Command responsibility

We talk a lot about command responsibility and the Iraq Occupation here at the Brain because, as vets and former enlisted men, we've served under our share of good and bad officers. One, Colonel Bryant (who flew Jolly Greens in Vietnam with a search and rescue squadron), whom I've mentioned here many times, is/was (I haven't heard from him in 20 years) a man I respected. He knew when to let us run and when to use the 'iron hand', and he never let us forget our principles and honor. I've served under others who were little control freaks or lassez faire, either protecting their positions rabidly or not wanting to know anything unless the shit was about to splatter them. Guys who would always look to pin blame on someone else, rather than accept responsibility for those under them.

With that in mind, our friend Lurch has an excellent take on the need for command responsibility in light of the current situation in Iraq:

...

Preventing this sort of criminality during occupation is the responsibility of the leadership of the Army, from the highest military commander right down to the most junior squad leader. But unless there are strict guidelines, coupled with an energetic program of command guidance, individual lawlessness will occur in the best trained, most motivated army in the world. Violations of the laws of land warfare, atrocities like rape and murder, are more than just a secondary assault on the occupied population. They are an indictment of the military leadership and the civilian control of that leadership. To formulate and maintain the proper and honorable control of soldiers in an occupation requires leaders of principle and compassion.

...

After all that's gone on in Iraq since 'Mission Accomplished', there is no way, now, for us to 'win hearts and minds'. We have destroyed any chance that history will portray us as liberators.