Replies

With his men under direct threat from an ambush from an enemy

Stop right there.

That wasn't the situation. If he has time to have his subordinates smack a prisoner around, and then engage in this little bit of street theater, then it wasn't a "direct threat."

Our enemies don't care about the "rules of engagement"

That's because they are evil. We are the good guys. That means we worry about the rules of engagement. If you wish us to be as evil as the bad guys, then start your own branch of the Ba'athist Party here in America.

If one of our Soldiers dies because an enemy who can't be trusted is given civilized treatment ~ the officer in charge of appeasement should be the one on trial, imho.

OK: suppose one of your ham-handed interrogations results in a prisoner clamming up completely (read about the Hanoi Hilton to understand what people can choose to endure), and one of our troops gets killed. Does the officer who pulled that stunt get a "That's OK, buddy" from you?

Or, suppose the interrogation generates its usual result--false information to make the interrogator stop. That false information is acted on, and the unit gets ambushed because they were misled by a prisoner who really didn't know a damn thing. You still going to say the officer is a hero?

Direct threat...sorry, civilian interpretation of rumors of a planned attack on his troops, which turned out to be accurate ~ and which was thwarted based on info obtained by LTC West shooting at the sand.

That's because they are evil. We are the good guys. That means we worry about the rules of engagement.

Yes. If this were Battleship and the enemy played fair. I understand your argument, and the importance of both rules of engagement, and chain of command.

What I don't agree with is the application of neat and tidy rules in this case ~ during this war, against this enemy ~ when LTC West ended up saving the lives of his troops, and the enemy was relatively unscathed. That is highly civilized, imho. The enemy can even go on to repent, change his ways and find freedom. How many victorious occupiers allow their captives that opportunity?

Does the officer who pulled that stunt get a "That's OK, buddy" from you?

How many more of ours die while we consult the rule book as rumors of pending enemy attacks swirl about our good guys ~ esp. w/ the availability of WMD info?

Or, suppose the interrogation generates its usual result--false information to make the interrogator stop.

We already know that LTC West's efforts obtained truthful information that most likely saved US lives.