Jason Dunham, Corporal, USMC, Medal of Honor

This isn't news, really. We knew it was coming. But now it has happened.

By Sgt. Sara Wood, USA American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 11, 2007 - President Bush today presented the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest decoration, to the family of Marine Cpl. Jason Dunham, who died shielding his fellow Marines from a grenade blast in Iraq in April 2004.

"With this medal, we pay tribute to the courage and leadership of a man who represents the best of young Americans," Bush said before presenting the medal to Dunham's family at the White House.

Dunham, who grew up in Scio, N.Y., was the leader of a rifle squad with 3rd Battalion, 7th Marines, in Iraq. Dunham's squad was conducting a reconnaissance mission in Karabilah on April 14, 2004, when a nearby convoy returning to base was ambushed. When Dunham's squad approached to assist the convoy, an Iraqi insurgent jumped out of a vehicle and grabbed Dunham by the throat. As Dunham wrestled the insurgent to the ground, he noticed that the enemy fighter had a grenade in his hand. Dunham ordered his Marines to move back, and when the enemy dropped the live grenade, Dunham took off his Kevlar helmet, covered the grenade with it, and threw himself on top to smother the blast.

Dunham initially survived his wounds, but died eight days later at the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., with his mother and father at his bedside.

"By his selflessness, Corporal Dunham saved the lives of two of his men and showed the world what it means to be a Marine," Bush said.

Dunham is the second servicemember in the war on terror and the first Marine since the Vietnam War to receive the Medal of Honor. His mother, father, sister and two brothers were at the ceremony today, which was attended by Cabinet members, Defense Department and Marine Corps leaders, members of Congress, past Medal of Honor recipients, and members of Dunham's unit.

Bush spoke about Dunham's upbringing in upstate New York. Dunham was a star athlete who was popular and a natural leader. His father, a dairy farm worker, and his mother, a school teacher, were devoted parents. "He grew up with the riches far more important than money," Bush said.

Dunham joined the Marine Corps on July 31, 2000. It was in the Marines that he learned honor, courage, commitment and leadership qualities, Bush said. "As the leader of a rifle squad in Iraq, Corporal Dunham led by the values he had been taught," he said. "He was the guy everybody looked up to; he was a Marine's Marine who led by example."

Bush noted that Dunham's mother called the Marine Corps her son's second family. Now that family is embracing her and the rest of the Dunham family as they deal with their loss, Bush said.

Since World War II, more than half of those who have earned the Medal of Honor have lost their lives in the action that earned it, Bush said. "Corporal Jason Dunham belongs to this select group," he said. "On a dusty road in western Iraq, Corporal Dunham gave his own life so that the men under his command might live. This morning, it's my privilege to recognize Corporal Dunham's devotion to the Corps and the country and to present his family with the Medal of Honor."

Now is the time at Castle Argghhh! when we dance: In Memoriam.

President George W. Bush presents the Congressional Medal of Honor to Dan and Deb Dunham for their son, U.S. Marine Cpl. Jason Dunham, during a ceremony in his honor at the White House Jan. 11, 2007. Cpl. Dunham gave his own life in April 2004 by jumping on a grenade during an insurgent attack in western Iraq to save the lives of men under his command. DoD photo by Cherie A. Thurlby. (Released)

The citation has not yet been published, as far as I know. This URL is the placeholder at Marine Corps News.

Increasing ground forces.

Well, that will put some more pressure on Recruiting Command... that said - we had 740,000 soldiers in my VOLAR (old term, Volunteer Army) army of the '80s, when there were fewer Americans than there are now (not counting the illegals, either). We're not talking about going back to that era.

Of course, that was also when we had the economy we'd inherited from President Carter.

Oh, wait - the Dems are back in charge of Congress. So, in a few years, especially if they win the White House, I expect meeting those numbers won't be all that hard.

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 11, 2007 - The active-duty Army and Marine Corps will grow by 92,000 personnel over the next five years, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said during a White House news conference today.

"The President announced last night that he would strengthen our military for the long war against terrorism by authorizing an increase in the overall strength of the Army and Marine Corps," Gates said. "I am recommending to him a total increase in the two services of 92,000 soldiers and Marines over the next five years."

The breakout is 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines.

