Deja Vu

[Eaglestrikes]

The Story continues
It is at this time largely repetive. I have underlined what I believe are salient points. Not for conclusions, but to point out there are two sides to each story and ramifications to each action.

Gen. Vows Review of Iraq Safety Measures

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - The U.S. Army will study protective measures for supply vehicles and add steel plating to vehicles if necessary, a general said Sunday, after members of a Reserve unit refused to deliver supplies down a dangerous route in Iraq partly because they were concerned their vehicles were in poor shape.

Brig. Gen. James E. Chambers, commanding general of 13th Corps Support Command, said all soldiers involved in the incident had returned to duty and it was "too early" to determine whether any of them will face disciplinary action.

Chambers told reporters the command will "assess armor" on supply vehicles, which are often subject to insurgent attack, and add steel plating if necessary.

He denied claims by some of the soldiers to their families that the fuel they were to deliver was contaminated.

The Army announced last week it was investigating up to 19 members of a platoon from the 343rd Quartermaster Company based in Rock Hill, South Carolina after they refused to transport supplies from Tallil air base near Nassiriyah to Taji north of Baghdad.

On Wednesday, the 19 did not show up for a scheduled 7 a.m. meeting in Tallil to prepare for the fuel convoy's departure a few hours later, a military statement said.

The mission was carried out by other soldiers from the 343rd, which has at least 120 members, the military said.
Chambers has since ordered the 343rd to undergo a "safety-maintenance stand down," during which it will conduct no further missions as the unit's vehicles are inspected, the military said.

The platoon has troops from Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina, Mississippi and South Carolina.

I indicated in a previous post that the FRA in Kuwait is currently up grading and up armoring all vehicles, tracked and wheeled.
There are sattelite IM Depots in Iraq near Basra and Baghdad.
They are doing the best they can.

[LivinSoFree]

Agreed... it seems my instincts were right... notice that one of the first to be reduced and transferred was a Sergeant... sounds like he was doing his job.

[thedrifter]

October 18, 2004

Recalcitrant troops may be discharged, soldier’s father says

By Jeremy Hudson
The (Jackson, Miss.) Clarion-Ledger


Five members of an Iraqi-based platoon who allegedly refused a convoy order earlier this week were told they would be punished with a general discharge, the father of one of the soldiers said Saturday.
“My son said they are getting ready to be discharged and would be home in three or four weeks,” said Ricky Scott of Quinton, Ala., father of Spc. Scott Shealey. “It’s just a boot ... some way to put some type of close to this while using them as scapegoats.”

Shealey, 29, and four other members of the 343rd Army Reserve Quartermaster Company from Rock Hill, S.C., were reassigned to other units after 17 members of their platoon refused an order Wednesday to take part in a fuel convoy because of what soldiers termed “deadlined” or unsafe vehicles, officials said.

Sgt. Larry McCook and Sgt. Michael Butler, both of Jackson, are among the five reassigned, said Patricia McCook, wife of Sgt. McCook.

The Combined Press Information Center in Baghdad would neither confirm nor deny Scott’s statement.

A general discharge can be given by a military administrative discharge board without a hearing, said military law expert Mark Stevens of Rocky Mount, N.C. “It is not necessarily a bad thing,” Stevens said. “It’s certainly better than being charged with a crime. It is sort of a wimp’s way to get it done and get rid of this thing.”

Refusal of orders during wartime, which by law can be punishable by death if charges were filed, most likely would be punished by dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of pay and up to five years’ confinement, Stevens said. But now, that might not be an issue.

Soldiers can be discharged honorably, other than honorably, or generally by an administrative discharge board, Stevens said. They can be discharged for bad conduct or get a dishonorable discharge through a court hearing, he said.

A soldier’s benefits usually remain intact following a general discharge, minus some education allowances, Stevens said.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said he has not been told the soldiers will be discharged. He requested a congressional inquiry on Friday as the commanding general of the 13th Corps Support Command began its investigation into the platoon’s refusal of orders.

Thompson said he reviewed a faxed plea from Patricia McCook to his office after a Clarion-Ledger reporter called it to his attention.

