Posted on 09/29/2006 3:11:27 PM PDT by RGSpincich
Driver claims he was abandoned during Iraqi insurgents' fire Friday, September 29, 2006
RICHMOND — A Virginia National Guard unit from Martinsville and Rocky Mount came under scrutiny after a video seemed to show troops abandoning a civilian truck convoy during an attack by Iraqi insurgents, resulting in the executions of three unarmed drivers.
However, the military investigated the incident and found the military personnel responded properly. Investigators recommended awards for one soldier and one civilian in the incident.
The video, obtained by ABC News, shows a military personnel carrier racing away after insurgents open fire and disable four Halliburton trucks last September near Balad, Iraq.
“I do not know who the driver was of that Humvee, but he abandoned us,” civilian driver Preston Wheeler of Mena, Ark., who taped the footage, told ABC News.
Wheeler said almost 40 minutes passed before U.S. troops returned.
Military officials said Thursday that there was an immediate investigation, which found that no personnel had abandoned the convoy and they responded properly.
“They fought back bravely while waiting for reinforcements and attending to the casualties,” Lt. Col. Michelle Martin-Hing, a spokeswoman for the Multi-National Force-Iraq, told The Associated Press in an e-mail.
In fact, Martin-Hing said, investigators recommended that one soldier and one civilian be nominated for awards for the actions during the Sept. 20, 2005, incident.
Virginia Guard officials confirmed Thursday that its 1173rd Transportation Company was on active federal status at the time. The hometowns of the 1173rd are Martinsville and Rocky Mount, according to the Guard Web site.
Guard spokesman Lt. Col. Chester Carter III referred all questions to the Tampa, Fla.-based U.S. Central Command, home of key command centers in the U.S. war on terrorism.
Wheeler said that while the troops were absent, he crouched down in his truck and watched two truck drivers being shot at point-blank range.
“They just killed ’em. They just killed him. Oh my God,” Wheeler said in the video.
Wheeler can be heard on the tape pleading for help on his radio: “Please help me ... I’m fixin’ to get killed. I have no gun back here. I am by myself!”
Those killed in the attack were Keven Dagit, 42, of Jefferson, Iowa; Sascha Grenner-Case, age unavailable, of Sierra Vista, Ariz.; and Christopher Lem, 40, of Lyndon Station, Wis., said Cathy Mann, a Halliburton spokeswoman. They were killed while delivering the mail, according to a news release from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in a dedication of a facility in Iraq.
The military investigation found that “individuals at the front of the convoy reacted as they were taught by pushing forward and getting out of the kill zone of the ambush,” Martin-Hing wrote.
“What is not visible in the video being shown is that they collected the casualties they could reach and laid down suppressive fire with their weapons to help get those vehicles that could move from the front of the convoy out of the kill zone,” she wrote.
The troops then set up security, called for support and medical evacuations and directed the movements of other gun trucks farther back in the convoy, she said.
In a news release, KBR, Halliburton’s engineering and construction subsidiary, did not address the details of the incident but said the military has “command and control” over its convoys in Iraq and is “required to provide security.”
"And what difference does that make anyway?
Ohhhhh I don't know. Perhaps a false selected outrage over something that happened a year ago, but just so happens to occur just a few weeks before midterm elections. (\Sarcasm on) You are right....when it get's released doesn't matter at all. (\sarsasm off)
If they do, they are considered combatants. If they don't wear uniforms and have a responsible chain of command, they are illegal combatants.
Paid with 'rat dollars, more likely. he was "at the base" not at the ambush. He doesn't know what happened except what he was told--or made up. The longstanding Army doctrine is, when encountering an ambush, always always attack into it, both to engage the enemy and to exit the kill zone. The reason is that if you linger in the kill zone, you will be--killed. Duh. But one wouldn't expect a civilian truckdriver to figure that out.
When an inflammatory story about a hitherto non-issue is put into play in the context of a hotly contested, rancorous election campaign, it is both relevant and legitimate to ask about motive. Sorry you can't see that.
Who got left? There were gun trucks right behind Mr. Video the whole time. That's why he is alive today to fabricate this story.
Besides collecting his handsome paycheck from Haliburton he's now picking up a hefty check from someone else...what a man.
We should just say the Second Amendment overrides the Geneva Convention, which it does BTW, and allow the civilians to arm themselves at least as well as they could at home, say in Texas.
Seperate the apples from the oranges. This guy is doing more than whining. He's fabricating a story to fit a video with tunnel vision.
Rush usually does a good job, but on this he is wrong.
Non combatant doesn't mean unarmed. Police are not soldiers, and are armed. Many citizens are not "legal combatants" but are not unarmed.
Michael Yon has been known to pick up a rifle while acting as a journalist. That doesn't make him a combatant. it makes him armed.
If you are an armed non-combatant, you may not go on offensive missions, but may hold your position, and fire back. You may clear your immediate area, like a homeowner clearing his downstairs.
You may recall that non-military security types were murdered in Fallujah. They were armed.
Having said that, I am sure that military JAG types would recommend to commanders that they disarm people, or have VERY high standards for permitting people to be armed.
Tell me about the armed security guys at Fallujah?
No different then the armed security guards at the front gate at most of our bases these days...that is specifically what they are hired to do and yes, they are covered under the Geneva convention.
And so would be armed convoy drivers.
That sounds reasonable but they wouldn't be covered...they aren't hired to perform security and they aren't combatants.
The Geneva Convention doesn't mention what someone is hired to do.
That is some JAG weenie's interpolation. Doesn't have to be that way.
Try showing a little intelligence if it's possible. Right now your coming off looking bloody stupid.
Non-response. Yawn.
It doesn't take a genious to figure out it out. If your family is caught in a storm of bullets and your wife is shot down are you going to stand there with your kids to fight or are you going to grab you kids and get the hell out of there, and then come back. Hopefully with a few cops on the way with you.
Stuff happens and there are huge risks in running convoy over there. This guy wants to make this into a big deal, but....BUT they all know the rules, the risks, and how things are going to go down if the worst happens. Wasn't this guy paying attention in class?
Things he had to consider was they disabled the trucks, the number of the enemy, and was there an IED buried along the roadside(might be why the moved away from the area)? I am sorry this guy went through what he did and people died, but decisions had to be made. If the ambush was over a roadside bomb and they didn't move away, they would ALL be dead.
It is interesting. I am very familiar with the contractors captured by the Japanese at Wake Island. The Japanese didn't follow the Geneva Convention at all, so their practices have little to teach us. By the way, the Terrorists don't follow it either, and pretending that following it protects our soldiers is a kind of insanity.
Note, the current version of Geneva Convention was adopted after WWII. The current version was modified in light of WWII experience to permit organizations like the French Resistance (Maquis) to follow the rules, and fight against an occupier in fair ways and gain some protection.
Again, the Terrorists don't follow it. They don't wear uniforms. When that happens, restrictions do not apply to only one side, do they?
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.