Captured sailors will stand before the man for violating Code of Conduct

Article ll:
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

As I said on day one on another thread these sailors violated the Military Code of Conduct.

They just didn't resist from being captured, they failed to scuttle their boats and allowed them to be captured.

This is what happens when the military is used for liberal PC social engineering. Instead of attending classes on the Code of Conduct and how to use their weapons instead they were attending Obama's mandatory diversity and sensitivity classes.

The U.S. Navy is suppose to be in the war fighting business not the social engineering business. Social engineering distracts from war fighting.

Obama's PC Navy is an embarrassment to America.

 

There is so much about that incident that does not make sense.

They saw Farsi Island and thought it was Saudi Arabia? They were supposedly going from Kuwait to Bahrain, to do that you travel south in sight of land (Saudi Arabia) to the West on your starboard side all the way. To see Farsi Island - a tiny, nothing little speck of land maybe 1500 ft wide, which is off limits, and everyone in the area knows it, or is supposed to know - on the port side and think it was Saudi Arabia?

And you go with 2 boats always so if one has trouble the other tows it. This story of one boat having mechanical trouble and drifting into Iranian waters is either BS, or true and the boat crews were totally incompetent (and I don't believe that).

Another thing, there were women in the boat crews, as far as I know there are no women SWCC. Maybe these were not regular boat crew. I can't see a SWCC boat crew making those stupid mistakes, or letting "unauthorized" on their boat.

Even though the boats appeared to not have their usual armament, just some rifles, I know plenty of guys that would still tell the Iranians to (*)(*)(*)(*) Off.

Everything about this smells.

****

As to the code of conduct, its confused. On paper it says one thing, in real life you are told to do what you have to do to survive. I'm sure being a prisoner is worse when you don't trust your own government to come get you. But in the end its up to the individual, some combination of intelligence, guts, pride, training, and heart. There will be the guys who will die rather then be captured, and the John McCains who tell his captor to (*)(*)(*)(*) off even when his arms are wrenched out of their sockets (that's why his arm doesn't work anymore), and there will be the guys who cry on camera.

 

Here's what a typical Riverine Patrol Boat armament looks like, look armed enough for a small patrol boat -> http://www.popsci.com/sites/popsci.com/files/styles/large_1x_/public/riverboat.jpg?itok=o_H8MY6W

A photograph released by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards showing the sailors' weapons.
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/01/14/world/14SHIPS-2/14SHIPS-2-master315.jpg

The boats and crew were heavily armed, (*)(*)(*)(*) they even had mini-guns !

No reason for them allowing themselves to be captured.

No excuse for not scuttling the boats if they weren't going to put up a fight.

These sailors let down the U.S. Navy and America.

Basically I don't think todays sailors are being properly trained to be sailors.

A few years ago the Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus (the worse Sec. of the Navy in America's history) said that the main mission of todays Navy is "fighting sexual harassment." As we have seen the first branch of the military to become politically correct under Obama was the Navy.

From another source the investigation said these sailors weren't properly indoctrinated in the U.S. Military Code of Conduct and weren't properly trained in there weapons. But I sure bet you these sailors were well indoctrinated in liberal PC diversity and sensitivity training.


This whole incident stinks.

If the boat commander and I'm guessing they were CPO's ordered their crews nit to fire their weapons and defend the boats, then the boat commanders violated Article ll of the code of conduct. Actually it would be an unlawful order so the crew would fall under the UCMJ following an unlawful order. All ten of these sailors should walk the plank.

Three officers already fired !

I wonder how high up the chain of command this goes ?

If these sailors weren't properly trained because of social engineering taking priority over training for combat, then it goes all the way to the Oval Office. It's the job of the CnC to make sure that our sailors, Marines, soldiers and airmen are properly trained, armed and equipped for war.

 

In the pictures of the men kneeling on the boat, there are weapon mounts but no weapons. Maybe the weapons were removed before the pictures, maybe the weapons were never even mounted.

And this from the CNN report is just false: "The U.S. craft were also undermanned, and couldn't be operated at the same time the weapons were being manned."

It seems the Navy is trying to put all the blame on the boat crews claiming the crews were ignorant, poorly trained, overworked, could not even operate their boat, and did not have even the most basic ability in navigation. That's hard to believe. Even a Boy Scout can find his way home given a map, a compass, and the sky. Add in GPS and radar like the boats have and even a jarhead could find his way .