The increase will make permanent the 30,000 temporary increase in Army end-strength and 5,000 increase in the Marine Corps. Then the services will increase in annual increments of 7,000 for the Army and 5,000 for the Marine Corps.

The Army has a current end-strength of 512,400, with the Marines at 180,000. Under Gates' proposal, the Army's end-strength will grow to 547,000 and the Marines to 202,000.

"We should recognize that while it may take some time for these new troops to become available for deployment, it is important that our men and women in uniform know that additional manpower and resources are on the way," Gates said.

The increase will give soldiers and Marines more "dwell time" at home, officials said. Currently, units are on close to a one-to-one deployment to dwell time schedule. The increase in end-strength will reduce the stress on deployable active duty personnel.

Army and Marine officials said the services cannot grow forces overnight. Currently, the active duty Army recruits 80,000 young Americans each year with the Marines bringing in 39,000.

Recruiting officials said that right now, only three of 10 young men and women in the 19-14 year old cohort meet the standards to enlist in the military.

Those young men and women have a lot of demands for their services, an Army official said, and incentives for enlisting and for service may need to be "plussed-up" to encourage these people to enlist. The services also may need to put more recruiters on the street.

Training the individuals in the proper military occupational specialties is also a potential choke-point. Both the Army and Marine Corps training establishments have some growth potential, and can probably expand to handle the influx, officials in both services said.

DoD Announces Changes to Reserve Component Force Management Policy

The secretary of defense announced today a policy change in the way the department will manage reserve component forces.

The first aspect of the policy change will involve the way the department manages deployments of reserve forces. Currently, reserve deployments are managed on an individual basis. In the future deployments will be managed on unit basis, allowing for greater unit cohesion and predictability for training and deployments.

Interested in the rest? It's in the Flash Traffic/Extended Entry.

Something you might find interesting...

By Sgt. Sara Wood, USA
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 10, 2007 - A new law that took effect Jan. 1 changes the way the remains of servicemembers killed in combat are transported and handled.

The 2007 National Defense Authorization Act states that the primary mode of transportation for remains of servicemembers being returned to the U.S. is military aircraft or military-contracted aircraft. This is a change from the past, when commercial service was used to transport the remains of fallen troops.

"It was a provision in the law, and I think ... there was some interest to make sure that the remains were moved in an expeditious manner," Air Force Col. Michael Pachuta, director of morale, welfare and recreation policy for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, said in an interview.

Every servicemember who dies in a theater of combat is transported by military aircraft to Dover Air Force Base, Del., for processing and burial preparation, Pachuta explained. This law changes the way the remains are transported from Dover to their place of burial.

In a memorandum to senior military leaders, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England wrote that this change is to ensure the transportation of
fallen servicemembers is given priority. England instructed the military services and departments to work together to ensure air transportation arrangements are handled properly and efficiently.

The law also directs that an honor guard escorts servicemembers' remains from Dover to their final resting place. The servicemember's next of kin can request that commercial air transportation be used for the remains, or that the honor guard not escort the remains, Pachuta said.

Another recent change that is giving more recognition to the remains of fallen servicemembers is the use of honor covers on coffins, Pachuta said. The honor cover is a reinforced cardboard cover that fits on top of the airline industry's standard air tray for coffins. The cover is embossed with an American flag, and the Defense Department seal on both ends.

The idea for the honor covers, which the Army has been using since October, came from feedback from family members and military members who had escorted remains, Pachuta said. "Our intent certainly is to make sure that those handling the remains along the way understand that this is a fallen servicemember and certainly should be handled expeditiously but also with care and respect," he said.

The Army designed the honor covers in cooperation with the Air Transport Association, so they are standardized throughout the airline industry, Pachuta said. The covers are not used more than once and are treated to make them waterproof. When the remains reach their final destination, the honor cover is removed and an American flag is placed over the coffin, he said.

Tension in the Ranks in Blighty

CAPT H sends: Colonel sacked for rebuke over visits to injured.

Sean Rayment, writing in the Sunday Telegraph:

A high-flying Army officer has been sacked for rebuking a senior commander who failed to visit injured troops in hospital.

Col Julian Clover, 43, was dismissed from his post as a staff officer at the Army's Land Command headquarters after clashing with his superior over the need for senior officers to visit troops injured in Afghanistan and Iraq at the Selly Oak hospital in Birmingham.

