Deployed Army Ranger Captain...

[hickoryhouse]

I sent this editorial by Mark Davis, published yesterday in the DMN, to my brother, an ARMY Ranger Captain who is currently deployed, as the Company Commander of a combat group, in Iraq at the moment. What follows is his take on the current situation and the reasoning behind the government and military reaction that has come under such scrutiny, well deserved in some cases.

Should the government be chastised for not identifying this loon earlier? Was it even possible? Was it a terrorist act and if so should it be labeled as such? What are the international implications in doing so?

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Caveats: NONE

Robert,

Couple of notes: 1, a bad OER does not force an officer to leave the service. It may mean he is bad at his job, and if it becomes a trend then he will not be promoted, but a bad OER from his residency (Walter Reed), would not force the army to kick him out, especially in a career field as short handed as Psych. Think of him as a 2LT, he was expected to make mistakes...

2. Notice, the entire government has a similar stance on this incident, avoiding the use of the word terrorism, Islamic extremist, etc... Why?

Likey due to perceived international repercussions, that the POTUS determines would likely have significant impact on greater US interests.

A few possibilities:

- Iraq and our withdrawal depend on the Iraqi publics view of the US...

- Pakistan, and convincing the islamist state to support our war in Afghanistan, while simultaneously avoiding a coup that would place extremists in charge.

- Relations with Turkey, Kyrgistan, Iran, etc...

Notice the lack of denial in regards to using the word terror (I haven't seen anyone state that it wasn't terror, they just didn't say that it was). That does not mean that the govt does not believe that it was an act of terror, only that they view the impacts of stating such a thing to be more damaging then not saying them.

3. It is very easy to look back and see what should have happened, must harder when you are there. Very, very, (I repeat) very unlikely that any one commander saw all of the warning signs. I have nearly 260 people in my company, as a Captain. COL F****, my senior rater (and the officer who would have to recommend my dismissal, but not the approving

authority) has nearly 5000 people in his command. Lets think about how likely it is that the doctors commander knew him, heard his speech, and was able to put together the signs an realize he posed a threat. Likely he voiced his opinion about deployment in one area, posted to his blog somewhere else (I do not read my soldiers blogs, so who knows, maybe I have a mass murder in my company), and spoke to his friends about etc...

The point being, I can't kick a soldier out of the army for what he says on a blog (freedom of speech), I can try him under UCMJ for actions unbecoming or Art 84 (supporting the POTUS and civilian govt), but I must show that he made those comments in an official status (in uniform, representing the Army, etc). Last point, standard practice for all officers, including doctors, is to move every 3 years or so. He finished his tour at Walter Reed, graduated his residency, and was PCS'd, he wasn't kicked out for poor performance, moving officers is just what happens.

4. Also, I ask you, what would be done if I kicked a Christian soldier out of the army, because I felt that, as a Christian, he could not be a good soldier? What if a soldier stated that he was unwilling to kill the enemy because of religious reasons, that he didn't' want to deploy, and therefore refused to work and do his job, earning a piss poor OER?

Guess what, I'd force him to get on the plane, or miss an official movement, because then I could kick him out. I would force him to do his job or choose not to, and then I would punish him. Intent is not enough, I have to have an act.

Why? Because, for the half million people in the Army, 30-50k or so who are muslims, one expects the occasional soldier to miss movement, to refuse to train, to say they don't want to kill, etc... (see 1LT Watada from my Brigade in 05', who refused to deploy, was court-martialed, and finally released from the army, as a Captain, 3-4 years after the incident. By the way, the press ate the army for lunch for court-martialing this officer, who refused to deploy and fight because it was an unjust war, so much so that the army ultimately dropped the charges and declared a mis-trial. What would have happened if they had kicked a muslim officer out? Guaranteed he has at least one award that states he was an amazing officer doing great things... Can't wait for that press conference)

Should he have been there, at the SRP site, preparing to leave. No.

However the system is not designed to catch such people, because they are so extremely rare. It is designed to prevent the army from discriminating against minorities, because that is more likely then a mass murderer. The system that exists protects people from being kicked out, and does not facilite getting rid of low performers. Trust me, it drives me insane on a daily basis that I have to keep certain soldiers in the army, that it takes months of negative counseling, poor performance, 2nd chances, boards, ect, to give them the boot, but it does.

Should the US Government declare him a terrorist? Why? (for arguments sake). It would damage foreign relations, be an Information Operations

(IO) victory for muslim terrorists, and a rallying call to Al Qaida and other groups (<---probably the most important point). What good would it do? It would make some of us at home feel better, but honestly, I'll feel better when he is sentenced, regardless if it's for terrorism or 12 counts of pre-meditated murder. Just my two cents. What do you think?

(Please feel free to forward this, would like a discussion on it)

Love

Ryan

Edited November 12, 2009 by hickoryhouse

[FirefightnRick]

Good insight HH.

Thanks for sharing and send him our prayers for a safe return home.

Rick

[KRAM1]

Great read. I agree and to add a supporting statement regarding his efficiency ratings...our son is a Navy Lt. (that would be the same rank as Capt. in the Army) and a medical doctor who attended the same med school in DC as did Maj. Hasan and was at Walter Reed at the same time. No, does not recall ever running into the guy while at Walter reed. He agreed with what your brother said about the efficiency rating and went so far as to say that in the medical corps. promotion to Major (or Lt. Commander in the Navy) is all but 100% certain given the lack of medical personnel available to the military. He verified that the medical guys get a much higher percentage of promotion to major than the regular office corps folks just due to the nature of the job and the challenges the military faces getting and keeping medical professionals.

I was shocked that his efficiency ratings could be so bad and he still get promoted to major. When I was in the Air Force (Viet Nam era) it was 85-90% promotion to Captain, but after that the percentages dropped a good bit. One could not (without some years of prior enlisted service) make a 20-year career in the military without at least being promoted to major. So, lots of guys got out as Captains without ever making major after as many as 10+ years of service simply because they were "passed over for major" a determined number of times. It was two tries for reserve Air Force Officers and three tries at major for "regular" Air Force officers during my time. I have no clue how the Army or navy does it...but, as my son mentioned, the medical guys are almost always promoted to at least major regardless of the OER's. Interesting, but says something about supply and demand I would guess.

My God bless and keep your bother and all our great men and women who serve no matter where they may be stationed. As events at Ft. Hood demonstrate, no place, it seems, is safe if you wear the uniform.

[Texas Stranger]

For Doctors and Lawyers, it also has to do with Uncle Sam getting its money's worth from footing the Law/Medical School bills of said Officer before he or she heads off into the private sector. Some become career military, but it's not difficult to see that percentage isn't as large as what the military would like it to be.

[hickoryhouse]

For Doctors and Lawyers, it also has to do with Uncle Sam getting its money's worth from footing the Law/Medical School bills of said Officer before he or she heads off into the private sector. Some become career military, but it's not difficult to see that percentage isn't as large as what the military would like it to be.

My sister in Law is an ARMY Dr. and her requirements after med school and the Academy is in the range of 15 years after she finished med school. That ends up being almost, if not 20 total years in the military. I would imagine that is a pretty good return on investment for the military.