 

A map and compass ? It's a different era and a different generation today who have become dependent on technology. They can't function without it. These sailors might have been millennial snowflakes ?

I provided a link above of the weapons that the Iranians took a photo of, yes they were dismounted after being captured.

A photograph released by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards showing the sailors' weapons.
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/01/14/world/14SHIPS-2/14SHIPS-2-master315.jpg

Undermanned ? Two boats, 10 crew members. That's five per boat, enough to man four weapons on each boat.

General Characteristics
Length: 53 feet
Beam: 12 feet
Draft: 36 inches static
Speed: cruise 35 knots; sprint 40 knots
Range: 250+ nautical miles
Armament: 4 mounts for M2 .50 caliber, 7.62mm M240B, Mk19 40mm machine guns, or Mk 44 GAU-17 7.62mm guns; foundation for remote-operated weapons system

In other navies these boats are classified as Fast Assault Craft but in todays Obama PC Navy the word "assault" isn't PC so they reclassified them as River Command Boats. Yeh, that sounds pretty politically correct.

The actual classification is CB-90 Fast Assault Craft. CB = Combat Boat, not a PC designation in Obama's PC Navy.

 

I saw your links to pictures in your earlier post. I just don't get it, the guys that volunteer to go in those boats are supposed to be a cut above the rest, when the Iranians grabbed that UK boat in 2007 I said that would never ever happen to a US Navy boat, there would be Iranians floating face down if they tried. How its changed in just a few years.

I absolutely agree that people are dependent on technology, both military and Western society in general. When the USA goes after a real opponent (or they come after the USA) and all those satellites go dark and the computer screens go blank a lot of people are going to suffer.

 

Don’t like a concept of people dying in peace time, killing other people in peace time, without any particular reason… creating an international incident in process… adding more blood and hatred in between… without any particular reason…
Mistake was made, lesson learned, do not think that shooting and killing was absolutely necessary.

 

While I agree that the capture of these sailors is indicative of a leadership failure, the six articles contained in the code of the U.S. fighting force are more guidelines than formal military law in the same way the UCMJ is.

I don't know how the USN trains their personnel, but everyone in the USAF who serves on an aircrew is trained on how they should act in combat when they must "evade capture, resist while a prisoner or escape from the enemy." It is part of military doctrine, but these are guidelines.

I remember the 3 x 5 flashcards we made and committing the code of conduct to rote memory.

I - I am an American fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.

II - I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

III - If I am captured, I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.

IV - If I become a prisoner of war I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me, and will back them up in every way.

V - When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.

VI - I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.

The ultimate goal is to ... Return With Honor

 

Just more part of the plan. Plan is working great.

- - - Updated - - -

You would feel different had those sailors been hung or beheaded. And I can bet that was a option to the Iranians.

 

The full report has been released this morning. Here it is. -> https://news.usni.org/2016/06/30/document-summary-u-s-navy-investigation-farsi-island-incident

It's 87 pages long. Haven't read every word but all of the important stuff.

My observations:

The crew didn't know what the ROE were. Most of the gunners thought they were under Obama's PC ROE that are forced upon our troops in Afghanistan that you can't fire upon the enemy until the enemy has already opened fire on you.

The American gunners should have opened fire without waiting for orders from the PC boat captains.

The boat captains put the safety of the crew above the boat, that's not the way it works in the Navy, the safety of the ship (boat/craft) comes first.

The gunners on the RCB's did rack there weapons (.50 cal. HMG) but were ordered to stand down by the boat captain.

The boat captains violated Article ll of the Code of Conduct and surrendered without firing a shot.

Under captivity some of the crew members gave more than name, rank and serial number, violation of the Geneva Convention.

All of the sailors seem to have been clueless about the Military Code of Conduct which is suppose to be driven in the heads of every soldier, sailor, Marine and airmen during basic and classes should be held a few times a years reindoctrination the Code of Conduct.

The Code of Conduct is in effect even during peace time, some crew members though the Code of Conduct was only in effect when you're at war. They got it wrong.

The boat captains didn't have the fighting spirit that all Americans use to have back in the days when America was great.

Basically I think the entire boat crews were snowflakes, pantywaist PC sailors, a disgrace to the U.S. Navy and America.

There were failures up the chain of command, big time.

But I think it goes all the way back to Navy recruit training. The Navy no longer turns out real sailors or warriors.

