Neptunus Lex

54 responses so far ↓

• 1 Zane // Mar 28, 2007 at 9:46 pm

  Realize also that she’s likely had no SERE training, and has been kept isolated since their capture. Sad, but I bear her no ill will at all, only for the SOBs who are using her.

• 2 Skippy-san // Mar 28, 2007 at 10:25 pm

  Does the British Armed forces have a code of conduct?

• 3 Chris Parkes // Mar 29, 2007 at 1:14 am

  I think British training is slightly different to US training.

  “What training would the personnel have been given to help them in the event of capture?

  These particular people would not be trained in counter-interrogation techniques because they are not expected to be captured. But I think our guidance to anyone in that position would be to say what they want you to say, let’s not be silly about it. Don’t tell them secrets, clearly, but if they tell you: ‘Say this’, well if that’s going to get you out, then do it. It means absolutely nothing, what they say, to be honest. ” - Admiral Sir Alan West, former First Sea Lord

• 4 Brian // Mar 29, 2007 at 2:50 am

  In this day and age I think it’s pretty clear that anything said by someone of that rank who is put in that position is going to be received as highly suspect in the UK and the West in general. As for domestic Iranian consumption I expect it will play a bit better.

  I have to agree that without any significant training for those situations, and given the demeaner she presents on-screen (as described - I haven’t seen it myself) she deserves a pass on judgement.

  Brian

• 5 Michelle // Mar 29, 2007 at 3:11 am

  I watched this on TV last night and my one thought was that the headscarf and the cigarette were an interesting combination.

• 6 dc // Mar 29, 2007 at 3:25 am

  Of course the Iranians went after the woman. In their culture, she would be weakest. I am sure she has done her duty. But I worry about her shipmates, and the unimagineable things they did to them to make her talk.

• 7 ASM826 // Mar 29, 2007 at 4:26 am

  dc,

  I had the same thought. Even the threat might have been enough.

• 8 sid // Mar 29, 2007 at 4:33 am

  Yet more proof that “gender equality” in combat roles is a good idea…

  I am dismayed she didnt’t give this style of a response

• 9 Kris, in New England // Mar 29, 2007 at 4:57 am

  DC said: “…But I worry about her shipmates, and the unimagineable things they did to them to make her talk…”

  And not just to her shipmates. She looks fine from the neck up - who knows what they’ve done to HER to make her say those things. Women in Iran are treated as cattle to be beaten into submission…

  I can’t believe anyone - outside of the Islamic theocracies that exist - would believe that she was speaking voluntarily.

• 10 Curt // Mar 29, 2007 at 5:06 am

  Several issues come to mind with this incident:

  While the “West” will realize that much of her statement most likely was coerced in one way or another, the “show” is not just to us. It was like Khadaffi launching 2 SA-5s in March ‘86 at our planes patrolling over the Gulf of Sidra: They were launched without benefit of the tracking radars being energized (which, by ROE, would have allowed the SEAD guys to ask no more questions before expending ordnance) so from a practical standpoint, they had no chance of striking a target (it being a semi-active homing weapon), unless a Naval Aviator decided to consciously fly into the ballistically projected path…No, it was about an Arab showing his great defiance of the Great Satan to his Arab brothers. They did have footage of the SA-5s rocketing off their launchers, so, he “saved face” and was a hero for a bit.

  In that case, it certainly also gave leadership pause: Was it a hostile act if the weapon had an almost zero probability of hitting one of our units? Yes, we were scratching our heads for a while, but not long before the A-7s with HARM were granted permission to launch on any RADAR emissions (which they got to do). But, I digress…

  The video of her speaking is to show the Arab world that Iran can take on the Western world, and despite the threats that got her to talk, which that culture most certainly knows all too well, that point will be dismissed and Iranian leadership has once more shown how weak the “West” is, as they can make us “talk” and we even have women to defend us. Big brownie points over there for the leadership.

  Another thought come to mind about some letter or article in Proceedings I read many, many years ago, from a Naval Officer stationed in a mostly USAF joint command. He commented that everyone came to him to get naval questions answered and his admonition was to not think too much of your not so broad based naval experiences. He said he was (I believe, but old age my have caused the loss of detail) an aviator, so he said it was incumbent upon him to call old shipmates/classmates/other commands more clued in if he got questions about things like submarine capabilities. Good counsel, especially when you understand people make decisions based on what your respond with.

