The Observation Post
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Assassination and Bin Laden
While perusing Military.com I came across an editorial by Oliver North regarding President Clinton's exchange with Chris Wallace on FOX News. It seems LtCol North was a bit put off by President Clinton's proclamation:
LtCol North seems to believe that President Clinton's outburst constitutes an admission of a crime - that of sanctioning the assassination of Usama Bin Laden. He points out the reaction to Rev. Pat Robertson's call for the assassination of Hugo Chavez, and asks why there was not a similar backlash against Pres. Clinton's statement.
With all due respect, come off it. Where was the outrage when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in a deliberately targeted operation? Was no one outraged because AMZ was an enemy combatant who targeted American troops and interests? What is the difference between that and a Presidential finding authorizing the CIA to kill Bin Laden? I'd be real interested to hear the difference between the targeted killing of AMZ and authorizing the CIA to kill UBL. On the other hand, while Hugo Chavez may not be the friendliest man when it comes to our interests in Latin America, you'd be hard pressed to justify calling him an enemy combatant. That's why Robertson's statement was immediately attacked, not necessarily because of partisanship, as LtCol North seems to want you to believe.
Personally, I believed both then and now that Usama Bin Laden should be hunted and killed by any means possible. I fully expect that the Bush Administration will sanction killing him if we locate him in the near future, and I will lose absolutely no sleep over it. I suspect that neither will LtCol North. Frankly, I think his article smacks of an attempt to attack President Clinton along partisan lines, rather than legal or ethical ones. And the reference to Rambo V? Come on, sir, isn't that a bit melodramatic?
Before you think that I am squarely behind President Clinton on this, let me elaborate on my views. I do not think that President Clinton tried as hard as he would like us to believe. Both the 9/11 Report and the excellent book Ghost Wars by Steve Coll indicate that President Clinton beat around the bush about killing Usama Bin Laden; leaving the CIA and many of his advisors unclear on what measures they were authorized to take. There seemed to be very much a sense that if the attempt did not go perfectly that the CIA would be left to take the blame. I don't know much, but one thing I've learned as a leader is that if you want to authorize your subordinates to take decisive action, you have to be prepared to accept responsibility if they fail.
The 9/11 Report makes it pretty clear that neither administration did enough about UBL before September 11th. So how about we dispense with the partisan bickering and focus on the business at hand?
Either way, your Marines and soldiers on the "bleeding edge" (note to Mr. Morris: hope you don't mind, but I really liked that phrase) will continue to suit up and do just that. But it would be nice if we heard a little more of that "bipartisan" spirit that used to be vogue, and a little less partisan bickering. ¶ Thursday, September 28, 2006 3 comments
While perusing Military.com I came across an editorial by Oliver North regarding President Clinton's exchange with Chris Wallace on FOX News. It seems LtCol North was a bit put off by President Clinton's proclamation:
“I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since.” -- William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, 24 September 2006
LtCol North seems to believe that President Clinton's outburst constitutes an admission of a crime - that of sanctioning the assassination of Usama Bin Laden. He points out the reaction to Rev. Pat Robertson's call for the assassination of Hugo Chavez, and asks why there was not a similar backlash against Pres. Clinton's statement.
The silence has been deafening from the barons of bombast and political potentates who went nuts last year when Rev. Pat Robertson suggested that Venezuela 's tin-horn dictator Hugo Chavez should be “eliminated.” Then, there were calls for an investigation of Dr. Robertson. Not so for Bill Clinton.
With all due respect, come off it. Where was the outrage when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in a deliberately targeted operation? Was no one outraged because AMZ was an enemy combatant who targeted American troops and interests? What is the difference between that and a Presidential finding authorizing the CIA to kill Bin Laden? I'd be real interested to hear the difference between the targeted killing of AMZ and authorizing the CIA to kill UBL. On the other hand, while Hugo Chavez may not be the friendliest man when it comes to our interests in Latin America, you'd be hard pressed to justify calling him an enemy combatant. That's why Robertson's statement was immediately attacked, not necessarily because of partisanship, as LtCol North seems to want you to believe.
The tape of a former President, arrogantly proclaiming on international television that he personally authorized the killing of a foreign foe may be great stuff for the screenplay of “Rambo V” -- but it's specifically forbidden by U.S. and international law.
