The Army Reservists Who Refused to Follow Orders

C

Courtenay

Active member
and complete a mission this week in Iraq (US Army). Citing lack of security and bad equipment. How do you all feel about it? I personally have ZERO sympathy, and hope that they are punished fully. This is a real problem with bringing reserve units into a war situation...they sometimes don't have the proper military mentality IMO. War, and war missions are DANGEROUS....hello. And sometimes, you have to make do with less than perfect equipment etc. Ask some VN, or Korea, or even WWII vets about that. It truly irked me when I heard about it.
 
I totally agree.

I do not care who you are, you are in the military and must follow orders. This is war and there are going to be dangers everywhere you go. I served in the reserves and know about not having the proper military mindset. It is up to the leaders to make things happen. In this situation, the leaders are just as guilty as the soldeirs.

This offence falls under Article 94 "Mutiny and sedition" of the UCMJ
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl94.htm

Any person subject to this chapter who--

(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuse, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;

(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or other disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition;

(3) fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.

A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

Those soldiers need to slamed to the fullest extent!!!!
 
The problem that I see is that reservists see their jobs as having boundaries - they're simply truck drivers, or simply fuel pumpers, nothing more. The fact of the matter is, we are all soldiers first - and only after that do we have our occupational specialties. "Insufficient security" does not seem to be a valid arguement in my book - soldiers provide their own security, we don't carry loaded weapons for vanity. We should not need soldiers to hold other soldiers' hands so they can drive down a highway. As for the equipment issue - there is some credence to what is being said about there being insufficent armor and heavy weapons to fully equip all convoys. I spent five months driving around in a canvas topped 998 with no doors. Not exactly the same feeling as riding in one of those up-armored jobbies. However, that does not give any soldier the right to disobey a lawful order. Our job is to accomplish a mission with available resources; to achieve an end-state. The execution is quite often a fluid operation, changing with conditions, but the end-state is what is most important. And I think that reservists, largely, lack that realization. They are trained to do their job a certain way with certain equipment. When they are ordered to execute a mission, but given less than the full array of equipment they are used to using they see that as reason to "decline" the mission instead of adapting to the situation and executing an ajusted plan.

And as far as the dealth penalty in the UCMJ goes - I think that if the Army tried to apply that in today's society (especially in this case), there would be such an uproar, and big huge investigations by civilian agencies, and blah blah blah and the guy(s) would likely end up either avoiding the death penalty, or walking away altogether. American society has gotten soft.

That's enough for me tonight...
 
You have a point there Iraq, regarding Americans being soft. In todays world.....where people are those willing to go to the extremes to achieve their goals (terrorists), our softness may be our ultimate undoing here in this country.
 
Death penalty is way out of line, but I agree in that they should be dealt with accordingly. Lives depend on their actions. They should be made aware of their responsibility. You can whine as much as you want beforehand, but as soon as you are on the ground, you must make the best out of the situtation and fulfill your duty.

Do you by any chance have a decent link to an article concerning that topic?
 
Against brutal opponents, you too must be brutal, but in today's society this is what we are incapable of doing at the national scale.
 
First, I'd like to know more facts concerning this (as I'm sure all of us would).

Next, I think the unit leadership needs scrutiny. Someone planted the seeds of this and allowed it to grow.

Soldiers complain all the time, especially in war. It's a dangerous and nasty job with no promises.

However, it's always been that way. D-Day, Okinawa, firebases in Vietnam, first Gulf War, etc. all had extremely dangerous missions without adequate protection/safety.

If you balk at the mission, the mission still needs to be completed and you'll only have them send others in your place.

The leadership knew this. So, I'd like to know what they were saying weeks prior to the mission.

Death penalty is no longer politically biable for this. 20 years in jail for the soldiers and life for the leaders (whatever rank) is not unthinkable.
 
AirborneEagle wrote
20 years in jail for the soldiers and life for the leaders (whatever rank) is not unthinkable.
Click to expand...

Yeah right...this ain't the middle ages.
Relocation to a hot spot would be more apropriate IMO. (to get them acustomed to the heat)
 
I believe that the whole story on this unit hasnt been told..and im going to wait to see what it is.

But i do understand what the main thrust of the discussion is..and agree.

You have to go out..you dont have to come back..Coast Guard unofficial motto.
 
If it was a lawful order and the data currently points out that it was, they need to be punished. They signed the papers, they gave the oath, they broke it.
 
the sad thing is there are people in active duty that side with the reservists. None of those people were combat arms though. People in combat arms generally know the importance of following orders. When the bullets fky, orders must be followed.
 
It is interesting to see the American views on this. I have somewhat of understanding for there refusal to do what they are ordered to do. They are reservists and probably rather poorely trained so they got scared. I do think this is a leadership/training problem. I don't think you should be to quick to judge them until we know what was really going on there. I do hope that they really look in to how your reservist are prepared before going to Iraq.
 
I have served with both active duty and the reserves. I can tell you that training with the reserves is a complete joke.

I will judge this situation and here is why. As an E-6 or below, it is not your place to question an order. You can bring up objections to an order (the outcome is never good when you do it though), but you have to follow that order. Orders in the military are not requests. Failure to follow and missing movement are serious offences in the military. I have seen a number of soldiers get article 15's for both offences. I must remind you that this was at Ft. Campbell, not a war zone.
 
I'd agree with MarkConley in that we most probably don't know the full story here, but on the face of things I personally believe that these clowns deserve all they get.
Unless the order is illegal- for example in breach of the Geneva Convention- then it's your duty to obey it. If you can't deal with that then you should never have signed your name on the dotted line in the first place. Did they honestly expect as members of the military that disobeying orders would not carry any consequences?
And on a less serious note, I've got to say I find it pretty ironic that there are a bunch of American soldiers complaining about their kit. Do a Google search on "poorly equipped US military"- I think you'll find the results are roughly the same as those for "French military victories" that someone suggested elsewhere in here...
 
if i get this right, they did not have all of needed equipment? Well many dont. thank Bush
but yes they should be punished
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top