  How does this play in? An Ordinary Seaman telling the world they most certainly had entered Iranian territorial waters? I don’t think she may have been privy to the exact positional data to make sure an assessment, particularly with the international relations implications. But, back to the first point: The rest of the world, except some of us, don’t realize that ordinary seaman, as good sailors as they may be, are not involved in the navigation operations of a vessel. All the world knows is it’s a “professional,” and therefore, the statement is valid….

  I saw the scarf yesterday and it just made me think of dogs peeing on the fence post. Sorry about the base reference, but it’s about “marking” territory, which is really about stating who’s more powerful and she got to be the analogous fence post in this larger international affairs flap.

  Anyhow, we live in interesting times…

• 11 lex // Mar 29, 2007 at 5:08 am

  Clearly she was speaking under duress, but - absent evidence to the contrary - I imagine it was more psychological than physical: Iran is not Al Qaeda.

  The country manifests a perverse political schizophrenia - they want to demonstrate the power to be a recognized regional actor while at the same time prevent themselves from being marginalized and isolated. It’s unfortunate that their inveterate hostility towards the West makes them take actions which guarantee their isolation and forestall their emergence.

  Now, with their nuke programs and this latest insult, they’ve painted themselves into corners that are hard to gracefully extricate themselves from.

• 12 Sailors, Video and International Relations - - It’s not random, it’s CHAOS! // Mar 29, 2007 at 5:18 am

  [...] Lex and his commenters are on it. I added my two cents to the basic post titled Code of Conduct. Go over there and read the good words from a man who had the possibility, but never the [...]

• 13 badbob // Mar 29, 2007 at 5:18 am

  Anybody even know if the Brits have a Code of Conduct?

  Until I know or have more facts, although irritated by the situation, I’ll ass-ume she is being deprived/tortured or coerced…

  Lex- If you made it to the ground you would survive just like the heroes of Hanoi did. Yes folks- that includes the McCains, Stockdales and Sam Houstons. Why? Because you’ve been SERE trained, you were well-educated and “formed” as an American fighting man and you know that someone would come for you…you know the rest.

  A lot of 18-22 year olds (particulary in the sea services) are not mature enough, specially trained enough, nor equipped to deal with hostile captivity. Unfortunately, that’s been a fact since Korea for the US and probably for the UK as well. Our troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan know this however and know NOT to be taken alive…Of course this 9is just my impression I do not think this is codified through training anywheres…the only thing I could liken it to is how the Marines dealt with the Japanese in WWII. Kill or be killed. No surrender.

  b2

• 14 Idaho // Mar 29, 2007 at 5:24 am

  I thought of the Code of Conduct, also, when I saw that propoganda. Back in the day, when I found myself serving in Somalia, before things turned from bad to worse, I was often the only female in our det. I decided I would develop a lisp if ever in a situation where I was forced to say things I didn’t want to say. So my family would know….But, thankfully, like you Lex, I never was tested.

  Which makes me hope…Turney doesn’t have a smoker’s voice, it’s so silky smooth. I’m hoping she’s not a smoker, and that was the “sign” that she was not using her own words. Pure speculation, and probably blind faith.

  I don’t want to judge either…But, my heart aches wondering why, in the world, she said the things she said.

• 15 piggybelly // Mar 29, 2007 at 5:36 am

  I wonder how “Admiral Sir Alan West, former First Sea Lord”’s remarks would be viewed by another former First Sea Lord — Sir Winston Churchill.

• 16 Ens Tim // Mar 29, 2007 at 6:09 am

  She should have ended her whole speech ala Borat’s comedy lessons…

  “Our ship was in Iranian waters….NOT!”

• 17 Buck // Mar 29, 2007 at 6:14 am

  piggybelly wonders about Sir Winston, I (and others) wonder what Lord Nelson’s response to this situation would be. A number of articles these past few days have invoked the “Lord Nelson spinning in his grave” metaphor, not the least of which is an excellent article by Melanie Phillips.

  I do SO love this woman…

• 18 badbob // Mar 29, 2007 at 6:31 am

  A lotta snark about this..not much insight, here and elsewhere around da blogosphere.

