Dispatches 
CBS Video of MEDEVAC Issue
CBS Video of MEDEVAC Issue
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
20 January 2012
What do you think of Lieutenant General John F. Campbell's remarks in this video?
Please click to view.
Reader support is crucial to this mission. Weekly or monthly recurring ‘subscription’ based support is the best, though all are greatly appreciated. Recurring and one-time donations are available through PayPal or Authorize.net.
| Recurring Paypal Support | One Time Paypal Support | For recurring or one-time donations through Authorize.net | ||
 |
||||
|
(Recurring subscriptions |
To send a check or money order:
Michael Yon
P O Box 5553
Winter Haven, FL 33880-5553
I will continue to do my part in telling the stories that are not being told. Readers must also do their part by keeping the cash flowing. Cash is essential .
Thank you!
Michael
Comments
any truth to that?
Reminds me of the BS going on with the Left in our current election/politics right now: Truth staring you in the face, and yet utter denial!
Work with the USAF CSAR crews and Know that they can handle this. Balony about the weapons and less Wounded can be carried. Look at the real hard facts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbASVr8HAxY
I think it was a good start... it sure makes Campbell look stupid... how much effort would it take to remove the cross? Even if you didn't arm the Helo... at least that giant target would be gone.
They need to get tougher... Ask the harder questions... "Why is the US Army the only ones still putting a red cross on their medevac?" "Why aren't the other military divisions and other countries using the red cross?" "Will Army pilots land and subject themselves to searches when the enemy directs them to? That is part of the Geneva Convention also." "Is having the red cross on the helo worth an 8% loss? What if you could have a 4% loss by removing the cross? Why haven't you done a study with half of the medevac armed and no red cross so you can have real stats instead of a guess-timate?"
Hammer those points home.
More seriously, it is disturbing that these people fail to realize that the more firmly they bunker themselves into an indefensible position, the more damaging it will be when their position is overrun. Don;t they teach things like that in West Point?
Amen to that.
The problem with the news media, especially TV is that they're composed of really stupid people and they go out of their way to miss the point. The lead with the "Golden Hour" comment is a near-miss too. That is a statistical term much-hated by emergency trauma personnel because it implies that, as long as you get touchdown within in hour, then you're good. Arterial bleeding won't last for a "golden hour." The main emphasis needed to have been on time wasted - any amount of time wasted - waiting for an unnecessary "escort." The non-mention Pedro, sitting on the same tarmac, was a major miss.
On the bright side, they are helping to get the ball rolling, however inefficiently.
Why is the Army so often so institutionally stupid when there are so many outstanding soldiers? I don't get it.
Well, Sir, Since you don't think, and allot of us do think, it wouldn't hurt to try now would it.
Having said that, the General simply asserted that taking the targets - I mean crosses - off the birds and arming them wouldn't help. There was no evidence supplied, nor any comparison with other services like the Pedros.
The argument about weight seems bogus: I'll bet most missions only pick up one or two wounded, as in this case.
Stay on 'em, Michael.
-Are the helo's in theatre targeted more because they have a red cross?
-Does the enemy target them because they are assumed to be unarmed?
-Does the enemy assume unmarked helo's are armed?
-Does the enemy shoot at all helo's indiscriminatel y?
-Are armed escorts required to end an offensive mission immediately in order to attend to medevacs? What are the priorities?
-How many medevacs are in theatre?
-How many escorts are available at any given time for duty? Is that number classified?
-If the enemy is more reluctant to fire on unmarked helos of any type then why would a helo carry a red cross?
-Are single helos dispatched normally?
-Does the type of injury, say in this case a mine injury, change the vectored response from say a firefight injury?
Whenever we have an ambulance response we send an engine or two to guard the approaches to our scene and furnish more assistance.
How do you do that with a forest fire raging at the other end of town? Gotta love civilians sitting in armchairs!
Apparently, once you pass O-8, you have become a politician. If you ever were a soldier, that's gone now.
In fact, they do call it the golden hour for nothing. "Golden Hour" is a statistical term created initially by insurance companies and jumped upon by emergency service equipment vendors. The Army has unfortunately adopted it as a meaningless performance standard which, as proven by this particular case, costs lives. Each trauma is unique. An adequate response to mild cerebral edema is completely different from an adequate response time to multiple amputation. As Rapidly As Possible needs to be the standard. "Golden Hour" needs to be banned as a term of obfuscation.
Instead, this adminstration cares more about giving people pizza money each month via a temporary holiday in the payroll tax.
It's all about priorities. This soldier's death was preventable.
I am sick of politicians and bureaucrats in the armed services. They need to be retired in the coming cutbacks and replaced with warriors, plain, pure warriors, who are commonsense veterans of the past ten years of conflict.
I would say that this general is a pathetic excuse for a soldier, except that he does not deserve to be called a soldier.
A cubicle slimeball?
Disgusting.
