https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/08/12/us-keeping-distance-as-afghan-forces-face-taliban-rout/ (https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/08/12/us-keeping-distance-as-afghan-forces-face-taliban-rout/)
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/08/12/about-8000-us-troops-are-deploying-to-secure-evacuations-from-kabul/ (https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/08/12/about-8000-us-troops-are-deploying-to-secure-evacuations-from-kabul/)
It appears freedom will not endure for long in Afghanistan.
Keep it strategic fellas. C:-)
Shocking. :2funny:
I hadn't heard the 8,000 figure, 3,000 was the most used number but I suppose there would be more for support and such. I also heard U.S. airstrikes are being ramped-up considerably but without a base close by, some flights are 8 hours or more. Anybody else heard anything similar?
I have read that US air support has increased for what's left of the Afghan gov't. That said, the whole situation is turning into the departure I think everyone here feared.
U.S. to deploy 5,000 troops to Afghanistan now.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/08/14/statement-by-president-joe-biden-on-afghanistan/ (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/08/14/statement-by-president-joe-biden-on-afghanistan/)
Quote from: Lowenstaat on August 14, 2021, 04:30:42 PM
U.S. to deploy 5,000 troops to Afghanistan now.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/08/14/statement-by-president-joe-biden-on-afghanistan/ (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/08/14/statement-by-president-joe-biden-on-afghanistan/)
Why? It's over.
To evacuate whoever they can.
They don't need 3000 to 8000 troops to cover an evacuation. Looks more like a bumbling attempt to belatedly appear to be Doing Something.
do you want the US to be there or not solops?
when the orange idiot said the US was leaving the right was all for it. now that its happening the right complains.
did any of you think its was going to be a smooth easy transition? LOL @ you if you did. :DD
It's shocking that the Afghan military collapsed and collapsed so quickly. Twenty years of training and equipping and THIS. It appears they are mostly just surrendering. WTF!! I suspect the Afghans will pay a terrible price. It was only 20 years ago when the Taliban ruled over them. So most Afghans living now have a memory of the Taliban. I thought that memory would help motivate them to fight to maintain their own freedom. It's difficult to imagine that the majority of the Afghan people support the Taliban and want to return to Taliban rule. But here we are. Maybe they actually prefer the Taliban? Just shocking to watch this $%it.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 15, 2021, 10:48:01 AM
do you want the US to be there or not solops?
when the orange idiot said the US was leaving the right was all for it. now that its happening the right complains.
did any of you think its was going to be a smooth easy transition? LOL @ you if you did. :DD
We did not close R&P so you could bring this type of shit into the general forums. I already posted a warning in this thread.
Keep this discussion non-political and focused on the strategic aspect. Period.
I can always count on you to disrespect the rules.
We should at least destroy the big airfields like Bagram, smash the runways, etc. You know, have a a B-52 wing flyover for toys we don't want China using. Never miss a good training opportunity!
yes, because destroying infrastructure like that will do wonders for pr and keep the taliban air force on the ground. ::)
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 15, 2021, 11:26:12 AM
Keep this discussion non-political and focused on the strategic aspect. Period.
theres no strategy left to discuss. the US is leaving and after 20 years of support and training the Afgans are collapsing. the taliban are going to take over and thats that.
the idea that you can separate this event from any political fallout is naive to say the least.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 15, 2021, 12:35:34 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 15, 2021, 11:26:12 AM
Keep this discussion non-political and focused on the strategic aspect. Period.
theres no strategy left to discuss. the US is leaving and after 20 years of support and training the Afgans are collapsing. the taliban are going to take over and thats that.
the idea that you can separate this event from any political fallout is naive to say the least.
The idea that you can make an intelligent comment without referring to the "orange idiot" was naive to say the least.
yawn..... keep it strategic JH.
oh right, you take everything personally. :idiot2:
Kabul is about to fall.
with any luck all western people and forces will be out as soon as possible and that stinking hole of a country can go back to being irrelevant again.
The Taliban appear to have hired new marketers. They're releasing statements saying how they won't harm anyone as they enter cities. I hope all Westerners that want to get the hell out of there, can...as quickly as they can.
taliban 2.oh-shit
It didn't help that the former Afghan President just up and left for Tajikistan...no peace talks, no transitional government, no government staff or troops at their posts...total and complete collapse. With 1000s of Westerners left in the country. The US embassy is now closed and the flag has come down.
hoping for no Saigon visuals.
but I have good news Gus.
the wife found a brand new 13 episode season of Animaniacs on Hulu.
so we can at least laugh while the world burns. :2funny:
^I binged all 13 of those last night >:(
Impossible not to compare this to Saigon, I think. But I have also noticed an absence of video or digital pics coming out.
Not sure if it's because of the speed of events on the ground or if there is a blackout, or both.
Reporters are saying that the entire city of Kabul collectively shit itself this morning as the first Taliban entered and the panic has swelled.
I think the taliban will try to leave US forces alone. they know we dont give a shit about their country and they also know that killing Americans tend to galvanize us when it comes to killing them.
^Yeah it would put everything the Taliban are trying to do in jeopardy by engaging US troops.
More good news! Moscow is trying to convene an emergency UN Security Council meeting to address the 'Afghan problem.'
Soviet salvation!
3000 more combat troops with air support are not a thing the talis are going to lean into.
and I couldnt ask for more if it does indeed become a russian problem.
Quote from: Gusington on August 15, 2021, 01:23:46 PM
^Yeah it would put everything the Taliban are trying to do in jeopardy by engaging US troops.
More good news! Moscow is trying to convene an emergency UN Security Council meeting to address the 'Afghan problem.'
Soviet salvation!
Seems like I remember them (Soviets/Russians) already having their shot at Afghanistan. Turned out as well for them as for USA...
all things considered it turned out far better for us.
If anyone's interested in the Soviet-Afghan War from 79-89, read 'Afghantsy' by Roderic Braithwaite. I finished it a couple of weeks ago and its a great book.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094716/
^Never heard of that. Is it good?
would I link it if I thought it sucked? :bd:
Who can tell with you!
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 15, 2021, 01:05:13 PM
hoping for no Saigon visuals.
here you go
now
(https://i.ibb.co/zPjM7mh/E80tld-MWQAI2-X4-J.jpg)
and then
(https://i.ibb.co/kSFH0Bh/E80tld-LXo-AAVg-TG.jpg)
at least the Chinook got some upgrades :-\
Quote from: Gusington on August 15, 2021, 05:08:07 PM
If anyone's interested in the Soviet-Afghan War from 79-89, read 'Afghantsy' by Roderic Braithwaite. I finished it a couple of weeks ago and its a great book.
i still have this
https://www.battlefront.com/soviet-afghan-war/cm-afghanistan/
(when Germany deployed to Stan i once tried to mod-in some vehicles from the German Modul of CM SF but with mixed success and not the tenacity to bring it to an public presentable end ...not to speek about legal issues in the wake )
strategic
lesson learned
We can't win a heart and minds war if the society who we want to get Westernized nation building
actually wants to live in a medieval tribal structure state, ruled by local lords and their council of elderly.
Well, beside a small group of interllectuals in the big cities pampered by oxymoron NGOs and media,
who all have their own agenda and don't want to see or report the unwanted truth: They just dont want LGBTQ+ rights, only prosperity.
Nation building only works if there was a real nation before (like Japan or Germany) and you have to rebuild the nation up from a still smoldering ground, actually from the Ground Zero of a Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
You have to break the will to fight and to let go of its former beloved ideology of each and every individual in country, or lose.
And you have to break a ton of eggs to get that omlett.
This war, like Vietnam, or any hot war after WW2 was lost at the homefront. When a sizable chunk of the western population (blown out of proportion by left media on top) mourns the loss of one of a Taliban lieutenants wifes and his flock of toddlers (unfortunately caught in the blast of a Hellfire from MQ9 to take him out of the game), more then the loss of one of our own boys trapped in an ambush days before, and made possible by "friendly villagers in the daylight", reporting in the very position to enemy elements when you turn your back on them for a minute in the night, new dug well and gift of Hilux to the chief or not
if the homefront, steered up by (social)media had the same attitude in the 1940ies like nowadays , you all would speak Japanese now , bow to the actual Tenno , and celebrate Pearl Harbor as the liberation of Hawaii from the bata kusai yankees
... its to sad :(
Quote from: MikeGER on August 16, 2021, 03:01:07 AM
at least the Chinook got some upgrades :-\
It wasn't a ch-47 chinook in Vietnam. It was a ch-46 sea knight.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 16, 2021, 06:57:08 AM
It wasn't a ch-47 chinook in Vietnam. It was a ch-46 sea knight.
my fault, :-[
...isn't at least the CH-47 not a kind of offspring for the US Army of the US Navy CH-46 design ;-)
Quote from: MikeGER on August 16, 2021, 04:52:31 AM
We can't win a heart and minds war if the society who we want to get Westernized nation building
actually wants to live in a medieval tribal structure state, ruled by local lords and their council of elderly.
Well, beside a small group of interllectuals in the big cities pampered by oxymoron NGOs and media,
who all have their own agenda and don't want to see or report the unwanted truth: They just dont want LGBTQ+ rights, only prosperity.
I disagree. The society and the women want to have a free and modern society. The problem i see is that the afghan army was almost non-existant (many on the payroll but not on the field) and the ones in the army were mostly there for the money. The logistics also fell apart (no supply in food, amunition nor repair). The Taliban almost did not have to fight to win. You need a federal system with a federal type of army for Afghanistan with federaly supply and logistics for the army. It was just to easy for the Taliban.
Also, there are 4 majors ethnic groups in the country. The Talibans come mostly from one group, the Pashtuns (the vast majority of them live in Pakistan).
Quote from: MikeGER on August 16, 2021, 04:52:31 AM
if the homefront, steered up by (social)media had the same attitude in the 1940ies like nowadays , you all would speak Japanese now , bow to the actual Tenno , and celebrate Pearl Harbor as the liberation of Hawaii from the bata kusai yankees
The Allies could have stayed 50 more years in Afghanistan and still fail i you don't have the right strategy. The country wouldn't have fallen apart in 10 days after 20 years of build up if things had been done correctly (that and a huge amount of corruption in the country).