Thompson said that in response to his inquiry request, he was told to expect the first written report of the investigation on Monday.

“Because so much attention has been paid to this issue and the question of whether our soldiers are adequately equipped, I do not expect formal charges to be filed,” he said. “A discharge is another thing altogether, though.”

The unit remained on a safety and maintenance stand-down Saturday after a preliminary investigation revealed the soldiers had “valid concerns,” said Dov Schwartz, an Army spokesman.

Jackie Butler, Sgt. Butler’s wife, said her husband told her “a lot of stuff is going on, and he’s just taking it day-to-day” right now. She said Butler on Saturday did not mention a discharge when they talked at about 1:30 a.m.

“I would be happy with that if it is true,” she said. “At least I would have him and wouldn’t have to worry about him being over there.”

Scott said his son told him some members of the 343rd, a supply unit whose general mission is to deliver fuel and water, left their station at Tallil Air Base for Taji, Iraq, days before the ultimate refusal of orders. The fuel was denied in Taji because it was contaminated and could not be used for aviation purposes, he said. The soldiers, who were not being escorted by armed personnel, were fired upon during their return trip by about 50 insurgents but were able to make it back without casualties.

The trip took five days, Scott said, and the soldiers were ordered to deliver the same fuel to another base about two days later with what Shealey termed “civilian vehicles” with speeds no higher than 40 mph, Scott said. “That is when they said they had enough,” he said.

The mission was later carried out by other soldiers, officials said, but those who refused the mission were ordered to write statements on why they refused, Scott said his son told him. “After they reviewed those statements, they separated him and the four others and put them in different units,” Scott said.

Patricia McCook said her husband told her on Saturday he has started working with a new company.

“He said it was only thanks to the media that they got some work done on their vehicles,” McCook said.



http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/stor...925-457163.php


Ellie

[Eaglestrikes]

The circle goes round does it not?
What goes up, must come down, Spinning wheel spinning round.
I want to keep up with this. Something ain't right. My sources still over there confirm some of this.

[thedrifter]

Alleged Troop Mutiny Was 'Isolated Incident,' General Says
By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 18, 2004 -- The commanding general of a group of soldiers that allegedly refused to take part in a recent convoy operation in Iraq told reporters the event was an "isolated incident."

Army Brig. Gen. Jim Chambers, commanding general of the 13th Corps Support Command, confirmed at an Oct. 17 press briefing in Baghdad that about 18 reserve soldiers with the 343rd Quartermaster Company didn't accompany a recent fuel supply convoy.

The Oct. 13 supply mission, Chambers noted, did move out a little while later with other soldiers. Chambers said the convoy in question was carrying good fuel and that all convoy protection measures were in place.

Some relatives of soldiers who didn't accompany the convoy were quoted in news reports saying the soldiers believed they were delivering contaminated helicopter fuel and that convoy protection measures were inadequate.

Chambers noted that the 343rd , based in Rock Hill, S.C., has successfully carried out its combat missions since being deployed to Iraq nine months ago.

The general said a full investigation of the incident is under way. Disciplinary action would be meted out if warranted, he added. All 18 soldiers involved have returned to duty and are performing routine tasks, Chambers said.



Ellie

[Eaglestrikes]

One of our guys in Balad which is one of the Satellite IM Depots I spoke of said he worked on some of their equipment. some of it did indeed need maintenance, including Scheduled Maintenance He said they were on no worse shape than any one else. Also he knows nothing about any convoy of Civilian Vehicles. He never saw one in the 6 months he was there. He just got back 15 Oct.
Spinning Wheel spinning on.

[thedrifter]

10-19-2004

Probe Why Convoy Reservists Refused





By Ralf W. Zimmermann



It came as a shocker to me to read that a U.S. Army Reserve truck platoon of the 343rd Quartermaster Co. last week had refused orders to hit the road and deliver essential supplies to the their comrades. Their reason: the trucks weren’t maintenance ready and the unit didn’t have adequate escort protection for the hazardous drive.



As the 18-member Army Reserve platoon was placed under arrest for their refusal of undertaking what members called a “suicide” mission, the Army rapidly shifted to damage control mode: “It’s an isolated incident … we’re investigating … the goods have been delivered.”



