Comments for PFC Bergdahl

PFC Bergdahl

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:46:15 -0600

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...

Comment from ry on 2009-08-02

Sun, 02 Aug 2009 17:35:36 -0600

1st. I'm speaking of GEN Odierno, when he was with 4th ID.

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.

Comment from BillT on 2009-08-02

Sun, 02 Aug 2009 02:47:18 -0600

In tribal societies, showing magnanimity toward your enemies is only effective *after* you have demonstrated you can be totally ruthless toward them. The Soviets applied Hammer Time indiscriminately, which is why they failed.

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.

Comment from Grimmy on 2009-08-01

Sat, 01 Aug 2009 23:29:52 -0600

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.

Comment from Lamigra on 2009-08-01

Sat, 01 Aug 2009 14:42:40 -0600

"2d SUPCOM"

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.

Comment from ry on 2009-07-31

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:29:49 -0600

Oh, and please, save the "Soviets tried that" bullcrap, y'all.
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.

Comment from Grimmy on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:01:22 -0600

IF we, as a people at war, were even half assed smart, this would be an opportunity to punish all involved among the enemy elements and their associates, hangers on, supporters and useful idiots in the OA with such a vengeance and merciless vindictiveness that every other tribe in the general area would be stunned.

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".

Comment from Lamigra on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:36:30 -0600

Pardon the intrusion...

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.........

Comment from Lamigra on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:02:44 -0600

Ahem! Let me establish my bona fides on this issue:

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

Comment from Grumpy on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:04:00 -0600

John, I'm not saying, Berdahl is not accountable. Heartless, i figure he would "at least* be facing an Article 15, if not worse, but that is a decision of the United States. You never publicly tell an adversary of the United States that you support any of their actions against the US Military, especially during a time of war

Comment from AFSister on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:27:15 -0600

concur.

Comment from Heartless Libertarian on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:49:58 -0600

I'll concur with abstaining from the Bergdahl lovefest...I've read different versions of how he ended up where he is, and none of them involved being captured while on patrol. (And if CJ5 Plans had more planners than just me when he disappeared, I would have been the Article 15-6 investigating officer.)

I have other thoughts, but this is NIPR.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 10:57:41 -0600

I'm not supportive of Peters' initial broadside of let the Taliban kill the kid, Grumpy.

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.

Comment from Grumpy on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 10:50:35 -0600

John, I always thought we were the ones who decide, based on evidence *first* then decide if charges are appropriate. I feel like saying, "Peters, just STFU!"

Comment from BillT on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 10:41:29 -0600

I concur with John. And now, I'll shut up.

Comment from FbL on 2009-07-30

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 10:34:41 -0600

Thanks for publishing this, John. As you can imagine, keeping my mouth shut on this hasn't been easy. :P