His sacking has sent shock waves through Land Command, the biggest Army headquarters in Britain, and has raised concerns that some senior officers are "out of touch" with the concerns of the rank and file.

There's more to the story.

Brig Bruce Brealey, 47, who had previously served in the Royal Artillery, was on a rota of senior officers who had been asked to visit Selly Oak hospital in November to check up on the soldiers' welfare and to deal with any complaints they might have. It is understood, however, that before he was due to travel to the hospital he delegated the visit to Col Clover, who at the time was an assistant chief of staff with responsibility for media operations at the headquarters.

After visiting the hospital, Col Clover had a meeting with Brig Brealey in which he expressed his view in a "forthright and uncompromising manner" that it was not acceptable for senior officers to delegate the responsibility of visiting injured troops to junior officers. The two officers were known by colleagues to have had a difficult working relationship.

Brigadier Brealy is referred to by a fellow officer as a "process man" whilst Colonel Clover has made a career in unconventional operations. A clash of personalities.

I'm no Brit, so I may be wrong, but I read this rather as Brigadier Brealy is a Stuffed Shirt Rule-bound Garret Trooper, while Colonel Clover is rather more results-oriented. I can see, being a Brigadier, how your schedule might be pretty full and it's hard to carve out the time to do things like that. Who knows what the travel time is to the hospital?

Of course, that's why you have a vehicle with a driver, and a cell phone, etc - and a laptop. No reason you can't work while in the vehicle going to and fro. And I suspect the hospital might just allow you some leeway in visiting hours, so you could go after work.

And, I suspect, this incident was merely the straw that broke the camel's back for the Brigadier, what with that unruly subordinate. The Brigadier undoubtedly has a story.

Absent any more information, however, I frankly don't care. Bad Brigadier. Sit, stay! You can't find time in your schedule to go visit soldiers? To show you actually care for soldiers - and make the hospital people know you care for soldiers, especially wounded ones? If you can't muster that kind of professionalism, then, in my book, you are unworthy of your commission.

Worse, the man's a Gunner. An Artilleryman. A Redleg (which no doubt was *some* of CAPT H's motivation for sending me the story).

Meaningless as it is, I shun you, sir. I call upon Saint Barbara to withdraw her patronage from you.

Unless you've got a far better reason than the story indicates. If so, I'm sure Saint Barbara will take that into consideration. However, if I hear of you suffering a horrible accident involving a barbecue gone wild... or something similar - well, we'll know Saint Barbara's opinion, won't we?*

This isn't about Colonel Clover - wronged or not. He's getting by on his 70K ($135K USD) salary just fine.

This is about the soldiers, wounded soldiers, you didn't have time for.

Shame, Brigadier. Shame.

You can read the whole story here.

If someone can show me the Brigadier's side of the story, I'll be happy to run with it.

*Note to unbalanced personalities. Don't help the Saint. She doesn't need it. Let her be the judge. Don't you do a thing. -the Armorer

Drudge: ISRAEL PLANS NUCLEAR STRIKE ON IRAN

Me: D-uh.

And Syria.

And Egypt.

And Saudi Arabia.

And Jordan (well, maybe not, but probably).

And... they still have their Iraq plan in the safe, too.

Just like we have nuke target folios for... Russia. China. North Korea.

And they're secret, too.

The Israel Defense Force General Staff would be incompetent not to have a plan.

The question - thus far unanswered... is it a CONPLAN, or an OPLAN. Contingency, vice Operation. The current one, or an old one, if contingency.

If it's an OPLAN, *then* it's a story. And whoever leaked it should be locked into a very small, dark, hole. With rats.

Well, actually, if it's the current CONPLAN, whoever leaked it should be locked into a very small, dark, hole. With rats. Because there's a lot of intel analysis (and the reverse engineering thereof) locked into that document, depending on what it *actually* is.

Frankly, even an old CONPLAN gives away stuff. Same hole. With rats.

Otherwise, *yawn*.

Of course, if it's a sanctioned leak - then the target isn't Iran. It's us. To keep the West focused on the threat - and what Israel may choose to do about it - without our permission (which they don't need) or agreement (which they would like to have). And the plan may only contain data they want to share with us, anyway.