  Some advice kindly given. How many of y’all have ever even “missed lunch” in your lives, let alone been held captive?

  Think about it.

  b2

• 19 jpr // Mar 29, 2007 at 6:49 am

  What’s the US military rank equivalent to a Leading Seaman in the Royal Navy? Is she the most senior of the crew that was taken captive? Technically Iran and the UK are not at war, so do the Geneva Conventions apply about not using prisoners for propaganda purposes? Are both countries signatories?

• 20 Daveg // Mar 29, 2007 at 7:06 am

  I’m with BadBob. I cannot and will not come within a country mile of judging this woman because I have not been, and likely never will be, in her current situation.

  I suspect the threat, even if only implied, of an internet-distributed beheading video, with me as the unwilling star, would strongly influence my behavior.

• 21 Casca // Mar 29, 2007 at 7:17 am

  There are two elephants in the living room. How did they become captive? They were in small maneuverable boats with powerful engines, and presumably armed. What kept them from making a run for it, or making a stand? I don’t expect much from sailors, but you KNOW the Royal Marines were ready to “throw down”.

  Women in the military have changed the culture. I went from a Marine Division with no women, to a support group with about ten percent. The culture shock was extreme. No matter the situation, I always knew what to expect from the guys, and never knew what to expect from the women. Their presence changed the dynamic of the group in a way that diminished the warrior culture.

• 22 prowlerguy600 // Mar 29, 2007 at 7:20 am

  IMO, Doug Hegdahl was an anomoly. With a very few exceptions (count ‘em on one hand), all of those brave men in Hanoi departed from the Code of Conduct. Were it not for Risner and Stockdale’s awesome leadership, those broken men would have remained broken for the duration.

  I’m sorry, Lex, but by your standards Paul Galanti, Mike McGrath, and Jeremiah Denton would be “weak”, as all gave propaganda statements. I must disagree.

• 23 Michelle // Mar 29, 2007 at 7:21 am

  This thread has stuck in my mind all morning since my #5 above. Some disjointed thoughts:

  My “take” would be that the Iranains went after (who they thought would be) the weakest link. And all the questions about what her training actually was are certainly valid.

  I can understand where you’re coming from, Lex, but as you said, you don’t know for sure what even you “might” have done if ever captured. Although if I may be bold enough to presume that I “know” you somewhat (I believe your life is, for the most part, about honour, loyalty and commitment - to your country and to your family) I don’t particularly doubt that you wouldn’t die first. [ Yeah, don't sweat it, you can pay me later.] However, I seriously doubt that her training or life experience comes anywhere near yours.

  And speaking as and for a woman, I could be totally off the wall here but … I don’t know what they threatened her with (and I know, it really shouldn’t matter what they might have said/done) but isn’t there always an extra fear of what could/might be done to you?

  Like I said, just disjointed thoughts.

• 24 SJBill // Mar 29, 2007 at 7:34 am

  Lex

  Thank you for posting The Code of Conduct. It’s been many years, but the words jumped into memory immediately.

  By all accounts it appears the Brits were not well briefed or prepared for this eventuality and that is a huge problem. It’s a lot like us when the Stark or the Cole was hit. ROEs and readiness were out of step with the reality.

  If so near the line, why weren’t the Brits locked and loaded when their kids walked into that trap? Why was a woman in the boarding party? SOCOM types should have been present if they had any.

  On the comment that the Iranians are not Al Queda, perhaps you might reconsider.

  We have detained 300 or so Iranians on Iraqi soil — that sounds as though they are pretty active in their support of the destruction of our boots on the ground. Also sounds as though they have a pretty good working relationship with AQ.

  Are they not the source of much of the IEDs?

  Also, was it not Iran that supplied the huge amount of missiles and personnel to the Lebanese?

  How many times must they threaten to blow a certain countries off the face of the earth befor they get the status they deserve? Iran surpassed mere rogue nation status decades ago. Iran is a terrorist state.

  V/r
  -SJBill

• 25 Jim Collins // Mar 29, 2007 at 7:50 am

  I’ve got a couple of questions. Doesn’t the Code of Conduct only apply in time of war?

  Is this a situation where the rules of war would be applied?

  These days there seems to be more lawyers than leaders in the military. Is this a military or civil incident? There are some big gray areas here, I wouldn’t be too quick to judge anybody’s conduct here.

