Posted on 12/09/2003 4:05:51 PM PST by Ispy4u
In seeking to find the equitableness in the case against Lt. Col Allen B. West, one struggles as the news poured out of Iraq, in regard to the action of the troops of the 4th ID--which Col West was a part of up until he was removed from his battalion command-- with in the span of one week, included the following:
November 17 Reuters reported: Angered by bomb attacks ... the commander of a US battalion in Iraq sent his tanks and armored vehicles through the streets on Monday in a demonstration of firepower to insurgents. Weapons of choice: Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, “.. Infantrymen in full battle dress... machine-guns mounted on Humvees...”
Message cast: It’s in your best interest to not resist us; cooperate with us; tell us what you know of the activities aiding this insurgency. Or there will be severe and fearsome consequences to pay. November 18, World Net Daily report:
'Heroic' officer faces Army hearing Lt. Col. West argues aggressive interrogation saved lives of troops Article breakdown: after suffering previous ambush attacks to his troops, upon being tipped-off of yet another organized attack designed for he and his men; in an attempt to advert that pending attack, Lt. Col. Allen B. West-- former commander of the 4th ID’s 2 battalion of it’s 20th Field Artillery Regiment--used a demonstration of fire power. Thus, successfully obtained legitimate human intel sufficient to avoid that foe-scheduled appointment with death for he and his troops.
Weapon of choice: 9 mm weapon. Fired twice; close to the mans head; with the urging: “Talk or I kill.”
The man, who had been with his female interrogators for two hours and yet only claimed he knew nothing, suddenly with the aid to his memory granted him by the aggressive actions of Col. West, was blest with total recall.
Additionally on November 18, Washington Post carried a story: This, a narrative of this division’s major general, MG Ray Odierno. It Spelled out, how he pressed to drive home his message to officers under his command: “ ... make sure you understand my intent: that I want to be lethal. Make them, (any insurgents) understand.”
This General is said to “care deeply” for his soldiers. Said to be a man who “lead by example”, a no nonsense kind of a leader. Article also spotlighted, General Odierno was “the youngest division commander and one of the most rapidly promoted officers of West Point's Class of 1976.”
Next caption: 18 November, Los Angeles Times: U.S. Flexes Its Muscles in Iraq's North, Tells of “Intimidation campaign.” Used to 'send a signal.’ Weapon of choice: “a missile carrying a 500-pound warhead.”
Message implied: No more footsies; Cooperate: Or there will be hell to pay.
November 19, Reuters: Emotional U.S. officer admits wrongdoing in Iraq.
Opening paragraphs quote a man who says he knows his actions were not in line with Article 128 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but argues his actions were in line with his will to do all he could to keep his promise to the families he and his boys left back in Ft. Hood, TX. That being, bring them home alive.
Weapon of choice: recall the 9mm pistol.
Intended end: Cooperate; or else.
Twentieth November, Army Times: “Military in Iraq gunning more firepower as scare tactic for insurgents”
Weapons of choice: “artillery, tanks and aircraft.” Message sent: Conveyed in article’s title.
All these, from the ranks of the 4th ID.
Now the hearing is past, and once he receives the recommendation from the Article 32 hearing officer the decision of what to do to Col. West lies with Major General Ray Odierno.
Should that recommendation be to proceed with a court martial, the General is in a tough spot.
How can he in good conscience do any thing less than decide to bring this--except for it’s sombourous possible ends --ridiculum on our will to be lethal without apology, to an all ready all-to-late and none-to-soon abrupt end?
Mean while, a division watches. So too, a nation.
Likewise an most lethal foe.
All-the-while, daily this past week the death toll in the 4th ID continued to rise. And as a mother of one 4th ID soldier, we can only pray our son is blessed enough to be serving under the command of a man the likes of the height, width and stock not far from that seen in Lt. Col Allen B. West.
Debi M. Brand 918-283-2477 20405 E. Hwy. 20 Claremore, OK 74019 Mother of a 4th ID Soldier, Serving in Iraq since Early April, When his unit first went in
What facts ?????? !!!
LTC West's own behavior has caused me to question his integrity and character.
Before the Article 32 hearing, he claimed that (a) he never struck the prisoner, and (b) he did not order his subordinates to strike the prisoner.
At the Article 32 hearing, we found out that he did both.
Tell me that you did one thing, and then tell me that you did exactly the opposite--yes, I will question your integrity and character.
Or should we merely start parsing his statements in Clintonian fashion?
This is what we know, factually: (1) LTC West did violate orders from his seniors, and gave illegal orders to his subordinates. (2) An ambush that may or may not have been actually planned did not take place. (3) No one has demonstrated a solid connection between (1) and (2). Indeed, no one has actually demonstrated that (2) was actually about to happen. (4) West's subordinates have been punished for obeying West's illegal orders. (5) West now faces prosecution for issuing those orders and disobeying lawful orders to begin with. That's all we know at this time.
No, that's not all we know. We know that there is NO EARTHLY REASON, WHEN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT COMMON SENSE, why LTC West is in trouble...
Btw, I'm watching the Col.'s attorney on O'Reilly right now and he said that the Army has just now decided not to court martial this American hero. ......And is pension is secure as well. He's going to get just a slap on the wrists, much to your chagrin I'd imagine.