Personally, I believed both then and now that Usama Bin Laden should be hunted and killed by any means possible. I fully expect that the Bush Administration will sanction killing him if we locate him in the near future, and I will lose absolutely no sleep over it. I suspect that neither will LtCol North. Frankly, I think his article smacks of an attempt to attack President Clinton along partisan lines, rather than legal or ethical ones. And the reference to Rambo V? Come on, sir, isn't that a bit melodramatic?
Before you think that I am squarely behind President Clinton on this, let me elaborate on my views. I do not think that President Clinton tried as hard as he would like us to believe. Both the 9/11 Report and the excellent book Ghost Wars by Steve Coll indicate that President Clinton beat around the bush about killing Usama Bin Laden; leaving the CIA and many of his advisors unclear on what measures they were authorized to take. There seemed to be very much a sense that if the attempt did not go perfectly that the CIA would be left to take the blame. I don't know much, but one thing I've learned as a leader is that if you want to authorize your subordinates to take decisive action, you have to be prepared to accept responsibility if they fail.
The 9/11 Report makes it pretty clear that neither administration did enough about UBL before September 11th. So how about we dispense with the partisan bickering and focus on the business at hand?
Either way, your Marines and soldiers on the "bleeding edge" (note to Mr. Morris: hope you don't mind, but I really liked that phrase) will continue to suit up and do just that. But it would be nice if we heard a little more of that "bipartisan" spirit that used to be vogue, and a little less partisan bickering. ¶ Thursday, September 28, 2006 3 comments
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Shift Fire
OK, since this blog has outlived its original purpose, I've been faced with a choice to retire it until next deployment, or keep it going and shift focus. I've decided to go with the latter and add commentary on current events and various military-related topics as I get the opportunity. In addition, I will be posting on another related blog, OP-FOR. I'm currently working on a piece about my personal observations following the deployment, and how I think the war is progressing based on the small piece that I experienced in Jazirah. ¶ Saturday, September 23, 2006 1 comments
OK, since this blog has outlived its original purpose, I've been faced with a choice to retire it until next deployment, or keep it going and shift focus. I've decided to go with the latter and add commentary on current events and various military-related topics as I get the opportunity. In addition, I will be posting on another related blog, OP-FOR. I'm currently working on a piece about my personal observations following the deployment, and how I think the war is progressing based on the small piece that I experienced in Jazirah. ¶ Saturday, September 23, 2006 1 comments
HOME
I've been a bit behind on posting this, but I make absolutely no apologies - I was spending time with my beautiful girlfriend.
We left Kuwait at about 8:30 Local on the morning of 17 Sept. We made a brief stopover in Amsterdam (where we were segregated from the rest of the concourse by barriers and police with H&K submachineguns) before landing at Cherry Point at 5:00 PM Eastern time. Of course it was another 3 hours or so before we actually made it to the reception area. Once I tracked down my family and finished hugging Steph, I grabbed my bags and we bailed. I almost felt bad for not introducing Steph around, but not really.
More to follow. ¶ Saturday, September 23, 2006 5 comments
I've been a bit behind on posting this, but I make absolutely no apologies - I was spending time with my beautiful girlfriend.
We left Kuwait at about 8:30 Local on the morning of 17 Sept. We made a brief stopover in Amsterdam (where we were segregated from the rest of the concourse by barriers and police with H&K submachineguns) before landing at Cherry Point at 5:00 PM Eastern time. Of course it was another 3 hours or so before we actually made it to the reception area. Once I tracked down my family and finished hugging Steph, I grabbed my bags and we bailed. I almost felt bad for not introducing Steph around, but not really.
More to follow. ¶ Saturday, September 23, 2006 5 comments
Saturday, September 16, 2006
One Step Closer
Brief update: after a week at Al Asad, we arrived in Kuwait early this morning. We should be home within the next 48 hours.
On a sidenote, after a few complaints I decided to remove the background image to make the blog easier to read. ¶ Saturday, September 16, 2006 2 comments
Brief update: after a week at Al Asad, we arrived in Kuwait early this morning. We should be home within the next 48 hours.
On a sidenote, after a few complaints I decided to remove the background image to make the blog easier to read. ¶ Saturday, September 16, 2006 2 comments
Friday, September 08, 2006
Homeward Bound
We've made the first step of our trip home. I left the OK Corral this morning to head back to Camp Habbaniyah. I'll post a few more short updates as we keep making our way back to North Carolina.
