|
This is unusual. A whole platoon defying orders?!
Link Platoon defies orders in Iraq Miss. soldier calls home, cites safety concerns By Jeremy Hudson jehudson@clarionledger.com A 17-member Army Reserve platoon with troops from Jackson and around the Southeast deployed to Iraq is under arrest for refusing a "suicide mission" to deliver fuel, the troops' relatives said Thursday. The soldiers refused an order on Wednesday to go to Taji, Iraq — north of Baghdad — because their vehicles were considered "deadlined" or extremely unsafe, said Patricia McCook of Jackson, wife of Sgt. Larry O. McCook. Sgt. McCook, a deputy at the Hinds County Detention Center, and the 16 other members of the 343rd Quartermaster Company from Rock Hill, S.C., were read their rights and moved from the military barracks into tents, Patricia McCook said her husband told her during a panicked phone call about 5 a.m. Thursday. The platoon could be charged with the willful disobeying of orders, punishable by dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of pay and up to five years confinement, said military law expert Mark Stevens, an associate professor of justice studies at Wesleyan College in Rocky Mount, N.C. No military officials were able to confirm or deny the detainment of the platoon Thursday. But today, Sgt. Salju Thomas of the Combined Press Information Center in Baghdad issued a statement saying that an investigation has begun. "The Commander General of the 13 Corps Support Group has appointed a deputy commander to lead an investigation into allegations that members of the 343 Quartermaster Company refused to participate in their assigned convoy mission on Oct. 13," Thomas' statement said. The investigation team is currently in Tallil taking statements and interviewing those involved, Thomas said in the statement. U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson said he plans to submit a congressional inquiry today on behalf of the Mississippi soldiers to launch an investigation into whether they are being treated improperly. "I would not want any member of the military to be put in a dangerous situation ill-equipped," said Thompson, who was contacted by families. "I have had similar complaints from military families about vehicles that weren't armor-plated, or bullet-proof vests that are outdated. It concerns me because we made over $150 billion in funds available to equip our forces in Iraq. "President Bush takes the position that the troops are well-armed, but if this situation is true, it calls into question how honest he has been with the country," Thompson said. The 343rd is a supply unit whose general mission is to deliver fuel and water. The unit includes three women and 14 men and those with ranking up to sergeant first class. "I got a call from an officer in another unit early (Thursday) morning who told me that my husband and his platoon had been arrested on a bogus charge because they refused to go on a suicide mission," said Jackie Butler of Jackson, wife of Sgt. Michael Butler, a 24-year reservist. "When my husband refuses to follow an order, it has to be something major." The platoon being held has troops from Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina, Mississippi and South Carolina, said Teresa Hill of Dothan, Ala., whose daughter Amber McClenny is among those being detained. McClenny, 21, pleaded for help in a message left on her mother's answering machine early Thursday morning. "They are holding us against our will," McClenny said. "We are now prisoners." McClenny told her mother her unit tried to deliver fuel to another base in Iraq Wednesday, but was sent back because the fuel had been contaminated with water. The platoon returned to its base, where it was told to take the fuel to another base, McClenny told her mother. The platoon is normally escorted by armed Humvees and helicopters, but did not have that support Wednesday, McClenny told her mother. The convoy trucks the platoon was driving had experienced problems in the past and were not being properly maintained, Hill said her daughter told her. The situation mirrors other tales of troops being sent on missions without proper equipment. Aviation regiments have complained of being forced to fly dangerous missions over Iraq with outdated night-vision goggles and old missile-avoidance systems. Stories of troops' families purchasing body armor because the military didn't provide them with adequate equipment have been included in recent presidential debates. Patricia McCook said her husband, a staff sergeant, understands well the severity of disobeying orders. But he did not feel comfortable taking his soldiers on another trip. "He told me that three of the vehicles they were to use were deadlines ... not safe to go in a hotbed like that," Patricia McCook said. Hill said the trucks her daughter's unit was driving could not top 40 mph. "They knew there was a 99 percent chance they were going to get ambushed or fired at," Hill said her daughter told her. "They would have had no way to fight back." Kathy Harris of Vicksburg is the mother of Aaron Gordon, 20, who is among those being detained. Her primary concern is that she has been told the soldiers have not been provided access to a judge advocate general. Stevens said if the soldiers are being confined, law requires them to have a hearing before a magistrate within seven days. Harris said conditions for the platoon have been difficult of late. Her son e-mailed her earlier this week to ask what the penalty would be if he became physical with a commanding officer, she said. But Nadine Stratford of Rock Hill, S.C., said her godson Colin Durham, 20, has been happy with his time in Iraq. She has not heard from him since the platoon was detained. "When I talked to him about a month ago, he was fine," Stratford said. "He said it was like being at home." |
Kudos to them for refusing a mission due to unsafe equipment (if that was legit).
