Death to the US Soldiers in Iraq!
Dec. 14th, 2004 01:10 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
naruki_oniThat's what Rumsfeld seems to be saying, anyway. In a followup to this post about good old red-blooded American patriot Donald Rumsfeld telling soldiers they need to scrounge for materials, we now have the same people being thrown in jail and court martialed for following his instructions.
For those of you who don't have a subscription to the Chicago Tribune, an excerpt of the article:
For those of you who don't have a subscription to the Chicago Tribune, an excerpt of the article:
`Scrounging' for Iraq war puts GIs in jailGod bless.
Reservists court-martialed for theft; they say they did what they had to do
By Aamer Madhani
Tribune staff reporter
Published December 12, 2004
COLUMBUS, Ohio --
Six reservists, including two veteran officers who had received Bronze Stars, were court-martialed for what soldiers have been doing as long as there have been wars--scrounging to get what their outfit needed to do its job in Iraq.
Darrell Birt, one of those court-martialed for theft, destruction of Army property and conspiracy to cover up the crimes, had been decorated for his "initiative and courage" for leading his unit's delivery of fuel over the perilous roads of Iraq in the war's first months.
Now, Birt, 45, who was a chief warrant officer with 656th Transportation Company, based in Springfield, Ohio, and his commanding officer find themselves felons, dishonorably discharged and stripped of all military benefits.
The 656th played a crucial role in maintaining the gasoline supply that fueled everything from Black Hawk helicopters to Bradley Fighting Vehicles between Balad Airfield and Tikrit. The reservists in the company proudly boast that their fuel was in the vehicles driven by the 4th Infantry Division soldiers who found Saddam Hussein hiding in a hole last year.
But when Birt's unit was ordered to head into Iraq in the heat of battle in April 2003 from its base in Kuwait, Birt said the company didn't have enough vehicles to haul the equipment it would need to do the job.
So, Birt explained, he and other reservists grabbed two tractors and two trailers left in Kuwait by other U.S. units that had already moved into Iraq.
Several weeks later, Birt and other reservists scrounged a third vehicle, an abandoned 5-ton cargo truck, and stripped it for parts they needed for repair of their trucks.
"We could have gone with what we had, but we would not have been able to complete our mission," said Birt, who was released from the brig on Oct. 17 and is petitioning for clemency in hope that he can return to the reserves.
"I admit that what we did was technically against the rules, but it wasn't for our own personal gain. It was so we could do our jobs."
The thefts mirror countless stories of shifty appropriation that has been memorialized in books and films as a wartime skill. Birt and other reservists in the unit said that what the prosecutors called theft was simply resourcefulness, a quality they say is abundant among soldiers in Iraq.
While in confinement, Birt had a chat with a military police officer who was puzzled by why Birt was in the brig. The MP, a guard, told Birt that his unit had "acquired" a Humvee in a similar fashion.
Equipment shortages have become a concern, and soldiers are expressing growing frustration about them. On Monday, the military announced it would not court-martial the 23 reservists who balked at transporting fuel in Iraq because their vehicles were in poor condition and lacked armor, and on Wednesday, soldiers complained to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld about the lack of armor for vehicles.
In addition to the six in the 656th who were court-martialed, eight others in the unit were given non-judicial punishment, including fines, pay reduction and loss in rank.
The commanding officer of the company, Maj. Cathy Kaus, 46, was sentenced to 6 months in jail and fined $5,000 for her part in the thefts. She is scheduled to be released from the Naval Consolidated Brig Miramar in San Diego on Christmas Day after serving most of her sentence.
Kaus and Birt chose to be tried by a military judge rather than a panel that would have included fellow soldiers, and they waived the formal investigation.
An Army spokeswoman said Friday that the Army does not comment on specific cases. But she noted that the military's judicial process allows those who are court-martialed to apply for clemency.
The severity of the punishments was surprising to many members of the company, who regularly saw off-the-books trading and thefts of military property in Iraq by troops in other units.
...
Copyright © 2004, Chicago Tribune
no subject
Date: 2004-12-15 09:45 am (UTC)First I'd like to point out that during Desert Storm we never stole or scrounged from the Iraqis. I don't know where BloodyViking is getting his information from but it's obviously not from personal combat experience in Iraq. Of course, if you have indeed served in Iraq in the military, BloodyViking, then do let me know how much and when you stole from Iraqis. :|
I'm not a proponent of Rumsfeld by any means but he spoke truth with "You go to war with what you have."
While it's true that scrounging parts from a vehicle that you are responsible for and have signed for is commonplace and legal, to take another units vehicle abandoned or otherwise is theft and a crime and a punishable offense. The point that many of you seem to be completely missing is that this unit stole 3 WHOLE vehicles FROM ANOTHER UNIT.
Frankly, I don't understand the logic of complaining that the military doesn't have the proper equipment while you support the liberal politicians that strip the military of those resources. During the late 80's into Desert Shield my Armor unit had an 95% to 99% combat readiness which meant that at any given time we only had 1 or 2 vehicles down. During the mid to late 90's that percentage had dropped to 15% which meant only 1 or 2 tanks ready for combat -because there was no money for spare parts.
