Podcast: Marvin Olasky interviews the president of Rasmussen Reports on the necessity of accurate polling 
Click to Print
Include Comments
No way out
I worked on an incredibly interesting story this week and last, that of Army Capt. Roger Hill. Just a few months ago, Hill, a West Point grad and Bronze Star winner, was leading a high-action combat unit in Afghanistan. Today, he’s back in the States awaiting dismissal from the Army, possibly with an other-than-honorable discharge.
His case illustrates what embedded journalist P.J. Tobia calls the terror war’s “impossible mission”—and what can happen when the letter of military law clashes with a commander’s duty to protect his men.
Here are two links: One to my story, and one to Tobia’s story. It’s important to read Tobia’s story, too, because he was present in Afghanistan for all public portions of Roger Hill’s Article 32 hearing, a military proceeding that enables an investigating officer to weigh evidence from both sides and recommend further action.
Take a look at both pieces and tell me what you think of Hill’s case.
back to top23 Comments to “No way out”
Hi Lynn,
Thanks for this story. The first question on my mind, knowing how battalions operate, is, where the (bleep) were the bn’s XO (executive officer) and BC (battalion commander)? If my BC and XO lost operation awareness and control over Dog Co, and ignored repeated commo requests, they would each receive loud screaming counselings from a brigade commander (full bird COL), and likely receive a new orifice non-surgically, if you get my drift. It’s shameful in my mind that a LTC would ignore that sort of radio traffic, even if it was from a company commander he didn’t like.
Perhaps Hill did something incorrect by Army regs. I can see that. I can also see he got into the situation because his chain of command failed him. If somebody’s head has to roll, I’d love to see the LTC and XO talk about this, because their lack of words is saying more about them than about Hill.
Report comment to moderator
OK, read Tobia’s story. Same thing as before. The LTC has some talking to do to convince me he’s not gotten PC or something. Realpolitik is one thing. Hanging a junior officer out to dry…that’s something different.
Report comment to moderator
War is hell, but that doesn’t excuse a violation of the chain of command. Without the chain of command soldiers take justice in their own hands and become vigilantes.
I sympathize with Hill’s situation, but he erred by detaining the Afghans too early. He should have not let on that he knew they were spies until the decision for what to do with them had already been made. So one bad decision led to a string of other bad decisions.
The real problem here is that we have one army trying to play by the rules of war against another who does not. The American political machine tries to fight fair and look good on TV, while the Afghan fighters hack off the arms and cut out the heart of US servicemen and then distribute their fingers downtown amongst the locals.
Those people are savages, following their savage spiritual leader Muhammad. An analogy might be the American Indian appearing like ghosts and hacking people to death. What are civilized people to do?
Political America refuses to acknowledge the nature of the enemy and this puts a tremendous pressure on the armed services. It creates an Impossible Situation.
Report comment to moderator
At a different level, there’s an element of lawlessness here that subverts long-term goals. As Pollack comments
“Roger [Hill] and his first sergeant decided to turn Jack Bauer on the detainees.”
The problem is that these things do happen. Soldiers do lose their control, take it out etc. Yet even though knowing this, don’t we also have to say that this also violated the standards we have set for ourselves?
We can use the context of violence to excuse our actions, but boil it down and what you have is lawlessness, the natural traveling companion of war (and so why Christians, above all, should be cautious about the claims of war and its supporters).
Report comment to moderator
We’re going to lose this war. Imposing a 96 hour rule on enemy detainees is idiotic and we have idiots running this fight. In any other war, who would release someone who is out to kill you and your men? I don’t understand why a soldier would re-enlist under these circumstances. The jihadists are not criminals, they are the enemy who are out to destroy us and our way of life.
This is serious business.
Report comment to moderator
These Islamists are out to destroy western civilization: “In sayin that ‘Islam’ will eliminate Israel, Hamas echoes another Muslem Brotherhood document-one which the organization vows to work in America toward ‘eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabatoging its miserable house by thir hands and the hands of believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion-that is, Islam- is made victorious over all other religions.’”
Excerpt from the Washington Times 12 January 209.
It is a religious war, but we can’t declare that. If we aren’t going to let the soldiers fight, they shouldn’t be there.
This is outrageous!
