At this point I don't know all the facts about those Army Reserve Soldiers that refused to go on their assigned mission in Iraq. My first reaction to this was that the soldiers should be shot. Regardless of the situation the Army can not alow soldiers to refuse to do their jobs. In war we have to do our mission regardless of danger. We don't always have the best equipment and we must do our job with what we have. There were soldiers counting on that fuel and supplies. I believe it is a disgrace and punishment should be swift and harsh. Most of all this should not be used by the liberal anti war peacenicks to undermind the war in Iraq. This is a slap in the face of all those soldiers who do their jobs without question and danger to themselves. I would never tolerate this from my soldiers for any reason.
I know that this may seem harsh and uncareing but when you lead soldiers in war you hope they follow you because they trust and respect you as a leader but the bottom line is they have to do what you tell them to do at any cost.
"No man can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude without finally getting bewildered as to which may be true." {Nathanial Hawthorne}
I agree with you, they signed up for the military. Why would you sign up & then when you country needs you, you refuse. It confuses me, but they need harsh punishment IMO. If they don't receive punishment it underminds the whole voluntary Armed Services. They must be made an example of.
"It's the U.S. soldier, not the protester who gives you the freedom of speech"
Posts: 508 | Location: Dallas, TX, US | Registered: July 13, 2004
Then again, maybe command should listen to there troops. It isn't a democracy of course, but why put them at unneccessary risk? I think that is the point. These "weekend warriors" were being asked to do something that was possibly foolishly dangerous.
1. The fuel in the trucks was rejected by another camp because it was contaminated and could cause a helicopter to fail (jet and diesel mixed). Command ignored the troops concern about this.
2. These rigs had never previously been on a dangerous supply run, like they were ordered to this time, specifically because they were in poor repair and NOT armored.
3. Other vehicles were available more suited to the task and more suited to the survival of the troops.
Our soldiers are professional, the best in the world. I, for one, do not want them wasting there lives on this sort of thing. Save it for when it really counts.
No lives were at risk due to this event, only theres if they went on the run.
[This message was edited by JohnH on October 18, 2004 at 10:17 PM.]
Unfortunately for the soldiers, it is really quite simple:
They need to be courtmartialed, and imprisoned.
If you have a problem with your orders, you take it up with the individual giving those orders.
If it is not solved to your satisfaction, then you tell them that you are going to their superior, and then do so.
You keep taking it up the line, you do not refuse to obey.
If I remember correctly, the only time that you are allowed to disobey a direct order is if that order is illegal: If the order is for you to do something that violates The United States Constitution, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), or the Geneva Conventions. I don't remember if there are other times when you can disobey an order.
----------------- Yes. I AM a pig.
Posts: 417 | Location: Spanaway, WA, USA | Registered: June 23, 2002
What about the soldiers that did follow orders and then got court marshaled for it? I.e. the MPs that undressed prisoners. They were ordered to do that no question. So if you are given a Bullsh it order what do you do? I don’t know about the other armed forces but in the Army you can question an order and have it taken to a higher officer in charge. We have no clue what the real situation was and those soldiers have every right to ensure they are not being sent on some BS mission brilliantly thought up by some Lieutenant that can barley tie his boots without a Sergeant helping him. Just my opinion – ARMY SFC
Posts: 7 | Location: Salt Lake City, UT | Registered: June 30, 2003
Like I stated above I don't know all the facts and this is just my first reaction to this news.
Not stated above, I feel like I can make a good judgement call on this due to my having served 23 years on active duty in both Regular Army and now in the Alabama Army National Guard. I have served in combat several times. Three 179 day tours in El Salvador in the 80s. The Gulf War, and in Afghan & Iraq.
Yes, I have questioned orders before and I have had numb nut 2LT's to deal with. However, Like my old Team Sergeant said "you aint got to like it, you just have to do it."Like it or not I did my job anf followed my orders regardless of the risk or how stupid I thought those orders were.
Leaders have an obligation not to put their men at unreasonable risk. My job as a senior NCO is to bring my men home alive and to acomplish the mission. The mission is always first.
The fuel being contaminated has not been proven yet and if it was contaminated how did it get that way.