Quote from: MikeGER on August 16, 2021, 07:21:45 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 16, 2021, 06:57:08 AM
It wasn't a ch-47 chinook in Vietnam. It was a ch-46 sea knight.
my fault, :-[
...isn't at least the CH-47 not a kind of offspring for the US Army of the US Navy CH-46 design ;-)
Well, I don't know the development history of the two aircraft, but they were both certainly designed by Vertol and manufactured by Boeing, so they definitely share the same DNA. :crazy2:
The new video and still shot of the US plane taking off from Kabul airport as 100s of Afghans run after it is heartbreaking. That said, as much as it sucks, I don't think there is anything else we could do there, after 20 years. Maybe our exit could have been handled differently, I don't know...but we can't and should not stay there forever.
Quote from: Gusington on August 16, 2021, 09:20:36 AM
The new video and still shot of the US plane taking off from Kabul airport as 100s of Afghans run after it is heartbreaking. That said, as much as it sucks, I don't think there is anything else we could do there, after 20 years. Maybe our exit could have been handled differently, I don't know...but we can't and should not stay there forever.
I don't think anyone disagrees with this point. In fact, many will say we never should have been there in the first place. Once Al Qaeda and Bin Laden fled into Pakistan, some could argue the mission changed and there was no need to remain in Afghanistan...certainly, it could be argued, there was no basis to change the mission to one of nation building.
It is unclear to me how we could not have been aware that the Afghan National Army would collapse with such rapidity. Our leadership on the ground over there who were responsible for assessing this were either (i) incompetent; (ii) untruthful to the suits; or (iii) gave an honest assessment and the suits did not care. Either way, it is a major foreign policy disaster that will have far reaching repercussions for decades into the future. Just think about all the US military technology that is now in the hands of the Taliban.
Meanwhile, the human aspect of the situation over there is heartbreaking, and it is insulting to hear anyone suggest that "we don't care" about what happens there or to the people who we have left behind.
In any event, the pull-out was handled incompetently, there is no way around that. I'd like to think there will be lessons learned, about not only the withdrawal, but our COIN strategy and overall operational experience there...but I'm sure this situation will be repeated elsewhere for a host of reasons.
Now it's China's turn. My prediction is they'll do it right. They will co-opt the Taliban by sending them lots of aid, they care nothing for the rights of the people or women & children. China will grab all the Strategic Materials for themselves, help distribute the Opium crop to further destabilize the West, build a link to the Paks to surround India, their common enemy, and set themselves up as THE Global Policemen/Only true World Power. And use this as a warning to Taiwan and the rest of Asia that there's a new Khan in town, don't piss us off. And demonstrate to the world America's impending twilight as a Great Power.
Unless I'm wrong, no Empire in history has successfully controlled Afghanistan....except for the Mongols. :coolsmiley:
A couple takeways from an interview with Roya Rahmani, the former Afghan ambassador to US:
Quote
...
She said 70% of Afghanistan's population is under 30, meaning that most people spent the majority of their lives with U.S. occupation and don't know what life is like without it.
...
Rahmani feels Afghanistan is heading toward "very bloody civil war that will be very difficult to end. God knows how long it will continue for."
https://www.foxnews.com/world/afghan-ambassador-roya-rahmani-veterans-devastated-taliban-insurgency
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 16, 2021, 09:54:18 AM
It is unclear to me how we could not have been aware that the Afghan National Army would collapse with such rapidity. Our leadership on the ground over there who were responsible for assessing this were either (i) incompetent; (ii) untruthful to the suits; or (iii) gave an honest assessment and the suits did not care. Either way, it is a major foreign policy disaster that will have far reaching repercussions for decades into the future. Just think about all the US military technology that is now in the hands of the Taliban.
Amen.
Think it'll be a cold day in hell before anyone joins any kind of coalition we put together anymore outside of WW3, and even then, they'll be a lot of hesitation to do so.
"Either way, it is a major foreign policy disaster that will have far reaching repercussions for decades into the future."
Definitely.
I understand that the White House was appalled at the videos and pictures of Afghans fleeing Kabul and crowding the evacuation runways because none of them were wearing masks.
Quote from: solops on August 16, 2021, 12:37:48 PM
I understand that the White House was appalled at the videos and pictures of Afghans fleeing Kabul and crowding the evacuation runways because none of them were wearing masks.
Yes. I saw this joke too and laughed, even though there is nothing laughable regarding this situation, but please. This is not the place for it.
Keep the discussion focused and away from political jabs.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 16, 2021, 12:42:53 PM
Quote from: solops on August 16, 2021, 12:37:48 PM
I understand that the White House was appalled at the videos and pictures of Afghans fleeing Kabul and crowding the evacuation runways because none of them were wearing masks.
Yes. I saw this joke too and laughed, even though there is nothing laughable regarding this situation, but please. This is not the place for it.
Keep the discussion focused and away from political jabs.
It's either graveyard humor or tears. I had not seen it elsewhere. And I increasingly believe wrecking the big infrastructure projects we built on the way out is the best way to go, unless we plan on going back. There is no sense in handing those big landing strips over to the Chinese. Slowing them down and costing them resources is what I'd do.
Quote from: solops on August 16, 2021, 01:27:39 PM
It's either graveyard humor or tears. I had not seen it elsewhere. And I increasingly believe wrecking the big infrastructure projects we built on the way out is the best way to go, unless we plan on going back. There is no sense in handing those big landing strips over to the Chinese. Slowing them down and costing them resources is what I'd do.
Personally, I thought the one about the White House welcoming the Taliban into the embassy because they WERE wearing masks, was a bit more funny...because, they actually are wearing masks, so to speak.
As far as slash and burn and wreaking infrastructure, you know that isn't going to happen. Even if there was an intention to do so, it is already too late. In any event, you think China is really going to gain a foothold there? I don't see China having much interest in Afghanistan beyond the fact that the country could create some instability for China's BRI and is wedged in the way of China's efforts to build roads into more lucrative markets to the west/southwest. Otherwise, I don't see China engaging in any long term occupation or engaging in any activity there, at least in the near term, that would represent any substantial credible strategic threat to the US.
I cannot see China moving into Afghanistan as in making it a client state. They have plenty of Muslim minorities they are oppressing already. The last thing they want is the Taliban spreading East. I do think they would prop up the Taliban in return for black ops cooperation and for basing rights. I doubt if they want or need more than that. They certainly would not need large troop formations there. Big airfields in Afghanistan would be of value to China in support of operations and influence spreading throughout the Middle East as well as Africa. Their ability to project directly into those areas now is poor. Afghani airbases would be valuable. Even more interesting is the benefit to China of bases there in their ongoing rivalry with India. Their claims in the Punjab area may become more strident in an effort to get a land route to Afghanistan, however tenuous. The political fallout with India and Pakistan, bitter rivals and nuclear powers, is fascinating. No, I think the whole China-Afghanistan combo is an unknowable powder-keg. This has potential for them vis-a-vis India, Pakistan, Russia and Iran. The Chinese are willing to play the long game. I can see them trolling there for a lot of reasons. And nice, big empty U.S. built airbases can be nothing but good for them, even if they never use them. Everyone else has to honor the threat. And as far as the Taliban goes, China knows they can be bought.
Edit: Credit where due - The Russians left a lot of stuff too, especially at Bagram.
Here's an interesting take on the strategy, tactics, and service attrition of US Army, US Navy, and USAF CAS during the past 20 years in Afghanistan. I found their discussion interesting and helpful and thought some of you might, too.
'Daniel Flores, T.R., "Wombat" Matson, and Gonky join [C.W. Lemoine] to discuss the fall of Afghanistan and the effects of fighting there for two decades on our air power.'
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 16, 2021, 09:54:18 AM
Meanwhile, the human aspect of the situation over there is heartbreaking, and it is insulting to hear anyone suggest that "we don't care" about what happens there or to the people who we have left behind.
its rather difficult to care about people that dont care about themselves. on a certain level of empathy it sucks but ultimately the vast majority of people here in the US have more pressing things to worry about.
QuoteThink it'll be a cold day in hell before anyone joins any kind of coalition we put together anymore outside of WW3, and even then, they'll be a lot of hesitation to do so.
do you mean the NATO allies that left a few years ago? Im really not worried to much about the US putting together coatlitions when faced with a clear and present danger or need.
QuoteIt is unclear to me how we could not have been aware that the Afghan National Army would collapse with such rapidity
I used to see it all the time when bartending in college. mouthy brat is all big and tough with his much bigger friends around. and then they go home and the mouthy brat says the wrong thing to the wrong person and usually runs away. this is the nation state version.
I've been seeing some reports saying that as many as 40,000 US civilians are still in Afghanistan and can't reach the airport as well as upwards of 50,000 Afghanis comprised of those who aided the coalition and their family members. This is starting to bear and chilling resemblance to the British retreat from Kabul in 1842 with Biden in the role of Elphinstone.
links to that?
"Defense officials say they'll save 5,000 a day from Kabul but 'up to 40,000' Americans remain stranded: Taliban fighters close in on airport after taking ALL access points which forces US troops to negotiate with them on who gets in"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9901361/Up-40-000-Americans-stranded-Afghanistan.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9901361/Up-40-000-Americans-stranded-Afghanistan.html)
"Bush's Asst. Secretary of State Robert Charles said between 15,000 and 40,000 Americans are stranded.
John Kirby, the Pentagon's spokesman, said on CNN that between 5,000 and 10,000 US citizens are in Kabul alone but Charles said thousands more are further afield in Herat, Kandahar and Jalalabad."
40,000 Americans still stranded in Afghanistan seems like a surprisingly high number to me. I certainly hope the actual number is smaller.
I heard Jen Psaki state at a press conference that there 11,000 people in Afghanistan who "self identify" as American, what ever the hell that means.