Report comment to moderator
I agree with Chas. The exact absolutist commitment of the jihadi fanatics is poorly understood by many many folks. A good share of those folks are in uniform, it now seems. The fanatics of fascislam wont rest til they hear a funeral dirge playing: Our own
Report comment to moderator
Now having read in more detail, I still fault the battalion for not picking up the detainees. Our catch and release strategy will guarantee even more fence-sitters will join up with Taliban. If anything the captured spies should have been routed to a joint forces detention facility. Handing them over to the Afghan army alone would not have worked. I’m wondering what the exact motives of the terp were. There was a westernized terp on my FOB who was well liked but that ended when weapons and explosives were located in the trunk of his car.
Report comment to moderator
Sign me up for the Facebook group to support a full pardon/reinstatement of CPT Roger Hill
Report comment to moderator
Hill’s dilemma reminds me of the scene from “Saving Private Ryan”. The Lt. Captured a German soldier. Under the circumstances, he couldn’t turn him in. He surely couldn’t keep him. What to do? Either kill him or let him go. The deciding factor is whether or not he is a threat. He decided, probably correctly, that this is just a soldier who has no emotional stake in this war and just wants to go home. So, he let him go. OTOH, if this man was deemed a threat, he has to kill him. In cold blood. Just like that.
You can’t risk the lives of your men and the mission because of some idiot who makes rules he doesn’t understand. But a pardon? They’ll leave Hill swinging in the wind, the same as the two border guards who are in prison for doing their jobs.
Report comment to moderator
The wars have become a bit too overlawyered these last few years. Does anyone recall COL Allen West? He was relieved and made to retire. I think he was acquitted of wrong doing after a well-publicized court martial. He interrogated an informant and while doing so un-holstered his sidearm. Oh my heavens.. the subject was under duress, but the man was unharmed.
Then lets recall the marine Lt Ilario Pantano. He was tried and eventually asked to be let go from the USMC. The notoriety of his trial (went his argument) meant that subsequent commanders would question his ability and subordinates would second-guess him.
The Afghan war is a brutal grisly thankless affair. While NATO troops confine themselves to securing kiddie school crosswalks in Kabul or other safe places, it is YOUR sons and yes even YOUR daughters who are facing off against the enemy.
Had Hill or his men been captured they would have surely got the black flag.
Efforts to tar him or the 1st SGT with Calley/My Lai comparisons are scurrilous
Report comment to moderator
9. Where can we go for that?
Report comment to moderator
The thing that disgusts me the most about this incident is the duplicity of our politicians who are ultimately responsible for all these impossible rules of engagement that shackle and endanger the lives of our military men. Having served in Vietnam I saw the same thing, many times over.
Politicians clap you on the back and send you off to war. Then they stab you in the back when you lay your life on the line and do your job. Sometimes, I hate every damn one of them. Meanwhile, the majority of the American people just yawn and go about their business. During the Vietnam era they were often characterized as “The Silent Majority.” In their silence, I considered them almost as despicable as the cowardly and Judas politicians they elected.
War is chaos and we see here, as in Vietnam, when there is doubt about what happened, the enemy gets the benefit of the doubt, not our men. Spies and killers are walking free while our guys are in custody and being punished. This is insane. Honestly, it is amazing that we have any soldiers left who are willing to serve and protect a nation that treats them this way.
We can expect this trend to get even worse under the Obama administration.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner and Chas — you both seem to dodge the underlying question: are there standards of conduct? The pleading of special circumstances excuses everything. Chas is certainly of the age to remember “Situational Ethics.” This is the same thing on the battlefield.
In war, savagery breeds savagery. How then do you set boundaries for behavior? The lawlessness bred by war is an evil. Thus, even in war, we must still insist on accountability. So I’m not going to give the guys a pass: there’s more at stake than their personal perception.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunnner
While NATO troops confine themselves to securing kiddie school crosswalks in Kabul or other safe places, it is YOUR sons and yes even YOUR daughters who are facing off against the enemy.
You’ve made this mistake before and I’ve corrected you before. Remember the Dutch, Danish, the UK and Canadians are all heavily involved in SW Afghanistan. When Americans ignore the contributions of their allies, its makes it easier for them to leave.
The side that proclaims to be civilized has to set boundaries. My own opinion sees the Northern Alliance vs Taliban War devolve into a more tribal/clan based war where personal interests far outweigh religious compulsions.
Report comment to moderator
This makes 4, no 5, that Bush should pardon.
Report comment to moderator
15 HRW,
What is really needed is a clear cut legislatively codified guide which would not impose any subjectivity on the commanders and NCOs in the field. I agree with the earlier post. The spineless pols who injected our men into the tribal war should have spelled out from the git go what they would and would not allow our forces to do to achieve the goal in Afghanistan.