What's the first thing one learns during his first few days during boot camp ? Your 11 General Orders which tells you when and when not you can surrender your weapon. The Military Code of Conduct use to be driven into your mind during recruit training.

Obama purging the Officers Corps of it's warriors and replacing them with PC yes men who couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag just makes things worse. Social engineering of the American military resulted in losing the fighting spirit.

And when the military is used for liberal social engineering stuff like this are going to happen. The U.S. Navy along with the Army. Marine Corps and Air Force are suppose to be in the war business not the political correctness business.

What was even worse, when the Iranians boarded the RCB's they struck the American colors and raised the blue flag of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on an American Navy craft !!!

 

Ted Cruz was saying the same thing in January, 2016 a full six months before the formal AAR was issued.

“The only reason they were seized is because of the weakness of Barack Obama.”
"“Any nation that captured our military officers, captures our soldiers, should face serious repercussions.”

 

Funny, this incident happened just right after Obama gave Iran $150 billion dollars.

I know Iran wouldn't have pulled this stunt if McCain or Romney or even if Hillary were POTUS. Obama is a pantywaist.

 

This question should have been asked - loudly! Why did they surrender?

It is VERY unlikely that an Iranian gunboat would have actually open fired on a US military boat. It is notable the US boats were 40 knot capable, meaning faster than the Iranian boat. So they literally had to stop to let the Iranians catch up, not only surrendering but pro-actively acting to surrender.

They had radios, so the question is did the CO on the mission order the surrender without inquiring by radio up command what to do first?

WHO SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE is ONLY the HIGHEST AUTHORITY in military command who ordered the surrender UNLESS it was a mutiny. That seems obvious. If a CO orders a surrender, the others are not liable.

 

But if the boat captains violated Article ll of the Code of Conduct; I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist. wouldn't that be an unlawful order to surrender ? The boats and crew still had a means to to resist.

Under the UCMJ a subordinate is suppose to refuse to carry out any unlawful order.

Pretty sure after the court martial of Lieutenant William L. Calley for carrying out an unlawful order and issuing that unlawful order to his platoon that resulted in the My Lai incident, since 1971 it's SOP to hold individual soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen responsible for carrying out an unlawful order.

What's your take on that ?

 

I just noticed, the report on the investigation is 257 pages long !

 

I seem to recall that the Marines absolutely did not want to surrender when the Japanese were prepared to storm the Bataan Peninsula on the main Philippine island. Although the Japanese had superior firepower from their ships, the Marines believed even with light arms they could slaughter the Japanese on the beach. Instead, the CO surrendered, leading to the Death March.

It is a complicated question. Soldiers do not have to accept a suicide mission and at some point not surrendering is suicidal - such as the German troops at Stalingrad - starving and out of ammo - though surrendering resulted in nearly all being slowly murdered in Soviet POW death camps.

American troops, German troops, Union troops, Confederate troops, all surrendered. I don't think people see them a cowards or disobeying the military code. Soldiers may surrender if facing certain death without inflicting major enemy casualties is allowed - and the Geneva Convention was addresses this in detail.

A CO orders subordinates to surrender, but they could still fight - BUT IT IS NOT WAR TIME? I believe because there was no war between Iran and the USA and they believed they were in Iranian water, no I do not think subordinates would be liable for obeying a surrender order. Because there is no state-of-war the definition of "surrender" might be different.

But I'm not really knowledgeable and it seems you are. My sense of it is that I want to know who is the highest ranking officer to order they stop and surrender, and then would stomp on that officer - literally imprisonment - as a lesson to all. For the rest? Again it might depend on rank. Low rankers doing what higher ups ordered? It is drilled in to blindly follow orders and unless they had specifically been taught how to handle "surrender" situations and when they should disobey such an order I would give those low rankers a full pass.

What are your thoughts as example? What would you have done? You're on a boat with others. The CO of the boat announces that by radio he's been ordered to stop and allow Iranians to board the boat. The other 8 agree to do so. What would you do? Lock and load the 50 cal and open fire on the Iranian boat, killing half a dozen of them although they hadn't even fired on your boat? I think if you did that the military would have you up on murder charges.

I'm trying to be realistic. They should not have stopped. Their boats were faster so couldn't have been run down. However, I think it was a poker game bluff by the Iranians and, candidly take a don't fire until fired upon towards their boat. On the other hand, OUR military should have advised the Iranians firing on the boat will be considered and act of war a numerous squadrons of Naval aircraft on racing their way in case Iranian leadership wants war.