The initial press positions differed. The reports reiterated that many other units had complained about similar maintenance problems. They hammered home stories of missing body armor and poor protection for Humvees.



What was the real deal?



Would the famed Red Ball express have refused to roll in World War II? Had troop morale reached new lows? Was our equipment really that crappy?



Foremost, I’d hate to see the incident exploited for political gain by either side of the political spectrum. This isn’t just about money for equipment and the war we’re fighting. This incident is also about leadership, as well as good order and discipline in our professional military.



Let’s face it – our Army, National Guard and the Reserves aren’t made up of people forced into uniform and deliberately sent on suicide missions. Since 1973, the American military has been a professional force, made up of people who join because of true patriotism, decent benefits or a combination thereof.



As professionals and warriors, our troops uphold an honor code that they will fight for and support their comrades. It’s what warriors do – what you call the brotherhood of war. In that regard, the Reserve platoon failed miserably, breaking with good order and discipline. In an extreme situation, comrades could have perished because critical supplies didn’t get up-front in time.



On the other side of the coin, you can’t but suspect that the unit’s leadership had lost touch with its troops. Was it possible that the platoon really had severe maintenance problems? Could fully operational vehicles from other outfits have supplemented their shortfall? Did the unit commander request security from other sources? Were all trucks equipped with machine gun mounts and sufficient ammo?



Had I been in command of a combat outfit, needing ammo and fuel, I would have sent an armed escort to the rear and made the truckers deliver – one way or another!



I fully acknowledge that our military has shortages of body armor, armored Humvees and spare parts. But I also know that compared to other militaries, including the better ones of NATO, the U.S. Army today stands out as “lavishly protected and supplied.”



Compare the dangers to the days of World War II. Then, our truck convoys were about as vulnerable as they are today – maybe more so. My father, who served in the German army, remembers running into one of those large American convoys with his Panther tank in 1944. After lighting-up the first and last truck of the column, the rest became a stationary shooting gallery. Then, the fuel cargo wasn’t mainly diesel but more highly explosive gasoline.



In World War II, there were many instances when convoy leaders balked at their missions. Despite terrific losses, my father still marvels at the Americans’ ability to keep the supplies coming. It was exactly that heroic supply effort which kept the armor and infantry rolling, and the artillery shooting.



Iraq is also a difficult conflict – no doubt! Real front lines don’t exist. That’s why rear areas and their supply and support people, are more under the gun than ever before. That’s why they have to be tougher and more rational than ever. But the bottom line remains that the trigger pullers can’t function without “beans, bullets and gas.”



Pushing critical supplies forward requires brave men and women who are willing to take a calculated risk. It also demands compassionate junior- and mid-grade leaders who speak up when the risks are foolish and unnecessarily jeopardize lives. No doubt, there will be times when the compassionate leader must forget about his or her career fears and lay it on the line for the troops. It’s the right thing to do!



But most importantly, you need more senior leaders who unexpectedly show up in unit outposts and assembly areas to do a “friendly” dipstick-check on the real and truthful state of morale and readiness. The troops tell me that today that most of these visits still occur mainly for photo ops, or if something has gone wrong.



This “isolated” refusenik incident cloaks many important lessons that our military leaders ignore at their peril.



Lt. Col. Ralf W. Zimmermann, USA (Ret.) is a regular contributor to DefenseWatch. Please send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.


http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/c....7991691019489

Ellie

[arzach]

Originally posted by Eaglestrikes
One of our guys in Balad which is one of the Satellite IM Depots I spoke of said he worked on some of their equipment. some of it did indeed need maintenance, including Scheduled Maintenance He said they were on no worse shape than any one else. Also he knows nothing about any convoy of Civilian Vehicles. He never saw one in the 6 months he was there. He just got back 15 Oct.
Spinning Wheel spinning on.

I gotta hang with EagleStrikes on this one...there's more to this than meets the eye. In Nam, we went to the bush with Tractors in dire need of maintenance, track was at a premium and torsion arms along with road wheels froze up during ops...they were removed and dumped. Supposed to be 9 a side, we were operating with six and seven...still getting the job done. I might add that a crew consisted of 3, we ran with 2, sometimes a comm or maintenance man covered for the 2nd crew member.