Quote
In its budget request for fiscal year 2022, the White House included $3.3 billion for Afghan security forces to be paid out via the Department of Defense's Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.
That money would flow to the Afghan National Army, Afghan National Police, Afghan Air Force and the Afghan Special Security Forces, entities that put up little resistance as the Taliban swept across the country in just a few days.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/afghanistan-withdrawal-biden-more-spending-reconstruction
What Afghan National Army?
What Afghan National Police?
What Afghan Air Force?
What Afghan Special Security Forces?
I don't believe these entities exist anymore. Just more US dollars to flow into the Taliban coffers. Talk about aiding and abetting the enemy :idiot2: >:(
Quote from: steve58 on August 18, 2021, 08:48:12 AM
Quote
In its budget request for fiscal year 2022, the White House included $3.3 billion for Afghan security forces to be paid out via the Department of Defense's Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.
That money would flow to the Afghan National Army, Afghan National Police, Afghan Air Force and the Afghan Special Security Forces, entities that put up little resistance as the Taliban swept across the country in just a few days.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/afghanistan-withdrawal-biden-more-spending-reconstruction
What Afghan National Army?
What Afghan National Police?
What Afghan Air Force?
What Afghan Special Security Forces?
I don't believe these entities exist anymore. Just more US dollars to flow into the Taliban coffers. Talk about aiding and abetting the enemy :idiot2: >:(
I am pretty sure this was in the budget before the campaign of the Talibans to take over the country.
The number of Americans I saw quoted on CNN was ~15,000, which I still thought was high.
Exactly what Steve said. America could've stayed in Afghanistan another 20 years as long as the Money Spigot stayed on. With it gone, the government went as well. The Afghans were never going to support a centralized, federal government with a standing National Army. The place is still predominantly tribal with ethnic and cultural ties being the glue that holds people together there. A Representative Democracy? Please, they have no desire to become that. That doesn't mean they don't care about themselves, or their future.
The Taliban should not celebrate too soon. The country they ruled over back in 2001 is a very different place today. Then almost no one had electricity, now almost the entire country has it as well as the Internet and cell phones. If Biden's statement is accurate, there are only about 75,000 Taliban fighters, and considering Kabul alone has around 5 million people living there, if they can't provide jobs and keep the lights and water on, then it may be the Taliban who collapse next and more quickly than the late Federal Government did. More likely is another long-running Afghan Civil War with the people suffering the most, as always. :hide:
In the news:
This week, the Taliban is encouraging women to return to work and girls to go back to school, where headscarves are being handed out, according to The Associated Press. But a damning photo shows a woman in district Taloqan, Takhar province, lying in a pool of blood as her parents and others crouch around her, a pitcher on the ground nearby. She was shot and killed for going out without a burqa.
So that's where the "Afghan Airforce" went.
Hundreds of Afghan soldiers have fled over the border to Uzbekistan with dozens of US military aircraft and helicopters (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/afghan-service-members-fled-to-uzbekistan-in-dozens-of-us-supplied-planes-helicopters/ar-AANsJgW). Think the Uzbekistanis will give'em (the aircraft) back?
Quote from: Anguille on August 18, 2021, 09:03:17 AM
Quote from: steve58 on August 18, 2021, 08:48:12 AM
Quote
In its budget request for fiscal year 2022, the White House included $3.3 billion for Afghan security forces to be paid out via the Department of Defense's Afghanistan Security Forces Fund.
That money would flow to the Afghan National Army, Afghan National Police, Afghan Air Force and the Afghan Special Security Forces, entities that put up little resistance as the Taliban swept across the country in just a few days.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/afghanistan-withdrawal-biden-more-spending-reconstruction
my understanding is that there is no more money going to afghanistan.
What Afghan National Army?
What Afghan National Police?
What Afghan Air Force?
What Afghan Special Security Forces?
I don't believe these entities exist anymore. Just more US dollars to flow into the Taliban coffers. Talk about aiding and abetting the enemy :idiot2: >:(
I am pretty sure this was in the budget before the campaign of the Talibans to take over the country.
pretty sure the money has been cut off.
Quote from: steve58 on August 18, 2021, 05:04:40 PM
So that's where the "Afghan Airforce" went.
Hundreds of Afghan soldiers have fled over the border to Uzbekistan with dozens of US military aircraft and helicopters (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/afghan-service-members-fled-to-uzbekistan-in-dozens-of-us-supplied-planes-helicopters/ar-AANsJgW). Think the Uzbekistanis will give'em (the aircraft) back?
its almost all russian stuff anyway so theyll probably keep it.
Hard to believe, and a crazy ironic story in the midst of all this, but it looks like the Sea Knight/Chinook in Saigon and Kabul...really is the same machine:
https://warisboring.com/from-saigon-to-kabul-the-tragically-ironic-tale-of-the-little-sea-knight-that-could/?fbclid=IwAR3kQ8Wn8xajuMH27kUT6AtbhFH7UU9qqBjPUG8oMgWY_Txr0YHM1G4EH3M
:o :o :o
I couldn't believe it either!
The opening line is a bit insulting, isn't it? Especially in light of what the Brits, Frenchies, and Germanz are doing to get their people out of this clusterfuck.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on August 20, 2021, 02:56:02 PM
The opening line is a bit insulting, isn't it? Especially in light of what the Brits, Frenchies, and Germanz are doing to get their people out of this clusterfuck.
I assumed they were referring to local allies, like the Afghan president and military, but you're right that it's not particularly well phrased (and clearly written by an American :buck2: )
From the BBC:
The Taliban have stepped up their search for people who worked for NATO forces or the previous Afghan government, a document prepared for the UN has warned. It said the militants have been going door-to-door to find targets and threaten their family members. The hardline Islamist group has tried to reassure Afghans since seizing power promising there would be "no revenge". But there are growing fears of a gap between what they say and what they do.[/i]
Shocking. The Taliban fibbed. Just shocking.
I didn't really read it as insulting. Everyone with any involvement in Afghanistan seems to be sh*tting it right now, except the Taliban. And the whole point of the post, that it's the same damned helicopter, is incredible...outweighing any use of the word 'panic' to me.
Quote from: Gusington on August 20, 2021, 04:04:12 PM
I didn't really read it as insulting. Everyone with any involvement in Afghanistan seems to be sh*tting it right now, except the Taliban. And the whole point of the post, that it's the same damned helicopter, is incredible...outweighing any use of the word 'panic' to me.
It's honestly not that surprising to me considering the age of most aircraft in the USMC fleet. I'm more surprised that someone actually compared tail codes
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 20, 2021, 04:33:32 PM
Quote from: Gusington on August 20, 2021, 04:04:12 PM
I didn't really read it as insulting. Everyone with any involvement in Afghanistan seems to be sh*tting it right now, except the Taliban. And the whole point of the post, that it's the same damned helicopter, is incredible...outweighing any use of the word 'panic' to me.
It's honestly not that surprising to me considering the age of most aircraft in the USMC fleet. I'm more surprised that someone actually compared tail codes
dude its the internet. how can anything surprise you :)
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on August 20, 2021, 02:56:02 PM
The opening line is a bit insulting, isn't it? Especially in light of what the Brits, Frenchies, and Germanz are doing to get their people out of this clusterfuck.
speeking about helicopters...
(https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AANxRIK.img)
Germany deploys two H145M LUH SOF (Light Utility Helicopter – Special Operation Forces) to Kabul airport
(https://i.ibb.co/y5V7cdp/H146M.jpg)
training picture
i had read in a german language article that the USA asked for it because their usually larger helicopters are to big to operate for most of Kabul compounds and inside the city pick-ups
^That last picture is the most German thing I have seen this morning.
Quote from: Gusington on August 21, 2021, 09:00:38 AM
^That last picture is the most German thing I have seen this morning.
The shepherd is especially German.
All jokes aside, what a bloody mess. To anyone that went to Afghanistan or lost anyone, going surely saved someone whether a fellow or an Afghani, or made their lives better at least for a short time.
Love the Flying Dog approach to warfare. Wonder why it's not an, 'Air-dale'? :2funny:
Holy crap I didn't even see the dog!
The dog seems to be really happy about flying!
From Aljazeera:
Taliban fighters massacred nine ethnic Hazara men after taking control of Afghanistan's Ghazni province last month, Amnesty International has said in a new report. According to the Amnesty report, six of the men were shot and three were tortured to death, including one man who was strangled with his scarf and had his arm muscles sliced off. One man, Wahed Qaraman, 45, was taken from his home by Taliban fighters who broke his legs and arms, shot him in the right leg, pulled his hair out, and beat his face with a blunt object, the report said.
From Aljazeera:
A NATO official has said that at least 20 people have died in and around the airport in the past week.
An Afghan security guard has been killed in a firefight between unknown gunmen and Afghan forces at the north gate of Kabul airport, the German military said, as thousands thronged the airport, seeking to flee Taliban rule.
Three more people were injured in the gun battle on Monday morning that has also involved German and US forces, the German military said.
Did anyone seriously entertain the idea that there wouldn't be reprisals the aftermath of a Taliban victory? It doesn't matter at all what their leadership said for PR, or even if they really, really meant it. Rabid followers of any flavor will just go ahead and carry out extreme justice on anybody who appears to be tangentially associated with "the enemy," and nobody's going to hold them accountable because they're fighting for "the good guys" and they just got a little carried away.
In my eyes, it's like taking the fence off a sheep pen and then getting surprised when wolves come in for the slaughter.
Ive still not heard of any American or European people getting killed.
hope it stays that way. :bd:
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 23, 2021, 05:48:29 PM
Ive still not heard of any American or European people getting killed.
hope it stays that way. :bd:
You fishing?
not at all. the taliban seem to be actively trying to not engage or by cause of action be engaged by allied forces.
its the smartest thing they can do.
Quote from: al_infierno on August 23, 2021, 04:47:57 PM
In my eyes, it's like taking the fence off a sheep pen and then getting surprised when wolves come in for the slaughter.
