I haven't had much to say regarding PFC Bergdahl because everything I know is hearsay. But I do know what the buzz is on "the inside" vice what the media has been portraying, and Ralph Peter's letter below reflects that buzz pretty accurately.
I don't know the truth of the matter - but I agree with Peters on the issue of the diversion of assets to find this kid, I want him back, and if it turns out he was AWOL, I want him to face the music for that - because this event has diverted a *huge* amount of resources from the fight. And caused casualties.
And if PFC Bergdahl is culpable in his actions - he should face a reckoning. If he's not, then lets move on. Regardless, it has been an I/O victory for the Taliban.
Here's what Mr. Peters had to say:
I'll add this: A lot more people know the name of Bowe Bergdahl than know the name of Jared Monti. And that's too bad.
I don't know the truth of the matter - but I agree with Peters on the issue of the diversion of assets to find this kid, I want him back, and if it turns out he was AWOL, I want him to face the music for that - because this event has diverted a *huge* amount of resources from the fight. And caused casualties.
And if PFC Bergdahl is culpable in his actions - he should face a reckoning. If he's not, then lets move on. Regardless, it has been an I/O victory for the Taliban.
Here's what Mr. Peters had to say:
Subject: Ralph Peters Letter -- 'Marshall: Fox News Analyst Crossed Line By Suggesting Taliban Should Kill U.S. Soldier
Thanks for the feedback. No matter what it costs me--and it will cost me--I am sticking to my conviction that Bergdahl is not the heroic martyr portrayed by the media (in the inevitable film, I expect Shia Labouef to play Bergdahl, with Sean Penn as a wicked US general and George Clooney as Mullah Omar...). Before I spoke, I had unequivocal confirmation from a very high military level--on background--that Bergdahl deserted his post. The senior officer also took pains to insure that I understood that Bergdahl "is no hero" and that he lied about being on patrol on the videotape, etc.
I do hope he comes home safely--for his family's sake--and that the Army does not then succumb to leftwing cries that "The poor boy's suffered enough." If, under the provisions of the UCMJ, the evidence shows that we was AWOL in a combat zone, fine. If he is judged as a full-fledged deserter, fine (Articles 85 and 86 leave some gray area). But he must face charges.
I do believe, by the way, that the Taliban, who are very media savvy, may have learned from the backlash against the al Qaeda in Iraq atrocity videos. After another video or two, Bergdahl may be released "for humanitarian reasons," is a further propaganda coup.
At present, our military has diverted a wide array of assets from the fight in order to bring back this PFC (who I believe is in Pakistan, at this point). None of this is addressed by the adulatory media. The confirmed fact that Bergdahl just walked away from his post in the hours of darkness has been in the public domain for weeks. The media ignore that, too. Nor have the media "fact-checked" the Taliban video, in which even the mention of a girlfriend appears to be scripted (note that the reporters who've descended on his hometown have not surfaced this girlfriend for whom PFC Bergdahl pines...). Of course, the anti-American tirade and lies about the behavior of our troops are delicious to our media.
Most of all, I find it despicable that the media (and now some Congressmen) lionize PFC Bergdahl and his family, while largely ignoring those authentic heroes who are struggling on our military hospitals, while their families live with fear and doubt, or those who come home in flag-draped coffins (and their families), or those decorated for valor...who go ignored by the media. I keep asking media figures the same question: Why is it that we all know Bergdahl's name--the name of a soldier who deserted his post and collaborated with the enemy in clear violation of the Code of Conduct--while we don't know the names of a single soldier fighting for his or her life in
a military hospital?
Feel free to share this note with anyone. I will not back down and join the Bergdahl lovefest. As for the Congressmen, when was the last time they all circulated and signed a letter praising one of our troops for heroism? I guarantee you that not one of them has bothered to look into the known facts of the Bergdahl matter. But, of course, facts don't matter. And, I suppose, desertion is no worse than calling in sick because you have a hangover...
Best regards,
Ralph
I'll add this: A lot more people know the name of Bowe Bergdahl than know the name of Jared Monti. And that's too bad.
But I do believe the story is more complicated than the media have been playing it - and I fully understand why the family is playing it the way they are.