Please demonstrate that the ambush was actually about to happen. No one here has done so; they are merely taking LTC West's word for it. And since his statements to the press prior to the Article 32 hearing about his actions are at significant variance with his statements at the Article 32 hearing, I am unwilling to take LTC West's word for it.
That mental condition is called "integrity." Fake executions (such as that engaged in by West) and beating prisoners (such as that engaged by West) were standard techniques of the trade within Saddam Hussein's secret police. Civilized nations don't engage in these sorts of practices for a reason: Where does it stop? At what point do you say, "OK, he isn't talking" and stop these activities?
Get a life and stop sensationalizing. We'll never be that vile and you know it. West's actions weren't even on the radar scope compared to Saddam. Have you been taking propaganda training from the nazi press?
Read about it HERE.
Verbal reprimand, charges will not be pressed. He'll get his full retirement benefits. I'm waiting for confirmation from Iraq.
And others, it now appears....
Last weekend, three American soldiers were ordered to stand trial in January on charges of abusing Iraqi prisoners of war at the detention center at Camp Bucca in southern Iraq.
The charges grew out of an alleged incident May 12 in which the three soldiers from the 320th Military Police Battalion allegedly punched and kicked Iraqi POWs. The soldiers said they acted in self-defense, that conditions were chaotic at Camp Bucca, and that guards had been harassed and assaulted daily by unruly prisoners.The three soldiers, Master Sgt. Lisa Marie Girman, 35; Staff Sgt. Scott A. McKenzie, 38; and Spc. Timothy F. Canjar, 21, are accused of dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment of enemy prisoners of war, filling false official statements, obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
A fourth soldier originally held on the same allegations, Sgt. Shawna Edmondson, 24, has received an other-than-honorable discharge from the military, which she requested rather than face martial proceedings.
Well, it's either that, or I rely on LTC West's word.
I'd be a hell of a lot more sanguine over the latter if he hadn't already "misled" (as Clinton would say) the public over his actions.
Actually, it isn't to my chagrin. The guy's CO made a decision. That's the way it works.
I still think a lot less of West now than I did at the beginning. He chose to make a public spectacle of the matter, and "misled" the public regarding his actions in doing so.
Others, paraphrasing or parsing his words may have, but he has not.
As to his making a public spectacle. If this had been handled in this current fashion, which is what he expected and believed should happen, he would not have done anything. Someone was out to hang his hide on a rack and he exercised his own perogative in the end to save his pension for his family...and it worked. I cannot fault him for that.
In the end, you seem to suggest he should take the unwarrented loss of his pension and court martial "for the service". His oath is to the constitutiona and the wellbeing of this nation...he was willing to take one for that, and is now going to. But he was being treated (in his own estimation and in the estimation of many, many others) in a manner that was far disprorortionate to what he did and he determined to do something about it.
I am glad he did. Just my own opinion.
Fine. He talked straight to you. His attorney (who legally speaks for him--why do you think i's called a "power of attorney," anyway?) said otherwise.
As to his making a public spectacle. If this had been handled in this current fashion, which is what he expected and believed should happen, he would not have done anything. Someone was out to hang his hide on a rack and he exercised his own perogative in the end to save his pension for his family...and it worked. I cannot fault him for that.
When it involves false statements to the public, I do have a problem with that, and can fault him.
In the end, you seem to suggest he should take the unwarrented loss of his pension and court martial "for the service".
No, I would prefer that LTC West and his attorney had either told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth to the public--or that they had simply kept silent until the Article 32 hearing.
His oath is to the constitutiona and the wellbeing of this nation...he was willing to take one for that, and is now going to.
As long as he didn't suffer any material hardship, he's happy. F*** his troops, though.
Fine example of moral courage.
But he was being treated (in his own estimation and in the estimation of many, many others) in a manner that was far disprorortionate to what he did and he determined to do something about it.
Uh-huh. No problem with his troops getting punished for obeying his illegal orders--but he sure didn't want any materially adverse consequences for himself.
I've had the displeasure of serving under two commanders who thought and acted like that. One is far too many.
I have talked not only to LTC West, but to troops there and to their families. They do not feel in the least that he screwed them, to the contrary, to the person they have been willing to support him and lauded him.
Clearly, there is at least one individual in the battalion who feels otherwise to some extent. I have not been able to find that one individual who wrote, in passing, a comment that brought the JAG into it and led to what we have seen. Nonetheless, I am confidant in the story as I have presented here on FR.
We clearly disagree...I'm not surprised by that but am glad that such disagreements and debate have allowed the story to get aired completely and for this end to be reached...which is what the LTC felt would occur from the get-go.
'nuff said on my part, others can come to their own conclusions.
Nothing to do with them? Why they've been engaging in these *illegal* and excessive interrogations that are such an issue with you when it's a combat officer performing them instead of an MP or wannabee spook *professional interrogator*. Now we have a choice of either cutting LTC West some slack, or going back and applying the exact same standard to every MP and M.I. interrogator who's ever performed any sort of similar act, and also bringing Article 128 charges against them, too...including those in Afghanistan. Maybe they'll even apply it retroactively to Johnny Spahn....no exceptions, right?
As for it working on *folks like me* it looks like those folks like me include at least several congressmen and Army Chief of Staff Pete Schoomaker....
-archy-/-
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.