I don't believe they ever considered it "borrowing". They knew they were taking abandoned units, which they weren't allowed to do, because if they *didn't* do it then they'd have to drive through the war zone in unarmored fuel carriers three times instead of just once.
Then they tried to pretend that they'd never taken these abandoned vehicles because, surprise surprise, taking the vehicles in the first place was not allowed.
Ahh... since that's not what they're being courtmartialed for, are you saying that Wizwom is saying that's the actual intent of the outrage? That they scratched off serial numbers?
Because, like, this is the case that really highlights what that soldier was asked to ask Rumsfeld in his Q&A...
"Chuck Yaeger, in his autobiography, talked about how, during the Vietnam War (he served in combat in WW2, Korea, and Vietnam), there were rules against having planes fixed when they were shot up by enemy fire. You had to plan in advance which planes would be shot up, and schedule the repair details prior to the damage actually occurring.
So if a plane got shot to hell, he'd look to find out which plane he'd scheduled for repairs, and have that plane's number repainted on the plane that needed repairs. He commented that the auditors are probably still trying to reconcile the books."
In the end, I think Jon's point is that they'd probably have been yelled at for taking the trucks if they hadn't tried to conceal that they'd taken the trucks. Trying to hide it is what made taking the trucks *really* worthy of a court-martial.
Yeah, well, you know it's a matter of physics. You can have all the armor on a tank you want and still get blown up. At least, that's what Rummy said. So stop whining already. You'll go out there and get blown up and like it! In fact, you can have all the body armor you want and still get shot dead, so don't even bother wearing that warm uncomfortable stuff. Oh, and you can have lots of camoflage and still be seen, so just wear a T-shirt and shorts, that'll be more comfortable anyway. And you can have all the bullets you want, and still miss, so we'll just take those off your hands too. Right! And no point carrying all those MREs, because you can have as many of them as you want and still be hungry sometime later.
Now shut up. We've got more important things to do, like writing checks to Halliburton and consulting the Bible to see how to bring about the end times.
Because, in the piece it says that if they had made the attempt to restore the units to their correct units, that they would have only been reprimanded - a far cry from being sent to Levenworth.
But once the reservists were done with the assignment, they should have sought out the units the vehicles belonged to, he said.
"Instead of taking the trucks back to their rightful owners, the first thing was erasing the identity marks and dumping them off at bases," Wicker said. "They destroyed it. They did the enemy's job. ... Those trucks could be used for other units."
Wicker ordered the investigation of the thefts, which occurred before he assumed the battalion post.
"Taking the trucks in my mind was not the worst thing they did," Wicker said from Fort Hood, Texas, where he is now with the Army's 13th Corps Support Command.
This is the guy who had the power to sweep the incident under the rug, and that's HIS position.
This wasn't scrounging armor, this wasn't a simple case of borrowing equiptment from a unit which wasn't around. This was a case of grand theft, BECAUSE the people who took the units TRIED to keep the units from being returned.
But they shouldn't be repremanded either. They're doing what they can to protect their lives, and at the same time perform their duity to their country. The fact that to keep from getting repremanded for that they had to disguise things is a problem with the military, not them.
It's also worth noting, they filed off the numbers, stripped the units, and *scrapped* them - those trucks were not fit for use afterwards.
They did this to avoid being courtmartialed for taking the trucks in the first place, and they took the trucks because otherwise they were afraid they'd get shot and the trucks *were* abandoned in a combat zone, but they still destroyed a couple of trucks.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 08:09 am (UTC)If you borrow something, you don't make it hard to track.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 08:30 am (UTC)Then they tried to pretend that they'd never taken these abandoned vehicles because, surprise surprise, taking the vehicles in the first place was not allowed.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 08:40 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 08:51 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 08:56 am (UTC)Because, like, this is the case that really highlights what that soldier was asked to ask Rumsfeld in his Q&A...
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 09:27 am (UTC)"Chuck Yaeger, in his autobiography, talked about how, during the Vietnam War (he served in combat in WW2, Korea, and Vietnam), there were rules against having planes fixed when they were shot up by enemy fire. You had to plan in advance which planes would be shot up, and schedule the repair details prior to the damage actually occurring.
So if a plane got shot to hell, he'd look to find out which plane he'd scheduled for repairs, and have that plane's number repainted on the plane that needed repairs. He commented that the auditors are probably still trying to reconcile the books."
In the end, I think Jon's point is that they'd probably have been yelled at for taking the trucks if they hadn't tried to conceal that they'd taken the trucks. Trying to hide it is what made taking the trucks *really* worthy of a court-martial.
I disagree, but I think I get what he's saying.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 09:28 am (UTC)"Dear soldiers,
Yeah, well, you know it's a matter of physics. You can have all the armor on a tank you want and still get blown up. At least, that's what Rummy said. So stop whining already. You'll go out there and get blown up and like it! In fact, you can have all the body armor you want and still get shot dead, so don't even bother wearing that warm uncomfortable stuff. Oh, and you can have lots of camoflage and still be seen, so just wear a T-shirt and shorts, that'll be more comfortable anyway. And you can have all the bullets you want, and still miss, so we'll just take those off your hands too. Right! And no point carrying all those MREs, because you can have as many of them as you want and still be hungry sometime later.
Now shut up. We've got more important things to do, like writing checks to Halliburton and consulting the Bible to see how to bring about the end times.
Sincerely yours,
Dept. of Defense
P.S. Iraq caused 9-11. Pass it on."
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 11:28 am (UTC)This is the guy who had the power to sweep the incident under the rug, and that's HIS position.
This wasn't scrounging armor, this wasn't a simple case of borrowing equiptment from a unit which wasn't around. This was a case of grand theft, BECAUSE the people who took the units TRIED to keep the units from being returned.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 04:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 08:53 pm (UTC)They did this to avoid being courtmartialed for taking the trucks in the first place, and they took the trucks because otherwise they were afraid they'd get shot and the trucks *were* abandoned in a combat zone, but they still destroyed a couple of trucks.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-13 10:58 pm (UTC)Isn't this the type of thing you're supposed to get a comedation for?