  Yes. I have been to SERE school.

• 26 midwatchcowboy // Mar 29, 2007 at 7:54 am

  I imagine in a boarding party, that a Leading Seaman would not be the OIC. Perhaps they were not separated, they were shown eating together; I heard that the Iranians allowed them to sleep separately. Maybe the others (on scene leadership) acquiesced or encouraged her to make whatever statement their captors wanted? This may have removed pressure from them. The Iranians get their video for internal/regional consumption. We all get to acknowledge that she didn’t speak for the detachment nor the UK. Was what she said all that damaging? I haven’t heard much about espionage trials recently.

• 27 bthun // Mar 29, 2007 at 7:58 am

  “A lot of 18-22 year olds (particulary in the sea services) are not mature enough, specially trained enough, nor equipped to deal with hostile captivity.”

  IMHO that sums it up nicely, at least for me.

  When I was a young swab I knew the code well. How would I have behaved in a similar situation? As per the code I have to hope, but at that age I had no clue regarding how cruel and evil some humans can be to others. My own assessment of my mental and physical toughness may have fallen short in a real test.

  Last night Retired U.S. NAVY Captain Don Sharer wason Glenn Beck. A snippet of the transcript follows.

  SHARER: Well, it`s running like a scripted scenario of 28 years ago. They`re walking around with blindfolds on when they`re not in front of a camera. When they`re in front of the camera, it`s a P.R. session.

  BECK: The — the woman who has just made this video and wrote the letter, how did that come about, do you suppose?

  SHARER: I think there`s a lot of intimidation there. “You`re going to be tried as a spy, possibly executed,” a lot of intimidation. They want you to write a letter. She wrote what they wanted her to write.

  A young single mother may not have a higher priority or call to duty than returning to her child. Then again, she might want to reevaluate her thoughts on serving in the military if that is the case.

  My 2 cents?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ in 1970’s currency.

• 28 lex // Mar 29, 2007 at 8:04 am

  prowlerguy, like you I know that everybody breaks eventually. But you break hard and you snap right back. That’s what we were taught, and what I hope we would have done.

  No one who hasn’t been there can know, really know how they’d respond and at what level they break.

  Like I said, this is just sad. Sad all the way around.

  Bill, I don’t doubt that Iranian elements, and even the government themselves are willing to cause us grief in Iraq, not least as a way of keeping us occupied and off balance in the region. And Ol’ Beady Eyes has certainly said some rather rash things, although significant questions remain as to how much power he has to actually effect his wild notions - the real power over there rests inside the mullahcracy, of which he forms no part. But Shia-dominated Iran and Sunni Al Qaeda - the group the celebrates kitchen knife beheadings on internet videos - are mortal enemies of each other, while also being enemies to us.

  Be nice if we could step out of their way at some point, and let ‘em fight it out to the last man.

• 29 Kris, in New England // Mar 29, 2007 at 9:31 am

  B2 said: “…Some advice kindly given. How many of y?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢all have ever even ?¢‚Ǩ?ìmissed lunch?¢‚Ǩ¬ù in your lives, let alone been held captive?…”

  Training is all well and fine, until someone in a hostile country with nuclear intentions tells you that you will be raped, tortured, beaten, abused - that your compatriots will also be tortured and beaten - if you don’t write and read what you are told.

  Have no way of knowing if this is true in this case, but it HAS to change things a bit, training or not. And no Iran may not be Al Qaeda, but they don’t have the most humanitarian history do they, especially when it comes to Americans or American Allies.

• 30 AW1 Tim // Mar 29, 2007 at 10:02 am

  Shipmates,

  No man knows how he will react under a given set of circumstances. Researchers say this and that, based upon “X” & “Y” factors will likely result in… whatever. It’s still a guess. We’d all like to think of ourselves in the same league as Leonidas. But there are so many variables.

  Still and all, training DOES play a role in it, and I thank SERE school for their little foray into faux terror and pain. Got me to thinking, way back in the day.

  I won’t judge those Marines and Sailors yet. I especially won’t judge the woman, especially as how she’s been dressed up with a Pali Rag and used as a human prop. I reserve my scorn for the Iranians.