Well the wolves have a core of 60000 (200000 max with supporters) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-58187410 and there are well over 30 million sheep maybe just under 40 million.
The timing of the withdrawal was stupid, it's fighting season, but come on over a trillion dollars (almost all by the US) has been spent on rebuilding the country and building a military. Clearly, the people of Afghanistan aren't willing to fight for their country. There is a resistance under Ahmad Shah Massoud's son but it is one small region. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-58239156
The Chinese Government yesterday apparently announced they would be providing Financial Aid to the Taliban saying they wanted to make a, 'Positive' contribution to the country. Strange Bedfellows indeed.
Maybe the offer of Chinese financial aid is an effort to dissuade the Taliban from causing problems with the Chinese Uighurs Muslims?
From PBS:
At least 1 million Muslim minority Uighurs are held in Chinese government-run detention centers. There are at least 85 known centers in Xinjiang, China, ...
Who in their right minds takes students to Afghanistan right when the US is planning on leaving? (https://www.foxnews.com/us/california-students-parents-stranded-afghanistan) :idiot2: :idiot2: :idiot2:
Quote from: steve58 on August 25, 2021, 03:49:26 PM
Who in their right minds takes students to Afghanistan right when the US is planning on leaving? (https://www.foxnews.com/us/california-students-parents-stranded-afghanistan) :idiot2: :idiot2: :idiot2:
Californians? :2funny:
WTF? Are there really people in the world that are that stupid?? Don't answer. I can kinda sorta understand that the Americans there were trying to visit family, but still...
Damn, when I was in school the only field trips we got was to the local Cattle Breeding Research Station. And then we didn't even get to take part. With the research I mean.
The students in question were visiting their families. It wasn't just a field trip to Afghanistan for shits and grins.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/25/us/san-diego-students-stranded-afghanistan/index.html
Quote from: al_infierno on August 25, 2021, 10:31:49 PM
The students in question were visiting their families. It wasn't just a field trip to Afghanistan for shits and grins.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/25/us/san-diego-students-stranded-afghanistan/index.html
That's ballsy. I won't even visit my mom during SXSW.
Had a co-worker (Afghani & a prior interpreter for Coalition forces) go back and get caught up in this mess; he's on his way back home as we speak, but could have been so, so much worse.
Explosion reported outside Kabul airport.
Quote
According to one US official, there are injuries among Afghans, but there is no information yet on any US casualties.
https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/afghanistan-news-taliban-refugees-08-26-21-intl/h_9b945725b577ab5d934d7db9daa2d835
update: 3 US troops injured, 11 people killed in suicide attack (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/explosion-at-kabul-airport-gate-hours-after-severe-terror-threat-warning-pentagon-confirms).
God help them all.
Reports say this was done by an ISIS offshoot, ISIS-K, K for Khorosan...which also are enemies of the Taliban.
Now hearing 4 US Marines were killed. Pentagon is now saying 12 service members killed >:( >:( 60 killed in 2 bombings, including at least one car bomb.
https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/live-updates-taliban-gain-more-ground-in-afghanistan-as-they-close-in-on-kabul
https://www.wsj.com/articles/afghanistan-kabul-airport-explosion-11629976397
LTC has balls of steel. Semper Fi.
Hopefully someone appreciates the integrity and hires him on if he gets the axe.
Holy crap.
Wow..........an impressive fellow. Let's hope he does not become a casualty to speaking the truth.
I wonder is there any way to send a message of support.
He put a lot on the line. Hopefully his video goes viral and the higher ups join him in asking for accountability.
I just found the video on you tube. So if anyone wants to send a message of support, here is the link. https://youtu.be/Q3Qie2oZKW0
Damn, he's already been relieved.
Quote
Marine Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller was relieved for cause after demanding that senior U.S. leaders hold themselves accountable for actions made during the U.S. military's withdrawal from Afghanistan that led to the deaths of 13 service members.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/marine-afghanistan-senior-leaders-accountability
pretty sure serving officers arent supposed to openly question political leadership.
I also found his "message" to be a bit rambling and something I dont agree with.
I think that the things the US and its allies have done in Afghanistan were good and worthwhile and served a valuable purpose.
I dont think that whats happening now negates any of that. any blame for whats going on can be put mostly on the shoulders of the Afghan army and government. they were given every possible chance and THEY blew it. I also think we can sit here all day long and armchair quarterback whats going on but it was always going to end is some kind of shit show.
this guy lost his focus and should have been fired. its not his job to question the strategic decisions in public, its his job to train people. and if hes training people with this mentality then hes hurting the force as a whole.
I seem to recall lots of people urging military officers to openly question the last Political Leadership we had and certain people thought that was Heroic when they did. Just once I'd like to see the military get on the planes and leave a bunch of State Dept. Bureaucrats and EPA Administrators to hold the line in a F-'ed-Up mission like this one. :clap:
Careful Slash. Let's not turn this into R&P Lite.
I wrote this for my law blog several years ago...
Quote
A heated, emotional and bellicose climate is certainly not new to U.S. politics, but constant connectivity to a never-ending news cycle, combined with new forms of communication technology by way of social media presents new challenges for active duty and reserve service members.
As any Soldier, Airman, Sailor or Marine knows, the Uniform Code of Military Justice ("UCMJ") sets forth various rules and standards of etiquette and decorum when publicly expressing opinions, views and political affiliation and/or ideology. Violations of these rules and standards can result in a court martial proceeding with quite severe penalties, including but not limited to confinement, forfeiture of pay and even dishonorable separation from the service.
In particular, military personnel must be especially careful in how they publicly express their views of various elected and appointed civilian leaders, including but not limited to the President, Vice President, members of Congress and the Secretary of Defense.
Men and women who serve their country in the armed forces do not check their First Amendment rights at the door when they take the Oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. However, service does impose a set of very specific standards that do not otherwise apply when in the civilian world.
If you are presently serving in the U.S. military, reading this article before your next "Tweet" or "Facebook" posting could be the only thing separating you from a promotion, and a bad conduct discharge.
The Law for Commissioned Officers
There are primarily two (2) provisions of the UCMJ that relate to contemptuous statements against leaders, the first, 10 U.S.C. Section 888, Article 88, titled "Contempt Toward Officials" applies only to Commissioned Officers. The second, 10 U.S.C. Section 934, Article 134 is a General Article that will apply to enlisted personnel.
Article 88 provides:
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
The elements of this Article are as follows:
(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;
(2) That the accused used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article;
(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and
(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used. Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element
(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.
Unfortunately, the Manual for Courts-Martial provides only limited guidance in defining what constitutes "contemptuous words". However, Colonel Winthrop, in his Work, Military Law and Precedents, offered some examples, which include, "abusive epithets, denunciatory or contumelious expressions, and intemperate or malevolent comments..." The legislative history is sparse on explanations, as well, but it is clear that "contemptuous words" includes "disrespectful" speech. In addition, the Military Judges' Benchbook suggests that contemptuous means "insulting, rude, disdainful or otherwise disrespectfully attributing to another qualities of meanness disreputableness, or worthlessness."
Records of prior courts-martial reveal that the element of contemptuousness is fairly easily satisfied. For instance, during the Civil War, convictions resulted for referring to President Lincoln as "a loafer," a "thief", a "damned tyrant", and a "damned black republican abolitionist." A conviction was even obtained for the statement, "Jeff Davis was as good a man as Abraham Lincoln." Convictions in subsequent periods continued to run the gambit and convictions were obtained for disrespectful statements accusing Presidents Wilson and Roosevelt during the World Wars of being "socialist" and there are even convictions for disrespectful statements made against President Clinton (use your imagination here) and President Obama.
One recent high profile case involved Marine Corps Sergeant Gary Stein, who was court martialed under Article 134 of the UCMJ (see below). SGT Stein created a Facebook page called the "Armed Forces Tea Party". On his page, SGT Stein called President Obama a "coward" and a "religious and economic enemy of the American people". On another Facebook page, SGT Stein vowed that he would not salute Obama, and he was also selling "Nobama" 2012 bumper stickers. As a result of his conduct, an Administrative Separation Board at Camp Pendleton voted 3-0 to recommend that Stein should be dismissed and given an other-than-honorable discharge for making comments "prejudicial to good order and discipline." Various appeals of the decision were unsuccessful.
In addition to the above, the official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither "Congress" nor "legislature" includes its members individually. "Governor" does not include "lieutenant governor." Significantly, it is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity.
While expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation, or adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion that are not personally contemptuous, are typically not charged as a n offence, giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, will result in an offense with aggravating circumstances, and the truth or falsity of any contemptuous statement is always immaterial.
As noted above, dismissal, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to one (1) year are the possible penalties for a violation of Article 88.
The Law for the Enlisted
Meanwhile, Article 134 provides:
Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special, or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.
This article is peculiarly vague when compared to the vast majority of UCMJ provisions, and although extremely broad, it has survived several attacks on its constitutionality over the years since its inception to military law in 1775. In essence, Article 134 is a "catch-all" for any offenses that are not otherwise covered in any specific article of the UCMJ. Typically, an enlisted member of the armed forces will be charged with a violation of Article 134 for making disrespectful statements against civilian leaders or superiors on the ground that such statements are "disloyal".
In general, any individual subject to the UCMJ, who, at an alleged place and time, makes a statement on or about a particular subject or person, so as to encourage disaffection, disloyalty or both, or to interfere with or impair the loyalty and morale among the members of the armed forces, the civilian population or both, would be violating the Article 134 and shall be punished as deemed fit through a court martial. The statement made by the accused service member is considered an offense, if it is in anyway disloyal to the United States.
The elements of crime are as follows:
(1) The accused person actually made the alleged statement;
(2) The statement was made in public;
(3) The statement was disloyal to the United States;
(4) The statement promotes or encourages troops or the civilian populace to be disloyal, hostile or both towards the United States;
(5) The statement impairs and/or interferes with the morale, the discipline or loyalty towards the United States, of a member or multiple members of the U.S. military; and
(6) The nature of the statement was such that it brings upon discredit to the U.S. military, or disrupts the discipline and good order of the armed forces.