Here's hoping that it is an unbiased investigation. |
Quote:
If the commanding officer judged that the material condition of his equipment was so extremely bad that the risk to his soldiers outweighed the completion of the mission, then fine; it's his call and more power to him. That said, it's his fault that they weren't mission ready to begin with... |
Aerich: with quotes suggesting that Bush is lying to the country, I doubt this report is unbiased.
|
Quote:
Aerich (and I) are hoping that the tribunal will be fair, not the reporting. |
<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
It is debatable that it was a "Whole Platoon" Chewie, it may have been some of the members of the Platoon. I pity the stupid girl who made a phone call discussing mission data over a clear channel. Thats a major rule break no matter what was going on. As for them refusing to follow Orders, if the Courts Martial (who the hell called it a "tribunal"?) finds that they were not properly equipped and had a justified reason for feeling that it was a "Suicide" mission then their punishments will be reasonably light or non-existant...I will however note..that a different group of people managed to get the supplys through on the alleged "suicide" mission. Im still waiting for an actual number, serveral reports said it was the "platoon" Other sources said "members of a platoon" and a UPI report direct from Iraq said that "some members of a platoon..." so we have no real good idea of exactly what happned or why...and as I said...the other squad managed to do the job apparently with the same vehicles. Will be interesting to see the details unfold. </font> |
Quote:
It still comes down to someone making a call that this particular order put the group and the mission to undue risk. It was probably the wrong call -- it's a reserve unit from Mississippi :D -- but it will still be looked into from the perspective of the unit commander. |
<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Aleph, you are correct that platoons are not corts martialed, nor are platoons subject to tribunals. The US Military did away with mass punishments decades ago. Each and every member of the platoon who refused to pull the mission will be evaluated by the unit commander and from there it will be decided whether Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP) is warrented or if they should be sent to higher Authority, in any event...each of them will have the right to request a courts martial as per the UCMJ instead of allowing the unit commander to issue NJP. I thought it was the press calling it a Tribunal and I hate it when the press acts like its all informed and knows what the hell they are talking about, and then go off getting the story wrong.</font> |
I doubt they have many land lines in Iraq, so if the call was made from a mobile it's encrypted anyway. And I can see where they're coming from if they're having to deliver a useless cargo in vehicles which apparently aren't bulletproof!
|
Quote:
were just one unit of the platoon. They failed to show up for their 7am briefing regarding the resupply mission. It was a deliberate decision made by those originally chosen to go. They were confined for refusing orders (as per normal military regulations) and the mission was eventually carried out by other members of the same platoon. Military officials said that the allegations of inferior equipment and vehicles would also be investigated - and in fact - that platoon has been placed on a "safety maintenance stand down" until all of the vehicles have been properly inspected. I respect their courage to say "This is is just TOO dangerous", but I'm aggravated especially by the young woman that called her parents and said "We're being held against our will. Do everything you can. Raise pure hell". I'm sorry, missy, but you are in the military during a time of war. If you REFUSE to obey orders, you WILL be detained by armed guards until the matter can be investigated and a Judge Advocate appointed. That would be just like any of us saying "I REFUSED to do something my boss told me to, and now he has placed me on suspension for a week." In the military, and especially in a time of war, soldiers are expected to follow the orders they are given. By NOT delivering the supplies, they put the lives of OTHER soldiers in danger as well. I'm not faulting them for taking a stand, because it sounds like they have a legitimate complaint (though I agree it is just ridiculous to claim that Bush is personally responsible for that {sigh} :rolleyes: ), but if thy are going to disobey orders, then they also have to be expecting the consequences of that action and be willing to face them. Here is a link to the MSN story. It contains a few more details than the OP --->Link</font> |
Not too long ago somebody had a [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img] about the NG/Reserves.
