More

Army Reverses Punishment For Officers Found Responsible For Deadly Afghanistan Firefight

RICHARD LARDNER   06/23/10 11:08 PM ET   AP

Afghanistan Wanat Reversal

WASHINGTON — The Army has reversed a decision to punish three officers for command failures that led to one of the deadliest firefights for U.S. forces since the Afghanistan war began nearly a decade ago.

Families of the soldiers killed during the battle said they were briefed Wednesday by Army officials on their call not to reprimand the officers for dereliction of duty. They were told punishing the three would have a chilling effect on other battlefield commanders who have to make crucial decisions.

David Brostrom, whose son Jonathan was killed during the attack, said he and members of other families walked out of the briefing before it was over because they were so upset.

"I've never seen anything like it," said Brostrom, a former Army colonel who retired from military service in 2004. "The Army has reinforced leadership failure."

The attack at the small village of Wanat near the Pakistan border left nine American soldiers dead and 27 wounded. Their platoon-size unit was attacked by as many as 200 insurgents during the early morning hours of July 13, 2008.

U.S. Central Command, the military organization managing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, directed a Marine Corps general last September to investigate the battle after families expressed dissatisfaction with an earlier inquiry by the Army.

The investigation by Marine Lt. Gen. Richard Natonski concluded that the brigade, battalion and company commanders should be punished for having too few troops at the remote outpost and for not supplying them properly, according to the family members.

Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., a member of the Armed Services Committee and a Marine combat officer in Vietnam, said on Wednesday that after receiving Natonski's investigation in January, the Army issued letters of reprimand to all three officers for being "derelict in the performance of their duties through neglect or culpable inefficiency."

But after an Army command in Georgia took a closer look at Natonski's report, service officials decided to annul the reprimands, according to Webb.

"I find it deeply troubling that the Army has exonerated these officers and in the process rejected the findings of the independent review," Webb said in a statement. "This development raises concerns regarding the principle of command accountability in the Army."

In a statement, the Army said that the second look at the incident proved that the officers were "neither negligent nor derelict" and that "their actions were reasonable under the circumstances."

Col. William Ostlund, the battalion commander, said, "This is good news for this round, but it is by no way over for me or the others officers." Ostlund, who was a lieutenant colonel at the time of the attack, indicated there are still other administrative steps the Army may take, but he wouldn't specify what those were.

"It's not over for any of the three of us at this time," said Ostlund, the deputy commander of the 75th Ranger Regiment.

Kurt Zwilling, whose son Gunnar was killed at Wanat, said "we got what we wanted" from Natonski's investigation.

"I'm not surprised the Army didn't punish its own," Zwilling said.

Natonski's findings were delivered to Army Gen. Charles Campbell, then the leader of Army Forces Command at Fort McPherson, Ga. Campbell retired earlier this month, but he conducted the briefing at Fort McPherson for the families because he made the decision to overturn the reprimands.

Carlene Cross, whose son Jason Bogar was killed at Wanat, said the families first were informed of Natonski's findings, which she said were endorsed by Gen. David Petraeus, the Central Command chief just appointed top U.S. commander in Afghanistan.

"Then Gen. Campbell gets up and says they're not going to do anything to them," Cross said.

"They've completely revoked all of the dereliction findings and basically they won't even get a slap on the wrist," she said. "We were just furious."

On the day of the attack, fewer than 50 U.S. troops from the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team, along with two dozen Afghan soldiers, were stationed at the remote Wanat outpost.

A detailed account of the battle written last year by a military historian at the Army Combat Studies Institute in Kansas said there was a growing hostility toward the Americans in Wanat and a failure by higher-level commanders to recognize the tension when they ordered the unit to the village just a few weeks before the attack.

Concern had been expressed by 1st Lt. Jonathan Brostrom, a platoon leader, about the number of troops he had and the mountainous terrain surrounding the outpost, according to the historian's report.

The commanders withdrew airborne intelligence-gathering assets from Wanat to another location one day before the attack despite vehement protests from the unit. The reasons, according to the report, were that "nothing of consequence" had been detected in Wanat and the equipment was needed elsewhere.

The soldiers at Wanat also had shortages of water and fuel. According to the report, a lack of heavy construction equipment meant troops had to use picks and shovels to dig their fighting positions and fill sandbags.

__

Associated Press writer Anne Flaherty contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

WASHINGTON — The Army has reversed a decision to punish three officers for command failures that led to one of the deadliest firefights for U.S. forces since the Afghanistan war began nearly a d...
WASHINGTON — The Army has reversed a decision to punish three officers for command failures that led to one of the deadliest firefights for U.S. forces since the Afghanistan war began nearly a d...
Filed by Jeff Muskus  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 276
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (9 total)
  1 of 3  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
ItWasntMeReally 12:34 AM on 06/24/2010
Any military "investigation" and self policing is done in the service of PR, image control, preservation of the power structure of the military itself. The entity is not going to create an atmosphere which might scare off potential recruits.