¶ Friday, September 08, 2006 5 comments
We've made the first step of our trip home. I left the OK Corral this morning to head back to Camp Habbaniyah. I'll post a few more short updates as we keep making our way back to North Carolina.
¶ Friday, September 08, 2006 5 comments
Monday, September 04, 2006
Rest In Peace
One of our interpreters, Tom (not his real name, obviously) didn't return from leave last week. It wasn't the first time he had been late, so no one thought too much of it at first. However, his family reported that he left his house in Baghdad on time, so we began to get concerned. Two days ago we confirmed that his family located his body, he was killed by insurgents while trying to return to the COP.
Tom carrying a M249 ParaSAW on patrol near the Euphrates River
On the face of it, Americans might think that it shows a lack of commitment on the part of the Iraqi interpreters and jundi to take 10-15 days of leave every month. Most of us go without seeing our families for 6-7 months, so you would think that the Iraqis could go without taking a "vacation" every month.
Posing on top of an Amphibious Assault Vehicle from a platoon that wandered into our COP
A little digging would reveal the ignorance of that assumption, however. For one thing, Iraq does not have a working bank system, so the soldiers have no way to get money to their families without physically carrying a wad of cash home.
Me posing with Tom in front of the same AAV
Additionally, one of the ironies of this war, from the Iraqi perspective, is that the terps and soldiers are frequently in more danger at home than they are here in Jazirah. Many of them are from Baghdad, and have to conceal the fact that they are in the Iraqi army, or else they face kidnapping or murder by criminals or insurgents.
For those who doubt the dedication and commitment of the Iraqis who are fighting alongside of us, never forget that their tours never end, and they have to deal with the dangers of this war not only while fighting with their units, but also when they return home.
To get back to the real subject of this post, Tom was a friend to all of us here, and dedicated to helping the Coalition and the Iraqi Army improve the security of his country. Rest in peace, good friend. ¶ Monday, September 04, 2006 5 comments
One of our interpreters, Tom (not his real name, obviously) didn't return from leave last week. It wasn't the first time he had been late, so no one thought too much of it at first. However, his family reported that he left his house in Baghdad on time, so we began to get concerned. Two days ago we confirmed that his family located his body, he was killed by insurgents while trying to return to the COP.
Tom carrying a M249 ParaSAW on patrol near the Euphrates River
On the face of it, Americans might think that it shows a lack of commitment on the part of the Iraqi interpreters and jundi to take 10-15 days of leave every month. Most of us go without seeing our families for 6-7 months, so you would think that the Iraqis could go without taking a "vacation" every month.
Posing on top of an Amphibious Assault Vehicle from a platoon that wandered into our COP
A little digging would reveal the ignorance of that assumption, however. For one thing, Iraq does not have a working bank system, so the soldiers have no way to get money to their families without physically carrying a wad of cash home.
Me posing with Tom in front of the same AAV
Additionally, one of the ironies of this war, from the Iraqi perspective, is that the terps and soldiers are frequently in more danger at home than they are here in Jazirah. Many of them are from Baghdad, and have to conceal the fact that they are in the Iraqi army, or else they face kidnapping or murder by criminals or insurgents.
For those who doubt the dedication and commitment of the Iraqis who are fighting alongside of us, never forget that their tours never end, and they have to deal with the dangers of this war not only while fighting with their units, but also when they return home.
To get back to the real subject of this post, Tom was a friend to all of us here, and dedicated to helping the Coalition and the Iraqi Army improve the security of his country. Rest in peace, good friend. ¶ Monday, September 04, 2006 5 comments
Sunday, September 03, 2006
Another ANGLICO Blogger
While running a Google search, I stumbled across Mike Chankij's blog. Mike is a team leader with 5th ANGLICO, attached to 2nd ANGLICO for this deployment. His team is working in the Fallujah area. I was originally supposed to be working alongside Mike's team, but my team was shifted to Habbaniyah shortly before I arrived in-country. Anyway, Mike's blog is a pretty interesting read, have a look.
Mike's Blog ¶ Sunday, September 03, 2006 1 comments
While running a Google search, I stumbled across Mike Chankij's blog. Mike is a team leader with 5th ANGLICO, attached to 2nd ANGLICO for this deployment. His team is working in the Fallujah area. I was originally supposed to be working alongside Mike's team, but my team was shifted to Habbaniyah shortly before I arrived in-country. Anyway, Mike's blog is a pretty interesting read, have a look.
Mike's Blog ¶ Sunday, September 03, 2006 1 comments