My questions, and sure are some of the same that the 15-6 panel will ask. 1. Who maintains these vehicles? The unit! 2. How did these vehicles fall into deadlines? The unit! 3. How do we fix it. WE MAKE them do the right thing 24/7. Iraq is not a club med trip, it's a freaking hot zone! It goes back to the mentality *they* (Yes THEY, not WE) have. After working with the NG and preparing them for their deployment, I can fully understand this issue. Cerek, good post. However, most people, and especially R/C soldiers, families and communities do not understand what you wrote. It's foreign to them. They work one weekend a month, two weeks a year, maybe some community work, fight fires, etc, go to college on the government's dime or upto 50k worth anyhow. Possilby do airport duty. But my goodness, now they have to go and support the Army in Iraq! Sheez! [/rant] |
<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
It must be pointed out, that the womans assertions that they were being held against their will.....while technically accurate, also tend to make things sound worse than they obviously could have been....if she were "REALLY" being abused and held against her will, I doubt very much they would have allowed her access to a phone with the ability to reach the states..... I don't know the details but I do know, A. The nightly news played a recorded message from some girl who talked about sensitve mission details over an open line. She can be Court Martialed for that offense alone....it is a SERIOUS breech of protocol...and could have put others at risk. B. If they don't have a long string of written reports to their chain of command about the equipment's defects and deficiency they will be hard pressed to prove their case...why did it "all of a sudden" become an issue. C. If the equipment and vehicles were so bad, how is it that the other team members were able to complete the mission? While I think the evidence released so far weighs heavily against the 19 members who refused, Im waiting till the whole set of facts gets released before I judge them on their actions. Troops do have the right to protest orders...but there are right ways and wrong ways to go about it, and some times, being in the Military means you have to put your ass out there where it is very likely to be shot off.....if you cannot face that fact..then don't sign up for the NG or any Military branch, because you give up the right to protect your precious behind at all cost when you swear your oath....and joining the guard and taking the money and the benefits means you MAY be called on to put yourself into a deathtrap. </font> |
<font color=plum> First off. I live in wasp white safe suburbs and have never had to put my 'ass on the line' for nothing. So I will leave comments to those who have and do.
Are the following comments true? Is this a beat up to make things worse than they are? and info please, what does deadlines mean in this context? </font> "Aviation regiments have complained of being forced to fly dangerous missions over Iraq with outdated night-vision goggles and old missile-avoidance systems. Stories of troops' families purchasing body armor because the military didn't provide them with adequate equipment have been included in recent presidential debates. Patricia McCook said her husband, a staff sergeant, understands well the severity of disobeying orders. But he did not feel comfortable taking his soldiers on another trip. "He told me that three of the vehicles they were to use were deadlines ... not safe to go in a hotbed like that," Patricia McCook said. Hill said the trucks her daughter's unit was driving could not top 40 mph |
First off, failure to follow orders, dereliction of duty, and mutiny are not able to be processed by Article 15 hearings (Non-Judicial Punishment) they must be handled by Article 32 procedings (Courts Martial). For one thing, while soldiers are not required to follow unlawful orders, only an Article 32 hearing can determine if the order was lawful or not.