Patricia McCook said her husband told her on Saturday he has started working with a new company.

“He said it was only thanks to the media that they got some work done on their vehicles,” McCook said.

And, I find something dramaticly wrong with this statement...is it a direct quote from McCook? Or altered by his wife with an agenda to get her husband home? Airing 'dirty laundry' in public is never good, morale as I've heard is high and the troops believe in what they're doing.

[thedrifter]

October 20, 2004

Fuel in tankers was contaminated, soldier told father

By Emery P. Dalesio
Associated Press


RALEIGH, N.C. — Army reservists refused to carry out what they considered a dangerous supply mission in Iraq last week only after another military outpost rejected the fuel they were to deliver, according to the father of one of the soldiers.
The soldiers had just returned from a three-and-a-half day journey to deliver the fuel to a city north of Baghdad, but military officials there found that the supplies were contaminated, said John Coates, who said he spoke to his son Thursday.

When the soldiers returned to their base with the fuel still in the tankers, their commander ordered the platoon to prepare for another transport mission, this time to a hotspot of guerrilla activity, Coates said.

“I guess he wanted somebody to take it,” said Coates, whose son is 26-year-old Spc. Major Coates.

The Army announced last week it was investigating up to 19 members of a platoon from the 343rd Quartermaster Company, based in Rock Hill, S.C., after they refused to transport supplies from Tallil Air Base near Nasiriyah to Taji north of Baghdad.

Families of several of the soldiers have said the men would not have taken such drastic action without compelling reasons. Some said the commanders did not act on complaints that the convoy was hauling contaminated fuel or that their vehicles were in poor working order and were not sufficiently protected with armor.

Another member of the unit, Spc. Reeves Williams, 19, of Maiden, N.C., told his mother, Genia White, that he helped carry out the delivery with eight other soldiers after initially refusing to do so.

“My son has strong convictions,” White told the Hickory (N.C.) Daily Record for a story in Wednesday’s editions. “For him to say no, there is something definitely, definitely wrong.”

Ricky Shealey of Quinton, Ala., told The Associated Press that his son, Spc. Scott Shealey, said the trucks earmarked for the mission had hauled jet fuel and were then loaded with diesel fuel without purging the tanks.

The platoon’s soldiers told their commander that trucks broke down four times during their previous mission, John Coates said. They urged their commander to ride on the new mission through hostile territory to see how faulty the trucks were. The officer refused.

“That’s when they banded together,” John Coates said. “They were wore out.”

Soldiers with drawn weapons took the troops into custody, John Coates said.

The commanding general of the 13th Corps Support Command, Brig. Gen. James Chambers, denied the fuel was contaminated. He said Sunday the Army is adding steel armor plating on unarmored vehicles and upgrading maintenance.

The Iraqi tanker trucks used by the platoon appeared to date from the mid-1960s “because of the condition and the way it looked,” John Coates was told by his son. The trucks regularly overheated and couldn’t reach a top speed much beyond 35 mph, John Coates said.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/stor...925-462052.php


Ellie

[thedrifter]

Unit Commander Relieved Of Duty
Associated Press
October 21, 2004

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The company commander of a U.S. Army Reserve unit whose soldiers refused to deliver fuel along a dangerous route in Iraq has been relieved of her duties, the U.S. military said Thursday.

The decision to relieve the commander of the 343rd Quartermaster Company came at her request and is effective immediately, according to a statement from the 13th Corps Support Command. It was authorized by Brig. Gen. James E. Chambers.

"The outgoing commander is not suspected of misconduct and this move has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of anyone involved," the statement said.

The commander, whose name is being withheld to protect her privacy, will be reassigned to another position commensurate with her rank and experience, the U.S. military said.

Eighteen soldiers from the 343rd Quartermaster Company, based in Rock Hill, S.C., are under investigation for refusing to drive a fuel convoy from Tallil air base near Nasiriyah to Taji north of Baghdad.

The mission was later carried out by other soldiers from the unit, which has at least 120 soldiers, the military said.

