343rd Quartermasters

UPDATE: This article from Fox News states that the Officer in Charge of this unit has been relieved of his command.

This is my opinion, and only my opinion.

I've been reading quite a bit on the internet about this situation from Blogs as well as "news" sites.

Many of the "news" sites have been reporting on what Mommy and Daddy say happened to little Johnny Jerkoff and little Janey Rottencrotch. Like that has any relationship to the problem.

I've seen several Blogs that seem to think that this is a problem with the Company Grade officers. Had they shown more leadership this would not have happened. Personally, I'm not buying it.

Let me preface this by saying that the vast majority of Reserve and Guard units - both Stateside and overseas - have served and are serving with honor, diligence and distinction. And it is not in any way their fault that the government has seen fit to transfer many former active duty functions to their baliwick.

But by their very nature, a Guard or Reserve unit will not have the training that active duty troops have. It simply can't be done - not on a daily and continuing basis. When the troops are called up, they spend time in Kuwait or other locations trying to get up to speed. Apparently there are times that, by the nature of their speciality and the nature of the mission, the amount of training they receive isn't enough for a combat environment.

Guard and Reserve units often have to suck hind tit when it comes to equipment. The best gear will almost always go to the active forces, since they are the ones most often at the sharp end of the stick. Is it fair? Where the hell did this concept of "fair" come from, anyway? Fair to who?

You are almost always going to have individuals in any Guard or Reserve unit who maintain their "part-timers" view of their service - the "I'm only here for the college" view. Even when called up to active duty, they cling to their civilian mindset and think the rules don't apply to them.

Having said all that, before pointing fingers at the officer corps, how about we look at the NCO's. It appears this was a platoon-level problem, based on the number of troops involved. Even though there were a few junior NCOs involved in this decision to refuse orders, the senior NCOs should have squelched this before it went any further.

The thinking out there in the Blogosphere seems to be that the troops should just get Article 15 punishment, if any at all, while the officers should be relieved of command. Huh? I must have missed something there.

I have seen similar situations arise in other settings - when a police officer in Australia I saw an "attempted mutinity" take place over the living standards during a tough duty. It only takes a couple of "sea lawyers" to get something started, and if a few more buy into the justification for not doing their job, it can get out of hand unless the senior NCOs stomp on it quickly.

Even if every rationalization presented by these troops for not obeying orders is correct, that still does not excuse their actions. Others from their same unit had to undertake that "suicide mission" with the same trucks of "magically" uncontaminated fuel to the same place - without incident.

Bottom line - they screwed the pooch. They talked themselves into something that they now have to pay for.

Now, I was in a unit once that was the only truck company in the Division, and on a surprise IG inspectection it failed every echelon of maintenance. The Company Commander was properly relieved of command. Should something similar be the case here, the same result should take place.

Their vehicles were shipped without armor. So were everyone else's - including the active duty troops. They improvised their own armor; they didn't bitch and refuse orders because the mythical "someone else" should have done it for them.

At a minimum, the NCOs in the unit who took part in refusing to obey orders should receive Courts Martial - but not General Courts. possibly the junior Privates and PFC's should rightfully receive Office Hours, but again, that depends on the circumstances of the situation.

Keep in mind, the only ones going public with their side of the story are the troops involved - not exactly an unbiased point of view. We still do not know what the actual circumstances are as to the order itself and their refusal.

Of course, USA Today, The New York Times, CNN, CBS, NBC, etc., etc., will be happy to tell us what they want us to believe.

As I said - this is only my opinion, based on what little we know so far. Should other facts - cand I cannot stress that word highly enough - come out, this opinion may change.