Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,944 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Staff Sergeant Al Lorentz, a reservist from Texas and a former state chairman of the Constitution Party of Texas, who is now on active duty and currently on the ground in Iraq, is also now currently under investigation by the US Army for "disloyalty and insubordination".

If charges are bought and Staff Sergeant Lorentz is found guilty, he could face 20 years in prison. It would be the first such disloyalty prosecution since the Vietnam War.

Why is Staff Sergeant Al Lorentz under investigation?

Well, on September 20, 2004, he posted an essay on the website, LewRockwell.com

It seems that the Pentagon and the Bush Administration didn't like what he had to say.

Here is that essay.

------------------------------------

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/lorentz1.html

Why We Cannot Win

by Al Lorentz


Before I begin, let me state that I am a soldier currently deployed in Iraq, I am not an armchair quarterback. Nor am I some politically idealistic and naive young soldier, I am an old and seasoned Non-Commissioned Officer with nearly 20 years under my belt. Additionally, I am not just a soldier with a muds-eye view of the war, I am in Civil Affairs and as such, it is my job to be aware of all the events occurring in this country and specifically in my region.

I have come to the conclusion that we cannot win here for a number of reasons. Ideology and idealism will never trump history and reality.

When we were preparing to deploy, I told my young soldiers to beware of the "political solution." Just when you think you have the situation on the ground in hand, someone will come along with a political directive that throws you off the tracks.

I believe that we could have won this un-Constitutional invasion of Iraq and possibly pulled off the even more un-Constitutional occupation and subjugation of this sovereign nation. It might have even been possible to foist democracy on these people who seem to have no desire, understanding or respect for such an institution. True the possibility of pulling all this off was a long shot and would have required several hundred billion dollars and even more casualties than we've seen to date but again it would have been possible, not realistic or necessary but possible.

Here are the specific reasons why we cannot win in Iraq.

First, we refuse to deal in reality. We are in a guerilla war, but because of politics, we are not allowed to declare it a guerilla war and must label the increasingly effective guerilla forces arrayed against us as "terrorists, criminals and dead-enders."

This implies that there is a zero sum game at work, i.e. we can simply kill X number of the enemy and then the fight is over, mission accomplished, everybody wins. Unfortunately, this is not the case. We have few tools at our disposal and those are proving to be wholly ineffective at fighting the guerillas.

The idea behind fighting a guerilla army is not to destroy its every man (an impossibility since he hides himself by day amongst the populace). Rather the idea in guerilla warfare is to erode or destroy his base of support.

So long as there is support for the guerilla, for every one you kill two more rise up to take his place. More importantly, when your tools for killing him are precision guided munitions, raids and other acts that create casualties among the innocent populace, you raise the support for the guerillas and undermine the support for yourself. (A 500-pound precision bomb has a casualty-producing radius of 400 meters minimum; do the math.)

Second, our assessment of what motivates the average Iraqi was skewed, again by politically motivated "experts." We came here with some fantasy idea that the natives were all ignorant, mud-hut dwelling camel riders who would line the streets and pelt us with rose petals, lay palm fronds in the street and be eternally grateful. While at one time there may have actually been support and respect from the locals, months of occupation by our regular military forces have turned the formerly friendly into the recently hostile.

Attempts to correct the thinking in this regard are in vain; it is not politically correct to point out the fact that the locals are not only disliking us more and more, they are growing increasingly upset and often overtly hostile. Instead of addressing the reasons why the locals are becoming angry and discontented, we allow politicians in Washington DC to give us pat and convenient reasons that are devoid of any semblance of reality.

We are told that the locals are not upset because we have a hostile, aggressive and angry Army occupying their nation. We are told that they are not upset at the police state we have created, or at the manner of picking their representatives for them. Rather we are told, they are upset because of a handful of terrorists, criminals and dead enders in their midst have made them upset, that and of course the ever convenient straw man of "left wing media bias."

Third, the guerillas are filling their losses faster than we can create them. This is almost always the case in guerilla warfare, especially when your tactics for battling the guerillas are aimed at killing guerillas instead of eroding their support. For every guerilla we kill with a "smart bomb" we kill many more innocent civilians and create rage and anger in the Iraqi community. This rage and anger translates into more recruits for the terrorists and less support for us.