Under Article 134, a disloyal statement is a result of the accused person's conduct, which is prejudicial to the good order and discipline of the armed forces and which brings upon discredit to the armed forces. This means that the accused has acted or behaved in such a way as to distort the armed forces discipline and to harm the reputation of the service in general.
A service member is said to have "made" a statement only if it was spoken, written, published or printed, uttered, issued or put forth for circulation by him or her. The statement is made "public" only when it is made openly in the presence of others, who have the knowledge that the alleged statement was actually made by the accused.
The alleged statement made by the accused must incite disloyalty, where the term disloyalty implies being untrue or unfaithful to the United States as a whole. It is important to note that disloyalty to the armed forces, a government department, or any other organization need not necessarily be disloyalty towards the United States.
Similarly, the accused must have, by making the statement, promoted disaffection, which means disgust, ill will, or a hostile attitude towards the United States.
An individual found guilty of a violation of Article 134 is subject to a maximum punishment of no more than three years in confinement.
CONCLUSION
Commissioned officers and enlisted personnel may each be charged with violations of Articles 88 and 134, respectively, if they have used contemptuous, disrespectful, or disloyal words in content posted online. Servicemen and women who have made derogatory comments against various officials in Facebook posts, in Tweets, in forums and blogs, or any other social media outlet may be charged with violating these punitive articles. In effect, these articles limit the ability of officers and enlisted personnel to criticize certain officials verbally and in writing, both through hard copy and digitally.
Accordingly, when expressing your feelings about the President on the internet, think twice before you click on the "post" button, for sometimes discretion truly is the better part of valor.
Bottom line, I think he lost faith in his leadership and decided he didn't want to be a part of the military anymore. He got the result he expected, and most likely hoped for.
JH-Two unrelated points:
1) IRT Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller having balls of steel. Yes, he does. While I understand that DoD has to remove him, I also appreciate what he did.
2) In an article today, the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) is claiming that military personnel, including retirees are subject to UCMJ Article 88. See https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-active-duty-retired-naval-intelligence-members-told-they-cannot-disrespect-biden-over-afghanistan-debacle
While technically they may have a very slight argument, based on the fact that retired officers are technically receiving retainer, not retirement pay, this seems like a considerable stretch to me. (Full disclosure: I'm a retired USNR). I'm not sure what I think of ONI's analysis. I think it is very weak IRT the retired aspect, and seriously doubt that they would actually try to go after a retired officer. Do you have an opinion on this?
Quote from: Tripoli on August 28, 2021, 07:26:20 AM
JH-Two unrelated points:
1) IRT Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller having balls of steel. Yes, he does. While I understand that DoD has to remove him, I also appreciate what he did.
2) In an article today, the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) is claiming that military personnel, including retirees are subject to UCMJ Article 88. See https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-active-duty-retired-naval-intelligence-members-told-they-cannot-disrespect-biden-over-afghanistan-debacle
While technically they may have a very slight argument, based on the fact that retired officers are technically receiving retainer, not retirement pay, this seems like a considerable stretch to me. (Full disclosure: I'm a retired USNR). I'm not sure what I think of ONI's analysis. I think it is very weak IRT the retired aspect, and seriously doubt that they would actually try to go after a retired officer. Do you have an opinion on this?
Actual prosecutions of retirees is rare, but the threat is very real. Unlike civilian courts, UCMJ jurisdiction is not territorially bound. Instead, jurisdiction is predicated upon an individual's relationship to the military.
Article 2(a)(4) allows for the court-martial of regular component (Army, Navy, Marine, Air Force, Space Force, and Coast Guard) retirees who are entitled to pay, and Article 2(a)(6) allows for the court-martial of retirees who are part of the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve. Moreover, despite their retiree status, these two groups are treated like active-duty members in that they are continuously subject to UCMJ jurisdiction.
Despite many challenges to these provisions, military courts have consistently found that the Constitution allows Congress to extend UCMJ jurisdiction to retirees. For instance, in the 2018 case United States v. Dinger, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) concluded that it was "firmly convinced that those in a retired status remain 'members' of the land and Naval forces who may face court-martial." Though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), the highest military appellate court, did not squarely address the jurisdictional question, it ultimately affirmed the CCA's decision, and the Supreme Court denied Dinger's petition for certiorari.
However, in the first break of this long standing precedent, check out LARRABEE v. BRAITHWAITE, et al, No. 1:2019cv00654 - Document 28 (D.D.C. 2020). The government has appealed this decision, but the lower court rejected the government's contention that Fleet Marine Corps Reservists' receipt of retainer pay and the ability of the Secretary of the Navy to recall them to active duty at any time necessitated jurisdiction. Instead, the court ruled that pay received by retirees constituted deferred pay from past services, not retainer pay. And it found that Fleet Marine Corps Reservists were "much less likely to be recalled to active-duty service than [r]eservists," rendering Congress's distinction between Fleet Marine Corps Reservists and inactive reservists "arbitrary at best." In consequence, the court found that Congress failed to demonstrate why the application of UCMJ jurisdiction to Fleet Marine Corps Reservists was necessary to the promotion of good order and discipline, which is a standard based on a decision in 1955, United States ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11 (1955).
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 28, 2021, 08:20:26 AM
Quote from: Tripoli on August 28, 2021, 07:26:20 AM
JH-Two unrelated points:
1) IRT Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller having balls of steel. Yes, he does. While I understand that DoD has to remove him, I also appreciate what he did.
2) In an article today, the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) is claiming that military personnel, including retirees are subject to UCMJ Article 88. See https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-active-duty-retired-naval-intelligence-members-told-they-cannot-disrespect-biden-over-afghanistan-debacle
While technically they may have a very slight argument, based on the fact that retired officers are technically receiving retainer, not retirement pay, this seems like a considerable stretch to me. (Full disclosure: I'm a retired USNR). I'm not sure what I think of ONI's analysis. I think it is very weak IRT the retired aspect, and seriously doubt that they would actually try to go after a retired officer. Do you have an opinion on this?
Actual prosecutions of retirees is rare, but the threat is very real. Unlike civilian courts, UCMJ jurisdiction is not territorially bound. Instead, jurisdiction is predicated upon an individual's relationship to the military.
Article 2(a)(4) allows for the court-martial of regular component (Army, Navy, Marine, Air Force, Space Force, and Coast Guard) retirees who are entitled to pay, and Article 2(a)(6) allows for the court-martial of retirees who are part of the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve. Moreover, despite their retiree status, these two groups are treated like active-duty members in that they are continuously subject to UCMJ jurisdiction.
Despite many challenges to these provisions, military courts have consistently found that the Constitution allows Congress to extend UCMJ jurisdiction to retirees. For instance, in the 2018 case United States v. Dinger, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) concluded that it was "firmly convinced that those in a retired status remain 'members' of the land and Naval forces who may face court-martial." Though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), the highest military appellate court, did not squarely address the jurisdictional question, it ultimately affirmed the CCA's decision, and the Supreme Court denied Dinger's petition for certiorari.
However, in the first break of this long standing precedent, check out LARRABEE v. BRAITHWAITE, et al, No. 1:2019cv00654 - Document 28 (D.D.C. 2020). The government has appealed this decision, but the lower court rejected the government's contention that Fleet Marine Corps Reservists' receipt of retainer pay and the ability of the Secretary of the Navy to recall them to active duty at any time necessitated jurisdiction. Instead, the court ruled that pay received by retirees constituted deferred pay from past services, not retainer pay. And it found that Fleet Marine Corps Reservists were "much less likely to be recalled to active-duty service than [r]eservists," rendering Congress's distinction between Fleet Marine Corps Reservists and inactive reservists "arbitrary at best." In consequence, the court found that Congress failed to demonstrate why the application of UCMJ jurisdiction to Fleet Marine Corps Reservists was necessary to the promotion of good order and discipline, which is a standard based on a decision in 1955, United States ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11 (1955).
Thanks for the
Braithwaite citation. Interesting analysis. My gut feeling is that the
Braithwaite court's opinion is going to be upheld. I believe the court is correct in narrowly construing the USMJ to those necessary as part of Congress' Art I, Section 8 responsibilities, especially in light of the Articles III and 5th and 6th Amendment protections granted to citizens. As the Court points out in pages 16-17, the fact that reservists not on active duty are treated differently from retirees pretty much forecloses the ability of the government to argue that the law is "narrowly tailored" to meet these competing constitutional interests.
To the extent that retired personnel are on what is technically "retainer pay", the necessity to maintain good order and discipline among retirees can be met by other mechanisms short of court martial. [as an aside, there may also be an equal protection argument in
Braithwaite: I'd guess that few, if any, retirees in CONUS are ever charged under the UCMJ for civilian criminal activities. Braithwaite was probably charged because the Japanese were outraged by the incident]. The court's point that retired pay is based on past rank and service, not current obligation and duty performed points to it being more akin to retired pay (while acknowledging that as a condition for receiving the pay is maintaining a legal availability for mobilization). The court's citation to the requirement in
Ex parte Milligan that the individual must be in "actual service" before being subjected to the USMJ indicates that the Congressional act in expanding UCMJ authority to retirees may be unconstitutional. Despite the fact that retirees are potentially subject to recall, the fact that retirees have no requirement to meet training, health, PT or mental requirements to continue to remain on the retired list and receive pay indicate that the pay received is retired pay, not retainer pay.
[Edit/Addendum: My wife, who was a USN JAG in Misawa took a look at my analysis and slapped me around a bit. She thinks the victim in this case was probably a non-Japanese national, and that as a result the Japanese didn't pursue any charges. Since the incident took place off base, the only way the victim could get justice was for the US to do a court martial on the guy. She is probably right]
Wow, the last few posts have been very interesting.
I just got to watching the video. That took a lot of courage to do. I wouldn't have done it.
He pretty much had to be relieved, but I'm not sure that he's necessarily going to be discharged via court martial. A good lawyer could likely argue that he didn't say anything contemptuous, or that otherwise violates the Article 88 posted above.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 27, 2021, 02:36:32 PM
LTC has balls of steel. Semper Fi.
