Officially, the US military never leaves troops behind. Secretary of State James Mattis even said literally this last week, in denying that a soldier might’ve been left behind in the October 4 Niger ambush, in which four US special forces were killed.
As details continue to emerge on the incident, however, it appears increasingly certain that Mattis hadn’t told the truth, with officials now saying that when French helicopters evacuated the US forces, they had lost contact with four US troops, and only evacuated seven out of 11 in the unit.
Hours later, they managed to return to recover the bodies of the three soldiers initially reported killed. The fourth soldier wasn’t found for another two days. That the troops left without contact with the four makes it uncertain if some might’ve been alive at the time, and died abandoned on the field.
That would obviously be scandalous if true, so officials are dodging the possibility by continuing to insist that they don’t ever leave people behind, despite mounting evidence that they definitely did leave people behind.
The Niger incident has fueled controversy and prompted numerous questions from Congress, not only about the ambush but about how the US military managed to get 1,000 troops into Niger and conducting “routine” operations on the ground without telling the Armed Services Committees or informing President Trump.
Another interesting question is why did a planned meeting suddenly turn into an offensive to kill or capture someone?
It’s typical of intelligence gathering while on patrol. You go out and meet with locals to see if they have any info on the whereabouts of the local bad guys and if they have something that the patrol leaders think should be acted on right away that’s what you do. This highlights the danger of relying on locals, who may or may not be sympathetic, for intelligence. Personally I found that they couldn’t be trusted more than half the time. If they were not sending you into an ambush they were just as likely to be sending you after some innocent people who they held a grudge against. But often it’s this or simply “patrol to contact” which means wandering around until they shoot at you. I was Army infantry S2. Which is battalion level intelligence, otherwise known as the “scouts”. Gathering intelligence while in the field is full of all sorts of hazards and lying informers top the list of things that can quickly get you in trouble. A gung ho patrol leader and a belief in their own invulnerability is most likely to blame. I’m now very much anti-war and a proud member of Veterans for Peace and yep, seeing too much of exactly this kind of thing is one of the reasons.
That sucks. Sorry to hear you had to go through that. Veterans for peace are good people. Take care.
Initial reports said that the combined Niger/US patrol had gone out there specifically for a parley, about a terrorist gold mine. The village head, who had been informed about the patrol before they got there, was in position to inform the rebels about it, giving them the time to assemble their forces for the planned ambush.
At the conclusion of the parley, prolonged by the village chief (who has been arrested by the Niger authorities), a group of rebels on motorbikes appeared in the distance and taunted the Nigeriens into chasing them. The Americans followed, and the whole column was ambushed. The first reports had absolutely no mention of a high value target. That is a frill the government is tacking on.
This is a part of the deliberate obfuscation, by the military and the political government, of what happened there, most especially concerning the capture, or desertion of Sgt. Johnson. They were never willing to say he was captured, and “separation” means he separated himself voluntarily, “bugged out” in his truck which he was driving, with only Nigeriens aboard.
Not a tale they wanted to get out in the US, especially with characters like Rep. Wilson saying that he had been “left behind” because of “racism”.
Right now, they have got Rep. Wilson to clam up, and the widow story has dropped clean off the media.
Well, gee, that’s the danger when you pass the buck from Congress to the chief executive to the generals. Congress has long since abdicated any responsibility for overseas aggression, and the current chief executive clearly handed that responsibility to the military so he could avoid blame if things go wrong.
I think Burma did something like that. Didn’t end well, if I recall.
We are all over the world destroying governments for corporations!!! We’ve at war in places we don’t even know about…like Niger!!!
Remember when according to the Constitution Congress were the only ones to declare war?!!!! We’ve become ugly and corrupt…and the “other” shadow government is in control because they NEVER leave office!!! The swamp is EXTREMELY deep!
It won’t be long before they tie Iran into this for some reason.
The military certainly flagrantly left the American sailors on the USS Liberty behind after they were attacked. and they covered up for the attackers despite their having killed 34 sailors and wounded and wounded 171 others during an hours long attack by air and by torpedo boats.
And dear Senator McCain’s dad helped in the coverup.
LBJ called back the response.
The first reports uniformly said that only one was not to be found at the end of the battles. That would be Sgt. La David Johnson. He was not Special Forces, but a mechanic and driver.
The other three KIA were evacuated with the rest of the living and wounded. Their bodies came home right away.
Sgt. Johnson was the only one declared Duty Status Unknown Whereabouts which means they didn’t know where he was.
The suspicion was that he had been captured, or had deserted the field of battle and subsequently been captured.
The military’s story now is a direct contradiction from numerous earlier reported stories. It revolves around Sgt. Johnson, who Rep. Frederica Wilson had charged was left behind because of racism.
As for the four soldiers, they were all assigned to the 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne) at Ft Bragg. Here are the DOD notifications as they came in:
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/1336607/dod-identifies-army-casualties/
and Sgt Johnson’s
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/1337409/dod-identifies-army-casualty/
It seems “the mightiest military force the world has ever known” has a few glitches that another $70billion will probably not solve.
They are not still there are they? Nope they brought them home, in body bags but they brought them home. So technically he didn’t lie. But who cares about this silly semantic argument anyway? The big question is why do we continue to spread out our forces all around the world and why doesn’t anyone other than the small minority of anti-war people seem to care? It’s almost as if the majority of Americans approve of “fighting them over there” so we don’t have to fight them here at home. However, I would like any of them to explain to me how this kind of stuff doesn’t in fact make us more enemies and provide an excuse and recruiting propaganda for groups like ISIS, who see our presence there as intolerable.
It would truly be a scandal if they were alive when they left them. That is one of the myths the generals always tell the troops so it would speak very badly of Mattis and probably ruin his reputation with “the troops”. It is just a myth though and one that had been broken before. It is why still to this day you see vietnam vets flying the POW flags. As far as your other concerns I dont think the pentagon really cares about any kind of workable strategy. The consequences of what you perceive as failure give just more reasons for intervention and bigger budgets. A win as far as they are concerned. As far as the “American people” are concerned they have been indoctrinated in myths in their 12 year government indoctrination camps and have been listening to Edward Bernays MSM creation all their lives. That is a lot to overcome…. plus there is this… “Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one’s self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all.” Michael Rivero
Well, the Democrats have their Benghazi.
Let the sh*t show begin.
Bush initiated, Obama supported Africom. That’s why! Many more skeletons behind this Geopolitical closet. Quite a few the American Congress and nation are incognizant of.
Did anyone hear the complaint from the widow that they wouldn’t let her see his body?!!! She wanted to see at least his hands or is feet, if not his whole body, she was refused!
Am I the only one to find this strange? I mean they wouldn’t even let her look at an appendage?!!!!
“We leave no man be…no man is le…quick, let’s go.”