Home Front: Culture Wars |
How The Army Tried To Avoid Telling The Truth About Women In Ranger Training |
2019-08-30 |
![]() The Department of the Army’s reaction to the allegations is more important than the allegations themselves. The impetus for Susan Katz Keating’s bombshell story in People diagramming the concerns from Ranger Instructors (RIs) about watering down of course requirements for women was a letter sent by a member of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Steve Russell of Oklahoma, to Army Secretary John McHugh. Russell was a highly-decorated infantry lieutenant colonel and Ranger School graduate who had a distinguished career of more than twenty years in the Army (including commanding a battalion that played a central role in capturing Saddam Hussein) before retiring and becoming a member of Congress. Russell’s letter asked the Army to provide all internal Ranger School documents related to the female candidates’ training and assessment, including "test scores, evaluations, injuries, pre-training and more." Russell had spoken to several RIs who told him one story‐that standards had been lowered and senior Ranger Training Brigade officials had unduly influenced the outcome of the course‐while the Army was telling him another‐that everything was the same as always. "The training of our combat warriors is paramount to our national defense," Russell wrote to Secretary of the Army John McHugh. "In order to ensure that the Army retains its ability to defend the nation, we must ensure that our readiness is not sacrificed." (It’s worth noting that Russell also went out of his way to emphasize in his public statements that he did not, and would not, question the abilities or records of any of the individual candidates themselves. His concern was solely about the possibility that officials with their own agendas had improperly influenced the course and about the effects their actions would have on the Army.) |
Link |
Afghanistan |
US Army Opens Criminal Investigation of Death of Unarmed Taliban Detainee |
2016-12-10 |
[VOA News] The U.S. Army has opened a criminal investigation of a soldier who confessed on national television to killing an unarmed Taliban detainee, a senior Army official told VOA Thursday. The investigation of former Major Mathew Golsteyn, first reported by The Washington Post, began earlier this month, according to the senior Army official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. In an October interview, Golsteyn admitted to Fox News Channel that he had killed the alleged bomb maker while in Marja in 2010. "This is a criminal case that was opened up because of a public confession," a U.S. official told VOA. "It is incumbent upon the Army to investigate that." In the interview, the show host asks, "Did you kill the Taliban bomb maker?" "Yes," Golsteyn replied. Honor removed Golsteyn initially acknowledged killing the detainee - who was accused of making a bomb that killed two Marines serving under Golsteyn's command - during a polygraph test while applying for a job with the CIA in 2011. According to The Washington Post report, Golsteyn said a tribal leader who had identified the detainee as a Taliban member said he feared that if the American unit let the detainee go, the detainee would kill the tribal leader and his family. A U.S. official said the CIA alerted the Army of the statement, and the Army launched an administrative board of inquiry into the killing. Hey big Army, Golsteyn is moving in on our market share. Handle it. The administrative review ended in 2014 without the Army finding evidence to charge Golsteyn; none of his fellow soldiers corroborated the story of the killing and Army officials weren't in the room to confirm the CIA confession. But then-Army Secretary John McHugh decided to revoke Golsteyn's Silver Star Medal, the U.S. military's third-highest decoration for valor in combat, which he had earned in Afghanistan. The U.S. official said an Army administrative review is different from an Army criminal case, and added that the October confession provides new evidence about the incident. "So double jeopardy doesn't apply," the official said, referring to a law in the United States that prohibits citizens from being retried for the same crime using the same evidence. Golsteyn told The Washington Post in an email Thursday that the Defense Department and Army have "viciously pursued me without a discernible cause or a stated goal for over five years." A senior Army official said there is currently a complaint on the Army’s handling of the case that was filed with the Defense Department Inspector General. There cannot be any results released from the case until the complaint is resolved. |
Link |
Afghanistan |
Will new Army Secretary Eric Fanning go to bat for SFC Earl D. Plumlee ? |
2016-05-25 |