I find it next to impossible now hard to understand how responsible people find it so easy to brazen distort reality as much as they do. Still its not them doing the dying, if it were perhaps the attitudes would be different.
Brainstorming: Why not design a helicopter with the hearty design traits of the A-10 Warthog? Expensive? Challenging? The US has always valued the lives of our men and women who serve, it's worth the time, trouble and expense. Imagine the affect of a chopped designed specifically for armored medevac and what it might be capable of doing!
Problem is, the Army doesn't want to admit it's made a bad choice, so it's sticking with a failed policy.
C. banks,
The Brass cant think that far out of the box...
If the President were aware of this important detail - he would change things. As an attorney, he will want to review the law on this subject. The President cannot be aware of everything going on in his administration - the span of control is too great.
But, his generals should know that the only satisfactory percent of success is 100%. To me, it is ridiculous that there is no uniformity amongst the Services. That is why the JCS letter is so disappointing; there is zero concern that there is a difference amongst the Services, much less fellow NATO allies. The Army is saying, we are in--charge here and this is our mission. We will call upon other Service or country assets when we think we need them!
The fact is that the Chairman, JCS and the Commander,ISAF should be concerned that there is no uniformity among the Services. The Air Force SOP is what we should be following. Because their underlying mission is pilot SAR, they are prepared to fight their way in and fight their way out to retrieve a downed air crew. This philosophy reduces the number of aircraft going on a mission. I assume that the Air Force flies in pairs; but there are no other rotary wing aircraft required.That saves money! Doesn't any of this appeal to the brass?
The other aspect is what does it mean to be on strip alert. Obvious runs to their aircraft the moment they get fragged. With todays electronics, they can punch in the coordinates as they take off. They appear to figure-out their flight path on the run. Well, after a short time, they know their AO
Could it be that the Army's problem be that it is doctors and JAG officers who have made this inappropriate decision? Certainly, this protocol isn't satisfactory to Army pilots.
Those soldiers are fighting against people who have never heard of the Geneva Convention and if they had heard of it would think it foolish. They have never heard of the Red Cross. The "cross" is a hated symbol to them.
Wake up Army Brass.
Mr. Yon I thank you for what you are doing.
I agree with those who have said that this general has become a politician. We know the Taliban will not respect the red cross, so take it off and arm the MEDEVAC helos. When our enemy fights with no holds barred, we must meet them on their terms.
Someone throw the BS flag on the General. If the AF Pedros and Marine medevacs can come in armed, so can the Army. Having spent time in an Army medevac unit in the 70's, with pilots who wouldn't fly into a hot LZ w/o an armed escort because they'd had their butts shot off in 'Nam, I think it's nothing short of dereliction of duty to leave things like they've been for decades. Arm 'em up, and let the medics kick some ass while saving lives.
Ric,
That would make too much common sense.
A place to start is to quantify the experiences of USAF and Marine missions of similar type. How often, for instance, have USAF crews come under fire and how often have them had to respond with covering fire? How often were such counter-fire incidents deemed essential to the survival of the mission? How many USAF and USMC aircrews and their commanders would be willing to de-arm and paint red crosses on their aircraft? Why? Why not?
How do we quantify the impact of an enemy whose values do NOT include a certain code of honor concerning wounded combatants? The do not recognize or respect a Geneva Convention rules.
Michael, I've been following your blogs since 05. Keep taking the fight to'em Brother because you've opened up a lot of eyes with this one and a lot of the big-wigs are starting to get nervous. Hmm, must be getting close to election time. Time for a CHANGE!
There is only ONE reason the Army still puts Red Crosses on MEDEVAC helicopters: choppers are in short supply in the Middle East, and birds with Red Crosses on them are the ONLY ones that cannot be reallocated. The Army cannot even figure out how to rewrite it's own rulebook on this one, and Chazray Clark died because of this outdated and dangerous policy. Additionally, our enemies are given explicit instructions to shoot at anything with a Red Cross on it. The Army is the ONLY branch of any military in the Middle East still putting crosses on their helos, thus keeping them unarmed and defenseless. This goes far beyond whether or not you believe we should be in the Middle East- this is our military being so FUBAR that it's own rules are killing our soldiers. Write your congressmen and demand a 21st Century policy. We owe it to all the Chazray Clarks serving our country.
But Mrs Clark is totally correct that the failure to provide timely MedEvac in this case is inexcusable; and LTG Campbell seems unconcerned over the failure of his system to execute properly. I hope those two sound bites weren't indicative of the entire interview. If they need more or dedicated escorts, get them. If they can't organize that, a couple door-mounted M60s beats hell out of nothing.
I'm going to finally get off my ass and bitch at my congressman and Senators.
I can't believe this...
I believe the Pedros fly in pairs, not alone. It's still frightening that they have to risk their lives-as do the troops on the ground.
1. If other services are using armed, unmarked helicopters, there must be at least a reasonable case to be made for the Army considering that option. If the Army policy is the 'best', are they pushing for the other branches to change theirs?