Jay, over at Stop the ACLU is running a reax post. Okay Jay, that's my reax.

Until you tell me it's an OPLAN, I'm not interested, except in that warrior geek way that I'm always interested in stuff like that.

Well, that's not entirely true. The old targeteer in me would like to see it, just to see what the Israelis consider the target set to be. But I wouldn't share that with you. I'd just giggle quietly in the corner playing with my data.

Oooo. Bad image.

Buddies, source, differences by.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Get upset if you're too busy to talk to them for a week.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Are glad to see you after years, and will happily carry on the same conversation you were having last time you met.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Never ask for food.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Are the reason you have no food.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Call your parents Mr. And Mrs.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Call your parents mom and dad.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Bail you out of jail and tell you what you did was wrong.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Would be sitting next to you saying, "Damn...we screwed up...but man that was fun!"

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Have never seen you cry.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Cry with you.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Borrow your stuff for a few days then give it back.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Keep your stuff so long they forget it's yours.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Know a few things about you.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Could write a book with direct quotes from you.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Will leave you behind if that's what the crowd is doing.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Will kick the whole crowds ass that left you behind.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Would knock on your door.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Walk right in and say, "I'm home!"

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Are for a while.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Are for life.

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Have shared a few experiences...
MILITARY FRIENDS: Have shared a lifetime of experiences no Civilian could ever dream of...

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Will take your drink away when they think you've had enough.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Will look at you stumbling all over the place and say, "You better drink the rest of that, you know we don't waste...that's alcohol abuse!!" Then carry you home safely and put you to bed...

CIVILIAN FRIENDS: Will talk crap to the person who talks crap about you.
MILITARY FRIENDS: Will knock them the hell out for using your name in vain.

H/t, Dom J.

Mind in the Qatar

Since Trackbacks aren't working yet (still looking for a blog-mechanic!) MajChaz of Mind in the Qatar asked me to post these two gems... and today's H&I is already pretty long, so I'll put 'em up here.

Long Live Military History (Word!)

Long Live Military History

Saving a disappearing portion of Academia

A long important part of the study of history, has been the study of the subset of military history. It is incredibly important to understand both U.S. and global military history, as many significant events across time have involved and been driven by military influences of one form or another.

However in the increasingly leftward tilt of the ivory tower of higher education, military history is "...dead at many other top colleges and universities as well. Where it isn’t dead and buried, it’s either dying or under siege..." This according to John Miller in his National Review article "Sounding Taps" from earlier this fall.

Read that here.

And his suggestion we quit trying to fix the MSM, but simply supplant it.

Much has been made over the last couple of years (and especially in the last several months) about the major media's (aka main-stream media, drive-by media, or alien-media nation) inability to provide balanced news coverage about major events shaping our world....especially in Iraq.

Several times I suggested that a "Good News Hour" would do wonders to combat all the negative reporting, and possibly avoid a decline in public opinion on Iraq. Unfortunately we have turned that corner, and can only now hope to regain ground. Truth and good news still have a place in our media environment.

Perhaps as Glenn Reynolds suggests, the Davids born of the blogosphere could produce an adequate alternative. The Alternative Media Network (AMN) if you will. In my mind, a lot of the ingredients for the recipe are already in place....

Start with some hearty 'Army of Davids' stock, add heaping cup of Pajamas Media ingenuity, mix in a bushel each of Bill Roggio's and Milbloggers, and finish with a dash of Paul Harvey.

Read the rest of that, here.

With trackbacks hosed, don't be shy about asking for links. They may not all make it - but hey - it makes life easier sometimes when the Muse is on vacation.

On the origins of some military traditions...

...laid out for you in preparation for President Ford's funeral.

By John J. Kruzel American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Dec. 28, 2006 - Military tradition will be evident throughout the events associated with the Dec. 26 death of former President Gerald R. Ford, as the services join the nation in bidding farewell to their former commander in chief.

Ford's three-stage state funeral will begin tomorrow [today] with the former president's remains lying in repose at St. Margaret's Episcopal Church in Palm Desert, Calif. He will then be honored in the nation's capital, and finally in his home state of Michigan, where he will be buried. Ford's casket will arrive Dec. 30 at Andrews Air Force Base, Md. A motorcade will travel through Alexandria, Va., where Ford resided while serving as a congressman and vice president. After a pause at the World War II Memorial -- Ford served in the Navy during the war -- the motorcade will proceed to the U.S. Capitol, where the former president will lie in state.

