat operations is a plus, but not sufficient. Only those deemed willing to advance the goals of the organization will be selected.
Once you are a Brigadier, you quickly realize that the herd will once again be cut in half, those making the cut becoming Major Generals. Brigadiers normally have one or, at most, two assignments to show their mettle. Fail at this stage and you are put out to pasture, where you can chew your cud and write your memoirs. Brig. Gen. Crapparotta will be judged on how he performs in this role. If he does not deliver the desired outcome, he can start planning his retirement ceremony.
My guess is that he wants to be a Major General.
polarbear1605,
I notice the keywords for your post are boi; chessani; haditha; warcrimes;
I take exception to the use of the keyword “warcrimes”.
I consider it a slander to the good name of LtCol Chessani and would like to see it taken down.
Did you choose that keyword or was it someone other than you?
Thanks.
I also take acception to the keyword “warcrimes” no matter whom entered it.
LtCol Chessani nor any Haditha Marine are guilty of a war crime. That keyword shoulf be deleted.
Thanks for the ping, Smooth.
BFL. Looking forward to reading this.
Any news on the Inquisition?
No news and there probably won’t be until after tomorrow when the live testimony begins. I don’t know if there’ll be a daily update on that but hope there is.
Yeah, there are a bunch of other keywords that can be added:
Bullsh.., chickensh..,horsesh.., ratsh.., batsh.., dogsh..,etc., and so on. Maybe they could be amalgamated under one keyword in General: Crapalotta
The part of the post that has the "war crime" involved has to do with the above DOD directive and LCpl Reilly being killed by an RPG from an enemy combatant dressed as a civilion which is a war crime and which Crapparotta didn't investigate.
Col Weimann has raised good issues here. It IS possible to commit war crimes against US troops. It's been done far too often. These alqaeda & insurgents do it all the time.
Thanks for the info.
I try to catch Weimann’s appearances on the Internet radio programs when possible. I appreciate his insight.
Although, I’m not much of a keyword adder, I chose to add the key word that I feel best describes the process used against Chessani: persecution
Excellent
I added two keywords also, with xzins in mind---(jihadiwarcrimes; notamericanwarcrimes;).
With a hat tip to the good Chaplain's post#10.
So appropriate.
Man, you got that right! It's 25 here now in the SW corner and we had blowing white stuff(global warming?) earlier today. What's it like over around Philly?
25? We didn’t even hit 25 for a high. Supposed to be -2 in the morning.
-2! Yikes! Talk about a three dog night!
If the joint is snowed in, Al Gore will lose a fortune on his hand warmer franchise! LOL!
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.