![]() SFC Plumlee on the right with 'Electric Bayonet' shoulder patch. Army Secretary Eric Fanning was sworn in as the service’s top civilian leader last week, and almost immediately received a letter from Rep. Duncan D. Hunter (R.-Calif.) about Sgt. 1st Class Earl D. Plumlee. The Green Beret soldier was nominated for the Medal of Honor for his role in repelling a brutal ambush in Afghanistan in 2013. He received recommendations for the prestigious award from several of the military’s most powerful officers, but was ultimately denied last year by then-Army Secretary John McHugh. Plumlee instead received the Silver Star, which is two levels below the Medal of Honor in recognizing combat heroism. The case has been investigated by the Defense Department inspector general’s office and pressed by Hunter, who became a vociferous critic of McHugh in his last year in office. Hunter is looking to resurrect Plumlee’s case now in part by noting that McHugh chose to approve the lower award after learning that Plumlee faced a criminal investigation in the Army for allegedly selling a rifle scope online illegally. That raised questions about whether the service only wants recipients of its top awards who have a sparkling overall record. Plumlee has since been cleared of any charges. "As a member of the House Armed Services Committee and a former Marine Corps officer who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and having worked many valor cases, I can state that Plumlee’s actions most certainly meet or exceed the criteria for the MoH," Hunter wrote in a May 19 letter to Fanning. "Further, I encourage you to compare his actions to other MoH recipients -- I am confident that you will agree that Plumlee’s actions are significantly underrepresented by the Silver Star award." Wayne Hall, an Army spokesman, said the service has received Hunter’s letter and "will respond accordingly." He declined to make additional comment. Plumlee could not be reached for comment. |
Link |
Government |
Green Berets have growing doubts of duties with skittish political leadership |
2015-08-31 |
On foot, helicopter and horseback, Army Special Forces showed that if the U.S. was to win a long counterinsurgency war against Islamic extremists, the special skills of Green Berets would be fundamental. Nearly 14 years later, these soldiers, some of the military's smartest and best trained, are still creating lots of headlines, but not necessarily for heroics. In recent months, the Army has disciplined, admonished and ended the careers of a number of Green Berets for actions that the soldiers themselves believe were part of combating an evil enemy. Pristine standards for fighting the Taliban and al Qaeda are not achievable, some in the community say. "There is certainly a belief that upper echelons of leadership have morphed into political positions, and leaders are a lot less willing to risk their own career to support their soldiers," Danny Quinn, a former Green Beret team leader and West Point graduate, told The Washington Times. Examples abound: - Army Secretary John McHugh stripped a Green Beret of his Silver Star for summarily killing a Taliban bomb maker. - A military investigation blamed two Green Berets for the worst U.S. friendly-fire incident in Afghanistan, when critical errors were made by the Air Force crew that dropped the bombs onto their soldiers. - The Army fired a Green Beret from his hostage rescue post at the Pentagon and put him under criminal investigation for whistlingblowing to Congress. - The Army is kicking out a Green Beret for pushing an Afghan police officer accused a raping a boy. Maj. Matt Golsteyn, one of the Green Berets in the Army's crosshairs, said the group's motto, De Oppresso Liber ("To Free the Oppressed"), presents a "moral imperative for action against those who would use violence and injustice as means for repression." "It would seem the lives and careers of Green Berets who would dare to see the organization's motto realized on foreign soil are sacrificed for politics and careerism," the Afghanistan War veteran told The Times. "As we witness continual displays of failure after failure in military leadership, our collective failure to liberate the oppressed in Iraq and Afghanistan should confuse no longer." No one says the military is specifically targeting Green Berets, but there has been a rash of punishments for these soldiers for actions in warfare that they believed were justified. Joe Kasper, chief of staff for Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican, said the discipline is "causing a high sense of discomfort and concern with that small community." "What we hear consistently is what many of these soldiers can't say publicly, and that is Army leadership has created an environment that has soldiers second-guessing themselves and hesitating constantly, and one misstep -- whether intended or not -- is a career killer," Mr. Kasper said. "All of it has had an impact on morale and retention, and it should sound alarm bells for the Army." |
Link |
Home Front: Culture Wars |
Army Gen. Randy Taylor introduces his husband at Pentagon Gay Pride event |
2015-06-10 |
[Wash Times] "My husband Lucas is sitting up front here," Gen. Taylor said of the man in the same row as Mr. Carter, Army Secretary John McHugh and other senior officials. He said Lucas has subjugated his own career to support the general's frequent moves over an 18-year relationship. Info Systems geek and Norfolk 'basketball college' grad. That helps explain it. |
Link |
Afghanistan |
Army Weighs If Ex-Green Beret Hero Should Be Dismissed |
2015-05-17 |
