Military justice- Someone has to pay

[hist2004]

Military justice- Someone has to pay

August 5, 2007

Dan K. Thomasson - An old soldier once remarked that combining the words "military" and "justice" produces an oxymoron more aimed at finding a scapegoat to protect the particular service and those at its highest levels than producing any semblance of fairness. But when the spotlight gets too hot someone has to be found to pay for the damage, and all bets are off about whom that might be.

People got court-martialed because of Pearl Harbor — many and not the right ones, but enough to satisfy the scapegoat rule.

Recently, two cases that have never really left the public's attention — the friendly-fire death of Pat Tillman in Afghanistan and the human-rights violations of those held in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq — dramatically underscore the truth of that assessment. Developments in both have raised serious questions about how the Pentagon handles the not-so-niceties of war.

Death in battle by friendly fire is not rare, whether by misdirected air strikes or artillery barrages or, as in Tillman's case, misidentification by one's own troops. Mostly it goes unnoticed or is chalked up to the price paid in combat where there is always more than a measure of chaos. But when it involves a well-known figure like Tillman, who had given up a promising and lucrative National Football League career to volunteer for military duty after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, it becomes another matter, particularly when the Army was extremely misleading about the circumstances of his death before reluctantly admitting he died at the hands of his own comrades.

Now Army Secretary Pete Geren has decided a three-star retired general should be reprimanded and possibly demoted — which presumably would severely reduce his pension — for not revealing all he knew in the matter. Two one-star generals already have received written punishments for their part in the alleged cover-up, which former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and top generals testified recently did not exist at their level.

Whether Mr. Geren's action against Lt. Gen. Phillip Kensinger Jr. is aimed at cutting the Army's losses is anyone's guess, but it does come in the midst of congressional hearings on the case — hearings that have become another platform for questioning the policies of the Bush administration.

Would there have been this military soul-searching over one of the more common mistakes of battle had not the victim been so prominent? The brutal truth is probably not. As a Ranger who left the weekly war on the gridiron for the real thing, Tillman was nearly more celebrated than in his football career.

Justice — whatever that means in this case — must prevail and the scapegoat for not owning up must be found, no matter the rank.

In the case of Abu Ghraib, however, the military has been strongly criticized for mainly keeping the responsibility for sadistic interrogation techniques out of the officer corps. Now it seems the Army is about to try a reservist, Lt. Col. Steven Jordan, for his alleged part in the infamous affair, the lone officer to be held criminally responsible. Investigators and regular Army brass claim Col. Jordan is a liar and an abuser who used dogs on at least one occasion during his tenure at the prison.

Col. Jordan's court-martial will be held against a backdrop of denial from military interrogators that he had anything to do with their work at the facility. His alleged use of the dogs apparently came during a search for contraband among Iraqi prisoners, one of whom had been passed a weapon.

Col. Jordan denies he had anything to do with any interrogations or is guilty of anything. He has been sitting in a low-profile job awaiting word of his fate since 2004, unable to return to civilian life, while suffering a variety of physical and personal travails, including a divorce and counseling for post-traumatic stress disorder. He contends the Army decided to quell criticism by throwing a reserve rather than a regular officer to the wolves.

It does seem curious that the military has decided three years after the incident that Col. Jordan should be the one officer to pay. Well, perhaps not so curious when one considers the old soldier's views of "military justice." Someone always has to pay in the end, whether he deserves to do so or not.

Dan K. Thomasson is former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service.

Source: (http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070805/COMMENTARY/108050019/1012/commentary)

[Decebalus]

This is kind of true. Sad eh?

For example, dude gets 100 years for a horrible crime he committed while in uniform but oh wait, he can get out on parole in 10 years. So the other 90 years are for the headlines eh?

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Would there have been this military soul-searching over one of the more common mistakes of battle had not the victim been so prominent? The brutal truth is probably not. As a Ranger who left the weekly war on the gridiron for the real thing, Tillman was nearly more celebrated than in his football career.