Ford's coffin will be draped in a U.S. flag, with the blue field over his left shoulder. The custom began in the Napoleonic Wars of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, when a flag was used to cover the dead as they were taken from the battlefield on a caisson.

Graveside military honors in Michigan will include the firing of three volleys each by seven servicemembers. This commonly is confused with an entirely separate honor, the 21-gun salute. But the number of individual gun firings in both honors evolved the same way.

The three volleys came from an old battlefield custom. The two warring sides would cease hostilities to clear their dead from the battlefield, and the firing of three volleys meant that the dead had been properly cared for and the side was ready to resume the battle.

The 21-gun salute traces its roots to the Anglo-Saxon empire, when seven guns constituted a recognized naval salute, as most naval vessels had seven guns. Because gunpowder in those days could be more easily stored on land than at sea, guns on land could fire three rounds for every one that could be fired by a ship at sea. [This section appears to be incomplete. IIRC, the purpose of firing the salute was to prove your guns were empty as a gesture of good faith, and assuring the land-based guns the first shot. The same reason that when Navy ships enter harbor they have the crew standing in whites around the hull - to show that not only are the guns empty, they are un-manned. Sailors correct me if I'm wrong. -the Armorer]

Later, as gunpowder and storage methods improved, salutes at sea also began using 21 guns. The United States at first used one round for each state, attaining the 21-gun salute by 1818. The nation reduced its salute to 21 guns in 1841, and formally adopted the 21-gun salute at the suggestion of the British in 1875.

An "order of arms" protocol determines the number of guns to be used in a salute. A president, ex-president or foreign head of state is saluted with 21 guns. A vice president, prime minister, secretary of defense or secretary of the Army receives a 19-gun salute. Flag officers receive salutes of 11 to 17 guns, depending on their rank. The rounds are fired one at a time.

A U.S. presidential death also involves other ceremonial gun salutes and military traditions. On the day after the death of the president, a former President or president-elect -- unless this day falls on a Sunday or holiday, in which case the honor will rendered the following day -- the commanders of Army installations with the necessary personnel and material traditionally order that one gun be fired every half hour, beginning at reveille and ending at retreat.

On the day of burial, a 21-minute gun salute traditionally is fired starting at noon at all military installations with the necessary personnel and material. Guns will be fired at one-minute intervals. Also on the day of burial, those installations will fire a 50-gun salute -- one round for each state -- at five- second intervals immediately following lowering of the flag.

The playing of "Ruffles and Flourishes" announces the arrival of a flag officer or other dignitary of honor. Drums play the ruffles, and bugles play the flourishes - one flourish for each star of the flag officer's rank or as appropriate for the honoree's position or title. Four flourishes is the highest honor.

When played for a president, "Ruffles and Flourishes" is followed by "Hail to the Chief," which is believed to have been written in England in 1810 or 1811 by James Sanderson for a play by Sir Walter Scott called "The Lady of the Lake." The play began to be performed in the United States in 1812, the song became popular, and it became a favorite of bands at festive events. It evolved to be used as a greeting for important visitors, and eventually for the president, though no record exists of when it was first put to that use.

The bugle call "Taps" originated in the Civil War with the Army of the Potomac. Union Army Brig. Gen. Daniel Butterfield didn't like the bugle call that signaled soldiers in the camp to put out the lights and go to sleep, and worked out the melody of "Taps" with his brigade bugler, Pvt. Oliver Wilcox Norton. The call later came into another use as a figurative call to the sleep of death for soldiers.

Ford will be buried with full military honors at his presidential museum in Grand Rapids, Mich., Jan. 3.

(John D. Banusiewicz of American Forces Press Service contributed to this article. Information from Web pages of the Military District of Washington and Arlington National Cemetery was used in this article.)

I like young Wales.

No, not a typo-damaged lust for under-age cetaceans... rather young Prince Harry of A Squadron, the Blues and Royals.

Prince Harry has threatened to quit the Army if commanders refuse to send him to the front line.