"No man can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude without finally getting bewildered as to which may be true." {Nathanial Hawthorne}
________________________ Leaders have an obligation not to put their men at unreasonable risk. My job as a senior NCO is to bring my men home alive and to acomplish the mission. The mission is always first. ________________________
Here is the rest of the story… Mission first, safety always! If you follow a stupid order, that would make you stupid. Good leaders and Good “old team sergeants” don’t do stupid things or follow stupid orders they think first. This is what makes great NCO’s and leaders. If you are always a good little soldier and follow your orders you will always be a “good little solder” not a leader.
raven35031 don’t think I am calling you anything other than a great patriot which I have great respect for.
-ARMY SFC
Posts: 7 | Location: Salt Lake City, UT | Registered: June 30, 2003
quote:Originally posted by raven35031: The fuel being contaminated has not been proven yet and if it was contaminated how did it get that way.
SFC Peter A. Collins U.S. Army
They didn't flush the fuel tanks after dropping a load of Jet Fuel and refilling with Diesel.
Here's the thing. If I saw a truck with armor on it sitting in the yard... and my co said drive an unarmored POS on the most dangourous route because he had to get rid of some bad fuel... then I would tell him to **** off also. If I had the other truck... then off I go.
An order is an order and unless it is clearly unlawful it must be followed or face a court martial. I wish that there was a "stupid order" clause under UCMJ but as far as I know there is not. Now in a court martial hearing you may be cleared of all charges that is up to the board.
The bottom line this was not an unlawful order and it may very well have been a stupid order and members of their chain of command may be relieved before this is over but the soldiers had no right under UCMJ to refuse this order.
At what point is an order "stupid". And at what point should we as soldiers refuse a lawful order.
"No man can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude without finally getting bewildered as to which may be true." {Nathanial Hawthorne}
An order can be questioned and have a higher ranking officer review it. In “Stupid Order” I mean any order that seems to have no sound judgment to it or causes unnecessary risk to solders. _______________________ I would never tolerate this from my soldiers for any reason. I know that this may seem harsh and uncareing but when you lead soldiers in war you hope they follow you because they trust and respect you as a leader but the bottom line is they have to do what you tell them to do at any cost. ____________________________
Solders follow their leaders for lots of reasons but the most important is Trust. Trust that their leaders are making the best and smartest decisions to accomplish the mission and for their safety. By the time you take your solders to war it’s to late to think they will follow their orders because they are supposed to. You have to earn their trust long before that. Your reasoning is backwards. As a leader you don’t force your solders to follow orders you must earn their trust by time and time again showing good sound judgment in your decisions. This makes solders follow you without question, because they know you know what you are doing.
-ARMY SFC
Posts: 7 | Location: Salt Lake City, UT | Registered: June 30, 2003
One of the things that may complicate this situatiuon. From some of the news reports, theses folks sound like they were Reservists without prior Regular Military time. What I sometimes ran into during my 20 years was a "part time" attitude, that the soldier part wasn't real life. I really tend to wonder about the suitability of someone who immediately calls home to mommy when they don't want to follow orders.
One thing that I always used. A leader always leads from up front. And never, never requires the troops to do anything that they (the leader) would not do. One of the things that apply to some jobs, a calculated risk. Yes the job may be dangerous, however if you fall back on your training and do the job...chances are fair to excellent you will survive. There may be some problems in this area that caused the incident.
Posts: 242 | Location: Fort Worth, Tx USA | Registered: February 28, 2004
Yes they can question the order I have done it my self But they do not have the right to refuse a lawful order. There is a big difference in questioning an order and refusing an order. The Army needs to send a message that if you refuse a lawful order you will pay the price.
There may be reason to relieve some of their chain of command.
"No man can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude without finally getting bewildered as to which may be true." {Nathanial Hawthorne}
From a person with limited army experience outside of US, not really familar with this incident, this is what I though.
There is no way for a solider not following an order, unless it is unlawful. The Iraqi prisoner incident was clearly an unlawful order. It was stupid to follow the order.
As for stupid order, I say they are probably unlucky that they are smarter than their commader. But still, they had to follow their order. This incident aside, there may be times when you though the order was stupid by itself, but it might be just a small part of a larger operation which you may not have know of. Who are you to judge it was stupid without knowing? That's why solider always follow orders from their commander.
As for unneccessary risk, it is not up to a solider to say if it is neccessary or un neccessary. It may be unneccessary to a single solider or his squard, but it may be neccessary for the division.
Posts: 183 | Location: Hong Kong | Registered: October 22, 2002
I have a more serious issue with the “conscious objectors” who joined a military force, but then when called upon to fulfill that obligation, say “I can’t, I object to war” or some bull spit like that. The cry of “I only joined so I could go to college” only holds so much water, did someone forget to say “this is the military that you have just joined; you may be called upon to defend our country and way of life”?