I have to say - I was quite surprised that nobody along the line had the balls to simply tell it like it is - to say that it added value to the war effort - to the nation - to cover up the circumstances of his death. No, it's not nice, and it's not pleasant, but IMHO there are bigger things to worry about during wartime. There's no absolute requirement to adhere to the truth in all things. That's the world that he voluntarily joined, and it comes along with the territory. I don't know were we picked up the idea that immediate truth is somehow an advantage, and that it's more important than winning - but I think it's misguided at best, and deadly at worst. Just my opinion.

[hist2004]

I have to say - I was quite surprised that nobody along the line had the balls to simply tell it like it is - to say that it added value to the war effort - to the nation - to cover up the circumstances of his death. No, it's not nice, and it's not pleasant, but IMHO there are bigger things to worry about during wartime. There's no absolute requirement to adhere to the truth in all things. That's the world that he voluntarily joined, and it comes along with the territory. I don't know were we picked up the idea that immediate truth is somehow an advantage, and that it's more important than winning - but I think it's misguided at best, and deadly at worst. Just my opinion.


2Sheds_Jackson,

Can you image if the American public was told (in the immediate aftermath of the battle) about the number of casualties at Tarawa in WWII?

Hist2004

[2Sheds_Jackson]

2Sheds_Jackson,

Can you image if the American public was told (in the immediate aftermath of the battle) about the number of casualties at Tarawa in WWII?

Hist2004

I seem to remember some kind of backlash caused by that recruitment film they made about Tarawa. It's especially strange to me since this guy was a Ranger, right? About half the stuff they do is hidden from the American people as a matter of policy - I don't see why the circumstances of his death should be any different. Once the heat is off any everybody is back home, make the details public, but until then keep it under wraps. Why do we insist on shooting ourselves in the foot?

[CMNot]

Is it not fundamentally that the population of your country - much like mine - does not see itself 'at war' (i.e. for us we are not being bombed and you guys aren't working your balls off as part of a command economy)?

Take a walk down any street anywhere in Britain and you'd be hard pushed to realise, without the media, that this country actually is at war.

EDIT: Just so my post is on topic, regarding Tillman - the guy had some celebrity status, so he and the circumstances of his death would arouse more interest than the passing of a normal Joe. The governments of both the UK and the US have so far, to this point, showed a paltry understanding of proganda and PR in comparison to their foe.

[Durandal]

I don't see why the circumstances of his death should be any different. Once the heat is off any everybody is back home, make the details public, but until then keep it under wraps. Why do we insist on shooting ourselves in the foot?

Because rather than waiting, they covered it up. Its always better to tell the truth than get in a lie.

Tillman's death, while certainly tragic, was far less damaging (if his death was damaging at all) than a government lying about and then getting caught in the lie.

Transparency is always better to lies. There is nothing to hide and nothing to lie about.

And the appeal of having a government that is SUPPOSEDLY by the people and for the people act in a transparent manner is not hard to fathom.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Because rather than waiting, they covered it up. Its always better to tell the truth than get in a lie.

Tillman's death, while certainly tragic, was far less damaging (if his death was damaging at all) than a government lying about and then getting caught in the lie.

Transparency is always better to lies. There is nothing to hide and nothing to lie about.

And the appeal of having a government that is SUPPOSEDLY by the people and for the people act in a transparent manner is not hard to fathom.

Oh man. Let's hold hands and skip through candy land. :) Look! I'm the gumdrop mayor of candy cane junction! Now come on, you don't actually believe that do you? Hell, an individual can't even properly engage in civilization without lying.

I am a firm believer in the idea that not every truth needs to be told. Absolute truth is not something we want, and not something that's even good for us. That may be an an alien concept to many - and it goes against what most of us are taught as children - but I maintain that it's true none the less. Concessions must be made, and truth is the victim. Better truth take it in the ass than actual human beings...truth is simply an abstract concept.

