Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Top Military Officials are a Disgrace to Those They Lead

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298203,00.html

Top Military Officials are a Disgrace to Those They Lead

By Col. David Hunt



� E-mail Col. Hunt
� Col. Hunt's Q&A
Our generals are betraying our soldiers � again

Sorry, but I have to get your attention on this one. In both Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States Army � not the much maligned �LIBERAL PRESS� or BILL CLINTON or the LIBERALS IN CONGRESS � NO, the UNITED STATES MILITARY is prosecuting its soldiers for doing their jobs. I have tried, I have yelled, I have used nasty words. I have even tried to use humor, but none of this is sticking. You either do not believe me � or much worse, you do not care.

We did one of these stories on O�Reilly last week. Two great Special Forces soldiers, along with their team, tracked down a terrorist who was on the 10 Most Wanted list in Afghanistan. The Special Forces soldiers were operating under the much-hated rules of engagement, which said to capture or kill the bad guy, who was a bomb maker and terrorist leader. The soldiers followed this killer to his house/compound, used guile and trickery and lured the waste of life out of his lair and put a bullet in his head.

It was a perfect operation � a �Nice going guys,� high fives, take the day off, �Get ready for the next one,� type of operation. So how do you think our Special Forces soldiers were rewarded � or if not rewarded, treated � after this? THEY ARE BROUGHT TO TRIAL, INVESTIGATED AND FORCED TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR LAWYERS.
When the terrorist was first killed, the Army showed its trust in these bravest of the brave by investigating them twice. Both investigations, however unnecessary, found them innocent of any wrongdoing. So we now are so gun shy, so afraid and so massively politically correct, that we are treating combat like a police shooting. In most cities in this great country, if a police officer even shoots his weapon, he or she must face a board of inquiry. It makes the police officers crazy and causes all to look over their shoulders and to not trust their leaders -- but that is in a peaceful city, not a damn war zone.

Our generals in both the Army and Marine Corps have cared more about their precious careers and reputations than their soldiers and Marines under them. The Marines have actually prosecuted a Marine for shooting a terrorist too many times and the Army � well, the Army has the Pat Tillman tragedy, the Abu Graib disaster and many more to answer for, and now these courts martial.

In Iraq, the story is the same. The Army rediscovered a trick we used in �Nam' called �baiting,� where you leave ammunition and pieces of explosive devices out and shoot whoever takes them. We used to leave exploding ammo to put in your AK � when you try to fire it, the gun blows up. It worked then and it works now � but guess what the Army is now putting on trial: Ranger Snipers for doing their jobs. The rules of engagement were once again being followed and once again our generals put their careers over their men�s lives. The chilling effect that these actions have over our soldiers is dramatic; this distrust weakens the very foundations of our military. It causes soldiers to second-guess themselves and their chain of command. We cannot fight like this and hope to win.

We should be putting these generals on trial, first for going along with Rummy and just as important for not trusting their soldiers. At the very least, we should have a rule that states if you charge a soldier � like what happened in these cases � and they are cleared, YOU get charged and thrown in jail. Unfortunately, after the trials and after these soldiers� careers and lives have been ruined and after they clear up the mountain of debt they will amass from these trials, the generals involved will get promoted.

These poor excuse for officers do not deserve the soldiers they dare claim they lead. We as a nation had better go out and find us another Marshall, who at the beginning of World War II fired hundreds of senior officers because they were not cutting it. We need him today, as many of our senior officers are way overdue for a one-way trip to the woodshed.

Frag 'em.

I have to agree with the Colonel. jorge

The reason the generals are nervous is that any act of killing over there may bring repercussions. The reason any act of killing over there may bring repercussions is that the great majority of the American people are sick of the war. If we weren't, we'd cheer whenever an Iraqi got killed, and the generals would be under no pressure, and there would be no unnecessary investigations.

Bring 'em home. There's no reason for them to be there. They're not accomplishing anything that's worth American blood, and they've long since overstayed the authorization to use force that Congress sent the President.

Get 'em outa there.

No Barak. We have the absolute WORST track record of running out on people we told we would hang in there with and the cost has been millions of lives. If we EVER want anyone to take our "Word" seriously, we HAVE to stay. Who in Hell would EVER want to trust us ever again?? Bay of Pigs. Vietnam. Iran Lebanon.Somalia. Yep. We have a helluva lot more to prove than the Iraqis or anyone else. As to Generals?? Wars usually show the "peacetime" generals as organizers, trainers but only rarely as the warfighters. At the beginning of every war prior to RVN, those incompetent political promotions were unceremoniously chittcanned. Not so these days I'm afarid.

There is a column in the 9/24 issue of U.S. News and World Report titled The Overlawyered War, by Michael Barone, that makes just that point. The column begins with a quote of a law professor and former govt. lawyer: "Never in the history of the United States had lawyers had such extraordinary influence over war policy as they did after 9/11." Barone says that the Pentagon has 10,000 lawyers, and that the CIA has become so wary of possible criminal charges that it urges its agents to buy insurance. He says that the risk-aversiveness leaves us more vulnerable to terrorists, and sees it as part of the larger society that strips jungle gyms from playgrounds out of fear of lawsuits.

On a personal note, I am grateful for many reasons that my son returned safely from his tour in Iraq. One reason is that he served before the ROEs reached their current level. I cannot imagine the stress that this puts on our soldiers faced with split second life or death decisions, not to mention their leaders who formulate policy and issue the orders. It is truly a disgrace.

Paul

Add it up.

