Allen B. West, Lt. Col., U.S. Army

The Federalist Newsletter | 11-7-03 | The Federalist Staff

[Poohbah]

They say it's a slippery slope and what's next, grazing him? Wounding him?

You tell me. What WOULD be next?

[jmac1369]

Your attitude toward ANY command authority makes you a prime candidate for a body bag. Standing on the edge of a black hole has been calculated to exert 100,000 megatons in a nanosecond; return to plasma. How would you feel obliterating men, women and children by nuclear detonation?
But we digress, the topic is leadership and Ltc. West. What would you have done to extract the information gained by West? C'mon, Jarhead, what are your actions and orders?
Semper Fi.

[johnb838]

What would be next? Blowing his bloody head off that's what would be next. You can do that to an illegal combatant in a war.

[Poohbah]

Your attitude toward ANY command authority makes you a prime candidate for a body bag.

How so?

Standing on the edge of a black hole has been calculated to exert 100,000 megatons in a nanosecond; return to plasma.

Are you competing with .Christian to see who can write the most bizarre stuff? That was almost as irrelevant and non-sequitirish as one of his crevo thread posts.

How would you feel obliterating men, women and children by nuclear detonation?

Ah, there we go.

You see, I am a conservative. I am not ruled by my <Michael Savage Mode> "feeeeeeeeeeeeeelings." </Michael Savage Mode> I leave that brand of silliness to liberals.

But we digress, the topic is leadership and Ltc. West.

The topic is LTC West. When he hammers his own troops for violating orders and then demands clemency for his own acts in violation of those same orders, "leadership" is not in evidence.

What would you have done to extract the information gained by West?

Me, personally? Nothing. I'm not a trained interrogator. That's what Military Intelligence Brigades are for.

C'mon, Jarhead, what are your actions and orders?

Let the MI folks (the ones who actually know how to effectively interrogate prisoners) continue the interrogation.

I would focus instead on what WAS known--namely, that an ambush was likely in the near future--and on leading the troops under my command. Among other things, I would make sure that the soldiers actually conducting patrols were aware of the heightened threat level and taking care to not engage in avoidable ambush-enabling behaviors (not settling into routine patterns, maintaining good OPSEC and COMSEC, and maintaining heightened vigilance), ensure that higher headquarters understood the increased threat level, and I'd tighten up security at the base camp area.

In other words, I'd conduct myself as a soldier, not as a brigand.

What a concept.

Semper Fi.

Go Fi yourself...

[Poohbah]

What would be next? Blowing his bloody head off that's what would be next. You can do that to an illegal combatant in a war.

According to the Geneva Convention, this is a true statement.

According to Article 118 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, willfully doing so without a trial would be murder in the first degree.

Once again: do international agreements take precedence over the laws of the United States? Are we a sovereign nation?

[jmac1369]

Call in the MI interrogators? How pathetic!

You are in combat...lets take lunch break and get the Military Intelligence (oxymoron) types to do the Geneva Convention approved questioning, it doesn't matter if they get ambushed on their way over....wake up, Jarhead, smell the coffee! What the hell did they teach you in the Corps?
So far I would charge you with cowardess in the face of the enemy! Firing squad for you, boy. You have none of the answers to the leadership test and you wouldn't make a pimple on West's butt. Gutless is what you are, so did they drum you out, or what?

[Poohbah]

Call in the MI interrogators? How pathetic!

Pray tell why.

You are in combat...

Stop right there.

LTC West was not in combat, nor was anyone in his command. The only bullets flying were from his sidearm.

lets take lunch break and get the Military Intelligence (oxymoron) types to do the Geneva Convention approved questioning, it doesn't matter if they get ambushed on their way over....

Which did not actually happen; the MI folks arrived before LTC West could act on the information he had gained.

wake up, Jarhead, smell the coffee! What the hell did they teach you in the Corps?

To obey the laws of the United States and the orders of those appointed over me.

What the hell did the teach you?

"The ends always justify the means?"

"F*** the laws of the land, out here I am God, and I can do as I will?"

Jack, me lad, doing the right thing demands doing the hard thing.

I would have a great deal more respect for West if he simply demanded his court-martial and accepted what came next, without throwing a public tantrum.

So far I would charge you with cowardess in the face of the enemy!

Cowardice involves fleeing from battle; I would have done no such thing. Indeed, I would welcome battle. I would merely seek to fight it on my terms.

And that means the SJA would recommend a no-bill to the Division Commander, and I would be returned to my unit, whereas you would be relieved of duty at best--they generally don't let people who file false charges against their commanders stay in the unit. Something about "bad blood" possibly provoking the commander to issue you a suicidal order--and then shooting you for disobedience two milliseconds later.