Secondly, just because a mission is dangerous does not make it suicide or unlawful. They are frikken soldiers for Christ's sake!!! Felix, I gotta both agree and disagree with you. Sure, if the vehicles were NMC, why where the troops not disciplened for poor maintenence? Did they fail their mission, by not keeping mission capable? Or were they not properly supplied. But, NG soldiers are not always "second hand" soldiers. Often they do more with outdated equipment, less funding, and less training than the AC. For two years, prior to getting mobilized, we did not go to the ranges because there was no funding for ammo. WTF? I do agree with you though about the "AT" mentality. It is a difficult hurdle to get over. Remember one thing though ..... one of the best BDEs in the Army for Armored Gunnery is the 86th BDE .... a NG unit from the 42nd ID!!! [img]tongue.gif[/img] They were recently given a Unit Citation for their service at NTC as OPFOR. |
Quote:
Did anybody besides Felix get past the "Remember one thing though ... " part? |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
[ 10-17-2004, 11:21 PM: Message edited by: Felix The Assassin ] |
Quote:
</font>[/QUOTE]<font color=plum>Thanks for the enlightening explanation, <font color=white>Felix</font>. Just goes to show how very easy it is to put a "spin" on a story like this since the general population has no real knowledge of the hardware being used. The excerpt from the story made it sound like the pilots were using NVG's that were decades old rather than just 5 yrs old. It's also interesting how the original article quoted had "clipped" or changed certain portions of the article from the one I read on MSN. For starters, they claimed an entire platoon had defied the orders rather than just one unit of a platoon. They did get the actual number of soldiers correct, though, so maybe it was just ignorance on their part as to how many soldiers make up a "platoon". It also failed to mention that other members of that platoon succeeded in completing the re-supply mission - presumably with the same "broken down equipment" the original 19 had access to. Instead, the first article seems to focus on soldiers being ill-equipped with shoddy equipment for fighting a war and the discontentment of some of the members deployed there. Of course, FAR be it from me to suggest there could have been any "bias" involved in choosing which facts would remain and which ones would be cropped from the first article. ;) </font> [ 10-18-2004, 06:14 AM: Message edited by: Cerek ] |
Well, there is no such thing in the Army as "Shooters" and "NonShooters" anymore, as there is no such thing as a "Front Line" in Iraq. I do know from soldiers returning from Iraq that not all "Combat" troops even had the IBA to start with. But, that situation has been rectified and ALL soldiers receive the IBA as part of the RFI. "Combat" Troops still receive preferential treatment, though. I am not trying to disparage the Killers, but Log troops are more often exposed to harms way no a days than the Killers.
I can confirm Felix's sentiment about pilots - they are prima donnas. It's been awile since I've worked with the system, but the anit-missle system they have on Apaches and Black Hawks is more than enough to handle the guided threats in Theatre. The problem the pilots are facing is that often they are shot at with RPGs, unguided rockets. There is no warning system or defense against that, only alertness and manuvre. My initial read on this situation is that these soldiers were feeling deep efects of combat stress. They were uneasy about being sent out close to nightfall, and were down right jittery because there would be no air cover (a luxury, not a requirement). They were scared and used any excuse and played the "Safety Card" to not do their job. I've had troops play that card many times for something they didn't want to do, at the time at least. "We can't put up that antenna now. It's dark and unsafe." "Well, get some HMMWVs, turn the head lights on and put that fikken antenna up! NOW! It'll take less than 10 min and ya'll get done faster if you quit bitching!" |
Thankyou for the explanation <font color="#7c9bc4"> Felix </font>. As <font color="#7c9bc4"> Cerek </font> says it does look like spin. But if one more question could be answered from the original article
"He told me that three of the vehicles they were to use were deadlines ... not safe to go in a hotbed like that," Patricia McCook said." In the above context, what does deadlines mean? |
A deadlined vehicle is a Non-Mission Capable. It has serious maintanece issues. Usually it means it is less than 60% operational or has a single "deadlining" fault (like say .... a missing propeller on a single prop plane [img]tongue.gif[/img] ). A deadlined vehicle cannot be used, except when annotated in writing by the Company Commander that owns it on the vehicle maintanence log.
So, whether the vehicle was DLd or not, the Commander still issued an order, and soldiers must follow lawful orders or face consequences. (Note that there is no qualification for silly, dangerous, or what not - LAWFUL, as defined by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the operation Rules of Engagement and Rules of Interation, and other guide lines set forth by the Theatre Commander and Host Nation Governing Authorities.) |
Quote:
I'AM A SHOOTER, I train daily and or train others on a daily basis to: SHOOT, MOVE, and COMMUNICATE. I do not, and will NOT, allow a Clerk, Mechanic, or Trans Pogue, TO FALL INTO the catagory of HUNTER/KILLER/SHOOTER/COMBATANT! They, as their training prescribes, ARE REAR ECHELON NON-COMBATANT NON-SHOOTERS! I'm sorry, but that is the way it is! They qualify with weapons for self defense,and mission accomplishment, but LACK the training of taking the fight to the trenches! That is why they are ESCORTED in and out of the zone by SHOOTERS! I have trained for 23 years, I have put training ammunition on target for 23 years. I have had the opportunity to close with and destroy the enemies of my country TWICE. I have only sent SERVICE ammunition down range TWICE. The people this article speak of, reek with the sentiment of "IT's TOO HARD"! Do not confuse the mentality of a shooter with that of a non-shooter! Even thou my current post has me training the NG, they as I, see the difference between a Tank Company, and that of HHC! Or more importantly, that of the FSB! They, as with others, cannot see past the end of the muzzle for objective security, or mission accomplishment! I have nothing against them, mind you, but they lack the intestinal fortitude to accomplish the mission! For without them,?????</font> |
Um... Felix, I do doubt the "intestinal fortitude" bit. Not everyone joins the Guard or the "rear echelon" because they lack the will to fight. Sometimes it's their best option, based on pay, oportunity, post-milary career plans, or skill.