  Personally, I’ve tried to base my conduct on reason and restraint. In the matter of Islamofacists, and especially the Iranians, I’m done with that.

  respects,

• 31 Pogue // Mar 29, 2007 at 10:07 am

  I went through Navy SERE many moons ago. I also went through sere training (not a formal school) as presented for deploying troops in 2004. The Navy school made the assumption that as downed aviators you were likely to be captured. Very few ground pounders are taken prisoner, the enemy tends to shoot you through the head first. The level of training doesn’t even compare. For naval forces (ouside of the special warfare people) the likelyhood of capture is so low that I doubt much thought is given to it. I’m unwilling to make a judgement on this particular sailor’s actions because I doubt that she had much in the way of training for the situation.

• 32 bthun // Mar 29, 2007 at 10:15 am

  I just heard on the news that the Iranian embassy in London released a second letter from the young UK female sailor to the AP or Reuters, but I can’t find it posted.

  Details sketchy so far…

• 33 Jim Collins // Mar 29, 2007 at 10:21 am

  I have to ask what is the status of these sailors? I’m asking because what if one or more of them was to escape? Would it be a POW escaping or a criminal suspect escaping? I can just see some Brit lawyer wanting to return an escaped sailor to the Iranians because it was determined that the escape was against International law.

• 34 bthun // Mar 29, 2007 at 10:39 am

  “I can just see some Brit lawyer wanting to return an escaped sailor to the Iranians because it was determined that the escape was against International law.”

  We have a few of those too… Ramsey Clarke immediately comes to mind.

  info so far on the new/improvisedimproved letter

• 35 badbob // Mar 29, 2007 at 12:05 pm

  Kris,

  Not sure what your point was quoting me but I agree with what you wrote and that is why I wrote what I did!

  Yes Maam, I have missed several days worth of meals and in conjunction with SERE school, to boot!

  But that doesn’t make me judgemental on these things until all the prisoners (that is what they are) are recovered and can freely tell their story. Even then I am loathe to judge…as Lex.

  Michelle wrote some things above that need to be addressed. Not “breaking” is called “the John Wayne” approach at SERE school. That is the easiest way to get yourself or others killed and is frowned upon because the whole point is the first word- “Survive”.. In even the most senior aviator all tactical information possibly helpful to the enemy is useless within hours. Everything else the enemy does is for propaganda purposes. That doesn’t mean to reconcile ones self to be 100% compliant and do whatever the captor wants. No, it is avoiding death and attempting to make it tough on the enemy to get you to do things in his interest..but only up to that point where permanent injury or death appear imminent..

  As we have discussed here in the past- that is were/why the water-board was so effective.

  IMO, it is to be assumed, unless otherwise proven post captivity, that even though you may have written or said things not in the best interest of your country..that those were said under the type of duress described above and were not given freely. In simply true tome people are tougher than others.

  b2

• 36 Skippy-san // Mar 29, 2007 at 4:06 pm

  In what has to be a once in a blue moon event-I agree with B2.

  I’m not so sure its wise to second guess the actions of the folks out there-who knows what they were subjected to, or for that matter what their training was. Plus the Iranians are not stupid and they know if they kill them the roof will cave in. So there is hope in that………

• 37 Andy // Mar 29, 2007 at 6:47 pm

  The code of conduct is not completely appropriate in a situation like this. The CoC is meant for a war-time POW status. There are different rules of conduct for a detainee situation such as this as well as for terrorist/hostage situations. Following parts of the CoC in a detainee situation could get you into serious trouble since as a detainee you don’t have the rights a POW has.

  Frankly, everyone should get at least level 2 SERE training so they know when to use the CoC and when other methods are more appropriate.

• 38 DJVC // Mar 30, 2007 at 12:17 am

  Is this the ultimate test of women, or better yet, of Mothers, in combat situations? Is this the ultimate fear of letting women into combat, that they be captured and exploited by some of the most notorious women hating populations on the planet [or worse, exploited more than a man of equal stature]?

  This is so much of a taboo subject!

  Would the woman really be considered the weakest link? After all, it is said that women do have a higher threshold for pain than men to. But is is also said that the are much more prone to emotional distress than men. How do you gauge a breaking point?

  Would it be so easy as to ask a woman ‘Would you ever like to see your children again?’

  Image is everything. They have captured a western woman and are parading her around on TV.