He told senior officers before recently passing out of Sandhurst as a Second Lieutenant: "If I am not allowed to join my unit in a war zone, I will hand in my uniform."

Good on you, Lieutenant. That's what I want to see in a young officer.

Of course, it isn't that simple, now is it?

Like it or not, Prince Harry is 3rd in line for the Throne of England. That makes him a very lucrative "kill or capture" target.

Okay, it's a dangerous business, isn't it? The Royal Family have thus far not been too shy about risking their own flesh and blood in service, witness Prince Andrew in the Falklands.

So, the concern twists itself to another angle - would Lieutenant Wales' presence put his troops at greater risk, as the jihadis try to score the Big One?

That is a concern expressed by the senior leadership, for whom such things really are important.

The embarrassment for the Army caused by him quitting would be matched by uproar at the notion that while ordinary citizens are allowed to that their main problem is not whether Harry can take the pressure of coming under fire in action – but whether the lives of the men fighting alongside him will be more at risk because he is regarded as a ‘trophy target’ by insurgents.

One experienced commander said: "Second Lt Wales will, as far as is possible, be treated like any other officer but there has to be a line drawn as to whether the men he leads might experience extra danger due to his presence. Decisions will be taken by commanding officers based on an accurate risk assessment at the time."

The Sun is reporting that Prince Harry may go to Afstan with his unit. And, that soldiers are supportive of his deploying.

Officially, the Ministry of Defence insists that a final decision about whether second lieutenant Harry will be allowed to fight in Iraq has yet to be made.

The Prince has always said he is determined to do battle with his 100-strong unit, A Squadron of the Blues and Royals — part of the Household Cavalry.

They begin a six-month tour of Iraq in the spring. And before that, they are expected to take part in war games and exhaustive preparations for conflict.

The decision over the young Royal is deemed so important it will be made by the Army’s top man, Chief of the General Staff General Sir Richard Dannatt.

But a bandwagon of popular support is growing among the ranks to allow Harry to fulfil his dream of active service. Despite alarm over the possibility of putting the Prince’s life in danger, top brass will find that hard to refuse.

I say Lieutenant Wales is either a member of the unit, or not. If he is, then he should deploy with them, and not send them out with a newbie who hasn't trained with the unit.

If it turns out that every splodey-dope jihadi with a belt of explosives want to martyr themselves - that can be sorted out on the ground over there, based on the actual risks, vice the "might be a problems".

It's a war. Let's not forget the moral(e) aspects. There are some considerations that transcend.

Let Wales fight.

H/t, Heartless Libertarian.

You find the most interesting things...

...in the most unlikely places.

LTG Petraeus (CG here at Fort Leavenworth) was interviewed by the German Spiegel (Mirror) Online.

Spiegel asks...

SPIEGEL: General Petraeus, you were in charge of combat operations in Iraq, you supervised the build-up of the new Iraqi security force and now you oversee the training and education of Army officers here at Fort Leavenworth. Would you agree that you are trying to impose a sort of a cultural revolution on the United States Army?

LTG Petraeus' answer will be soup for Ry's soul:

Petraeus: There is quite a big cultural change going on. We used to say, that if you can do the "big stuff," the big combined arms, high-end, high intensity major combat operations and have a disciplined force, then you can do the so-called "little stuff," too. That turned out to be wrong.

This little snippet caught my attention:

SPIEGEL: You propagate the idea that young officers should go to graduate school. Why does a soldier need a master's degree?

Petraeus: We're talking about how to react to unforeseeable, non-standard tasks, we're talking about environments that are very different to those we're used to. You have to work in a foreign language, you have to negotiate with people who come from another religious background or who don't even share what we would call the same core values. Now here you have a setting quite similar to graduate school, which takes you out of your intellectual comfort zone -- and that really is something a young officer should experience.

You know, we in the Army, we have to admit, that we're living sometimes a sort of a grindstone cloister existence. We work very hard; indeed, we have our noses to the proverbial grindstone. And we tend to live a somewhat cloistered existence much of our lives. So we have to try to raise, as one of my colleagues once put it, our sights beyond the maximum effective range of a M-16-rifle. Graduate school and other experiences that get us out of our intellectual comfort zone help us do just that.