In short, this happened because of American gutlessness - and I want to know WHO was the highest military or civilian authority that is 100% incompetent and a pure gutless coward.

 

^ Ours



^ Theirs

Ours can do 40 knots, their's can do 52 knots, so I stand corrected.

The question is would the Iranians actually open fired and, if so, could they do so at a range that our boats (one had a bum motor) where ours could not fight back?

The photo of the weapons seized shows mini-guns that would turn the Iranian boats into Swiss cheese, but the Iranian boats had explosive shells and rockets/missiles.

In my view, the moment they knew they were in Iranian water and detected, they should have piled onto functional boat, scuttled the bum boat, and hauled ass for international waters ignoring demands to surrender. At 40 knots (46 mph) the boat is out of Iranian waters within minutes.

Whether it be Benghazi to Orlando, and this incident, the failures of a bureaucratic structure both in the military and the civil sector has become so complex, slow and confused that the immediate CO(s) to make decisions can't do anything without 7 layers of decision makers - military and civilian - reaching a consensus.

A Marine we know who was a squad leader in combat in the Helman district said they studied the contrast between German units and American units, recognizing the great superiority of the Germans. Why? Because German squads were very independent, they did not have to obtain permission and orders from higher ups, so could make direct and immediate on the spot decisions and actions, while American squads were terribly limited by needing remote, higher rankers orders and permissions.

The commander/captain of a boat or ship SHOULD be the final authority with total independent decision power in any military potential - other than ordering use of nuclear weapons. The commander/captain of that boat should have had 100% total an immediate decision authority. But I seriously doubt that is how it works now. It used to work that way - the captain of any boat or ship was a total independent dictator. Example? The destroyer captain at Pearl Harbor that attacked the Japanese mini sub - seeking no permission before doing so though no state of war existed. Not anymore, not in our military. It is a PC bureaucratic nightmare.

I suspect we nor those being charged will EVER know who actually told them to stand down and surrender.

 

Territorial waters is only 12 miles. The boats appear to have been about 3 miles off shore. At 40 knots it would have taken 10 minutes to be back in territorial waters. With the Iranian boats only being a tad faster, they could not possibly reached that location AND have closed the gap. Once in international waters opening would absolutely be an act of war and act of piracy.

I suspect many in our military are so afraid to do anything wrong and so NOT conditioned to think of themselves as COMBAT personnel, all their responses were wrongheaded. As soon as the CO of the boats saw they were in Iranian water and learned Iranian patrol boats on the way, it should have taken 1 minute to have all 10 on the good boat, the bum motor boat scuttled and hauling ass out of there seeing it as a MILITARY COMBAT situation where the correct decision is to RETREAT (not surrender).

I don't know the military protocol, but do know about offshore boats of that size and speed range in the context of escape and pursuit.

 

I thought the 4th Marines were on Corregidor ?

Now there was Wake Island.

The Marines repelled the first Japanese amphibious invasion, even sunk a Jap cruiser and a submarine.

On the second amphibious assault the Japanese loaded the invasion force on destroyers and ran the destroyers up on the beach.

The Commander of Wake was a Navy Captain, during the battle he saw a Japanese flag flying over one of the three islands and thought that the Japs has secured the island. There were no radios, all communications were by field phones and the lines had already been cut loosing contact with all of the units.

The Navy Captain figured the battle was lost and to save American lives he surrendered.

Unknown to the Captain, the Japs were losing the battle, they were getting their butts whooped big time.

If the Captain hadn't surrendered the Japanese would have been defeated a second time.

Would have the Japs conducted a third amphibious assault ? No one knows. But if they did, the Marines would have been wiped out. The Marines had already thrown all of the naval 3" and 5" guns breechblocks into the ocean preventing the Japanese form using guns.

Within a week after U.S. Marines landed on Guadalcanal the unwritten policy became that U.S. Marines didn't take prisoners during battle. The Japanese had the same policy. Only time prisoners were taken was after the battle was won during mopping up operations. The U.S. Army would soon follow suit in the Pacific and was the policy until August 14th, 1945.

Vietnam war era, every Marine, soldier, sailor and airman was drilled in the Code of Contact during basic. The three things you knew was your service number, 11 General Orders and the Code of Conduct.