I would rather think that by the time a soldier gets into a forward type position we have given them the tools necessary to be able to think on their feet, to potentially parse situations, and maybe have enough brain cells functioning to follow orders as given, unless there is a legal reason to question them.
This is just my $.02.
Alan
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects." -Robert Heinlein
Posts: 770 | Location: Greater Boston Area | Registered: August 16, 2004
In my 26 years of service in the USMC and the US Army, it was always beaten into me "Mision-Men-Self". The only order you can balk at is one that is illegal (like the MP's). My time was spent in combat arms on active duty. You don't follow one of my orders and I will mark a spot on the map where graves registration can locate you after I have accomplished the mission. You can not allow for this type of behavior. It's not a democracy in the service. I say execute them - have the courts martial - then execute them again. Draft any siblings they have to fill their spot. Might as well draft their parents too. By the way I would jail the chain of command of this worthless outfit and disband it in disgrace. By the way, I have mellowed out since retirement. All this IMHOWIHR
"A well-chosen cigar is like armor and is useful against the torments of life." Zino Davidoff
Posts: 711 | Location: Williamsburg, Va | Registered: June 16, 2003
Orders are orders - period! The hallmark of any true soldier is his ability to follow orders - no matter how difficult. The superiors that issue those orders will be held accountable if they are questionable.
While soldiers have the moral obligation not to obey unlawful orders (i.e., being told to shoot unarmed combatant/civilians), no such order was being given in this instance.
The Navy/Marine Corps have a process called "Request Mast" which is used to bring greviences to the attention of the Commanding Officer, and if the service member is not satified with the outcome, they can take it up the chain of command. I'm sure th Army has this process, as well. It obviously was not followed.
Regarding the fuel; it doesn't matter - they were told to go and they didn't. There are NO gray areas in the military. Additionally, most vehicles and fuel consuming equipment in the military can run on any type of fuel. For those who didn't know, the military has a number of vehicles that run on whatever fuel you put in it. Contaminated or not, someone...somewhere could use it, and most importantly - needed it!
Speaking as a combat vet; war is dangerous (no schitt, huh!). People shoot at you,....try to kill you,...try to destroy your equipment, but training, and physical and moral courage get you through it. Being scared is normal; being a coward, however, is a punishable offense!
There is not an excuse in the world for this type of behavior. Because of the actions of a few; many could've been killed or injured.
This is also about "Good Order and Discipline" and is the responsibility of the 1stSgt or SgtMaj and the unit commander (LtCol/Col). A congressional investigation is unnecessary.
That said, I, myself, would charge them with Art. 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation) and Art. 99 (Misbehavior in front of the enemy (Cowardice)) Understand that because this all took place during an armed conflict, in a hostile area, the punishment can be more severe.
Finally, I realize I am speaking as Marine, and for us - this is unthinkable and dishonorable. It contridicts the very trait that Marines are reknowned for. I would've been more surprised if it were Marines; thank God it was not, nor do I believe it EVER will be.
Reservist, Guardsmen, or Active Duty, it does not matter; all are subject to the UCMJ and ALL are expected, trained and paid to perform their assigned duties to the utmost of their abilities.
We protect democracy; we don't practice it!
Semper Fidelis "Death Before Dishonor" -Lethrnek
Posts: 378 | Location: Norfolk, VA | Registered: August 19, 2003
I agree that there are stupid officers out there and many do give stupid orders.
While I was in the USAF as a Munitions Systems Specialist, (sounds special, doesn't it?), we had a captain come up to us and ask if we "functionally test" mark 84 bombs. Those are the 2000 pounders. One sergeant handed him a hammer, told him how to arm the bomb, and then asked for enough time to evacuate before he functionally tested it. The captain set down the hammer and left while everyone was laughing at him, especially the colonel who was with him at the time.
We had lieutenants try to tell us how to do our job when they had no clue whatsoever what we were doing. We just told them "Yes, sir!" and went back to doing it right. (Butterbars were the worst.)
But, I agree, stupid orders do not equate to illegal orders. You MUST follow procedures and the chain of command if you have a problem with a given order. The military does not have the option to go on strike. In time of war, that might even be an executable offence.
The crap that went down at Abu Graib was inexcusable. That was clearly an example of an illegal order followed by stupid people.
----------------- Yes. I AM a pig.
Posts: 417 | Location: Spanaway, WA, USA | Registered: June 23, 2002