Heh. While I agree, and emphatically, I sent this response to the SAMS (School of Advanced Military Studies) graduate buddy of mine, Jim C. who sent me this link...

Heh. And those of us who did raise our sights above the proverbial M16 post-and-peep were rewarded exactly how...?

And Jim, who is something of a warfighting intellectual himself (at least the government pays us decent dollars to do this for them... now) responded thusly:

I believe we were shown the door.

Indeed. I agree with LTG Petraeus' responses in the piece. I only hope he (or someone like him in stature) is really working the other side - the officers who sit on the promotion boards. From our era, a not insignificant number of whom don't have combat patches. And I hope he finds a way to institutionalize it so that it lasts beyond this period of combat, though the history of the Army does not offer much hope of that.

One of the reasons I blog, beyond gun pr0n, or "the more kinetic aspects of history" as Matt describes the stuff at the Castle - to be a little ember, casting a small glow in a forgotten corner near the disused lavatory in the third sub-basement. You know the one - the one with the sign that says "Beware of the Leopard!"

Marines Charge Eight in Connection With Haditha Deaths

Let it all settle out in court. Good to see DoD making the connection between the leaders and the led, and that the officers will face a court, too.

By Jim Garamone American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Dec. 21, 2006 - Four Marines have been charged in connection with the deaths of Iraqi civilians in Haditha Nov. 19, 2005, and another four Marines have been charged with failure to properly report and/or investigate the deaths of the Iraqi civilians.

Col. Stewart Navarre, chief of staff of Marine Corps Installations West, announced the charges and specifications during a news conference on Camp Pendleton, Calif., today. All of those charged were members of 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment.

"The Marine Corps takes allegations of wrong-doing by Marines very seriously and is committed to thoroughly investigating such allegations," Navarre said. "The Marine Corps also prides itself on holding its members accountable for their actions.

"We are absolutely committed to holding fair and impartial proceedings in full compliance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice," he said. Navarre said the charges stem from an incident that occurred after an attack on a four-vehicle Marine convoy from the battalion's Kilo Company. The convoy was moving through Haditha when it was ambushed by insurgents employing an improvised explosive device and small arms fire, Navarre said.

"One Marine was killed and two were wounded by the explosion," the colonel said. "Over the next several hours, 24 Iraqi men, women and children died in the vicinity of the IED explosion."

The next day, 2nd Marine Division issued a press release stating that 15 Iraqi civilians were killed in an IED explosion, and Marines and Iraqi Army soldiers killed eight insurgents in a follow-on firefight. "We now know with certainty the press release was incorrect, and that none of the civilians were killed by the IED explosion," Navarre said.

In February, Army Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, commander of Multinational Corps Iraq, initiated an investigation. "This investigation focused on the circumstances of the attack and whether the Marines involved followed the Rules of Engagement and Law of Armed Conflict," Navarre said.

In March, Marine Maj. Gen. Richard Zilmer, commander of coalition forces in Al Anbar province, initiated a Naval Criminal Investigative Service investigation, to determine if there was any criminal responsibility for the deaths of the Iraqi civilians.

Later that month Chiarelli ordered Army Maj. Gen. Eldon Bargewell to conduct another investigation to look at three aspects of the incident: official reporting of the events and follow-on actions by the chain of command; training of Marines in the Rules of Engagement and the Law of Armed Conflict; and whether the command climate in 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, encouraged the disciplined application of the Rules of Engagement and the Law of Armed Conflict.

"In May 2006, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service also began a criminal investigation into the follow-on actions of the chain of command," Navarre said.

Bargewell ended his inquiry June 15, 2006. He concluded that the Marines were adequately trained on the Rules of Engagement and Law of Armed Conflict but that reporting of the incident up the chain of command was inaccurate and untimely. The report went to Chiarelli, Army Gen. George Casey, the commander of Multinational Forces Iraq, and finally to U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Central Command for appropriate action, Navarre said.

Those charged are:

Marine Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich is charged with unpremeditated murder, soliciting another to commit an offense and making a false official statement.

Marine Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz was charged with five counts of murder and one charge of a false official statement.

Marine Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum is charged with murder, negligent homicide and assault.

Marine Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt is charged with three counts of murder.

Marine Lt. Col. Jeffrey R. Chessani, the commander of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, was charged with three counts of violation of a lawful order and dereliction of duty.