Back to the topic at hand. Yes, if the soldier refused orders that were legal, they broke the rules and will suffer Court Martial. However, *if* it turns out they were right about the equipment, and *if* it was not their own fault, I do applaud their willingness to breach orders and suffer a Court Martial to bring this issue to light. *If*, of course. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Don't you know not to interupt a good soldier's trash talk unless you are willing to buy a few rounds? I'll take a Bass Ale, thanks! [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img] Make sure you get what the good Tanker is having too ..... [img]graemlins/cheers.gif[/img] [ 10-19-2004, 01:48 AM: Message edited by: Night Stalker ] |
Quote:
I'AM A SHOOTER, I train daily and or train others on a daily basis to: SHOOT, MOVE, and COMMUNICATE. I do not, and will NOT, allow a Clerk, Mechanic, or Trans Pogue, TO FALL INTO the catagory of HUNTER/KILLER/SHOOTER/COMBATANT! They, as their training prescribes, ARE REAR ECHELON NON-COMBATANT NON-SHOOTERS! I'm sorry, but that is the way it is! They qualify with weapons for self defense,and mission accomplishment, but LACK the training of taking the fight to the trenches! That is why they are ESCORTED in and out of the zone by SHOOTERS! I have trained for 23 years, I have put training ammunition on target for 23 years. I have had the opportunity to close with and destroy the enemies of my country TWICE. I have only sent SERVICE ammunition down range TWICE. The people this article speak of, reek with the sentiment of "IT's TOO HARD"! Do not confuse the mentality of a shooter with that of a non-shooter! Even thou my current post has me training the NG, they as I, see the difference between a Tank Company, and that of HHC! Or more importantly, that of the FSB! They, as with others, cannot see past the end of the muzzle for objective security, or mission accomplishment! I have nothing against them, mind you, but they lack the intestinal fortitude to accomplish the mission! For without them,?????</font> </font>[/QUOTE]AT EASE, Trooper! I am a COMMUNICATOR, my troops do everything imaginable to shape the battlefield, facilitate the fight, and make sure you CAN communicate while shootin an scootin! I won't disagree with you on the way CS and CSS troops trained in the past, but the old doctrine of the linear battlefield does not apply anymore. (Check out the CALL site on AKO.) Massive training efforts are under way to bring the previously REMFs up to speed with the killers because the killers are not always available to escort. Yet the LOGPACs still need to through .... or the only rounds your crews'll send down range are HOOAH rounds!! [img]tongue.gif[/img] What I'm saying is the Logies are seeing as much action as the Squishies and Bucket Heads! Not that we really want too, that's your job damnit! [img]tongue.gif[/img] We have barely enough time to keep proficient at our jobs let alone become adequit at yours! I'd very much love to have a Bradley PLT on permanent escort detail for my troops, but that ain't gonna happen. Timber, my impression is the same as Felix's in this situation. I've dealt with NG soldiers alot more that he has. While good troops, some of them think they are Union workers! Rights this .... Deserve that ..... SAFETY! SAFETY HAZARD! When's my break time? Blah, blah. While the facts will come out in the Article 32 procedings, I think at the end of the day, they were just unwilling to simply do their JOB. |
Quote:
I'AM A SHOOTER, I train daily and or train others on a daily basis to: SHOOT, MOVE, and COMMUNICATE. I do not, and will NOT, allow a Clerk, Mechanic, or Trans Pogue, TO FALL INTO the catagory of HUNTER/KILLER/SHOOTER/COMBATANT! They, as their training prescribes, ARE REAR ECHELON NON-COMBATANT NON-SHOOTERS! I'm sorry, but that is the way it is! They qualify with weapons for self defense,and mission accomplishment, but LACK the training of taking the fight to the trenches! That is why they are ESCORTED in and out of the zone by SHOOTERS! I have trained for 23 years, I have put training ammunition on target for 23 years. I have had the opportunity to close with and destroy the enemies of my country TWICE. I have only sent SERVICE ammunition down range TWICE. The people this article speak of, reek with the sentiment of "IT's TOO HARD"! Do not confuse the mentality of a shooter with that of a non-shooter! Even thou my current post has me training the NG, they as I, see the difference between a Tank Company, and that of HHC! Or more importantly, that of the FSB! They, as with others, cannot see past the end of the muzzle for objective security, or mission accomplishment! I have nothing against them, mind you, but they lack the intestinal fortitude to accomplish the mission! For without them,?????