  First thoughts go far from the facts of war. This is political. I would go as far to say that this was planned. VERY planned. They have told the west to F ourselves about NUCLEAR everything. We do our thing and sanction and this and that. It may be me, but I don’t think they really care, at all, about what we think or do. So much to the fact that they are going to pull something like this, especially with the whole ‘whoops wrong coordinates!’ issue. And with British folks, no less. Kinda like ‘proxy’ terrorism. Rather than rise to the threat, the Brits are most likely going to wait it out, or wait for us to do something about it [with very much personal hope that they let our humble scribe do his bidding on the Kilo's]. Why do we insist on playing by rules that the other player laughs at and breaks without a second thought?

  Education is key here. I’m not sure of the literacy out there, or the ability to understand English, but it cannot be that high, not the per capita TV to household ratio. So I’m going to guess that most news [read: propaganda] travels by word of mouth. What better story to all the Imperialist hating low education population in the far reaches that a western woman caught intentionally raiding Iranian waters with complete disregard for and intentions to disgrace Iranian sovereign land? That is what is making it to the reaches of the Iranian Empire, not to mention the Middle East as a whole. I think this would be a great idea to get them all unite and laugh at the west and talk about how stupid we all are, allowing a woman to be captured. And if we do end up in a brawl over it, what a wonderful platform to be standing on: ‘We were only protecting our land from being trespassed on.’

  In the end it is not the opinion of the world that is at stake, it is the stability of the Middle East, and the Iranians flexing power over the west, telling us to F off and parading our Mothers around on TV only serves to strengthen them amongst the other surrounding nations.

  Just think if Saddam would have pulled this. We went after him for WMD’s, after all [that really did exist, I swear they did!]. I mean, just think of all the guy’s out there that have training flying against F-14’s, F-5’s already. Wouldn’t want all that to go to waste, now would we?

  best.
  -djvc

• 39 Justthisguy // Mar 30, 2007 at 2:53 am

  Has Colonel Cornum had anything to say about this? I mean, she got captured in the first Gulf War, and was reported (I think) as saying something like

  “Yeah, if yer a female POW they can mess with you in different horrible ways than they do the guys, but you’re still not supposed to let it get to you.”

  I think some gals are tougher than a lot of guys.

  I don’t think we’re only recruiting the tough gals these days, though.

• 40 asgeir // Mar 30, 2007 at 6:51 am

  “During Tewodros’s reign, the alliance he forged between Britain and Ethiopia was ended in 1868 when the Emperor, angered by Queen Victoria’s failure to reply to his diplomatic overtures, imprisoned several British subjects. The British sent an army to free the subjects which defeated the Ethiopians and, in turn, led Tweodros to fall from power and commit suicide on April 13, 1868.”

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ethiopia#Leaving_the_Medieval_World

• 41 Kris, in New England // Mar 30, 2007 at 8:24 am

  B2 - I quoted you cuz I agreed with you. Sorry that I didn’t make that clear. And being the shy, retiring wallflower that I am…I had to add more, natch.

• 42 doorkeeper // Mar 30, 2007 at 8:46 am

  Have to ask a dumb question! Andy says: “Frankly, everyone should get at least level 2 SERE training so they know when to use the CoC and when other methods are more appropriate.”

  I checked with dh and he’s never had SERE training, nor have any of the local unit, which surprised me, since they were right in the mess, in the sandbox, last year.
  Who gets it, and why shouldn’t everyone? How long does it take?

  I realize I am talking about ARNG here, but still–we deserve training if we’re to be put on the line, too.

  Gives me shudders, it does.
  respectfully,
  doorkeeper

• 43 Andy // Mar 30, 2007 at 3:27 pm

  Doorkeeper,

  Everyone in the military gets Level 1 SERE training which is commonly known as code of conduct training. It only covers one’s obligations and rights as a prisoner of war under the Geneva Convention.

  The military recognizes two other categories, however - detainee and hostage. Level 2 training is a 2 day course, part of which is classified, that goes into detail about how to act and how to know which situation you’re in. For the brits, they would be considered detainees by the US military - similar in legal status to the EP-3 crew that was detained by the Chinese.

  Frankly, on today’s battlefields US personnel are much more likely to become detainees or hostages than POW’s. The military should train them for those situations and IMO the fact that they aren’t is negligent. Without the training, it’s easy to exploit personnel as the Iranians are doing to the Brits.

