The Army ain’t Dumb (It’s Crazy)
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
03 December 2011
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
From World War II, we’ve heard reports that the enemy shot at Red Crosses emblazoned on medical vehicles, tents, and helmets. The Japanese were said to specifically target Red Crosses. The Germans were reported to do it from time to time. American troops in Europe and the Pacific sometimes covered the Red Crosses to avoid being hit.
World War II should have been enough to teach us a lesson. But the Army seemed dumb. There was a repeat in Korea. A retired military man forwarded a link to this Korean War video.
Notice at the 4min57sec mark, our troops are hiding a Red Cross. How many of our people were shot to pieces in WWII and Korea before they started covering the symbols?
Then our people fought in Vietnam. Our Dustoff helicopters sported Red Crosses and were shot down.
Dumb learns from pain. Insane just keeps bashing its head against the wall and expecting different results.
Fast forward past Iraq wherein people kept shooting at our Red Crosses. Today the enemy is doing the same in Afghanistan.
The Marines, Air Force, and British did not and do not sport Red Crosses in Iraq or Afghanistan.
The Army needs intervention.
As we move into 2012, after a decade of war in Afghanistan, the Army continues an insane policy that been insane for about seventy years. The policy has existed long enough to retire and draw Social Security. Dumb policies don’t get smarter with time.
Meanwhile, the Army has redoubled efforts to send unarmed helicopters sporting Red Crosses into battle. In Afghanistan, crosses often are seen as evil symbols.
Today, when you question the Army about the policy, they first try deception. They say they are following Geneva Conventions. This is untrue. Curiously, when the Army says this, they imply that the Air Force, Marines and British are breaking the Geneva Conventions.
The US Army is allowing troops to die on Afghan battlefields. It’s not just Soldiers who suffer. Army helicopters also rescue Marines, Air Force and Navy personnel in Afghanistan. The unarmed helicopters cause serious delays in medical evacuations, while exposing crews to greatly increased dangers.
This policy is wrong.
Caring people are taking action:
10/26/2011
The Honorable Chuck Grassley
135 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON DC 20510
Dear Senator Grassley:
Senator Kyle was recently contacted by a constituent regarding the Army “Dustoff” MEDEVAC helicopters situation in Afghanistan. This constituent request was in response to Michael Yon’s reporting of the need to take the Red Crosses off the Dustoffs and allow personnel on them to be armed in order to protect themselves and our wounded from insurgent attack. [Please see: http://www.michaelyon-online.com/golden-seconds.htm]
On October 21, 2001 Senator Kyle responded to the constituent’s concerns by sending a letter to the Department of the Army. With all due respect to Senator Kyle now is not the time for polite letters from Senators or to try and follow SOPs from the Senate to Departments within our federal government. Now is the time for Senators to demand an immediate response and fix of the situation from the Department of the Army.
As your constituent and as the wife of a Marine who was at the Pentagon on 911 I implore you to support Senator Kyle and to bring together all your colleagues from the Senate in resolving this matter post haste.
Moreover, I encourage you not to listen to the Officer desk jockeys at the DOD who have no knowledge of the situation on the ground in Afghanistan; but instead to directly contact Senior Officers on the ground in Afghanistan, their NCOs and Michael Yon [a very well respected former member of the Army and international photo journalist] to clarify any questions that you may have.
America’s military does not leave its wounded or dead behind and we should not let our wounded die due to DOD bureaucracy and ego.
This is critical situation with a simple fix.
Sincerely,
Jordan Schneider
CC: The Honorable Tom Harkin
Please consider joining our private forum.
Comments
As a concerned American and a Soldiers' Angel, it grieves & infuriates me that our Army is sending these unarmed Red-Crossed helicopters into harm's way..it's as if they are committing them to suicide.
I pray to God that somebody in high places who knows what's REALLY going on, will change this stupid & UNSAFE policy.
I believe in many aspects of the Geneva Convention, but on the other hand, we are dealing with terrorists who have no respect for the rule of law, rules of engagement or decency, WHATSOEVER.
The goal of our Military is to bring back as many live & unharmed Soldiers as they can.....this is accomplishing the exact opposite.
As much as I live & breath and am eternally thankful for what was accomplished on the "original cross", these red ones need to come off and they need to arm-up.
God bless our Troops!!
Elaine
Also I suppose there is no chance that you could inbed with the Marines or Navy Seals.
maybe if you told them that the crosses are "offending the muslims" they may be manipulated in removing the target from the planes. amazed me that the target on the old dragon range was red cross and we had to close the range as medevacs were coming on over us to land at madigan..
Many many years ago somebody in the Army noticed that it cost a lot of money for medical care for severely injured soldiers. That same money could buy more bullets that might keep the other soldiers alive. Thus began the tradition of making rescue vehicles of any sort into targets. This may have happened back even earlier than the American Civil War. I remember seeing pictures of horse drawn field ambulances with crosses painted on them. (The pictures show dusky gray vehicles with white by comparison crosses.) Were they targeted then or were soldiers "gentlemen" in those days? Probably soldiers were told not to target the other side's ambulances because that increases costs for the enemy. Sometime in history this cost benefit analysis got lost and our enemies started using the thoughtfully provided targets. And nobody in our Army noticed who cared to increase the Army's non-productive war costs.