</font> </font>[/QUOTE]AT EASE, Trooper! I am a COMMUNICATOR, my troops do everything imaginable to shape the battlefield, facilitate the fight, and make sure you CAN communicate while shootin an scootin! I won't disagree with you on the way CS and CSS troops trained in the past, but the old doctrine of the linear battlefield does not apply anymore. (Check out the CALL site on AKO.) Massive training efforts are under way to bring the previously REMFs up to speed with the killers because the killers are not always available to escort. Yet the LOGPACs still need to through .... or the only rounds your crews'll send down range are HOOAH rounds!! [img]tongue.gif[/img] What I'm saying is the Logies are seeing as much action as the Squishies and Bucket Heads! Not that we really want too, that's your job damnit! [img]tongue.gif[/img] We have barely enough time to keep proficient at our jobs let alone become adequit at yours! I'd very much love to have a Bradley PLT on permanent escort detail for my troops, but that ain't gonna happen. Timber, my impression is the same as Felix's in this situation. I've dealt with NG soldiers alot more that he has. While good troops, some of them think they are Union workers! Rights this .... Deserve that ..... SAFETY! SAFETY HAZARD! When's my break time? Blah, blah. While the facts will come out in the Article 32 procedings, I think at the end of the day, they were just unwilling to simply do their JOB. </font>[/QUOTE]<font color=cccccc> I take your post with brotherly honor! But as a SIGO, how in the world can you or can you not get me ammo? HOOAH rounds are reserved for the reserves, so don't bring me any! [img]smile.gif[/img] PERIOD! However, I must ask. Why, would you want a go-kart platoon to escort you? [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font> |
I have a question....since when is a 17 man/woman group considered a "Platoon"? If that platoon was only 17 strong, then I would think they were combat ineffective...regardless of the equipments condition.
Oh, and NG soldiers aren't "second-hand". I served for 4 years as an Infantryman in the Marine Corps. I'm an eight time expert on the rifle range and have shot on rifle compititions in Hawaii. September 11th happened and I went into the guard. There is alot of experience in the NG units. People from all different branches and jobs join into the guard when they EAS (End of Active Service). It allows us to proudly serve our country and maintain lives outside of that as well. I've shot at people, I've been shot at. Just because I'm a soldier in the NG now doesn't mean I have no "Intestinal Fortitude". I'm off to the desert again next year, and I'm proud to do it. [ 10-19-2004, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: Morgan_Corbesant ] |
Quote:
Quote:
OT, stop the snow, I still have to make it back to La Grande next month! |
Two key points:
If someone asks you to jump off a bridge, you never should have to... Also, if you stick your ass in a fire voluntarily you better expect to get burned. Either an unreasonable request was made, or somebody didn't want to commit when it became unpleasant to do so. One way or another, something bad is going down. How many times was this kind of news reported in WW2? |
Quote:
It didn't happen a lot in WW II and when it did, it was dealt with very severely. When you signup for Military service, you swear to do your duty and follow orders. As for this incident..it is noted that OTHER members of the same platoon carried out the mission with the same equipment on the same route...and amazingly survived what the 18 insurectionists said was a Suicide run or death trap....funny how it wasn't suicidal or a death trap for others to perform it. Their case is insupportable in the light of the facts...and they should be glad that this is the 21st century because during WW II they would very easily find them selves facing the death penalty. Err, I am talking about US troops here, not sure about the numbers of troops from other nations that pulled mutinous moves. I do know the vast majority of troops for the Allies and the Axis were on the very loyal and dedicated isde...the Italians had some problems and the French...but most other nations were do or die types. </font> </font> [ 10-20-2004, 09:16 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ] |
Quote:
|
<font color=lime> Thankyou for the explanation guys [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
If (and this is still a big IF) these guys are found guilty of desertion / coward ness. What will and what should their punishment be? </font> |
<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Wellard, as of right now, I believe the penalty for what they did, can range from the Death Penalty because their actions were during armed conflict....to NJP (Non-Judicial Punishment) NJP being things like going on KP duty or being confined to quarters when not working to loosing some pay. But since this brought national attention they have pretty much gaurenteed that they will not get off as lightly as they could have. So NJP is out and Courts Martial will be the most likely venue ending probably in BCD's (Bad Conduct Discharges) along with some jail time....this is my guess.</font> |
Magik, their actions are not subject to Article 15 hearings (Non Judicial Punishment). They must be sorted out by Article 32 proceedings (Courts Martial).