The soldiers have told their families that they balked at the mission last week because the vehicles were unarmored and in poor condition. They said complaints to their commander about concerns went unheeded.


Military convoys are often the target of insurgent attacks in Iraq. The unit delivers food, water and fuel on trucks in combat zones.

Chambers said on Sunday that an investigation is underway but maintains that it is "too early" to determine if any of the soldiers will undergo disciplinary action. The soldiers have since returned to duty.

The U.S. military has downplayed the incident, calling it an isolated incident not indicative of wider U.S. Army morale or maintenance problems.

However, Chambers has called for the 343rd to undergo a two-week "safety maintenance stand-down," during which it will conduct no further missions as the unit's vehicles are inspected.

Chambers also said the Army is adding steel armor plating on unarmed vehicles and upgrading maintenance.

The platoon has troops from Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina, Mississippi and South Carolina.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Soldiers say driving unarmored vehicles is dangerous, but so is disobeying an order


By Ward Sanderson, Stars and Stripes
European edition, Thursday, October 21, 2004


CAMP VICTORY, Iraq — Some soldiers serving in Iraq sympathize with the 343rd Quartermaster Company platoon soldiers who last week refused to disembark their fuel convoy from Tallil for Taji because they feared their vehicles were unsafe.

Wary of roadside bombs or snipers, the troops with the 343rd reportedly believed that driving their unarmored trucks, which they complained were riddled with mechanical problems, would have equaled a suicide mission.

Other troops on desert duty said they, too, distrust unarmored vehicles, and certainly wouldn’t want to drive one in need of repairs.

However, they were mixed on whether the platoon should have openly disobeyed an order to roll out.

“The military knows about these roadside bombs, and the military should have had enough time to prepare,” said Sgt. Casey Roby of the 1st Cavalry Division’s 1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment. “The fact that they refused the mission? No, I don’t have sympathy with that. All in all, they had a valid point, but they went about it the wrong way.”

Roby said those in power who decide not to pay for armored vehicles need to spend more time in the field.

“I’ve been out in sector when a Humvee is blown up by a roadside bomb,” he said. “I can see what happens to a vehicle without armor. Soldiers who witness their friends and leaders hurt or killed by a roadside bomb, of course they don’t want to go out without protection.”

Roby said his unit once had an armored truck to make supply runs, but lost it when a rocket slammed into it and bent the frame. Now they have only a soft truck.

“We firsthand understand what these guys are going through,” Roby said. He and his fellow soldiers want another armored truck, though he said that all of them swore to follow orders to obey, and always would.

“We’re going to do our part here,” Roby said. “The military should do its part.”

Sgt. Shaun Johns, also of the 1/5, said no troops should be forced to drive long distances in faulty vehicles without armor, oath or not.

“That’s like saying your life ain’t worth nothing. … When I signed my contract, I didn’t sign up to be an idiot,” Johns said. “I personally feel these 19 soldiers were the voices of thousands.”

The soldiers said that the military’s practice of having armored Humvees escort fuel convoys isn’t enough protection — an M-16 can’t defend against a hidden explosive that’s already gone off.

“I could understand the reason they would not want to go out there if they had 19 fuel trucks and two Humvees,” said Staff Sgt. Ronald Leuma, also of the 1/5.

He said it shouldn’t take the rebellion of an entire platoon and national exposure to force the Army to buy armored vehicles that run well.

“That’s the sad part,” he said. “You have to go through all this to make this happen.”

Staff Sgt. Chris Garcia and Sgt. Brian Homer drive tanks and armored personnel carriers for the 1st Cav’s 2nd Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment, and have often tracked on the flanks of convoys to provide security.

“We kind of ride alongside in kind of a Mad Max dodge,” Homer said.

Garcia said the unit’s complaints did not surprise him, but their refusal of an order did.

“It’s their mission to resupply,” he said. “And it was the whole platoon.”

Capt. Joseph James, spokesman for the 2-12, said commanders encourage soldiers to tell them whether a mission is safe and whether their equipment suffers from any malfunctions. He said commanders want their soldiers to be safe.

Homer agreed.