Tillman's job itself was a lie. His life was a lie. Why do we suddenly have to switch to truth mode due to his death? What's to be gained? Or if you prefer - what's to be lost if we lie? What's more important - adherence to abstract principles of truth, or victory and human lives? The truth can come later.

[JKD]

^...wait, what? Is that like the long version of "it depends on what your definition of is is"?


I have to say - I was quite surprised that nobody along the line had the balls to simply tell it like it is - to say that it added value to the war effort - to the nation - to cover up the circumstances of his death.
I'd say it hurt the war effort.

Lying to the parents about their son's death. What does that do for military recruiting? What does it do to our image as the "good guy"? I don't see anything positive coming out of this lie.

They have to know this sort of thing will get out. They should have just come out and said friendly fire from the beginning and been honest with the family. If they had chances are it wouldn't still be an issue.

[Durandal]

Oh man. Let's hold hands and skip through candy land. :) Look! I'm the gumdrop mayor of candy cane junction! Now come on, you don't actually believe that do you? Hell, an individual can't even properly engage in civilization without lying.

I am a firm believer in the idea that not every truth needs to be told. Absolute truth is not something we want, and not something that's even good for us. That may be an an alien concept to many - and it goes against what most of us are taught as children - but I maintain that it's true none the less. Concessions must be made, and truth is the victim. Better truth take it in the ass than actual human beings...truth is simply an abstract concept.

Tillman's job itself was a lie. His life was a lie. Why do we suddenly have to switch to truth mode due to his death? What's to be gained? Or if you prefer - what's to be lost if we lie? What's more important - adherence to abstract principles of truth, or victory and human lives? The truth can come later.

Hell why even vote ƒuck it all. Come on man.

You completely missed the point.

I am confused why you are surprised or chocked or annoyed with the fact that people find the Tillman cover-up (call a spade a spade) distasteful, especially given his sacrifice....lying about the cause of his death demeans it.

If you want to get into a discussion abot the truth vs. a lie I guess we can go that route, but life is nothing more than trying to figure out which bottled spring water came from a tap in Atlanta or a cesspool in China...the government, almost literally ( :)) is no different.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

^...wait, what? Is that like the long version of "it depends on what your definition of is is"?


What part of that is ambiguous? Propaganda, spin, covert missions, cover stories, classified programs, classified information, black ops - are all lies - some are overt lies, some are lies of omission, but all are lies. How is this different?



I'd say it hurt the war effort.

Lying to the parents about their son's death. What does that do for military recruiting? What does it do to our image as the "good guy"? I don't see anything positive coming out of this lie.

They have to know this sort of thing will get out. They should have just come out and said friendly fire from the beginning and been honest with the family. If they had chances are it wouldn't still be an issue.

Well that's a different subject - I'm talking about the necessity to lie during wartime, not a single incident of bad judgment. I have no way to know procedurally how this went down, and/or how lame-brained an idea it may have been to cover it up.



I am confused why you are surprised or chocked or annoyed with the fact that people find the Tillman cover-up (call a spade a spade) distasteful, especially given his sacrifice....lying about the cause of his death demeans it.

I don't agree with that at all. His service to his country was exactly as distasteful, deceitful, etc. He was pretty much a company man - and the company did to him what the company does. Now his death is supposed to be above all that?

I'm somewhat peeved over this because I can't believe that nobody had the courage to say "we made the decision to delay releasing the truth of the circumstances of his death because we decided that it would cause unacceptable damage to the war effort" Is that so hard? Are individual feelings now supposed to trump a national effort where billions of dollars and thousands of lives are at stake? Where did we drive off the road into crazy pants land?

[Hollis]

I am confused why you are surprised or chocked or annoyed with the fact that people find the Tillman cover-up (call a spade a spade) distasteful, especially given his sacrifice....lying about the cause of his death demeans it.
.