It's best the humanity works to evolve beyond the point that it needs to have armies, weapons, and plans against other members of humanity. I know  Read More...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GandenT
01:04 PM on 06/25/2010
Too bad the Army can't annul the punishment meted out to the undermanned and under equipped soldiers since being dead and shot up must also have a chilling effect on these soldiers' ability to make critical decisions.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
omobob
left coast, usa
12:20 PM on 06/25/2010
So the Army told the families that they are not going to punish the officers for making terminally incompetent decisions lest other officers make the same ncompetent decisions? No, in the military you learn by example. They should be punished as an example of what NOT to do. This way, the Army is giving a pass on bad decisions that got soldiers killed.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LouGots
08:47 PM on 06/24/2010
An echo of the tale of the Two Smiths in the Battle of Saipan. The Marine Corps way is not the Army way. At Saipan, the Marine General Smith, the overall Commander, Landing Force, relieved Army General Smith for lack of offensive spirit.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:02 PM on 06/24/2010
Get out of Jail Free Card for mur..derers
05:35 PM on 06/24/2010
Our multitrillion-dollar military. Let's hire some Taliban generals. We'd at least get our money's worth.
03:42 PM on 06/24/2010
Im confused.
Is this the same incident where higher command put up a ranger force command post in the middle of a valley prone to enemy threat from higher grounds who had to fight 200 Taliban fighters? Then when things went wrong, the chain of command played CYA and just punished the officers?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
washlib
02:45 PM on 06/24/2010
typical, if they can't pin the whole problem on a few bad apples, and it shows a SYSTEMIC problem..best to just exonerate them, or you might have to actually, like...MAKE SYSTEMIC CHANGES...
12:14 PM on 06/24/2010
obviously people are going to screw up when they're fighitng a war... no sense in punishing the officers, just bring all of them home
01:45 PM on 06/24/2010
War is no excuse for negligence, willful neglect, inattention or laziness.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Greg285
02:15 PM on 06/24/2010
I agree 100%! They should be punished for failure of leadership...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Blackorpheus
the decisive blows are always struck left-handed
12:04 PM on 06/24/2010
Arrogant, compassionless decision. Will Petraeus intercede?
photo
StopThePlanet
Relentless pursuit of every silver lining's cloud
11:16 AM on 06/24/2010
This decision SHOULD have a chilling effect on enlistment. It is clear that the military does not care much for its soldiers. It cares more about oil companies and defense contractors profits. Parents keep that in mind when your children express interest in joining. Once they enlist it is too late. If they come back in a box you will never forgive yourself for not warning them of the dangers.
11:15 AM on 06/24/2010
There are such things as “failure of leadership” and “leadership of failure.” Yes, I agree that punishing the three officers would have a chilling effect on other battlefield commanders who have to make crucial decisions. Punishment in any manner should have a chilling effect on those in the field or anywhere. Rightly so, they should be aware that there are consequences when wrong and irrational decisions are made. The effect on field officers is one thing but at hand; let’s deal with the punishment required for the three officers. “Leadership of failure” occurs when so-call leaders who are in charge promote the ideology that when leaders do wrong there are little if any consequences required for these wrongs.

I am sorry to say, that the military I once loved has continually transformed itself into a den of liars and deceivers. You can attempt to cover manure, but when the covering collapses, the stench becomes profuse. This whole affair has a strong smell of “leadership of failure” that permeates from the top brass.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:08 AM on 06/24/2010
And in other news, here at home, prisoners are being released because their punishment might have a "chilling effect" on....
10:09 AM on 06/24/2010
Shades of REMFs in the Vietnam era.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pahpah25
10:04 AM on 06/24/2010
when will young men and women stop volunteering to enlist in the military....if they do volunteer, then don't complain when things go so very wrong.....there are some very smart officers and some very stupid ones....and you won't know which one you have until something like this happens.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael Valentine
Retired SEIU Member
10:41 AM on 06/24/2010
When you don't need money to live then people will stop enlisting.

Until then kids coming out of high school will continue to enlist out of economic need. A bad economy is the prefect recruitment tool.
03:51 PM on 06/24/2010
And...I know I'll get flak for this, but parents who do not set boundaries, make sure responsibility is job one, or provide a positive safe environment, will wind up sending their kids into the military to "straighten them out".

...just like Sara Palin's kid who was given a choice--jail or military service. Until parents start doing their job, the military will keep manipulating the deck to keep those who are under-privileged or under-developed in their ranks.
Paulo1
Thanks for reading, (even if you disagree)
09:50 AM on 06/24/2010
Let me get this right. You screw up so bad that you get US troops killed, an investigation (which is conducted by the military itself) agrees you screwed up and the sum total of your punishment is a letter in your file saying in effect. "you screwed up" and THAT is supposed to send such a chilling effect to our officers that they can't do their jobs ????????????/

Either the military has some awfully damned poor officers or someone is trying to protect the nice little careers of three unfit officers.
10:54 AM on 06/24/2010
A letter that says "you screwed up" in the file of a career Army officer is the death sentence. He will nvever be promoted again or be put in a position of responsibliltiy greater than the supply chain.
04:42 PM on 06/24/2010
Wow that's severe punishment for some numbnuts whose stupidity got a lot of good men killed.