By the way, did Congress ever specify a desired “end state” for Afghanistan?
If it comes down to who can be most brutal on a face to face man-to-man level, Americans will lose. At least in the early years we could “farm out” the unpleasantness to countries where the ACLU and others had no eyes to pry.
In all prior wars, enemy soldiers caught behind the lines out of uniform were spies and were shot. Treating the enemy in Afghanistan sounds like the failed approach of treating terrorism as a mere domestic crime nuisance. Howzat workin for you?
Report comment to moderator
Aaccording to the way we are waging this war, the jihadists are criminals and should be brought to a court of law. If you can’t make a case against them, you let them go. Trying to kill you is not sufficient evidence.
The side that is civilized does not set the boundaries. We have to play by the rules the enemy sets. You can’t allow them to make their own rules.
These are evil people. They adhere to an evil religion. Christians and Muslems have the same goal, to convert the world to their religion. Christians do it by preaching the Word, Muslems do it with the sword.
Our leaders do not understand that.
“To compare terrorism with an all-encompassing ideology like communism and fascism is evidence of profound confusion.” Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del. WSJ, May 28, 2008.
(Not picking on Biden here, I suspect GWB would say the same thing. The point is, our leaders don’t understand the war we’re in.)
Report comment to moderator
Chas and Sawgunner,
Your most recent posts demonstrate the inherent confusion that lies at the heart of waging war (which is the legitimate us of a nation’s military) vs. nation-building (which is not a job soldiers should be called to do).
We profess to be nation-building. Too many Afghans think we’re occupying. Hence they’re cut-throat guerilla/terrorist tactics.
Do you think you would do any different if the US of A were invaded and occupied by, say, China?
(I’m sorry, I mean “… if we were invaded and being nation-built by China …”)
Incidentally, this is one more exhibit in the case for a non-interventionist America defended by a citizen militia.
And lastly, in the 80s and 90s, we liked to rub the Soviets’ noses in “their” Vietnam — a.k.a., their long, slow defeat in Afghanistan. Looks like we’re setting ourselves up for ‘Nam II.
Report comment to moderator
Should read, “… (which is the legitimate use of a nation’s military) …” etc.
Report comment to moderator
As I stated above, the Afghan war has devolved into a tribal war with personal and family interests predominating over ideology and religion. Since its no longer a war between clear defined sides, its time to leave and let the glorified mayor of Kabul, Karazi, attempt to rule.
The current reincarnation of the Taliban contains many hired gunman who find work as a gunman more rewarding than anything else. Also the Taliban in some ways represents the interest of the Pushtan people, hence the tribal not religious nature of the war. Karazi needs to negotiate with the various factions instead of relying on NATO to prop him up.
Terrorism is not an ideology its a method, a tool or strategy. To treat terrorism as more than this is to fight the conflict in the wrong manner.
Report comment to moderator
I have known Roger Hill since he was a teen. He is one of the finest people I have ever known. I watched him defend weaker friends against larger bullys in high school. He went through West Point with a strong determination to succeed. I heard about the trials he withstood in the Ranger program in the Northeast winter survival regimen. I knew him when he was a serving in Arlington cemetary, helping bury the war dead. He eventually was asked to help in the ceremony burying Ronald Ragan. Roger would talk about the sacrifices of those men and how honored he was to be able to celebrate them in Arlington. Later he trained men to go into battle in Iraq in Columbus Ga. I remember how dedicated he was to send them off with the best skills. He then volunteered to go to Iraq since he wanted to be with those men and work with them side by side. He was someone who trained Iraq soldiers to take over when the US left. I understand that was a particularly dangerous job. I listened when he returned and we quized him on what was going on over there. His thoughtful replies and soft spoken nature made me proud that we had such men in the US military who cared for the Iraqi people and loved the US
Report comment to moderator
I remember sitting at church before Roger went to Iraq. We were all worried that it might be the last time we would see Roger. He comforted us all and said that if he had to give his life fighting for his country that he would do it without hesitation. Again I felt proud that he represented us.
So when I heard of Roger’s troubles and read the articles about what happened I can’t believe the trouble he is in. I am sure all the circumstance are not in the open but I know that the circumstances must have been very difficult for Roger to have done what he did. I don’t know if there were better options.
But I know Roger and will defend him as an honorable man, a tremendous defender of the US, and a great representative of the country I believe in.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's blogs to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!