In my case after Boot camp you went through ITR and again there was another class on the Code of Conduct. When you got your WestPac orders for Vietnam you found yourself in Staging Battalion at Camp Las Pulgas and again over and over classes on the Code of Conduct except you were told that surrendering or being captured wasn't an option if you were an enlisted man because south of the DMZ, Charlie didn't take prisoners and if you surrendered, you were executed with in hours. So being captured was never an option in South Vietnam. In North Vietnam they would take prisoners but not south of the DMZ.

This female sailor who was one of the ten sailors who were captured, she was the first female of the U.S. military since the first Gulf war who was captured and wasn't raped.

The Navy is a little different, the number one job of the captain is protecting the ship, not the crew. If the ship looks like it's going to be captured, it's suppose to be scuttled.

Code of Conduct
for
Members of the United States Armed Forces
I
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.

II
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

III
If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.

IV
If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.

V
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.

VI
I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.

 

They didn't even succeed in fighting sexual harassment since the female soldier had to wear a scarf. Well, at least she wasn't sold as a sex slave in Raqqa.

 

She also wasn't raped making history, the first American female in the U.S. military since the beginning of the all volunteer military who was captured ant not raped by her captives.

 

US/Iran confrontation will take its tall in human life yet. This is how it goes. There is no way of avoiding the risks, they are many to come, some of them will result in firefight, some of them can be closed peacefully.
The question is what do you want to be.
- Do you want to be a mad dog, shooting everything that moves in your path.
- Or do you want to try to establish a human like relationship? Are the Iranians a fire eating monsters with no other thoughts than to violate American freedoms in their territorial waters, or do they have kids, old parents, possibly a fat monstrous tom-cat that spends his time hating humanity sitting on a fridge.
In this case the common sense won. There was no reason to loose life, so no one pulled the trigger. Boat commander have taken a risk of surrender, violated the Code of Conduct, have saved 10 lives of his men, 10 lives of Iran coastguard, and many more that wear supposed to pay for stupidity of others that would be spent to resolve a conflict that came out of dead engine pump or bad battery.
Yep, now he will pay the price.

I agree with your point entirely, the risk of “bad death” was there, but it is not for us to judge. We live under a propaganda umbrella that describes Iranians as monsters. A person on the ground, is much more knowledgeable, he is to decide if Iranian Coast Guard can be trusted or not. In this case he made the right decision. (Apart form a (*)(*)(*)(*) up with navigation and engine)

 

Thanks. I remembered the story of Wake Island, but not the location. Thanks for the refresher.

Since there is no war between Iran and the USA, would the rules concerning "prisoner of war" even apply?

Iran may have been advising they were only coming to assist - and then did a double take. There is no formal adverse relationship between Iran and the USA. What if this had happened off the coast of Brazil, which technically has about the same official relationship with the USA - as in none? That there was no state of war or armed conflict between Iran and the USA would seem to play into this. Or would it?

 

They proved over the course of 444 days they are monsters.

 

Re: Code of Conduct, Navy JAG Corps testified during the investigation. Yes, the Code of Contact does come into play, and the first thing they pointed out was the violation of Article ll of the Code of Contact, the crew was ordered to surrender when they still had a means to resist.

The report is kinda long but it starts dealing with the Code of Conduct starting at page 131. -> https://news.usni.org/2016/06/30/document-summary-u-s-navy-investigation-farsi-island-incident
Major factor, the U.S. has no diplomatic relations with Iran. What the (*)(*)(*)(*) were the boat captains thinking surrendering the boats and crew to a foreign military that we have no diplomatic relations with ?

If the sailors didn't have the spirit, were wearing the uniform that warriors in the past wore, why were they serving in the U.S. Navy in the first place ?

Code of Conduct
for
Members of the United States Armed Forces
Article I
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.


Anyone who's wearing the uniform who isn't prepared to give his or her's life in the defense of America shouldn't be serving. Bu nit today our military today is all about diversity and political correctness. Just look at all of the officers who have been purged over the past seven years and who they been replaced with, (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*).

You read the entire findings of the investigation you see these sailors weren't properly trained. I'm sure they were properly trained in being politically correct but not trained being warriors. As Obama's yes man Secretary of the Navy Mabus said a few years ago that the U.S. Navy is no longer in the war business but it's main mission is "fighting sexual harassment." He said it.

Did you see in the report that the mechanic on the boat used the wrong type of bolt on the boat's engine ? Come on, they teach one about bolt torque ratings in high school auto shop class. Well, at least they did 40 or 50 years ago when every teenager boy in high school took shop classes unless you were gay.