Firing squad for you, boy.

No charges, no firing squad.

You have none of the answers to the leadership test and you wouldn't make a pimple on West's butt.

I am growing less and less impressed with you, Jack.

"Standards for thee, but not for me" is not leadership.

Gutless is what you are, so did they drum you out, or what?

Nope. The truly gutless decision is to do the "easy thing" and then demand that you not suffer the consequences.

Do it the hard way if the consequences of the easy way are too unpleasant for your taste, or do it the easy way and don't whine about what comes next.

[johnb838]

No, I understand that the UCMJ comes first. Wouldn't have it any other way.

[jmac1369]

UNODIR

All combat infantry officers know what Unless Otherwise Directed means....You send a message back to your commander telling him the situation has changed and you are taking the initiative to redirect you assigned mission and going against standing orders. It's called CYA. Understand, Grunt? I doubt it....

[jmac1369]

I have just been informed that Ltc. West is black. All of your previous remarks are based on race, not logic. You sonofabitch. I would certainly shoot you myself! And the JAG officer from Georgia, too. You hypocrit.

[Poohbah]

All combat infantry officers know what Unless Otherwise Directed means....

UNODIR does NOT exempt one from obeying the laws of the United States of America.

You send a message back to your commander telling him the situation has changed and you are taking the initiative to redirect you assigned mission and going against standing orders.

The situation had not changed, except for, apparently, LTC West losing his temper.

It's called CYA. Understand, Grunt?

I understand the concept of CYA. I've seen enough people play it after somebody calls the IG.

I doubt it....

It's called "right" and "wrong."

And it's painfully obvious that you do NOT understand that, Jack...and that you probably never did.

[Poohbah]

I have just been informed that Ltc. West is black. All of your previous remarks are based on race, not logic.

I didn't know that fact until a few days ago, myself, after I had been posting; it has not changed my opinion of this officer one bit.

You sonofabitch. I would certainly shoot you myself!

Through the windshield, no doubt? I seem to recall reading that's how Inchin Lam bought it. Amazing how an unknown person could shoot a moving jeep, hit the windshield, and the bullet just MAGICALLY hits the one non-American in the jeep...a man that everyone else in the jeep had reason to kill.

Fascinating, to say the least.

And the JAG officer from Georgia, too.

The first guy to scream "RACIST!" and that all folks from Georgia are racists (BTW, I'm not from Georgia) loses the argument, good sir.

[cristache]

I'm not a member of the US Army, and I don't know the what the code of conduct for officers entail, but I'll use a more basic approach as my judgement.

I see two presumtions that Poohbah made but he didn't back-up. First you say that LTC West lost his temper - where did you infer that from?

And then you said in a previous thread that the situation was not urgent (therefore LTC West should have left the interogation to the MPs). I want to know from where you infered that from too? I mean if you don't know when and where an ambush will occur, how would you know that the situation is not urgent.

Btw, The ends justify the means is fitting in this case, because there was nobody hurt as a result of LTC West's actions.

You say you're a Marine, well I haven't been thourogh basic training in the Marines but you cannot prosecute a man for putting pressure on somebody else and getting the desired result - especially if that result was benefical to your unit.

What if the Iraki didn't talk? - Well he did so there's no point in discussing what-ifs. This debate stopped discussing the present situation and quite a few people started bringing their past experiences to the table as arguments. This only gives answers to non-existent situations.

And the point that LTC West Articled 15 two of his soldiers for the same kind of behaviour. Somebody please tell me the exact account of what happend and what does the sentece of the two man mean. Exactly how harsh is the sentece (not the title of the sentece but how much money/days/rank they were lost) and for what deed.

Thanks for reading and I hope that we would use this board to bring more information to the table and not recycle known facts in harsher words.

[Poohbah]

Why did you just happen to hit on a thread that went dead 10 days before you registered?

Now, let's look at the point in your post where you destroyed the whole pro-West argument:

What if the Iraki didn't talk? - Well he did so there's no point in discussing what-ifs.

The whole defense of West is predicated on a gigantic what-if: "What if there had actually been an ambush?" Take away the what-if element of this alleged ambush, and the case for West is a lot less favorable.

But, since you said there's no point in discussing what-ifs, then you have to agree that West was way out of line.

At this point, we don't even have solid evidence that this plot to ambush US soldiers ever existed. All we have is that, after enough abuse was inflicted on him, the prisoner said some stuff. Whether that stuff was factual, or merely a desperate attempt to save his own skin by telling the interrogator what he thought they wanted to hear--well, that's another story entirely.