Does SOCOM have Spec Ops troop's backs?

Posted By Uncle Jimbo

The cases of CPT Dave Staffel and MSG Troy Anderson seem very strange and the circumstances that led to their being charged with murder even stranger.

They are charged for the shooting of an Afghani male who had been identified and vetted by ODA 374 as a High Value Target and leader of a local terrorist cell. He was shot by MSG Anderson from approx. 100 yards on order from CPT Staffel. Both agreed they had positive identification (PID) of Nawab Buntangyar, and their Rules of Engagement (ROE) allowed them to use lethal force once they had PID of enemy forces or combatants. This standard was met and the hammer dropped.

The problem is the hammer was then dropped on these two gentlemen for this action seemingly in accordance with ROE. That is where the strangeness comes in. The ROE for detachments operating in the field is classified, but today I spoke with CPT Staffel's lawyer, Mr. Mike Waple. He has seen the ROE and was able to confirm that the standard in place was PID of a known enemy combatant. There is no argument about whether they got the right guy or whether they identified him properly. Mr. Waple states that it is "absolutely astonishing that charges were brought".

Some time after the event individuals either Afghani or American "raised red flags" about the incident and LTG Kearney ordered a 15-6 investigation to see if anything untoward had happened. This was conducted by an Air Force Colonel Pahana and he concluded that he saw no clear crime, and according to Mr. Waple, "That it was reasonable for ODA 374 to conclude that Nawab was a threat to the province and specifically an upcoming Medical Assistance mission they were going to conduct"

Because accusation had been made that possible violations of the Laws of Land Warfare had occurred, COL Pahana requested that Army CID conduct a criminal investigation to make a final determination. This investigation was conducted and the result was that CID concluded no violations of ROE or the Laws of Land Warfare were committed, they included a legal opinion from JAG concurring in this assessment. So then no problem for the two soldiers right?

Wrong, enter LTG Kearney. He was Commander of Special Ops Command- Central and he had final say on the disposition of this investigation and the lives of these two men. Against the judgment of two investigations he commissioned, he decided that murder charges were warranted. He believed that Nawab should have been captured rather than shot. There does not exist any order specifying that Nawab was to be captured, and having been vetted as a known terrorist he was subject to ventilation at any moment. Staffel and Anderson could not risk allowing a likely attempt to conduct a terror attack as they were trying to set up an upcoming medical treatment operation for villagers in the area.

That was a reasoned decision that should be and was made by a battlefield commander CPT Staffel. When Generals in offices over ride the decisions made in accordance with the applicable rules, we have a problem. This is not LTG Kearney's first instance of doing this either. He ejected the first Marine unit ever to deploy as part of Special Operations Command from Afghanistan after a vehicle ambush and  shoot out. There was no clear cut answer as to what happened, but given conflicting US and Afghani statements LTG Kearney took the side of the Afghanis and sent the Marines home.

In this case he ignored his own experts and decided that the CPT on the ground made the wrong call. Mr. Waple called it "Inexcusable' for charges to be preferred. But they were and so there was an Art. 32 hearing in which the 15-6 investigation, the CID investigation and all other relevant factors were weighed and a recommendation to the Commander of Special Forces Command will be made as to whether charges should proceed or be dropped.

Mr. Waple said " We spent a day and a half arguing about whether he was right or correct in shooting the guy and we can't even all agree.  That Captain had to make a decision immediately" The Art. 32 finished up yesterday and we will soon find out if our Special Ops troops can feel comfortable that their command has their backs or not. The jury is definitely out on LTG Kearney.

Disclaimer: I think I know MSG Anderson, although I haven't confirmed that.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2819/21795045

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Does SOCOM have Spec Ops troop's backs?:

» Outrageous - SpecOps snipers charged with murder for zapping known terrorist from Ace of Spades HQ
At the Captain's Journal we find a very disturbing story of how dysfunctional some parts of the US military are, and how genuinely whacked in the head one of our 3-star generals is. In a nutshell.Sniper team is sent to... [Read More]

Comments

[Francis Marion]

Anderson is a common name so I don't know if he's the same Anderson I knew from 3rd Group but 374 is my old team.