Though a criminal investigation failed to find remains of his alleged victim and didn't result in charges against Maj. Mathew Golsteyn, he's been targeted for possible dismissal from the Army and the consequent loss of veteran's benefits with a less-than-honorable discharge. A Fort Bragg hearing before three, higher-ranked Special Forces officers could meet later this month to weigh arguments from Golsteyn's attorney why he should remain on active duty. "My hope is that Golsteyn will receive a fair and impartial hearing. Based on the Army's actions and decisions thus far, I regret to say this won't be the case," one of the soldier's defenders, U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., wrote Wednesday to Army Secretary John McHugh. Army brass have kept Hunter updated on the case. Others believe the Army is obligated to act because the Geneva Conventions governing warfare forbid arbitrary killings by troops, said Jeffrey K. Walker, a St. John's University criminal law professor. We have a Klingon drone program and WH directives for this type of activity. Please stay in your lane MAJ Goldsteyn. "That's a minimum protection anybody gets at any time, no matter how you categorize them or how you categorize the conflict. That is the basic floor below which nobody can drop as far as protections go," said Walker, a retired Air Force officer and former military lawyer. "Arbitrary deprivation of life is at the top of the list of things you cannot do." St. John's University and a bearded old former USAF lawyer? Besides personal opinion, what connection with the process does this statement represent ? Golsteyn's roller-coaster military career from battlefield hero to whispers of a war crime is rooted in the deadly month of February 2010, when American-led allied forces seized the Taliban stronghold of Marjah in Afghanistan's Helmand province. Insurgent snipers unleashed fire on Forward Operating Base McQueary. A patrol of about 80 troops headed out across muddy poppy fields to find the gunmen. Over a four-hour firefight, Golsteyn repeatedly exposed himself to enemy fire as he helped evacuate a wounded Afghan soldier and directed repeated airstrikes onto the enemy, according to the Army's narrative of why he was awarded a Silver Star medal. Then, about two months before being promoted from captain to major in November 2011, he had an A Klingon interview? Yet another very telling lapse in judgement. Golsteyn "claimed to have captured and shot and buried a suspected IED bomb maker. He further went to comment that he went back out with two others to cremate the body and dispose of the remains," according to a memo summarizing the Golsteyn case. "Capt. Golsteyn stated that he knew it was illegal but was not remorseful as he had solid intelligence and his actions protected the safety of his fellow teammates." Patrol report? Contact report? EKIA? SALUTE? GRID? Graves registration? Memory loss? Selective PTSD, Fit of rage? Accidental Discharge? No interest in interrogation? Book deal? WTF Major? Did you consult a shrink ? The Army's Criminal Investigative Division, acting on the CIA's tip, could find no one who corroborated Golsteyn's claim to have hunted the bomb-maker after an attack that killed two Marines. Nor could they find any cremated remains of the Afghan. Despite that, investigators said "Golsteyn committed the offenses of murder and conspiracy based on the interview provided by the CIA," according to the Sept. 29 memo first published by the web site The Intercept. Lt. Col. Christopher Kasker, a spokesman for McHugh, confirmed the memo is authentic. The Klingon's said it, so it must be true. No solid legal evidence required as they are the ultimate source of the knowledge of good and of evil. |
Link |
Home Front: WoT |
Victims of 2009 Fort Hood shooting to receive Purple Heart award |
2015-02-07 |
And here it is not even quite six years. [CBSNEWS] Army Secretary John McHugh has approved the awarding of the Purple Heart to the military victims of the 2009 shooting at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead, the Army announced Friday. The civilian counterpart of the Purple Heart award - the Secretary of Defense Medal for the Defense of Freedom - will be conferred on the civilian victims of the shooting. McHugh was freed to extend the awards after Congress recently broadened the guidelines specifying who is eligible to receive them. The Purple Heart can be awarded to military members who suffer combat injuries, including injuries suffered at the hands of a foreign terrorist organization. As part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2015, Congress redefined an attack by a "foreign terrorist organization" to include any attack in which the perpetrator was in communication with or inspired by foreign terrorist elements before the attack. The previous criteria required evidence that the perpetrator was acting at the direction of a foreign terrorist organization. |
Link |
Government | ||
Army, Navy target top brass, HQ spending in latest cuts | ||
2013-08-23 | ||
WASHINGTON With a warning that the money is gone, military leaders driven by falling defense spending are moving to cut top brass positions and slash headquarters spending. The Navy announced late Tuesday that Navy Secretary Ray Mabus had approved a plan to reduce, eliminate or consolidate a net of 35 Navy flag officer positions at the one-, two- and three-star ranks. The Navy said it also plans to eliminate 6 more top officer positions in the 2015 budget. And last week, a memo from Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno and Army Secretary John McHugh declared that a plan to cut Army headquarters at the two-star level and above by 25 percent was priority No. 1 for headquarters staff.