2. The argument that armed helicopters can't carry as many wounded implies that MONETARY costs are the consideration - how valid is that compared with the cost in LOST LIVES? And, that argument needs to be weighed against how many flights carry three or four wounded, vs one or two? And, if the current policy requires 2 aircraft for some extractions, wouldn't that be offset by a mission that required only 1 armed aircraft.
Better yet, move the Dustoff assets over to the Airforce or Marines and add them to cover the Army's needs - with armaments and without Red Cross aimpoints!
Many thanks, Michael. God bless you.
So they don't want to send two more men. WTF does it have to do with adding two M240's or even .50 cal's ? Preferably the M240's won't be .24 cal. and will be .30 cal.... a mini gun would be better yet and they scare the hell of the POS's . There is no way in hell this wouldn't cut the air time down. I think the Army is just too lazy to paint over the the crosses. They should make the General paint them.
If the Army paints over the Red Crosses, the helicopters can be easily reallocated. They need to ensure that won't happen, paint the damn target over, arm the birds, and save our guys. PERIOD.
The thinking was that a single unarmed helicopter would be in and out before the enemy noticed it -- a second unarmed aircraft would be going against alerted enemies who had time to set up with AA guns and/or small arms. I think it also probably had something to do with limited helicopters being available. They flew extremely aggressively when there were no casualties aboard, much more so than any of the transport blackhawks -- slashing diagonally up and down around electrical wires, towers, etc.
They also had just gone through a bunch of crap to be issued M4s in addition to the M9s; in 2003 and early 2004, the aircrew only had 9mm pistols to defend themselves on the ground, which was kind of absurd.
I remember on a flight one of the medics asked the pilot if he could test-fire his M4 over the empty desert. The PIC denied this due to concerns about brass and also law of armed conflict.
"This partial e-mail passed along by Willaim G. Howard [william.gerald.howard
"On a side note, my hat goes off to all MEDEVAC personnel. Here in the Baghdad AO, all missions for all aircraft are minimum of two ships. MEDEVAC are the only ones who fly single ship. I have personally witnessed MEDEVAC landing in areas where the battle is still ongoing and transported the wounded out of the area. Our MEDEVAC guys and gals have taken rounds through their aircraft and some of these guys and gals have been hit by small arms, IEDs, VBIEDs and shrapnel. I’ve seen them land where no-one else would and where no-one else DOES. As an Attack guy, I know I have big ones, but theirs are much bigger and I SALUTE them! I will protect them to the utmost of my ability, because of what they do and I know that they will be there for me if I ever need them.
Hope this helps in this discussion. And to all past, present and future MEDEVAC personnel, THANK YOU!"
V/R
CW4 Jerry W. Frye
Battalion Safety Officer
1-3 Attack/Reconnaissance Battalion
Camp Taji, Iraq
Jerry.Frye
http://www.army.mil/article/72250/Army_statement_on_MEDEVAC_issue/
I hope Michael leaves this up, but if not, so be it.
Valerie, did you notice that this was a STATEMENT from the Army. More specifically, from Public Affairs. Do you really think PUBLIC AFFAIRS ecrees the final word on ANYTHING? The most important thing I read in the article was the paragraph that corroborates my belief that the Red Cross is used to make sure the helicopters aren't reallocated for other missions.
And as for your teaser comment about censorship, I've never seen a more impartial moderator in any forum than M. Yon. Stick with the subject and skip the attacks.
The Army doesn't have final word because the Army doesn't own those helicopters. They belong to the people of the USA. Further, the letter you posted is so full of false information and outright deceptions that the authors should be ashamed.
Michael Yon
I notice in the video that he didn't address this instance, just generalities. Typical flag to politician conversion apparently.
I would like to encourage every single person that regularly posts on Michael's website to comment on the CBS story. Currently, the only people talking on there are the ignorant citizens of this country. Some of them mean well, but only a couple of them have any idea what they are talking about. (there were even a couple of people blaming the dustoff pilots which is so far off it makes me sick)
This situation is serious.
The general is flat out wrong. 100% wrong.
I completely understand that war is hell. I have seen it with my own eyes. I understand that the nature of some of these injuries is so severe that survival is not possible. However, I have seen enough of these injuries to know that things could have been different if he would have been picked up earlier.
As a MEDIC during Viet Nam, I would have felt a lot better going in to pick up wounded if I knew some one was covering my back,in the same aircraft with me.
guess To-Tall must be spinning in his grave.
To add injury to insult, approx. 70% of the missions I flew were MEDEVAC on MEDEVAC coverage. Meaning we had no gunship escort to the pickup site (one MEDEVAC aircraft covering another MEDEVAC aircraft).
There was more than one occasion that if we would have had mounted M249's or M240's we could have laid suppressive fire and/or engaged the threat. That is my personal and professional opinion. Unfortunately, my opinion doesn't matter.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/thoughts-from-a-dustoff-pilot.htm
RSS feed for comments to this post