But I also know that people a lot closer to the event, i.e., soldiers in Bergdahl's unit, have their own opinions and knowledge about what happened.
A lot of which hasn't made it into print, and, for the nonce, shouldn't. But there is enough there for me to say, as I did - get the kid, and if it turns out there is evidence sufficient for an Art. 32 hearing to recommend charges - that he should face the music, and not get a "victim pass" which is what the media and family are playing to.
There has been blood shed, willingly, for this kid. And if it was shed because he was stupid, there should be a reckoning.
Like I said in the post - if there's no fire where that smoke is - we should also just move on.
But it's all moot until we get him back, hopefully still breathing.
I have other thoughts, but this is NIPR.
SFC/71D4O, Senior Legal NCO, NCOIC, Crim Law, OSJA, 2d SUPCOM and again in 3ID. In between, and after, standalone Enlisted Legal Advisor to several Brigade level Commanders: 3d ID Div Arty (Creighton Abrams, Jr.), 3d ID Aviation Brigade. 19 years in JAG, from Battalon to Division to Brigade and back again.
This kid is in a heap of trouble.
BRB
There _will_ be an investigation UP AR 15-6, no matter how PFC Bergdahl comes back to US control, dead or alive.
If he's alive, I predict charges will be preferred, there _will_ be an Article 32 Investigation. Then, its anybody's ball game after that.
Charges of Desertion? Simple AWOL? How about Criminal Stupidiry?
Well, I've done writ a novel, so.........
Of course, we've become so intellectually and morally inbred as a society that we, in general, honestly believe that there is actual value in playing nicey nice with hard hearts and closed minds.
Oh, and please, save the "Soviets tried that" bullcrap, y'all. The Soviets were about as incompetent a warfighting organization as could be fielded by an industrial nation. Leadership picked by party loyalty, political officers interfering with ops in a much more aggressive manner than even our own JAG, conscript soldiers that were poorly trained and badly led. There is nearly nothing in common between the US and old Soviet military. The only possible similarity is between their political officers and the growing intrusiveness of our lawfare "specialists".
Fine. I'll say it different: we tried it and it failed, too.
There's a reason why one of the biggest "Mongo"s---no-knock raids, high body count engagements, kicking a and not caring about the names--- of the class of '76 turned into one of the biggest proponents of the 'namby pamby'(the guy who pushed and pushed and pushed on Rice to make 'The Surge' happen). It's actually in line with what we want to achieve(i.e. a functioning, sovreign, nation and not an admistered 'territory' that's part of an empire.).
Means and ends have to be in resonance or you find yourself on a train for downtown FUBAR. I'm more inclined to want to head for Argghhh!-arittavile, but that's me.
Correction: 21st SUPCOM. Largest GCMCA in the world. Jurisdictiion streched from England to Spain including BENELUX, France and Portugal and a massive chunk of Western Germany as well.
ry:
Enlighten me please. Where was this "Mongo" thing of which you speak and who is this person you allude to? Remember, Im a knuckle dragger, don't go all hinty at me. I ain't that deep.
As for what we want to achieve, as you list it, that "functioning, sovereign nation", you do mean Afghanistan? Ain't happening now, aint happening later, not for a long long long long time.
Tribalism and functioning sovereign nationhood are nearly 100% mutually exclusive. There are those outside of the institutionally inbred ivory tower set that understand that from the vast amounts of actual true fact history available on the subject.
Look at any place on this planet that is dominated by tribal structures and you have constant warfare, banditry, predation and real poverty. Not the "this is uncomfortable" poverty we call poverty, the "sorry children, nothing to eat until next harvest, if then, so suffer quietly please" type poverty.
Also, for your own enlightenment, there is not much evidence at all that points to the soft headed monkey clutcher concept working over the long term, anywhere. There is ample evidence of continued failure of it everywhere. Just look at the organized gang/criminal problems in the western world, US in particular. Softly softly will not, has not and can not reach either hearts or minds dedicated to being belligerent and hostile. You close with them and destroy them. That is the only actual known solution. The only solution to be proven functional over the entire history of mankind. You do get your outliers, of course. The strange individual who proves the rule by being so unique and rare, but as a whole, it's close with them and kill them, or let them grow in numbers and power until it is too late to ever functional solve the problem in any way other than to simple surrender to it and accept it as an unpleasant reality.
