| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1) the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2) in the public domain, with free use granted for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email.
Original content copyright © 2006 by the respective authors. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed.
Site contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com
News quiz!
What terrorist organization's attack on a helicopter resulted in minor wounds to the ambassadors of Italy and the U.S. and to the U.N. resident coordinator?
Check your answer here.
Second question.
What is going to be done about it?
Things are moving forward at Walter Reed, but it would appear there's an element of "two steps forward, one back" in evidence, as well.
The Army Times is reporting this two steps forward:
The soldiers said they were also told their first sergeant has been relieved of duty, and that all of their platoon sergeants have been moved to other positions at Walter Reed. And 120 permanent-duty soldiers are expected to arrive by mid-March to take control of the Medical Hold Unit, the soldiers said.
Then there's this - which I actually put mostly into a step forward.
Soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center’s Medical Hold Unit say they have been told they will wake up at 6 a.m. every morning and have their rooms ready for inspection at 7 a.m.,
Many of the troops undoubtedly think of this an punishment for those who spoke to the press. There may, indeed, be an element of that in there, in that the command is trying to regain control of the message (hold on, more to follow on that thought). However - I suspect this is also the jump-start of a return to a firmer discipline than that seemingly lax form of discipline that led to the environment at Walter Reed.
One of the things the service learned (and apparently forgot) between how it handled casualties in WWI vice WWII, especially psychiatric casualties - is that the maintenance of military discipline - not fanatical ala Gunnery Sergeant Hartman of Full Metal Jacket but simply firm discipline designed to enforce basic standards of cleanliness, appearance, demeanor - and to keep people usefully occupied with relevant tasks. The key to all that is, of course, good leadership, a quality abundantly absent at WRAMC. Getting those troops back into a routine will be good for them, and for the installation. Of course, the follow-on is that the command must also find a way to break through the logjam of paperwork and find ways to usefully employ those soldiers. And if they can't - it may actually make sense to break them out to less full facilities where they can be given useful duties for those times when they aren't busy trying to fight their way through the paperwork.
Now for one step back. Heck, possibly more, if at least in a different direction. That is the clamp-down on media contact - both by the soldiers themselves, and in more official ways.
The Army Times is reporting that the Pentagon has also shut down media coverage of any and all Defense Department medical facilities. This includes suspending planned projects by CNN and the Discovery Channel. The Army Times quotes a PAO email where the Army's official position is “It will be in most cases not appropriate to engage the media while this review takes place.” This apparently in reference to the panel being convened by DoD to investigate issues at Walter Reed.
I completely disagree. A buddy of mine sums it up nicely:
When will the Army learn that transparency in non-OPSEC issues is a disarming approach? Cover-ups do not work and do not speak well of our REMFs – and I do mean REMFs. This burns my ass…… ML
Gezackly. Better to throw open the doors, than simply ensure that the press will now push harder, and the disaffected soldiery will slip around the corners to talk to them - and you will have completely lost control of the message. And it will be the Army's own damn fault.
Lastly, accountability.
- The 1st Sergeant was relieved.
- The Platoon Sergeants were reassigned.
It may just be an oversight in the reporting by Army Times - but... where is my officer scalp? I *always* want an officer scalp, publicly taken, when things like this happen. Not scapegoat scalps, I want the people who forgot their most basic responsibility to pay the price.
Was the med hold company commander relieved? If not, it must only be because he or she just assumed command and was essentially blameless - in which case there ought to be an amended OER making the rounds for the commander's predecessor. Followed with a show cause for retention letter. And the OER of the rating official who let that company commander get his command to this state should be in receipt of, or pending receipt of, an OER that will guarantee they never command beyond their current level.
There is no way that you relieve a 1SG and reassign all the platoon sergeants and the primary blame doesn't lay squarely on the shoulders of the officer commanding.
Appropriate action may have been taken - and if it was, well, someone ought to report it. I don't have to have the name - I just want to know that officer careers imploded as thoroughly (actually moreso) as the NCO careers did. From where I sit, as a commissioned officer of the United States Army, currently without assignment, there is a disturbing lack of commissioned scalps hanging from the pike at the gate.
And if that is in fact true - it is a failure of leadership at the higher levels at WRAMC. REMFs, indeed.
Sad that an organization that in the balance is full of hard-working, dedicated people who just want to do right by the wounded is being let down by it's commissioned leadership - and if that's not the case, then the PAO needs a new job.
Regardless, more officer scalps please.
Cross posted at my place.
The Republic of Korea (ROK) Army deployed troops to Afghanistan immediately upon a US request in 2002 as well as deploying 3,000 soldiers to support the US mission in Iraq. The ROK Army due to the South Korean government's risk adverse policy, has been limited to humanitarian and reconstruction missions in both countries. The ROK Army may not be conducting combat missions, but this week served as a reminder to the citizens of Korea that even reconstruction missions carry an element of danger in Iraq or Afghanistan when South Korea had their first soldier killed by hostile action during the War on Terror when 27 year old, SGT Yoon, Jang-ho was killed by a terrorist bomb attack in Afghanistan.
Oh, to be able to respond to that post.
Suffice it to say that combat is a way to learn things, and that CENTCOM's not been the only organization that's been screaming for linguists for years, and that Peters was Army.
Like an intel captain told me once with a wry smile, "with the operators it's always an operational success or an intelligence failure".
At the risk of getting a reputation as a statistics geek, I came across some data on Jihadi terrorism as massaged and reported by Peter Bergen at Mother Jones, and thought readers and contributors here might want to weigh in.
It seems like there’s an awful lot of analysis out there – note I didn’t say a lot of awful analysis – that warrants a lot of serious, statistical or logical challenge.
I have been tracking an ongoing conversation that springs from new reporting from Mother Jones, of all places, journalism-wise. As part of a series “Iraq 101,” Mother Jones hosts a piece written by Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank, entitled The Iraq Effect - The War in Iraq and Its Impact on the War on Terrorism.
Bergen is as reliable an anti-war critic as can be found, but he strenuously attempts to do so with evidence and data he marshals to achieve that end. He serves his purpose well, to the adoring and enduring gratitude of audiences for media such as The New York Times and Mother Jones. Preaches to the choir, he does, and thus his analysis predictably follows the liberal hymnal.
(Actual data and in depth analysis back at Dadmanly.)
Blatantly reaquired from Milblogging.com and JP
Remember, the Milbloggies are NOT a popularity contest. The purpose each year is to recognize military bloggers for their contribution to blogging, news and information, and to the military over the past year. Make sure to check out each winning milblog below, and you’ll see why they won this year’s Milbloggie Award.
Now, I’d normally write up an eloquent piece about the Milbloggies and each of the winners (which I will get around to), but I’ve been online all day monitoring the website and at this point, I’m not really making sense. Earlier this evening I took a quick break to rock my 10-month old son to sleep, and it turns out I was holding a Mr. Potato Head.
Intel channels are buzzing today over Ralph Peters’ searing indictment of their community in this NY Post editorial.
He starts his critique with an anecdote of questionable import, describing how American troops “mistakenly” detained, searched and “jerked around” Amar al-Hakim, the son of the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), presumed to be a cooperative Shia partner to the US and Coalition efforts in Iraq.
Peters relates that he reacted first with annoyance, then with indulgence, about what he perceives as an apparent lapse in tracking such an important personage. Why annoyance?
"ICON" is a new series from the Pentagon Channel. Here's the debut episode.
More video (and other info on Lt Col Crandall) at the official MOH web page.
Site design and management: Mrs Greyhawk
Original content copyright © 2006 by the respective authors