It sounds to me like the problem is with the command environment which is becoming more and more prevalent in this long war and is something I call micromanagement by PSC-5. The PSC-5 is a satellite communications capable radio that makes it possible for guys on "swivel chairs" to talk directly to guys behind triggers from up to half a world away. Now, these swivel chair warriors think they are better qualified to make decisions for shooters on the ground and have begun insisting that teams ask permission before ever leaving home. With this type of environment, it is easy to see how some general who thinks he knows everything and has the ability to project his voice everywhere might develop some sort of god complex and get rather upset when someone else has the audacity to think for themselves.

[Peyton]

A mission to capture a known bad guy would have been set up completely differently. A mission to secure an area for medical treatment of the locals would have likely involved two guys and at least one long rifle.

Army special forces and Navy SEALS are trained and depended upon to evaluate a situation and take appropriate action within bounds of mission and ROE. If it becomes common practice to later second guess their actions, then it will cripple every team deployed, anywhere.

So, who is Kearney's boss, and how do we bring this ridiculous situation to his attention?

[Old Tanker]

Mr Sparkle??? Mr. Sparkle??? Where are you???

I think your "vindicated" option for the General is getting shot to hell...kinda like the tango our SF guys were kind enough to rid us of.

[defendusa]

I say again: Didn't anybody learn that political correctness and promotions should not matter when it comes to the guys pulling the trigger? Oh, yeah, right...sh** rolls downhill, doesn't it? I say the General may need a bit of remedial training...if he wants to f*** these guys over, guess I better start writing some letters.

[MajMT]

I will make this comment re: Gen Kearney's actions...perhaps he is playing the "preemption" card. By investigating the actions (overly)thoroughly, he can put to rest any current doubts, and any future doubts when other such actions are warranted. Is this a morale booster? Hardly, for the immediate situation, but it might make it easier the next time a trooper has to pop a bad guy; knowing that TIME, NEWSWEEK or CNN is not going to be able drag his 4thPOC through the cactus until fully exonerated in a court of law.

I would rather the good General simply say, "I reviewed the actions, investigations and the ROE and conditions regarding the operation and fully support the actions of my troopers". But we know this whole theater is subject to a different reality at home.

[Old Tanker]

MajMT,

I hope you're right however, there were 2 investigations and now an art. 32. You would think that would be enough.

[Francis Marion]

MajMT,

A 15-6 investigation was conducted along with a CID investigation. They were cleared by both. Now Gen Jealous He Wasn't Smart Enough to be SF wants to charge them with premeditated murder of a know terrorist. How can this possible be good for anything? If he wanted to review anything, he should have reviewed the investigations that have already occurred.

[David M]

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 09/21/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

[DDon]

Some background on GEN Kearny

http://www.special-operations-technology.com/
archives.cfm?CoverID=140

Dated March of last year.

Does he fit the late Col. Hackworth's "Perfumed Prince"

[MajMT]

Francis, Tanker...I agree to the scope and scale that is beging applied here is excessive; but, if I am correct, we might see the farther reaching, big-picture results being less second guessing or unwarranted attention by non-SOF leadership, or even the general public, when similar actions take place. I am sure the whole clusterf*** of Haditha et al left many leaders looking over their shoulder and maybe, just maybe, thinking of ways to outwit the public eye and let our guys kill bad-guys (within the ROE) without having to wonder if they will be brought up on charges because some CNN/MSM flunkie got wind of an "illegal assassination" ...just my personal hope.

[bthun]

DDon,

MajMT's point concerning the overkill on clearing the men for political reasons could well be what it has come down to. I hope that is the case and LTG Kearney is not exhibiting a Perfumed Prince/Murtha self-aggrandizing trait.

I would hate to find that the Hack definition of the PP's applies to this LTG.

Lately, well for the last three to four years, it does seem as though many of our political leaders have fallen through the looking glass. All to further their political ambitions regardless of the damage done to the nation and those fighting her fights.

[Lands’nGrooves]

MajMT,

I understand you’re line of thought, though I think your being toO kind to the Gen., but my question is; this can’t be the first time a bad guy has had his brain splattered by some Spec. Ops bad a$$es? I would think that after 6 years of the current wars that the ROE and subsequent take down of some Jihadi scumbags, everything would be set.

As far as the public eye angle, I doubt anyone would ever have heard about this unless this useless (third)investigation went forward by what seems to be an overzealous Gen.