I think that the bottom line is that many of you don't really care much at all about the soldier's safety, you're just looking for yet another excuse to bitch about Bush and his administration. There ARE rules in the military, not perfect rules and perhaps not rules you agree with, but still there are rules. My bone of contention is when people take an incident or article out of context and make assumptions for their own purposes. Actually being in Iraq in combat, is a horse of an entirely different color and if you ever want to question what you read in articles etc, as you should, what's so difficult about asking someone who has actually been there? I think the saddest/dumbest people are the ones who don't ask because their arrogance holds them back, because it's more important to them to badmouth the soldiers who are fighting or put down an administration they don't agree with.
I think you are totally misreading us.
Date: 2004-12-15 10:59 am (UTC)We are condemning Rumsfeld for keeping everyone in the war (as much of that as is his fault) and for being insensitive to their needs.
We don't condemn the soldiers for doing what they must to stay alive and to complete their missions. If anything, you are the one doing that.
It looks like you are just looking for an excuse to avoid blaming the Bush Regime for this illegal war when we are already committed to the legal war in Afghanistan.
Do you decide to buy a house when you are already in debt for another house and have no equity and no income? If you do, then that could explain why you support the Bush Regime.
The saddest thing is that you make really bad assumptions about us without good reason. And some of the things we've explicitly stated you've explicitly misread.
I've been quiet mostly
Date: 2004-12-15 11:03 am (UTC)However, I have to make a couple comments on this.
First, I can't see any problem at all with scrounging parts from Iraqis, or any other country you would consider hostile. I can see a problem with cannibalizing equipment in use by other units, or even equipment expected to be used later by other units. The fact that our readiness was down to 15% (or whatever it actually was when they scavenged) indicates to me that the scavenging was justified.
The comment that "You go to war with what you have" may be technically true, but there's a couple factors you aren't making note of here, I think.
If you are at war with incomplete equipment it is stupid not to rectify that situation if you can. Naturally I don't know all the details about this particular situation, nor does anyone else here, I think, but the scavenging of parts from vehicles abandoned in another country by a force on the move seems a reasonable action to me. You have to weight the benefits/risks of a force currently going into battle vs the equipment for a force to use after battle. Surely it makes more sense to equip the units going into battle as best as possible. You can't tell what units may be coming back, if any. If the 'rules' preclude this type of action, then either a senior officer should have approved it, or the action should have been taken, noted and passed along to the appropriate personnel.
Second, if your forces are not ready for war, you should seriously consider whether or not war is in your best interest. You certainly shouldn't wage war unless there is a clear and present danger, or you know for a fact that your plans will result in a zero casualty victory. Neither of these conditions were met for Iraq. You certainly shouldn't wage war because of..well, whatever reason Bush is pushing this week. I think the last 'reason' was that he 'knew' that if the sanctions hadn't been in place that Hussein would have been making WMDs. Even though the sanctions were in place. Not valid reason for war, IMO.
I think it is extremely unfair to generalize that 'many of us' don't really care about the soldiers' safety. Much of the reason we are bitching about Bush is BECAUSE we care about the soldiers' safety.
I don't think anyone in this journal post has badmouthed the soldiers who are fighting, including Bloody Viking, whose emoticon appears to show sarcasm/irony. (I could be wrong, but it seems out of character.)
It is entirely possible to support the troops without supporting either the war, or the administration which has put us there.
This isn't Desert Storm.
Date: 2004-12-15 12:21 pm (UTC)There have been numerous articles from varied sources regarding troops scavenging scrap metal to use as improvised armor for their vehicles. They list the sources as landfills, scrap yards, and junkyards. Landfills are fair game, but scrap/junkyards are businesses, and there is no mention made of any payment for materials scavenged. (There is also no statement that they Didn't pay.)
Somebody Had to have been responsible for those vehicles. There is no excuse for abandoning any vehicle in Kuwait. You don't just abandon functional vehicles along your supply chain without Someone being given responsibility for them. Did these people steal them from a motor pool, or were they really abandoned? If they did steal them, then they should be punished, if not, did people responsible for abandoning these vehicles get courts martialed too? I have less problem with those who put the orphaned trucks to use to do their legitimate military business then with those who abandoned them.
The article doesn't say whether the cargo truck was functional before they cannibalized it for parts to fix their own trucks. We don't know if it was waiting on a tow, or if it was totally FUBAR, but with some useful parts.
I don't see where Anyone was badmouthing the soldiers. Rummy isn't a soldier, and He is the one being chastised here.
You are also Way off the mark with the liberal crap. I am a Republican, though I am Not a fan of Dubya and his bunch.
Also, blackbyrd2 was right about the emoticon.
Oops. Forgot to sign that. - BloodyViking
Date: 2004-12-15 12:24 pm (UTC)Re: Oops. Forgot to sign that. - BloodyViking
Date: 2004-12-15 12:46 pm (UTC)