Unfortunately nobody in the Army has really thought through the equation. I know if I were a soldier out in the thick of things I'd be a lot more fearless and determined attacking the enemy if I knew I was most likely to survive if I got hit by most things the enemy could throw at me. That is why the other services maintain their dustoff vehicles' anonymity, I suspect. They see a force multiplier here whereas all the army seems to see is greater costs and fewer bullets.
I think we see here a start of a definitive analysis indicating that the other services have it right, especially when fighting an enemy who views paradise through any killed kafir, wounded or not.
{^_^}
Sadly - and for some, literally unbelievably - this same Michael Moore mentality that sees neocon cabals in every shadowed corner is directly related to why the Army is forced to fly with the Red Crosshairs on its noncombat support vehicles. This mindset does not see war as a struggle with an enemy whom one has determined must be conquered, but an apologetic necessity whose goal is to push in a general direction without too greatly resembling the frowny bits in postmodern college textbooks.
With perhaps a few militias following some halfway honorable local warlords, our enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan are barbarians. It's a testament to the commitment, competence, and good nature of our military that they've managed the successes they've had when so many people in influential positions at home are philosophically opposed to the very concept of barbarism.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/4-02-4/appa.pdf
The Geneva Convention does require vehicles used in the transport of wounded to be marked but that marking may be camoflagued if required by the tactical situation.
False.
The Geneva Conventions make no requirement that would bind our Dustoff helicopters from taking off the crosses and putting on the guns. By implication, the Army is saying that the Air Force, Marines and British all are violation the Geneva Conventions.
The Army is deceiving the public. This is about power and who controls the helicopters. The Red Crosses are a crucifix to ward off change.
Michael
Those combatant militaries -- faced against a non-signatory group (like Muslim insurgents), or against those who do not abide by the Conventions (like Muslim insurgents) -- but who nevertheless behave in the presence of their enemies as though the Conventions apply in that case, are actually doing a disservice to their fellow signatories and to the Conventions themselves. What, after all, is the point of having such agreements if a combatant may routinely violate them while expecting that they will be applied to himself?
The Geneva Conventions (as is often said of the Constitution of the USA) are not a suicide pact.
Jack E. Hammond
The more you learn about the Army, the more you respect it on some levels. On other levels, you learn to mistrust its every breath. It produces and nurtures a great deal of professionalism , and it also produces and nurtures backstabbing, pettiness, and a "me first over country" mentality among some. The best Americans I've ever met have been in the military, but we cannot deny there are some bad actors in big positions.
First SDN reply is spot on. Second none of your articles mention the fight over replacing the M4 carbine. Everyone wants the think replaced. Most want the HK416 which looks and fires like the M4 without the troubles. All SpecOps had them before the Pentagon ordered all not in direct combat to turn them in. Now the US Army is spending over a 100 million testing again. As one US Army general (General Page) in charge of infantry weapon purchases stated in the 1990s: Takes a Day and Forever to get a new weapon to the field. Jack
It was pathetic how the trigger pullers (or in the USN sub force I guess Lever Pullers) got the USN to accept that their was a problem with the impact exploder -- ie the USN said the captains were just missing and not being aggressive enough. A chief petty officer in Hawaii stated give me a torpedo firing tug (ie for testing torpedoes it had one tube on the bow) some of the Mk-14s and a case of Johnny Walker. That Chief got a bunch of brave or dumb sailors to go out with him and they kept firing torpedoes at this cliff till one was a dud and for that case of whiskey they swam out and retrieved the unexploded (which could still explode) torpedo and bring it back and they discovered the pin was made of two soft a material that would bend if the impact angle was to shallow.
Jack E. Hammond
I agree with you on this one, especially after reading the milblog commentary on your helicopter articles. I can only characterize the milbolg response as childish, smugly insider obsessive and contemptuous of others not in the oh so very special in group.
This is extremely dangerous for our Republic. This unfortunate cast of mind is of course best exemplified by the great and good walks-on-water Patreaus who wanted to strip an American preacher of his Constitutional Rights to make his own job easier. Typical D.C. insider careerist thinking - me first, country last.
not in the game. That and the ratio of bureaucratic idiots in the Army is higher than the other services, due to a
deliberately over-strength Officer Corps.
Bring the pain, when it gets bad enough, the Green Machine may change.
Brendan Doran
Vorgon poet hater.
The Vorgon's aren't evil, they just run things.
To my mind, if you arm the dust-offs, they are no longer exclusively employed for transporting wounded, and therefore the Convention no longer applies. I'm sure the professional lawyers could have a field day with this, but it seems fairly simple. With regard to NATO STANAG 2931 in reference to camouflage, that seems to only refer to facilities, and not transport.
It's the Taliban... Don't you see the flaw in your reasoning? It's Muslims who worship death and revile the very idea that they or one of their own could refrain from destroying a vehicle with a cross on it.
Check out this awesome trip - http://www.lionops.com
Looking forward to you visit to California. Be safe and thank you along with all of our Troops you encounter for making our lives safer!
BTV
RSS