Marine Capt. Lucas M. McConnell has been charged with dereliction of duty.

Marine Capt. Randy W. Stone was charged with failure to follow a lawful order and dereliction of duty.

Marine 1st Lt. Andrew A. Grayson is charged with dereliction of duty, making a false official statement and obstructing justice.

Thanksgiving in the Wilderness

Heidi's Thanksgiving, 2006. Via Heidi's Mom.

Click the picture for a larger version.

Motivators.

Heh. Looks like we're gonna get we've been caught by All Things Beautiful in the Weblog Awards voting. She's been creeping up on us all week, with a strong surge last night.

Sigh. Cannon just don't sell like they used to...

It's all Bill's fault for not posting more often. Funny sells!

Secretary Rumsfeld says goodbye.

From email at work yesterday.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 14, 2006 - For these past six years, I have had the opportunity -- and, I should add, the privilege -- to serve with the greatest military the world has ever known.

To all of the men and women in uniform, all across the globe, I wish it were possible for me to meet with each of you personally today so I could look you in the eyes, shake your hands and express my heartfelt gratitude for your service, and to give you some sense of what you have given me -- pride in our mission and an abiding confidence in our country and in those of you who volunteer to risk your lives to defend us all.

As I complete my second tour as secretary of defense, I leave knowing that the true strength of our military lies not in our weapons, but in the hearts of the men and women in uniform, in your patriotism, in your professionalism, and your determination to accomplish the mission.

President Abraham Lincoln once said, and I quote, "Determine that the thing can and shall be done, and then we shall find the way." That remains as true today as it did during President Lincoln's time. I have seen countless examples of this resolve when I have met with those of you serving in this long struggle against violent extremists.

I remember visiting a base near Fallujah, where Marines had been engaged in some of the most intense house-to-house fighting since World War II. It was two days before Christmas. A staff sergeant asked me why there wasn't a way he could extend his tour beyond his unit's service limit in Iraq.

And, I think back to a young man I met at Bethesda naval hospital. He was in the very early stages of his recovery from multiple wounds suffered in Iraq. He looked up at me with a tube in his nose, and he said with force: "If only the American people will give us the time we need, we can do it. We are getting it done."

And a soldier I met in Afghanistan not long ago who said, "I really can't believe we're allowed to do something this important." Well, I feel the same way. I can't believe I have had the chance to be involved in something so important to the safety of the American people and the future of our country.

What you are accomplishing is not simply important -- it is historic.

When the cause of human freedom required men and women to stand on the front lines in its defense, you stepped forward to liberate more than 50 million citizens in Afghanistan and Iraq.

You captured or killed tens of thousands of extremists -- taking the fight to where they live, rather than waiting for the extremists to attack us again where our families live; and you helped alleviate the conditions that foster extremism in places like the Horn of Africa, the Philippines and elsewhere so that your children and grandchildren will not have to face the challenges that we face today.

This month has two important anniversaries -- the free elections of the Iraqi national assembly and the seating of the very first democratically elected president in Afghanistan's long history. We all remember the images of Iraqis proudly raising their purple fingers in the air after voting in their first free elections and the images of the Afghan girls singing with joy as their new president took the oath of office. Those were historic chapters in the saga of human freedom, and you made them possible.

The long struggle we are in is complex; it's unfamiliar; and it's still little understood, leading some to believe that there is no need to go on.

The enemy is counting on us to falter and to fail. You are the ones who live the successes and who endure the setbacks of this struggle, who find your daily missions a personal test of will. And you are the ones who, above all, know that the cause of freedom is well worth the price.

In 10 or 20 years, when you are talking to your children or to your grandchildren, you will look back on your service and at what you have accomplished with a great sense of pride. You will know that you were part of a truly proud history. Indeed, you were the makers of that proud history and an inspiration to the generations that followed.

It has been the highest honor of my life to serve with you -- the men and women of the U.S. armed forces. You define the American spirit. You have helped millions triumph over tyranny, during this time of great consequence.

You have my eternal respect, and you will remain in my thoughts and prayers always. May God bless you and your families, and may God continue to bless our wonderful country.

Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense

Here's hoping you live long enough, Mr. Secretary, to see how it all turns out.