When the media gets involved, I tend to go in the opposite direction. Maybe a knee jerk reaction or I just don't trust the media.

As it has been mentioned, not all the facts are in. To add to this, it is a very emotional complex situation.

We had a young Marine, David Shelton from Washington, D.C. He received his first purple heart in August and was back in the bush in September. He was KIAed by a command detonated ****y trap. The company decided to put him in for a Silver Star, or hopefully downgraded to a Bronze w/V would be the least.

Why? Was he a hero. No, maybe? He volunteered to walk point. He was not experience enough to do so, or he might not have been KIAed. For his mother, his only NOK. she would get a flag and his purple heart. For a mother who gave her son to our country, it was felt we should do more. Was it a lie. I don't think so. Was it the absolute facts of the situation? No.

This is my thoughts when I read about this. A man served his country, gave up a very promising career, and was KIAed. Medals don't mean anything to him, he can not brag about some battle, but for his family is such a small compensation for such a great loss.

I wish the media would just try once to do the right thing.


Edited to add, for all of you who live in a perfect world, I get tired of your BS. It sucks out here in the real world. This second guess is all BS. Men and Women are dieing so you can play real world heroes who know it all. Maybe try growing the effin up.

[JKD]

What part of that is ambiguous? Propaganda, spin, covert missions, cover stories, classified programs, classified information, black ops - are all lies - some are overt lies, some are lies of omission, but all are lies. How is this different?
I just don't see how this can be equated to espionage, troop movements, base locations, patrol routes, etc.

He was a special operations soldier I can understand them withholding any details but cooking up a fictional story is another matter I think.

Tillman is unfortunately not the first soldier to die in a blue on blue. Are all their families told their son died in some other fashion? Do they need to be? Is that productive? Should that just be put in the recruiting commercials? "Should you die, your loved ones will never know the true details of your death...but we will tell them a kick ass action packed made up flag waving story. God bless America. 9/11." Maybe. I don't know. Personally I'd want my family to know the truth.


Well that's a different subject - I'm talking about the necessity to lie during wartime, not a single incident of bad judgment. I have no way to know procedurally how this went down, and/or how lame-brained an idea it may have been to cover it up.
I agree sometimes ya gotta lie about certain things to keep information from the enemy, or at least not say anything at all. This was faaaar from being one of those times IMHO.

Whoever cooked this up really shot themselves in the foot. We would not still be talking about this today had they just been honest from the start.

The problem with lying is people will stop believing you even when you're telling the truth.

[Hollis]

JKD, it is call micro management. The way we defeat ourselves is to get every Tom, **** and Harriet to start micro managing the war. Nothing is done right, all mistakes are big mistakes and up for major discussions by the most clueless people in the world, and it keeps going from there.

It is the worse of arm chair quarterbacking. What does it accomplish............ we defeat ourselves, people died for nothing but for some stupid vain stay at home egos can play god on the battle field.

[JKD]

JKD, it is call micro management. The way we defeat ourselves is to get every Tom, **** and Harriet to start micro managing the war. Nothing is done right, all mistakes are big mistakes and up for major discussions by the most clueless people in the world, and it keeps going from there.

It is the worse of arm chair quarterbacking. What does it accomplish............ we defeat ourselves, people died for nothing but for some stupid vain stay at home egos can play god on the battle field.
I'm assuming there are established procedures for releasing details about troops who are killed and for notifying families? I'm going to guess there are. Were they followed here? I'm going to guess not. Did not following them do more harm than good to my nation in this case? I'd say so.

It's not the end of the world but they put it out there for public consumption. If they didn't want anyone discussing it they could have just said nothing. Or told the truth. Instead we are now discussing a lie.

[Durandal]

I'm somewhat peeved over this because I can't believe that nobody had the courage to say "we made the decision to delay releasing the truth of the circumstances of his death because we decided that it would cause unacceptable damage to the war effort" Is that so hard? Are individual feelings now supposed to trump a national effort where billions of dollars and thousands of lives are at stake? Where did we drive off the road into crazy pants land?

OK, we seem to keep missing each other in making points here.

My point I guess is that with the government caught either real or perceived in soooo many lies (and be honest, they have) and when the military needs to win a war of propaganda (not doing the best job in the regard) why lie about this?

Here is my personal reaction.

When I learned that Tillman was going in, I though wow that's pretty cool and on a social level it was an oddity since no one else was doing it at his level...or at least getting the press he was.

Then he died. I thought, damn that sucks. Glad it wasn't me. He died though, doing what he thought was best for him and his country, defending his country and few get to make that claim.

He could have been hit by a truck and that fundamental concept would not have changed.

He could have been accidentally shot by his own troops and it would not have mattered to me.

But I was lied to about HOW he died. No, this is nothing new, but in the end, I simply put into the "just another ƒucking lie" pile.

I still think Tillman was a good American who decided to put his life on the line to help his country. Not a "company" man. I simply think that with many soldiers lives, it was bandied about without care by his superiors playing the political game.

Does this make sense?

[BugHunt]

How does saying "Killed by friendly fire" unacceptably hurt the war effort?

Are the public so shocked by this? Do riots occur in your country?

Doubt it.


The reason for the acres of BS surrounding the brave man's death was as his brother said - a good news story was needed to hide the current Abu Graib scandal.

A good news story which in this case had to be manufactured.

[Hollis]

OK, lets all stand back and look at what we know.

Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire. Why and who actually stated that he died heroically is a part that is being left to imagination, especially the why.

Ok we are at war. Is there complete transparency in war. NO.

Now we all know there are degrees of lieing. Some people are obsessed in just yelling they "LIED" <-- in really really big letters.


Now what was the purpose of this lie? Was it to cover up a big scandal? Was is to hide a blow job from a aid? Was it to change the course of a election, Steal money, hide grossly evil acts.... I think it is safe to say "NO" to all the above.

Now some will say it doesn't matter, "They Lied".


Now if a guy puts on a uniform and wears medals of valor....... all the were NEVER earned it is a lie too and he can go to jail.

Pat Tillman is dead. A medal isn't going to bring him back, get him free beers in a bar, admiration from babes etc. He is DEAD. Does that make him any less of a hero, NO it does not, he served his country honorably and paid the ultimate price.

We are also at war here at home with those who whether or not they actually support the enemy, their actions do support the enemy. Anything less than victory is a win for the terrorists.

Just as the anti-war people have their cheerleaders.. A pause for a moment, why do I call them cheerleaders?

Do cheerleader lie? First and ten lets do it again, we can win, etc.... we can say while not actually a lie, they sure try to promote the winning spirit even in the darkness of moments and that the opponents are defeatable.

Why was the lie stated?

Was it a mistake, we can over looked that a man died and his family no longer has his companionship nor his comrades. Maybe not a loss to you, but still a loss. Maybe it was felt something shold be done for the family.

Someone mentioned Abu Graib needed to defusing issue. Maybe?

Do we want to loose this war. I sure don't want to see a loss. The lie did not cost the life of a man, it embellished the life of a man who will never gain from it.

The perpetuation of this BIG LIE, benefit who?

I think if we look at who benefits from this issue then it is clear why this lie has grown to be a very very Big Lie.

This is no different than the Abu Graib issue, or any other issue that detracts from the military and aids the enemy. Listen to the opposing arguments, it is not about what happened, it is about the evil that lurks in the military.

Rest In Peace Pat Tillman,


Abe Lincoln, "That those dead should not have died in vain."

[timetraveller]

Because he was a Pro footballer who signed up and his death has caused scrunity ..since day one ,

If he were joe bloggs ,the media frenzy wouldnt be , nor would this thread be created ..