• 44 Michelle // Mar 30, 2007 at 5:26 pm

  DJVC
  I agree that the whole issue around women in combat is pretty taboo. It would be an interesting one for someone to take on. Either here on The Flight Deck.

• 45 Skippy-san // Mar 30, 2007 at 8:08 pm

  Michelle,

  Martin van Creveld has an excellent book on Women in Combat called, Men , Women and War. Suffice it to say he’s not a fan of the idea. He does punch holes in some popular myths though.

• 46 Jim C // Apr 1, 2007 at 11:55 am

  With all due respect… (and I’ve never been in a situation even close to the one that these folks are facing right now). It just really sticks in my craw that any soldier, sailor, or airman would bash their country like that. It seems to me that — code of conduct aside — there would be a part of me that would say “I will not be used in this manner. I will not be used to make myself, my countrymen, or my country look like a bunch of asses… consequences be damned”. At any rate… God bless ‘em. I hope they make it out of this alive.

  Jim C

• 47 Jim C // Apr 1, 2007 at 11:56 am

  and intact…

• 48 Jim C // Apr 1, 2007 at 12:51 pm

  Andy,

  Do you really think that Iran has any interest in following the rules of war in regards to these sailors and marines? They don’t give a rat’s ass about their rights as a pow. Heck, the Iranoans broke countless international laws when they took these folks captive.

• 49 djvc // Apr 2, 2007 at 11:45 am

  Jim C,

  Back to something i was touching on as well, they really don’t care what they are doing. They are giving the west the collective finger of the whole Middle East, and probably gaining possible ‘extremist’ support in doing so by showing the rest of the area that you can poke the beast in the eye, that there is still resistance, that there is hope that the way of life they lead will triumph over the intrusion of the Empire.

• 50 RB // Apr 3, 2007 at 2:41 am

  I feel sorry for this seaman but having been out of the U.S. Navy for about a year now, we had the code of conduct drilled into our head. Boot Camp, A School, and Overseas Anti-Terrorism training. I never got into the situation she is in but I’m sure there would have been some guns going off if I or my shipmates were in that situation.

• 51 Lee // Apr 5, 2007 at 2:24 pm

  As an Airborne Combat Engineer (Sapper)and Desert Storm Veteran, I find the actions of the British seamen, while repugnant to me, to be right in line with modern British philosophy. The British soldiers that I met while on combined training excercises in Germany and whom I met in Iraq were of the old school caliber. NONE of us would ever think of acting like that. I would rather die than come home in dishonor like that. The Army has many mottos and such like Duty, Honor, Country…..Never leave a man behind….Death before dishonor and many more. Before deploying for Southwest Asia we were given a refresher course on what our duty was in the event of our capture. It did NOT include admiting guilt, aiding the enemy, shaking the little raghead’s hand and acting like we just finished a family reunion. I would have tried to break his little neck given the chance to be that close to him. Of course I would never have been taken alive to start with. That’s a perspective from an old soldier with a nephew serving in the Marine Corp and a son who has talked about enlisting in the Navy. The articles listed as the Code of Conduct are not just suggestions they are in fact military law and a U.S. soldier would be court marshalled for acting like those British sailors did. As far as I’m concerned it is simple cowardice in response to a clear act of war.

• 52 Wu Wei // Apr 5, 2007 at 4:09 pm

  There is no excuse for the way some of the hostages behaved, no matter what the British code of conduct is or what threats they were under. Some of them acted like tourists who were relieved that their lost luggage had been found, so they could leave the country. The real life experience of US POWs shows that even though a prisoner can be forced to read something, they can always find ways to show resistance if they want. Like the the POWs who read the words awkwardly and said them the wrong way, while at the same time blinking out morse code messages.

  I don’t need to have been a POW in order to know the proper way to behave. Like everyone else I know the difference between right and wrong. I can’t know I would be strong enough to do the right thing because I haven’t been there, but I still know what that right thing is.

• 53 The Flight Deck » No Easy Answers // Apr 5, 2007 at 8:20 pm

  [...] have been reading the continuing comments in the Code of Conduct thread at Lex’s with a lot of interest. When I read today’s paper, my eyes kept coming [...]

Leave a Comment