LTC Scheller just verbally resigned his USMC commission today.
"I don't need a single dollar. I just need every single person that's willing to go back outside the wire every single day to wear a blue-collar and just go into work every single day and feed their families. Those are the people that I need. Follow me and we will bring the whole f***ing system down. I am honorable and you can ask any Marine who served with me for 17 years. I dare you to ask them all and find out what I'm made of. We're just getting started."
Do you think this is just his resignation video? Do you think he's calling for mass resignations/separations across the U.S. military? Or is this his version of a "Fight Club" statement?
hes unhinged from reality.
It's OK to love the Marine Corps, but you can't expect it to love you back.
I think we're looking at the blossoming of another swinging dick on the "outrage grift," train.
-his wording of "follow me and we'll take it down," smack of a political run at the very minimum - or some kind of rotating guest spot at FOX, OANN, etc. to spout the typical bits before publishing a book and the like.
Note: To be fair, this is my take and it's based off of nothing more than an exceedingly jaded world view. I hope I'm wrong and will gladly eat my words if so.
^or maybe he is a man of honor who is standing by his oath at great personal risk?
(https://media.defense.gov/2021/Aug/04/2002822895/780/780/0/200603-M-DC490-3009.JPG)
Quote
LtCol Stuart P. Scheller graduated from the University of Cincinnati with a bachelors in accounting. He began Officer Candidate School in January 2005. After completing Officer Candidate School, The Basic School, and Infantry Officer Course, he checked into 1st Battalion, 8th Marines in December 2005.
After checking into 1st Battalion, 8th Marines, and assuming the duty of platoon commander, LtCol Scheller conducted a deployment on the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit. He participated in the Non-Combatant Evacuation of American citizens out of Beirut during the 2006 Israeli/Lebanese conflict. Then the following year, he was assigned the role of Alpha Company Executive Officer and deployed to Ramadi, Iraq. Of note, during that time the infantry companies moved to a four infantry platoon construct, so LtCol Scheller, in addition to his Company Executive Officer duties, was also the Fire Support leader, and also served in this capacity during a Mojave Viper and the Ramadi deployment.
In 2008 LtCol Scheller checked into the School of Infantry East, Infantry Training Battalion. He spent six months as the Weapons Instructor group OIC, and a year and a half as the Echo Company Commander.
In 2010 LtCol Scheller sought out an Individual Augment deployment to Afghanistan. He was the Counter-IED team leader for the organization JIEDDO. He spent a year in Paktika and Ghanzi provinces while supporting the Army's 101st Infantry Brigade. He was the infantry subject matter expert for EOD and Route Clearance Platoon operations.
From July 2011 to June 2012 LtCol Scheller attended resident Expeditionary Warfare School.
Following Expeditionary Warfare School, LtCol Scheller augmented Officer Candidate School as a platoon commander for a 10 week class.
In September 2012 LtCol Scheller checked into 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines and served as the Company Commander for Headquarters and Service Company. During this Company Command tour, he completed the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit deployment. Following the deployment, in November 2013, LtCol Scheller assumed the duty as Weapons Company Commander. During his Weapons Company Command tour, he completed an Infantry Training Exercise and a Unit Deployment East.
In August 2015, LtCol Scheller checked into The Basic School. During his three year tour, he served in many capacities, to include Operations Officer, Company Commander, and Warfighting Director.
In July 2018, LtCol Scheller attended resident Command and Staff College where he earned a Masters in Military Science.
In July 2019, LtCol Scheller checked into Marine Special Forces Command and assumed the duties as the Executive Officer of 2nd Support Battalion. Of note, the Battalion Commander spent the majority of the tour deployed on a Special Operations Task Force, allowing LtCol Scheller the opportunity to lead the battalion stateside.
In June 2020 LtCol Scheller checked into 6th Marine Regiment and assumed the duties as Operations Officer. During this time the Regiment supported four battalions and completed a Service Level Training Exercise.
In June 2021 LtCol Scheller checked into the School of Infantry East, Advanced Infantry Training Battalion, as the commanding officer.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 29, 2021, 08:53:30 PM
^or maybe he is a man of honor who is standing by his oath at great personal risk?
Very well could be, but like I said, my opinion.
or maybe he's just a person that lost his way.
just because someone had a distinguished career doesn't mean they're saints and are immune to being stupid.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 29, 2021, 09:43:30 PM
or maybe he's just a person that lost his way.
just because someone had a distinguished career doesn't mean they're saints and are immune to being stupid.
Lost his way how? Not a "saint" how? Being "stupid" how? What evidence do you have to suggest that his motive is anything other than sincere concern for his brother and sister marines?
All he has done is spoken his mind and demanded accountability from his superiors. The only consequence has been to effectively end his own career. He obviously feels pretty strongly about his opinion, which is based off of his observations and firsthand experiences from a 17 year career. He isn't the only officer who feels this way.
I think it's peculiar that you have the need to attack his credibility or motive, particularly in light of the circumstances that led to him expressing his views. Why exactly is that?
Would I personally have gone about communicating this message in the same way? Probably not. But from his videos it sounds like he considered all options and advice, and like I said, it was clear he no longer wanted to effectuate change from the inside. Either way, I'm smart enough to know that I'm not in a position to judge, or rush to judgment. His bio earns him the benefit of the doubt at a bare minimum.
I respect and admire Lt Col Scheller for what he has done. I believe he is correct in that there needs to be accountability for what has happened in Afghanistan. For no reason other than this [correct] belief, he sacrificed his career. I find that admirable. While acknowledging that the effect of his action on the Washington DC bureaucracy was in keeping with Otter's comment in Animal House "... this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part", I believe it needed to be taken, if only to show that there are some officers who put the national interest above their careers, and to hopefully inspire a movement to demand accountability for the utter mis-management of the situation.
Note to Jarhead: I'm really trying not to delve too deeply in R&P issues here, so at this point I will sit down and shut up. :)
Quote from: Tripoli on August 30, 2021, 09:54:35 AM
I respect and admire Lt Col Scheller for what he has done. I believe he is correct in that there needs to be accountability for what has happened in Afghanistan. For no reason other than this [correct] belief, he sacrificed his career. I find that admirable. While acknowledging that the effect of his action on the Washington DC bureaucracy was in keeping with Otter's comment in Animal House "... this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part", I believe it needed to be taken, if only to show that there are some officers who put the national interest above their careers, and to hopefully inspire a movement to demand accountability for the utter mis-management of the situation.
Note to Jarhead: I'm really trying not to delve too deeply in R&P issues here, so at this point I will sit down and shut up. :)
Thank you. I'm struggling with the same predicament.
Appreciate your efforts.
I also will try to not make this political but I'm sorry if I fail at it. I saw Jake Sullivan on Chris Wallace's show yesterday essentially saying abandoning Bagram Airfield was totally the call of the Military and not the Administration, NEVER mentioning the fact it was the Administration who limited the number of troops available to accomplish the mission assigned to it. I felt this was VERY shallow and a deliberate attempt to shift possible blame onto the Military for the terrible scenes to follow as the evacuation comes to an end.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on August 30, 2021, 07:03:46 AM
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 29, 2021, 09:43:30 PM
or maybe he's just a person that lost his way.
just because someone had a distinguished career doesn't mean they're saints and are immune to being stupid.
Lost his way how?uummm how about losing faith in his chain of command Not a "saint" how? dunno Being "stupid" how? sinking a career with one video is pretty representative What evidence do you have to suggest that his motive is anything other than sincere concern for his brother and sister marines? I never said or implied that he wasnt sincere or didnt have concern for his fellow Marines so stop trying to put words in my mouth I never spoke. lawyers... O:-)
All he has done is spoken his mind and demanded accountability from his superiors. The only consequence has been to effectively end his own career. He obviously feels pretty strongly about his opinion, which is based off of his observations and firsthand experiences from a 17 year career. He isn't the only officer who feels this way.
I think it's peculiar that you have the need to attack his credibility or motive, particularly in light of the circumstances that led to him expressing his views. Why exactly is that? why is it that you think I attacked his credibility or motive when I did neither? I just posited that the guy lost his shit for a minute, theres no deeper dive into his backround, character or motives at all.
Would I personally have gone about communicating this message in the same way? Probably not. But from his videos it sounds like he considered all options and advice, and like I said, it was clear he no longer wanted to effectuate change from the inside. Either way, I'm smart enough to know that I'm not in a position to judge, or rush to judgment. His bio earns him the benefit of the doubt at a bare minimum.
Last plane's out. Thank you ALL who served so honorably in America's, and the rest of our allies, longest war. :notworthy:
a little over 700 flights to get 122000 people out is pretty good all things considered.
Afghanistan - FUBAR
imagine the experience of an Afghani family that was in Kabul 36 hours ago and in now in LA.
Is there much difference?
how could you not see the culture shock.
Sincerely wish for the best for them.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on August 31, 2021, 07:35:39 PM
how could you not see the culture shock.
I'd take culture shock over being dead. Taliban is going house to house murdering those left behind. The videos coming out of kabul are chilling.
well those people should have done something about that after all of this time.
Im not trying to sound shitty, or that I dont have empathy and all the other feelings Im supposed to have as a decent human being.
however, at what point do you just detach from all of that like you would an ex wife and say fuck it, not my problem anymore.
we did better then most, didnt lose our "empire" and its always going to be a shithole country.
I think we made it our problem when we went in back in 2001. And then laid our National Honor on the line by promising we wouldn't abandon them to death and chaos, the very words Sen. Biden used back then. And a lot of them believed us and DID do something about it. Right up until they woke-up one morning and found our military had fled Bagram Airbase without even telling them we were leaving. Some friends and allies we are. But who cares, right? They're just a shithole country after all.
this is where we skirt the political side of this. Biden didnt broker the original deal to leave afghanistan.
it actually doesn't matter who's in office. there was no way this exit was going to happen without a perceived optic of shitshow.