What we have been doing is what I refer to as the Lawrence of Arabia crap. Play the tribal game for immediate short term gains which serve no long term function except to insure that the sources of the problem do nothing but grow and fester. What we are doing, and not because of "military fubar" but absolutely and completely because of the stupid, self loathing, weak incompetence of our "homefront" in the inability to deal with hard reality, and the very vocal and active 5th column that openly supports our enemy, is poking at an open wound in such a way as to ensure that gangrene sets in and there's no option other than full removal of that infected limb.
All the idiot softly softlies are doing nothing but ensuring that eventually this will become a winner take all genocidal war.
It wont happen over night, and probably wont happen in our lifetimes. But it is most definitely in the cards. The longer we hide from reality, the few options remain open, and the closer we come to that day.
Ask your enemy to join you for tea *after* you have pounded him. Guarantee his safe conduct, because he will then be your guest, regardless of enmity, and *honor that guarantee*. Now you are operating from a position of strength, rather than one of percieved weakness, and you can bluntly tell your adversary, "You know we can maul you any time we choose, but we would rather not spend our soldiers or our money doing that. Although you know we will, if we have to."
By doing that, you have just established that you respect his fighting ability and consider him a worthy adversary. You have given him "face," you have extended him a gift of honor. Now, and *only* now, can you afford to be magnanimous, to allow "soft power" to work, because you have already laid it on a foundation of "hard power."
Meanwhile, you must demonstrate to those who *aren't* fighting you that you can protect them from the depredations of those who *are* fighting you. We dropped the ball big time in Pashtunland, because we didn't realize the power of the guest/host obligation under Pashtunwali. Rather than issuing demands that the tribes surrender their Taliban and al-Qaeda "guests," we should have instituted an info-op detailing how the members of those organizations were *dishonoring* their hosts by taking advantage of Pashtunwali to conduct their attacks and then return to the protection of their hosts.
Showing the hosts how they were being dishonored would have made it simpler for them to toss their guests out on their ears. But by immediately attacking their guests, we just reinforced the obligation of the host to protect the guest.
Stupid move.
DIsagree. Col Hammes, hard charging Marine with the scars to proove it, who spent time in Somalia before Slick Walrus(i.e. Bill Clinton) took over, says different. THe British experience in Malaysia says different. The handling of the Second Intafada says different, since Israel essentially won and is winning without having to kill much of anyone. That Israel and Egypt didn't go to war indicates that the softer, not cracking skulls, approach can work. The Marine experience in Vietnam shows that the 'hearts and minds' type strategy can, and does, work.
Contra to the 'kill them, hard' position. MACV under Westmoreland, where VC and NVA were killed in great numbers. No security, no change, and ultimately we lost(sorry, Unk, 'tis true, for all your heroics and killing of ninja spiders trying to hijack your beer). Korea. Place was a crap hole for 30 years. We killed them hard when Ridgeway came out with RIPPER, SLASHER, and KILLER. Seoul was essentially a cinder, economy shot to hell, people starving to death. Took 30 years of rebuilding and US staying as a garaunteer of the peace and security of the place. Iraq when we were in an iron fist in a velvet glove mode by staying in big bases and playing fireman to trouble spots---didn't bring us one whit closer to solving that Gordian knot.
So, I'm not seeing 'kill them, and break their wills' as being a panacea.
There's lessons to be taken from Silesia(which is a positive example of being ruthless and simply steam rolling your enemies), but we're dealing with something a bit more difficult than what Ceaser did. Which is why BH LIddel-Hart, no coward he, no pointy headed intellectual who never carried a rifle or got his feet dirty, wrote "Strategy'. A war of annihilation/push enemy to total exhaustion type stragey has great limitations and he outlined them while providing ideas of how to avoid simply putting it in a will vs will situation.
No worries, Grumpy. I'll even share my apple fritter with you. But the milk's all mine.