Epilogue: Lt. Pantano
Thanks to Blackfive for pointing to the thoughts of Mustang 23 at Assumption of Command.
Mustang 23 thinks Lt. Pantano's resignation is a good thing.
Before I get in to why, we need to get the basics out in the open. LT Pantano, and his unit here in Iraq, saw some heavy action. The proverbial "pucker factor" was high. In the course of a mission 2 gentlemen rushed up to Pantano and he reacted, first by warning them to stop, but it progressed until Pantano was forced to defend himself by killing these two gentlemen. Stop here for a second. If we look at these facts, we see a Marine lawfully defending himself. I totally agree with Pantano's actions. The fact that these two gentlemen were not bad guys is not part of the consideration. They were acting in a threatening manner. It is the right of every Marine, Sailor and soldier to defend themselves if threatened. That is something that is ingrained not only in our training, but Regulation and Law, not to mention instincts. If we take this right away, we harm the confidence of our troops and in turn this would lead to the inability to complete missions and wage war. Unfortunately, the story does not stop there. When LT Pantano defended himself, he did so to the extreme. He unloaded not 1 but two full magazines. He put 60 rounds into 2 men. And to add insult to death, he placed a sign above the remains as a warning to others.JTB commenting at Blackfive offers this:
I wonder if you Gentle Readers know US and Japanese soldiers crucified each other on Guadalcanal? War is not a sterile environment. It takes a massive pschological change to take Americans and change them into efficient killers. It is not pretty; but it is necessary to sacrifice some to allow the rest of us to quietly sip our lattes at StarBucks. We don't want pseudo-philosophers defending us. We'll end up as lampshades or landfill. The anti-war crowd have proven again and again that they hate us more than they value our freedoms. And none of them would fall on a grenade to save their own mother, much less another soldier... I fear that we may no longer be the same, strong, united country we were when we fought Hitler, Tojo, and Mussolini; but that's no excuse for maligning the men and women who are sacrificing their lives to keep the fight away from our homes...And I wouldn't be surprised at all by Mustang 23's conjecture:
I think Lt Pantano should still be responsible for his actions beyond defending himself. Now comes a bit of speculation on my part. It wouldn't surprise me if Major General Huck and LT Pantano made an under the table agreement to let these charges go away if he left the Corps. Pantano's attorney has claimed that Pantano's goal was to go back to a combat unit. Why the change of heart now? Was there a deal made?Folks who read Sierra Faith know I loathe those who think it hip to diss our military. I too fear the legalism that seems to infect our military every day -- legalism often expounded ad nauseum by folks sipping Starbucks. Just how would we report and react to the events of previous World Wars today -- probably note like this (from WWI):
In one instance, a number of newspapers covering the fighting at the Marne River bridges at Chateau-Thierry (a few days prior to the Battle of Belleau Wood) published headlines that read "Germans stopped at Chateau-Thierry with help of God and a few Marines.(Never mind the newspaper got the facts wrong even then.) Another interesting take from Thomas Sowell on our ability to fight and win wars against those who want us dead.