We have fallen victim to the body count mentality all over again. We have shown a willingness to inflict civilian casualties as a necessity of war without realizing that these same casualties create waves of hatred against us. These angry Iraqi citizens translate not only into more recruits for the guerilla army but also into more support of the guerilla army.

Fourth, their lines of supply and communication are much shorter than ours and much less vulnerable. We must import everything we need into this place; this costs money and is dangerous. Whether we fly the supplies in or bring them by truck, they are vulnerable to attack, most especially those brought by truck. This not only increases the likelihood of the supplies being interrupted. Every bean, every bullet and every bandage becomes infinitely more expensive.

Conversely, the guerillas live on top of their supplies and are showing every indication of developing a very sophisticated network for obtaining them. Further, they have the advantage of the close support of family and friends and traditional religious networks.

Fifth, we consistently underestimate the enemy and his capabilities. Many military commanders have prepared to fight exactly the wrong war here.

Our tactics have not adjusted to the battlefield and we are falling behind.

Meanwhile the enemy updates his tactics and has shown a remarkable resiliency and adaptability.

Because the current administration is more concerned with its image than it is with reality, it prefers symbolism to substance: soldiers are dying here and being maimed and crippled for life. It is tragic, indeed criminal that our elected public servants would so willingly sacrifice our nation's prestige and honor as well as the blood and treasure to pursue an agenda that is ahistoric and un-Constitutional.

It is all the more ironic that this un-Constitutional mission is being performed by citizen soldiers such as myself who swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, the same oath that the commander in chief himself has sworn.

September 20, 2004

Al Lorentz is former state chairman of the Constitution Party of Texas and is a reservist currently serving with the US Army in Iraq.

You can email Al Lorentz at: [email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
I wonder if Sgt. Lorentz was aware that the military had a gag order prohibiting him from commenting about problems in Iraq. For that matter, why wasn't John Kerry charged with "disloyalty and insubordination" for his participation in Vietnam war protests while still a Naval Reserve Officer. Double standard?

RIKA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
the same reason Bush's kids get away with driving drunk, as he did, and most of all of the rest. Status and wealth gets you off.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
It is somewhat amazing how some other letter I have read, written by military types in Iraq at the time they wrote them, gave the exact opposite sentiments. What is amazing is that both types of writer are supposed to be fighting an enemy to win for their country, yet one has also apaprently made his country his enemy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,890 Posts
Here's my reply from the Other Board:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by pato
He's in the military and he doesn't get the same rights as a civilian.
He's been in for 20 years--he knows that.
He's a big boy, if he wants to run his mouth--he gets to face the consequences.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I DON'T agree that he's a traitor, however, the above is true. It doesn't matter if you like him because he's not in one of the two major parties. It doesn't matter if you like him because he's a swell guy. It doesn't even matter if he's RIGHT.

When you join the military you literally are indenturing yourself to the state. You have no constitutional rights when on duty. If you're given an order not to say something, you DON'T have the Constitutional First Amenment right to say it anyway. And THAT is what they are going to roast his balls over.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Along those same lines as the post immediately above this one, some US Military blogger types over in Iraq were forced to shut down or severely curtail their blogging because of things they were saying. Not so much like this guy but rather details of engagements, and some things that were classified like how many times they had to resupply during a firefight, what they had to resupply, that they ran out of water, and so on. Not things you would want an enemy to know. One thing has become painfully obvious from all these types of letters, blogs and so on - quite a few people in the lower ranks of our military apparently do not have much smarts about opsec.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
no, this country's leadership has made it the enemy of those who respect and demand individual responsibility and decency.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
No such animal as that in the military - you belong to the G.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,374 Posts
Glenn Bartley said:
No such animal as that in the military - you belong to the G.
I concur wholeheartedly. When you put on that green suit you belong to them. You can whine, cry, and carry on, but you AIN'T going to beat the ARMY. You took an oath to follow orders, and that's what you do. If it's an unlawful order, you can complain later. (Usually when it's too late) But you do what your told. That's called discipline. Either you have it or you don't. If you have it you have a military unit, if you don't, you have a mob.
 

Attachments

1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top