BTW, OT slightly, this kill doesn’t sound much different that some of what I read about in the marine sniper book (in Iraqi) that I can’t remember the name of right now (figures). I know it’s a book but I’m not gonn’a call that man a liar and theoretically couldn’t he be brought up on charges. Just a thought.

[LPierson]

Perhaps this is an issue of "the wrong forces" taking the HVT....

Look at Kearney's most recent assignments since he left the RGR Regt. And compare some of the "anecdotal tales" (the official title for some of the lads' accounts of who gets to do what and the pecking order to get there...) regarding watching from hides as other HVT'S departing the area while the helo safari arrives two hours late.

I might be wrong.

[Old Tanker]

Haditha et al left many leaders looking over their shoulder and maybe, just maybe, thinking of ways to outwit the public eye and let our guys kill bad-guys (within the ROE) without having to wonder if they will be brought up on charges because some CNN/MSM flunkie got wind of an "illegal assassination" ...just my personal hope.

I'd like to hope so as well but it just doesn't make sense to me. Keep them from wondering if they will be brought up on charges by....well....bringing them up on charges? I don't see how this helps, it's gotta be a shitter on morale unless he pulled them in the office and said "look boys, this is what we're gonna do.....don't worry about it" If that were the case the lawyers response to Uncle J would have been quite different. Hey, we all hope that a General officer doesn't have his head in his duffel bag but on occasion......

[Old Tanker]

Of course, this could be nothing more than a serious case of CYA and not for his men but for himself....

[exhelodrvr]

I tend to agree with MajMT. This seems (from the info I have read here) like this is a very clearcut case. The worst possible finding would seem to be poor judgment, and even that looks like a stretch. If that is the case, then it would seem that this is being used as a method of publicly validating the ROE.

But (unless that has been communicated in secret to the people involved), it is sure a miserable way to treat couple of great soldiers just to prove a point.

Of course, the general being a dickhead is probably the Occam's Razor explanation.

[Uncle Jimbo]

Occam's dickhead, I like that.

Cordially,

Uncle J

[Casey]

Apologies for being pedantic, but I want to nail this down, Uncle J.

The man in question was, in fact Nawab Buntangyar, yes? And it is indisputable that he was a terrorist, yes? I'm assuming they performed DNA tests or some such to verify his ID.

I ask because -while your statement "There is no argument about whether they got the right guy or whether they identified him properly" implies the above, it was not positively stated. One could argue that the quote merely indicates the lack of argument, and not the accuracy of the ID.

Yes, that is pedantic, but I don't want to leave any rhetorical loopholes open for the (ahem) loyal opposition.

[The Wolf]

Rangers have lost their 'flexibility' in mission setup and how they tackle 'special ops'. They have become more concerned with the regimentation and hoah-ness than what they were developed for. LTG K only solidifies that view in my mind.

Results? Too inward-looking; lack of imagination, and loss of ground-commander capability to adjust parameters to meet commanders intent and mission requirements.

Guys, the company commander just became the bad guy...and useless

-W

[Francis Marion]

MajMT,

Assuming that you are, or have been, a MAJ in the U.S. Army then you should know that the mere accusation of these charges has almost certainly killed this young CPT's career. From a troops on the ground perspective, there is no way this can be spun as a ROE clarification since all we see is a warfighter who is facing jail time at worst and a new career at best; all for doing his job. I don't want to be the next example, so if I just sit on my 4th point of contact and do nothing then I won't risk getting burned. Meanwhile, the war lasts one rotation longer.

[Bill Faith]

Re: Did they kill the right man? Check out Conservative Liberal's post here. Yes, they killed the right man.

[Casey]

Ok, Bill; looks like they ID'd him pretty well, then.

Thanks for the link. :)

[gmwashingtondc]

Vote Murtha/Kearney in '08...There is hope for the Taliban!

[Soldier's Mom]

I just read where we killed "Al Tunisi" in Iraq. Now this time we did it with an air raid -- does this mean that some GO is going to charge the pilots with premeditated murder, i.e., you chose to take off and if you hadn't taken off, you wouldn't have found the target and fired your weapons and he wouldn't be dead instead of captured, so....."

this is getting sickening. I know that my son is probably developing an ulcer over this. He's at CGSC and not over there, but he cares about his men and what happens to them.