^I agree with that. We had to leave at some point. No matter when that would be it wasn't going to be easy.
Ain't that the truth.
Quote from: Gusington on September 01, 2021, 07:17:15 AM
^I agree with that. We had to leave at some point. No matter when that would be it wasn't going to be easy.
Few disagree with the general principle that our escapade over there had run its course. That is a totally separate issue. The large white elephant in the room is over how the withdrawal was accomplished. There were numerous tactical and strategic errors that absolutely could have and should have been avoided plain and simple. There is no excuse. There is no justification and simply stating that it would have been shitty no matter how, when and who is a total cop out and avoids holding those responsible to account. Had this fiasco happened under Trump, lol! how do you think the media and the Trump hating world would have reacted? It's a rhetorical question because you all know. The fact that some even try to blame Trump for this even now is hysterical.
Now I'm not criticizing anyone here for not casting blame because that would be political and we've banned that kind of thing around here for now, but let's not kid ourselves about the double-standard, emmmk?
I don't think it would matter who the POTUS was at the moment of our final withdrawal from Afghanistan, there would be mistakes made no matter what.
There are people out there who believe we should have stayed in Afghanistan 'forever' if it would have made the US even slightly more safe and secure.
And I'm not one of those. If the Afghans wouldn't fight for their own freedom/independence, then there's no point in our doing it for them. And I won't go into the details of the policy Biden inherited as Prez. and his claims to have been straight-jacketed into following it, he certainly never mentioned that fact when he was running for the job. But to pretend like this was inevitable or is now some kind of great victory for freedom is to purposefully deny the truth of an American surrender and deliberate renouncing of promises made to others. There's not enough lipstick in the whole world to put on this pig and claim it's pretty.
I would actually like to see an investigation into how this evacuation came to be such a CF, and lay the blame accordingly.
And by "lay the blame" I mean identify who made what decisions that made to this mess so that they can stand up and admit, yes I made that decision, it was wrong, and I apologize to the American people. And then maybe lose their job.
Quote from: Toonces on September 01, 2021, 12:48:12 PM
I would actually like to see an investigation into how this evacuation came to be such a CF, and lay the blame accordingly.
And by "lay the blame" I mean identify who made what decisions that made to this mess so that they can stand up and admit, yes I made that decision, it was wrong, and I apologize to the American people. And then maybe lose their job.
Amen. Nothing more. Nothing less.
I also agreed with leaving Afghanistan. That's not really the problem. Most (all?) polls say most Americans wanted to leave. Many pundits keep repeating the poll results in order to minimize / deflect from the problem. The problem is removing the Paratroopers and Marines before the women and children. The problem is giving up key terrain like Bagram Airbase before the women and children and Paratroopers and Marines have left.
These particular, specific problems were not pre-ordained or made inevitable by the conditional withdrawal agreement. These problems came later. It did not have to end this way. It should not have ended this way.
America's longest war is not over. It has barely begun. The West has all the watches. The extremists have all the time..........
they dont seem to have much time at all now as running a country takes a lot of that.
and to claim that "the war has barely begun" is a bit strange. what war are you talking about? the war against extremists? because that wars been going on since US forces first went to the Philippines over 100 years ago.
The next 3 years will consist of the Afghan hostage crisis and accompanying witch hunt. I predict that the witches will be far more nimble than the inquisitors and that no one, aside from a few peons, will ever be held accountable. Iran again. I saw this show once already. I doubt if the re-make will be any better.
I get where youre coming from, its part of my living history.
my question is who is getting taken hostage and why? I can see aid workers and such but whos aid workers and why? and who else?
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/p843x403/241036628_3771310722970894_3609850467388729310_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=vRZQKdQn2CUAX8p1tnl&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=eb298686bae3a206e19b5291438a45e3&oe=6158B39F)
;D
From Politico :/
**
CHINA IS TALIBAN'S "MOST IMPORTANT PARTNER": Taliban spokesperson ZABIHULLAH MUJAHID told an Italian newspaper that the militant group will rely on Chinese financing for their operations.
"China is our most important partner and represents a fundamental and extraordinary opportunity for us, because it is ready to invest and rebuild our country," he told La Repubblica today. There are "rich copper mines in the country, which, thanks to the Chinese, can be put back into operation and modernised. In addition, China is our pass to markets all over the world."
Ties between Beijing and the militants strengthened in recent months, including a high-profile Taliban visit to China in July. And Chinese media in recent days has published commentary essentially saying the government has no choice but to work with the group.
This could all be Taliban posturing, of course. But it's surely a worrying sign in the White House, as financial leverage is one of the few ways the U.S. can compel the Taliban to respect human rights. If the Taliban is flush with Chinese cash, though, then Washington's influence wanes even further.
CHINA'S NEW AMBASSADOR SCALDS U.S. IN MAJOR SPEECH: Speaking at the National Committee on United States-China Relations, QIN GANG offered his most substantive, scathing public remarks since becoming Beijing's most senior envoy to Washington in July, per our own PHELIM KINE.
The "wolf warrior" diplomat warned against violating the Asian power's "red line" of core interests in areas including the South China Sea, Taiwan and Xinjiang. He also nodded to China's nuclear weapons capability and said there would be "disastrous consequences" if the United States seeks to suppress China using a "Cold War playbook."
**
The Taliban spokesman is being disingenuous in that article. Afghanistan is rich in rare earth minerals https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/rare-earth-afghanistan-sits-1-trillion-minerals-n196861
Quote from: Uberhaus on September 02, 2021, 08:22:09 PM
The Taliban spokesman is being disingenuous in that article. Afghanistan is rich in rare earth minerals https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/rare-earth-afghanistan-sits-1-trillion-minerals-n196861
you need peace and stability in a region in order to benefit from this.
And there is far from peace and stability.
And dont forget its no more then a couple weeks ago that a faction of taliban blew up a chinese bus filled chinese workers in Pakistan.
NY Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No ISIS Bomb
The final U.S. air strike in the 20-year war in Afghanistan may have[edit] killed a man who was working for a U.S. aid organization, along with some of his family's children.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/10/world/asia/us-air-strike-drone-kabul-afghanistan-isis.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/10/world/asia/us-air-strike-drone-kabul-afghanistan-isis.html)
https://www.nytimes.com/video/players/offsite/index.html?videoId=100000007963596 (https://www.nytimes.com/video/players/offsite/index.html?videoId=100000007963596)
Final drone strike update.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4977557/general-mckenzie-apologizes-civilian-casualties-august-29-air-strike-targeting-isis (https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4977557/general-mckenzie-apologizes-civilian-casualties-august-29-air-strike-targeting-isis)
https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/2780738/general-kenneth-f-mckenzie-jr-commander-of-us-central-command-and-pentagon-pres/ (https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/2780738/general-kenneth-f-mckenzie-jr-commander-of-us-central-command-and-pentagon-pres/)
When your legal counsel advises you to keep quiet...I'm not sure this is what I would have adopted as a course of action. I guess this is the poker equivalent of going all-in.
Quote from: Toonces on September 19, 2021, 07:54:47 PM
When your legal counsel advises you to keep quiet...I'm not sure this is what I would have adopted as a course of action. I guess this is the poker equivalent of going all-in.
Now he's all in the brig.
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/marine-corps-officer-stuart-scheller-brig/ (https://taskandpurpose.com/news/marine-corps-officer-stuart-scheller-brig/)
its a very fine line between making a point and pushing to far.
if he had retired first and then done all that he's done on social media would he still be subject to the UMCJ?
I wonder if someone will develop a game on this and the game could be about managing an evacuation of American Citizens and not leaving anyone behind. I am not a developer but I see this as a interesting topic for a game developer. Lots of possibilities
Quote from: demjansk1942 on September 28, 2021, 03:11:21 PM
I wonder if someone will develop a game on this and the game could be about managing an evacuation of American Citizens and not leaving anyone behind. I am not a developer but I see this as a interesting topic for a game developer. Lots of possibilities
The concept is fertile ground for interesting game mechanics, but it would be impossible to make a game about such a controversial current event without drawing the ire of Twitter activists. Just look at Six Days in Fallujah. Even though the focus wouldn't be on killing people, it would still inevitably catch bellyachers complaining about how you're "playing in a graveyard." It's a good idea, don't get me wrong, but I don't see it happening unless the actors involved are replaced with fictionalized discount lookalikes.
or you can play escort missions in CS:GO
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on September 28, 2021, 12:49:39 AM
its a very fine line between making a point and pushing to far.
if he had retired first and then done all that he's done on social media would he still be subject to the UMCJ?
I
think I heard/read somewhere that he still could have been subject to UCMJ penalties, albeit perhaps not quite as harsh.
Note: Think the follow-on to that was that the military was generally loathe to dick with folks post retirement so generally speaking, no one got dinged on anything. Perhaps we'll see this change now.
p.s. Again, going by (my spotty, boozy) memory here, so I'm perfectly willing to concede being wrong as I was not legal whilst in uniform.
Quote from: Dammit Carl! on September 28, 2021, 09:21:44 PM
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on September 28, 2021, 12:49:39 AM
its a very fine line between making a point and pushing to far.
if he had retired first and then done all that he's done on social media would he still be subject to the UMCJ?
I think I heard/read somewhere that he still could have been subject to UCMJ penalties, albeit perhaps not quite as harsh.
Note: Think the follow-on to that was that the military was generally loathe to dick with folks post retirement so generally speaking, no one got dinged on anything. Perhaps we'll see this change now.
p.s. Again, going by (my spotty, boozy) memory here, so I'm perfectly willing to concede being wrong as I was not legal whilst in uniform.
See my reply #117 on page 8 of this thread.
LtCol Stu Scheller's predicament is shaping up to be a replay of the court martial of Billy Mitchell.
After the U.S. Navy's first helium-filled rigid airship Shenandoah crashed in a storm in September 1925, killing 14 of the crew, and after the loss of three seaplanes on a flight from the West Coast to Hawaii, General Mitchell issued a statement accusing senior leaders in the Army and Navy of incompetence and "almost treasonable administration of the national defense."