We had to make tough choices but it was the right thing to do -- the plan is in line with Congressional mandates, OSD guidance and our changing fiscal environment, said Vice Chief of Naval Operations, Adm. Mark E. Ferguson. The announcements follow an order from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel last month to reduce spending on military headquarters by 20 percent over five years, with corresponding staff cuts. The Pentagon endured a $37 billion cut in its budget this year because of sequestration, and faces a $52 billion reduction next year if elected officials dont find a way to stop the automatic budget cuts required by federal law. Hagel, however, said the headquarters cuts would proceed even if sequestration is avoided. The Navy released a detailed list of positions to be reduced or eliminated, with most being reduced by one pay grade. For instance, the director of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities in the office of the Chief of Naval Operations at the Pentagon will be a captain in the future, rather than a one-star admiral. Other positions will be merged, such as two jobs in the CNOs office director of the total force programming and manpower management division, and director of military personnel plans and policy division that will now be done by one rear admiral. Likewise, the Naval Surface Warfare Center and the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, located in Washington, will be commanded by a single one-star. A few positions will be eliminated, including commander of Submarine Group 2 in Groton, Conn. The Army memo, dated Aug. 14 and first reported by Defense News, lacks the specificity on cuts that the Navy announcement has. But in terse language punctuated with bold-face type and sentences in all capital letters, it ordered commanders to present plans within two weeks for achieving the 25 percent reduction. Let there be no mistake, aggregate reductions WILL TAKE PLACE, Odierno and McHugh wrote. The money is gone; our mission now is to determine how best to allocate these cuts while maintaining readiness. We expect Army leaders, military and civilian, to seize this opportunity to re-shape our Army. This effort will take PRIORITY OVER ALL other Headquarters, Department of the Army activities. Officials from the Air Force and Marine Corps told Stars and Stripes that both services are taking steps to follow Hagels direction on 20 percent headquarters reductions, but have no current plans to release details on how the cuts would be achieved.
| ||
Link |
Government | |
120+ US Representatives to Army: Reverse Abrams tank plans | |
2013-06-01 | |
More than 120 U.S. lawmakers are urging Army brass to reverse a plan under which the service would stop buying Abrams tanks for three years. The collection of Republican and Democratic House members "are deeply concerned to learn that the Army has once again failed to fund production of the [Abrams] tank," they wrote in a May 21 letter to Army Secretary John McHugh. "This decision neglects the Army's responsibility to modernize the National Guard units, and undervalues the damaging impact to the highly specialized industrial base that supports the program," states the letter. Under a years-old plan, the Army intends to suspend buying upgraded Abrams tanks in 2016, a freeze that would last until 2019. The service wants to use the savings for other priorities, and believes sales to other nations will keep the production line running. Industry officials and lawmakers with a stake in the program aren't so sure that's the best idea.
The Abrams program shows how the U.S. military services and industry have become experts at spreading work on major weapon programs across the country, and thereby locking in the support of sizable numbers in Congress. Congressional sources and analysts often say the ground service is counting on lawmakers to come up with the funds to keep American tanks rolling off the Lima line. However, that could prove difficult for 2014 since defense budget caps are in place and the 2014 Pentagon budget now would have to be cut by around $50 billion unless sequestration is addressed before Oct. 1. | |
Link |
Home Front: WoT |
Army shortens combat tours to nine months |
2011-08-06 |
The US Army will shorten the length of tours of duty for personnel deployed in combat zones from a year to nine months, as it pursues its withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon said Friday. "This policy will not affect personnel or units currently deployed or deploying prior to Jan. 1, 2012," the secretary of the army, John McHugh, said in a statement, adding the move would be fully in effect by April 2012. The US Army is looking to allow soldiers to spend two years in the United States for each year they are deployed, but the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq have resulted in consecutive deployments for many personnel.Those back-to-back war tours have prompted concerns about the health of the soldiers, with an increase seen in reported psychological problems and the number of suicides. "The reduced deployment length will improve soldier and family quality of life while continuing to meet operational requirements and is an important step in sustaining the all-volunteer-force," McHugh said. |
Link |
Home Front: WoT |
Army to shorten combat tours to nine months |
2011-08-05 |
The US Army will shorten the length of tours of duty for personnel deployed in combat zones from a year to nine months, as it pursues its withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon said Friday. "This policy will not affect personnel or units currently deployed or deploying prior to Jan. 1, 2012," the secretary of the army, John McHugh, said in a statement, adding the move would be fully in effect by April 2012. The US Army is looking to allow soldiers to spend two years in the United States for each year they are deployed, but the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq have resulted in consecutive deployments for many personnel. Those back-to-back war tours have prompted concerns about the health of the soldiers, with an increase seen in reported psychological problems and the number of suicides. "The reduced deployment length will improve soldier and family quality of life while continuing to meet operational requirements and is an important step in sustaining the all-volunteer-force," McHugh said. |
Link |
Home Front: WoT | |
Army Secretary Orders Nine Officers Punished For Failing To Flag Hasan | |
2011-03-11 | |
Army Secretary John McHugh has ordered the nine to have non-judicial punishment for failing to report unusual behavior on the part of the protected religious minority officer. The nine were in Hasan's chain of command at Walter Reed hospital, so it is likely that several of them had minimal exposure to Hasan. And in an equally empty gesture, Secretary McHugh ordered the training and evaluation of all other Army medical doctors to be examined, in case there are any other doctors with profiles identical to Hasan. Several US senators have likewise deplored the inability of either the DoD or the FBI to see into the future or accurately psychoanalyze potential threat individuals based on their unobserved off duty behavior.
| |
Link |