|
<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Which is what I said Nightstalker [img]smile.gif[/img] However, the unit commander could have kept the whole thing private and held NJP proceedings had they not drawn so much attention, they they gaurenteed their own tougher penalties. I have seen Unit commanders handle matters nearly as serious in NJP before. </font> [ 10-21-2004, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ] |
I imagine they will be lucky to just get hit with the usual non-incarcerative punishment under courts marshall and have the incarceration time suspended pending any further misconduct. Reduction in rank and forfeiture of pay is certainly a given.
|
<font face="COMIC Sans MS" size="3" color="#7c9bc4">
Reports about this I have been reading today....make me think they might get off scott free....will be interesting to watch what message is sent. </font> |
Update, as *cough* 'borrowed' from the internet. In my experience this ex-commander has sealed her military career as a failure. Not sure why it was requested, but hey, a staff officer is always needed somewhere, and at times, to remain in theather after the unit departure to conduct the close-out mission.
Charlotte Observer October 22, 2004 Convoy Chief Removed Rock Hill-based reservist commanded group that didn't go The officer in charge of the Rock Hill-based Army reservists who refused to deliver a convoy of fuel in Iraq has been relieved of command. Army officials Thursday said the officer, who they refuse to identify because of privacy concerns, asked to be relieved of command. The action is effective immediately, and she will be "reassigned commensurate with her rank and experience." When asked if the action was related to poor leadership, Army Lt. Col. Steve Boylan said no. "Her being relieved of command is not a disciplinary action and had nothing to do with the soldiers refusing to drive the convoy," said Boylan, a spokesman for Multinational Forces in Iraq. "If she had not made this request, she'd still be in command of that company." Boylan said he did not know if her request had been made before or after Oct. 13, when the incident occurred. In an e-mailed statement, the Army said, "The outgoing commander is not suspected of misconduct, and the move has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of anyone involved." Soldiers and family members of the 343rd Quartermaster Company have identified the officer as Capt. Nancy Daniels. Army Reserve Sgt. Richard Hoffman of Charlotte, a member of the 343rd, identified Daniels as his commander and said she took command when the company was deployed in December. A soldier's relative also identified Daniels as the company's commander. Spc. Major Coates of Mount Holly is one of 18 soldiers involved in the incident. Stephanie Parks, fiancee of Major Coates' father, Johnny, said news of the reassignment surprised the couple. "It didn't have to go that far," she said, adding that families had only wanted to see that soldiers are properly equipped and treated fairly. Parks said the fact that a leadership change occurred was comforting. "They don't need to fight Iraqis and the government, too," she said. Some military experts say an Army company commander being relieved of command is anything but routine. "It's a career ender. I hope she has a day job," said Jeffrey Addicott, a former Army lawyer and director for the Center for Terrorism Law at St. Mary's University. "I'd say that in 99.9 percent of the instances in which an officer is relieved of command, they'll never again be promoted." Addicott said the change in command could indicate how the Army may be handling the soldiers who disobeyed orders. "The military has to take this situation seriously," said Addicott, a former Green Beret. "You can't be in command and have 18 of your soldiers refuse a direct order in combat. ... This thing is a political pinata; I can't imagine there not being courts-martial." |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:40 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved