There is no higher service than that performed on behalf of others, and at the pinnacle of a list of voluntary services, one will find our all-volunteer armed forces. Each year, thousands of young men and women of all races and religions take a look at their surroundings, evaluate what they have been given as their birth-right, what they have been handed under the label of education, and decide there must be a more noble path. And so we find America’s sons and daughters signing up for military service, for the training that will give them tangible and ethereal skills that will, in time, provide them with a substantial head start in a very competitive world.
Military skills and vocations encompass hundreds of specialties, advanced training in exchange for a specified number of years of service. Every skill is marketable, from the maturity that comes from leading and being responsible for others, to the ability to diagnose and repair high-cost electronic equipment, airframes, or from managing inventory, to paramedic training. And as young men and women leave the military, they take with them their training and experiences. Most of these people become our finest citizens; they more than any other individual, have earned the rights of citizenship.
For the uninitiated, there is no “simple task” in military service. Every assignment teaches or reinforces the demand for self-discipline, learning to work with others. Military people hardly ever form life-long relationships with their peers, but they do learn to bond with one another, particularly true in combat units. Contrary to the views among those who have never served in uniform, there is nothing simple about the combat arms. The training is difficult, and it is exhausting — but vital to the creation of attitudes and skills that will allow our military forces to prevail on the field of battle; in some cases, only their wits will save them from destruction. Ultimately, what they experience in battle remains with them for the balance of their lives.
For the uninitiated, there is no “simple task” in military service. Every assignment teaches or reinforces the demand for self-discipline, learning to work with others. Military people hardly ever form life-long relationships with their peers, but they do learn to bond with one another, particularly true in combat units. Contrary to the views among those who have never served in uniform, there is nothing simple about the combat arms. The training is difficult, and it is exhausting — but vital to the creation of attitudes and skills that will allow our military forces to prevail on the field of battle; in some cases, only their wits will save them from destruction. Ultimately, what they experience in battle remains with them for the balance of their lives.
“The Art of War has no traffic with rules, for the infinitely varied circumstances and conditions of combat never produce exactly the same situation twice. Mission, terrain, weather, dispositions, armaments, morale, supply, and comparative strength are variables whose mutations always combine to form a new tactical pattern. Thus, in battle, each situation is unique and must be solved on its own merits.”
~Infantry in Battle, 1939
The essential mission in any infantry unit is a constant, “Locate, close with and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver, and to repel the enemy's assault by fire and close-combat.” This statement reflects the vigorous attitude among well-trained troops; its genius is simplicity. There is no question about the mission of a squad, platoon, company, or battalion in combat. Or, is there? The mission statement assumes the employment of US forces against the military forces of a belligerent nation, and that the Laws of Land Warfare govern the battlefield conduct of both sides, but this does not describe the Iraqi (or any other) insurgency, nor any guerrilla forces employed as part of a “small wars” scenario.
When Marine combat elements are deployed, whether movement to contact or while conducting numerous purpose combat patrols, they are always expecting trouble. If they have completed their sweep without any contact with belligerent forces, so much the better. But it is upon contact with the enemy where the feces hit the fan, as they say. How Marines respond in the first few seconds of hostile fire is crucial to the survival of the force and its probability of success in combat. No matter who commands, whether the young lieutenant in charge of a platoon or the sergeant who commands a rifle squad, training must immediately kick-in when the sound of the first shot snaps through the air, or the initial explosion pushes everyone to ground. This is a decisive moment for our young warriors, stalwart young men whom the reader will recall are more than soldiers or Marines; they are also someone’s son, husband, or brother. We have sent them in harms way to defeat our enemy. We have confidence in their leaders, we have trained them to be victorious, we have given them the best equipment, and we expect them to win every engagement.
But the issue is far from simple when dealing with insurgents, who are non-uniformed fighters. They dress in civilian mufti because it is their intent to blend in with the civilian population. As in the case of the events in Haditha, Iraq, Marines are suddenly under attack, casualties incurred, and the only other people out in front of them are dressed as civilians. The rules of engagement instruct them, “If they are shooting at you, they are the enemy.” What have we trained our Marines to do? They will first form a hasty defense, take stock of the situation, lay down a base of fire, report enemy contact with rear echelon headquarters, and they will locate, close with, and destroy the enemy. Some times, luckless civilians find themselves in the middle of a firefight — it is part of the horror of war. In spite of the fact that our soldiers and Marines do the best they can to avoid civilian casualties, it is likely to happen when insurgents hide behind women and children.
From all that I know about the events at Haditha, this is exactly what transpired in 2005. The battle raged for hours and several Marines became casualties. In spite of the sudden rush to judgment by senior Marine Corps officials and members of congress, we are now learning of a different insurgency — one perpetrated by our own government against our Marines. We are learning of a conspiracy of unheard of proportions that includes the undue influence of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, investigative bodies tampering with evidence, and individuals giving false testimony in a court of law, and a liberal media giving false information to the American public. These events force me to wonder what kind of country favors enemy insurgents over our own warriors. What kind of civilian official or military leader will conspire against his troops? According to Newsmax journalist Philip Brennen:
“A shadow legal body was set up by the Defense Department to manipulate the prosecutions of U.S. Marines accused of massacring Iraqi civilians in Haditha in 2005. That's the bombshell disclosure from the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm that is representing one of the accused Marines, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani. And it could prove to be the most damning piece of evidence showing the political motivations behind the ongoing prosecutions of the Haditha Marines.”
“The shadow legal body included the senior official or a representative from the offices of the Under Secretaries of the Army and the Navy, General Counsel to the Department of Defense, and the Staff Judge Advocate of the Marine Corps.The Marine Corps separately set up "Legal Team Charlie" to prosecute the Haditha cases, and lawyers were brought in exclusively for the team.”
“According to the Law Center, the director of the Naval Criminal Investigation Service admitted that more than 65 investigators were assigned, which in his opinion was the largest investigative effort in the department's history. ‘I am deeply troubled by the fact that the desire to appease the liberal anti-war press and politicians has led to the prosecution of innocent Marines for purely political purposes,’ Thompson told Newsmax.”
Recently, a good friend reminded me that charges have already been dismissed against six of the eight Marines charged in the firefight at Haditha, and that if court-martial proceedings continue against the remaining two, they will stand in the dock and have their cases heard by fellow Marines. He’s correct, and it gives me confidence that the two remaining Marines will have a fair hearing in spite of the pre-trail announcements of Congressman Jack Murtha and former Commandant Michael W. Hagee, or the manipulation of the “shadow legal body” put in place by Donald Rumsfeld. This isn’t the real question, however. I want to know why members of congress, the Secretary of Defense, Commandant of the Marine Corps, and a host of other officials conspired against our warriors in the manner implied by the Thomas Moore Law Center. If there was ever a precedent more dangerous to the morale and efficiency of America’s combat forces, I’ve never heard of it.
X-Post: Stacking Swivel
|