The generals in question probably also were among the 'young stud' majors and colonels who 'made the list' during the Klinton era when PC trumped mlitary skills as a promotion standard. The real hard nosed guys who had absorbed the lessons of Vietnam were forced out. "Diversity" -- homosexual and women in combat-- firendly, risk averse, peace-keeping, nation building, careerist-orieted types won out.

8 years loooong, 8 years ago --- the Klinton era is a gift that keeps on giving. Especially so, as this adminisration has not done all that much to reverse the harm done. A military institutiion that shuts up and does whatever it is told -- no matter the viability of the orders -- is always preferable to the politocos I guess.

1B

+ 1.............

I didn't promise. You didn't promise. The soldiers didn't promise. If anybody did promise, it was politicians unconstitutionally usurping the power of their offices and committing resources they had no authority to commit.

How do you stop politicians from doing something like that? By giving them your money and blood, and that of your children and grandchildren to spend on their illegal promises?

I don't. Bring 'em home. Even if you believe that the war has been good for the poor, downtrodden Iraqi people, which I don't for a moment, those poor, downtrodden Iraqis have had a six-year-long free ride on the blood and tax money of Americans. Time to get off and walk on their own two feet.

And as far as reputation goes: do you read the world press? Whatever reputation we have left is being damaged far more by continued occupation than it would be by withdrawal.

But even if that weren't the case, if the embarrassment of losing the Iraq war keeps the US out of future illegal, unconstitutional, imperialist military adventures, I think that'd be A Good Thing.

I wouldn't count on any "lessons" being remembered for more than a half generation.....

I do not think it is the military leadership in general, the case Col Hunt cited was brought by ONE General, after the incident had been investigated TWICE and the soldiers involved were cleared of any wrong doing. One General is NOT the whole military. Even one who may have other than Moral of the troops in mind. This looks to me as if he is working on some career after the military.

While it would be nice if we could take our marbles and just go home, the result of that action would mean a lot more death and distruction, not only in Iraq and Afganistan but here as well.
I for one am not ready or willing to convert to Islam, and that is where conceding now would lead.

The political correctness didn't start with clinton. It started with Carter. It just found new life with Clinton and the mindset in the senior "leadership" (?) is still there. kwg

These truly are disgusting times. I vote we get out of the way of our military and let them WIN!!!!!!!!!

Barak, why don't you tell that crap to one of the poor slobs murdered by the Khmer Rouge AFTER we bailed out of SEA! You ain't seen SCHITT for repression. You have absolutely NO friggin' idea what repression is. When it happens (and it happens a lot) the real victims have no hope, not one iota. The real savage regimes actually grow in strength and cred because we and others are too friggin' busy quibbling over whether we have any interest in stopping anything.
As to the Iraqis. Well now, they ain't blind or stupid. They are perfectly aware of what our history has been and the slaughter visited on those who sided with us. We have more to prove to them than they have to prove to us.The world press has absolutely nothing to do with reputation. I get the distinct feeling that if we had to wait for the permission of some of the guys on this forum, some rats' ass slime would be slicing my kids throat and I'd STILL be waiting for your permission to kill the SOB's. No thanx. I'll kill 'em BEFORE then and I don't GAF what and whose tender sensitivities are crushed.

Throughout my 22 years in the military, doctrine was that war is a means of furthering the national objectives. When we went to war, we had objectives an the military and the majority of the population knew what they were. The military should have been given a free head to do the job and win the war.

The politicians, led by liberals and encouraged by the press, prevented this from happening. In truth, much of the posturing and socialist attempts to stop progress in the war is treason. In WW II it would have been called treason and those involved would have faced the consequences.

I agree, we should get out of the middle east - as soon as we go on a full scale offensive and win the damn war! Go troops - kick ass.

My $0.02.

Actually, no.

You won't kill anybody.

Instead, you'll continue to support a regime that uses other people's money and sons to kill them (well, to kill at them--there'll always be a permanent supply of more as long as there are American troops over there) and endanger the rest of us over here.

If you did mean that you personally were willing to go over there and put your own tail on the line with your own money and your own resources, I'd say fine, go ahead, more power to you.

But that's not what you mean.

These ar the 'perfumed princes' the David Hackworth was speaking of.
Jim

Barak, I have already done my killing and if I were younger I am perfectly willing to do it again. And the context I put it in was what one could reasonably look forward to if all we ever did was allow evil crap like that to flourish. What exactly makes you think more attacks are not going to occur here again?? Hell, why is it that so many people seem to think that we have to fear an invading Army?? Nobody is THAT stupid-yet. We use aircraft carriers and armored divisions to project power. They use car bombs,poisons and -yep,they fly airplanes into buildings.

I have mixed feelings about the whole Iraq thing. That the politicians are hampering the troops is total treason, and should be handled accordingly.
I partially agree with barak that we should maybe pull up stakes and get out because those idiots in ther Iraqi government are too busy witht heir sectarian infighting that they'll probably never reach the benchmarks, not now and not in one thousand years. As soon as we do get out, they'll be killing each other to see who will end up in control and there will just be another Saddam Hussein in powder, just with a different name.
It'll never end until they all kill each other off.
Right now, and I firmly believe this, the greatest enemy this country has today are the politicians in the Congress. The only thing they care about is getting re-elected and maintaining their seat of power. Like a dirty diaper, they need to be changed.
Paul B.

Barak,

I have watched your schit for a long time in silence and now know that there is no point to resoponding to it.

You define yourself.

1B