"All aviation policies, schemes, and systems are dictated by nonflying officers of the Army or Navy who know practically nothing about it," Mitchell continued. "The lives of the airmen are being used merely as pawns in their hands. ... Officers and agents sent by the War and Navy Departments to Congress have almost always given incomplete, misleading, or false information about aeronautics."
Four days later, Mitchell launched another critical attack. "If the department does not like the statement I made, let them take disciplinary action as they see fit, according to their judgment, court-martial or no court-martial. ... The investigation that is needed is of the War and Navy Departments and their conduct in the disgraceful administration of aviation."
In October 1925, the U.S. military brought eight charges against Mitchell on the direct order of President Calvin Coolidge, accusing Mitchell of violation of the 96th Article of War, which Mitchell's chief counsel, Congressman Frank Reid, declared to be "unconstitutional" as a violation of free speech. The trial lasted 7 weeks, after which the court found the truth or falsity of Mitchell's accusations to be immaterial to the charges against him. On December 17, 1925, the military court found Mitchell "guilty of all specifications and of the charge."
In the 1955 movie The Court Martial of Billy Mitchell, Ralph Bellamy's character, Congressman Frank Reid who defended Mitchell, tried everything he could think of to mount a legal defense against the court marital, even issuing a subpoena for President Calvin Coolidge to testify.
I wonder who will be subpoenaed in the the court martial of Stu Scheller, if it comes to that.
Marine Corps Captain Sam Stephenson, a spokesman for Training and Education Command, explained today that the time, date, and location for Scheller's Article 32 hearing have yet to be determined. He also said the military is considering multiple UCMJ charges: "The general nature of the offenses being considered at the Art. 32 hearing are: Article 88 (contempt toward officials), Article 90 (willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer), Article 92 (failure to obey lawful general orders), Article 133 (conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman)."
Do any of those charges justify indefinite confinement in the brig under the UCMJ? Where's HIS Right to Parole? Or, is it the military's just taking a long time to hear his case? A VERY long time. :idiot2:
or maybe he should have kept his mouth shut and retired and THEN go on his little crusade.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on September 29, 2021, 05:27:44 PM
or maybe he should have kept his mouth shut and retired and THEN go on his little crusade.
Some people put their oaths, values and convictions above their comfort, personal liberty and financial well-being. Imagine that.
I dont see why following a different process invalidates oaths, values and convictions.
But don't the military swear an oath to, "The Constitution" not any President, or administration? I don't see how questioning the actions of superior officers violates that. But that's just me after all.
Usually the first person to complain so openly is simply the tip of the iceberg.
no doubt the whole thing was a shit show. no doubt that intel was in serious short supply. no doubt that all of the Lt. Col. points are completely valid.
I just think he chose a very bad path to get his msg out.
Quote from: Sir Slash on September 30, 2021, 10:14:04 AM
But don't the military swear an oath to, "The Constitution" not any President, or administration? I don't see how questioning the actions of superior officers violates that. But that's just me after all.
When someone is talking smack at a "national media notice," level, then I dare say some very strongly worded memos have wound their way out of the Pentagon to lower, and in typical military fashion, someone has to be the example of what not to do.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on September 30, 2021, 11:03:12 PM
no doubt the whole thing was a shit show. no doubt that intel was in serious short supply. no doubt that all of the Lt. Col. points are completely valid.
I just think he chose a very bad path to get his msg out.
If I recall correctly his option to retire was not far off. As you mentioned earlier he might have been wiser to wait for his retirement to publish his concerns. I do hope all works out well for him.
Quote from: z1812 on October 01, 2021, 08:34:47 AM
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on September 30, 2021, 11:03:12 PM
no doubt the whole thing was a shit show. no doubt that intel was in serious short supply. no doubt that all of the Lt. Col. points are completely valid.
I just think he chose a very bad path to get his msg out.
If I recall correctly his option to retire was not far off. As you mentioned earlier he might have been wiser to wait for his retirement to publish his concerns. I do hope all works out well for him.
I understand that the concept of putting the health and security of the Nation and one's brothers and sisters in arms above the interests of one's self is foreign to most Americans. The fact of the matter is that LT COL Scheller clearly felt the need was urgent enough to go public with his concerns immediately. In his opinion, the failure of the highest level of leadership in the military is dire and the inability for them to accept any accountability and the consequences of this inability do not permit him to remain silent. Certainly not for the three years until his retirement. Furthermore, the strength and power behind the willingness of one in Scheller's shoes to risk all and put everything on the line to get his message across speaks for itself.
So, yes. Was it a decision with severe personal consequences? Absolutely. Was it a decision that took great personal courage? Absolutely. Was it a decision that was made in the best interests of the country and the military? Absolutely. That this leader would be criticized or chastised for making public his concerns is incredible to me. It was certainly not the easy path to take, and for that, he should be commended. He is exactly the kind of leader the military and this country needs.
I think the disconnect here is that you think that someone like myself is criticizing his concerns. I'm not. I'm criticizing his timing of going public with those concerns. for that I think he jumped the gun and supposedly ruined his and his families life for a message thats already disappeared into the ether.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on October 01, 2021, 08:24:02 PM
I think the disconnect here is that you think that someone like myself is criticizing his concerns. I'm not. I'm criticizing his timing of going public with those concerns. for that I think he jumped the gun and supposedly ruined his and his families life for a message thats already disappeared into the ether.
Why do you think he jumped the gun? 12 American Marines and 1 Navy sailor had just been killed. How many more would have to die before it wouldn't have been "jumping the gun"? Like I said, the notion that some might risk their own personal liberty and comfort to save the lives of brothers and sisters in arms is foreign to most Americans. He mentioned in his videos that he discussed this with his family before he went public. It is obviously a decision they made together.
I think the timing of his statement was the most courageous part of his video. Just when everybody else in the military and government was keeping their mouths shut to, 'Go along to get along' is when Col. Scheller decided to speak-up. The easiest thing to do would've been wait until he had nothing to risk, then ask his questions.
I can agree to disagree.
Quote from: Sir Slash on October 01, 2021, 09:58:26 PM
I think the timing of his statement was the most courageous part of his video. Just when everybody else in the military and government was keeping their mouths shut to, 'Go along to get along' is when Col. Scheller decided to speak-up. The easiest thing to do would've been wait until he had nothing to risk, then ask his questions.
+1
Ward Carroll is a former Tomcat RIO who now has a pretty popular youtube series. He typically talks about aviation related topics, but sometimes delves into other topics.
I find his summary and overview of this situation to be very detailed and thoughtful. He flags all the key highlights and boils it down very well and in a balanced manner. It even has me looking at the situation in a bit of a different light. In particular, I was interested in his thoughts on the consequences of Scheller's actions to his direct chain of command and think they are particularly insightful.
It is worth watching for everyone with an interest.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on October 01, 2021, 08:58:31 AM
Quote from: z1812 on October 01, 2021, 08:34:47 AM
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on September 30, 2021, 11:03:12 PM
no doubt the whole thing was a shit show. no doubt that intel was in serious short supply. no doubt that all of the Lt. Col. points are completely valid.
I just think he chose a very bad path to get his msg out.
If I recall correctly his option to retire was not far off. As you mentioned earlier he might have been wiser to wait for his retirement to publish his concerns. I do hope all works out well for him.
I understand that the concept of putting the health and security of the Nation and one's brothers and sisters in arms above the interests of one's self is foreign to most Americans. The fact of the matter is that LT COL Scheller clearly felt the need was urgent enough to go public with his concerns immediately. In his opinion, the failure of the highest level of leadership in the military is dire and the inability for them to accept any accountability and the consequences of this inability do not permit him to remain silent. Certainly not for the three years until his retirement. Furthermore, the strength and power behind the willingness of one in Scheller's shoes to risk all and put everything on the line to get his message across speaks for itself.
So, yes. Was it a decision with severe personal consequences? Absolutely. Was it a decision that took great personal courage? Absolutely. Was it a decision that was made in the best interests of the country and the military? Absolutely. That this leader would be criticized or chastised for making public his concerns is incredible to me. It was certainly not the easy path to take, and for that, he should be commended. He is exactly the kind of leader the military and this country needs.
Once upon a time that was called integrity.
thanks for finding that JH :bd: very good analysis
...and an extremely lenient sentence. Letter of reprimand and forfeiture of pay for one month in the amount of $5,000.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/scheller-marine-who-criticized-afghanistan-withdrawal-sentenced-reprimand-pay-forfeiture (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/scheller-marine-who-criticized-afghanistan-withdrawal-sentenced-reprimand-pay-forfeiture)
The last line, especially the first two points, will cement his legacy as a hero to everyone who served under him and beyond:
"His other charges include contempt toward officers, disrespect toward superior commissioned officers and failure to obey order or regulation."
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on October 15, 2021, 10:41:47 AM
...and an extremely lenient sentence. Letter of reprimand and forfeiture of pay for one month in the amount of $5,000.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/scheller-marine-who-criticized-afghanistan-withdrawal-sentenced-reprimand-pay-forfeiture (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/scheller-marine-who-criticized-afghanistan-withdrawal-sentenced-reprimand-pay-forfeiture)
It is an "extremely lenient sentence" indeed.
During his 1925 court martial for violating the 96th Article of War, Colonel Billy Mitchell pleaded not guilty to charges brought against him by the Secretary of War at the direction of President Coolidge. The court found Mitchell guilty of the charges and then suspended him from duty and ordered the forfeiture of all his pay and allowances for five years.
https://www.historynet.com/the-court-martial-of-colonel-bill-mitchell.htm (https://www.historynet.com/the-court-martial-of-colonel-bill-mitchell.htm)
https://www.airforcemag.com/article/0812mitchell/ (https://www.airforcemag.com/article/0812mitchell/)
30 years later, actor Gary Cooper portrayed Mitchell in the Otto Preminger directed motion picture titled "The Court-Martial of Billy Mitchell."
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047956/ (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047956/)