“If we are out on patrols and I say, ‘Hey, sir, I have a bad feeling about this … can we take a different route?’ And he’ll say, ‘Sure, why not?’ ”

But were things really unsafe and equipment faulty, Homer said that he, too, might refuse an order to roll.

“If the vehicles aren’t armored and have serious mechanical problems, I’d probably do the same thing,” he said. “I’d say I’d rather take another vehicle, or wait until it’s fixed.”

James said that the only time a soldier can refuse an order is when that order is illegal, though he left the nuances of that to military lawyers.

On Friday, the Army announced it is investigating the incident that occurred two days before, and will weigh whether the 343rd soldiers disobeyed military law. U.S. newspapers have reported that the troops have been arrested, but the Army has denied this, saying that, so far, none of the soldiers in the platoon has been detained or disciplined.

The unit itself is inspecting the vehicles to determine whether they are, in fact, unsafe.

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?...&article=25030

Ellie

[Eaglestrikes]

Hey Arzach did you drive 2nd platoons vehicles? Sounds like B 20 and B 25.

In Nam, we went to the bush with Tractors in dire need of maintenance, track was at a premium and torsion arms along with road wheels froze up during ops...they were removed and dumped. Supposed to be 9 a side, we were operating with six and seven...still getting the job done. I might add that a crew consisted of 3, we ran with 2, sometimes a comm or maintenance man covered for the 2nd crew member.

You got that right. Sheesh. Most of the time it was in sand, or mud.
Cua Viet or Cam Lo. Water Water everywhere but not a drop to drink. (Beer that is) Cep't for Carlins Black label. Yuch!
Crews in Balad and Baghdad area say the fuel was DF2. They say they know nothing about Contamination. It was, and is being, used in M88's and AVLB's.
Some of the Trucks that were Armored are still operating in the area. Multi Fuels with tremendous horsepower. (Fast in other words.)
The FRA says trucks are priority two. Hummers and IFV's are priority one. They sit still the longest. The trucks keep moving.
One of them said the SFC NCO was the prime mover on not going.
CO as indicated left command. Unit cohesion seems to be a problem. I seen that before. It happens. This is not nearly over. I foresee Congressional Commissions before it ends. Politics. Bah.

[hrscowboy]

aww **** a woman commander no wonder the Army is losing there asses

[arzach]

Originally posted by Eaglestrikes
Hey Arzach did you drive 2nd platoons vehicles? Sounds like B 20 and B 25.

You got that right. Sheesh. Most of the time it was in sand, or mud.
Cua Viet or Cam Lo. Water Water everywhere but not a drop to drink. (Beer that is) Cep't for Carlins Black label. Yuch!
Crews in Balad and Baghdad area say the fuel was DF2. They say they know nothing about Contamination. It was, and is being, used in M88's and AVLB's.
Some of the Trucks that were Armored are still operating in the area. Multi Fuels with tremendous horsepower. (Fast in other words.)
The FRA says trucks are priority two. Hummers and IFV's are priority one. They sit still the longest. The trucks keep moving.
One of them said the SFC NCO was the prime mover on not going.
CO as indicated left command. Unit cohesion seems to be a problem. I seen that before. It happens. This is not nearly over. I foresee Congressional Commissions before it ends. Politics. Bah.

Was first Plt, First Tracs EagleStrikes...scarriest time was a roadwheel assembly froze up in elephant grass working out of Hill 55...vincent could have slipped up on us easier n hell...all we had was a few grunts topside lookin' out while we busted azz pullin' the roadwheel and torsion arm...

Army needs to re-think their deployment practices.

[Eaglestrikes]

Was first Plt, First Tracs EagleStrikes...scarriest time was a roadwheel assembly froze up in elephant grass working out of Hill 55...vincent could have slipped up on us easier n hell...all we had was a few grunts topside lookin' out while we busted azz pullin' the roadwheel and torsion arm...

Sounds like A Co. You Remember a Captain Johnson? Poindexter?
What fun huh? Grunts on top. Charles all about. Within range of everything Victor had in artillery. Remember it well. Those were the days. Glad we made it through them. 1st Tracs was Home Sweet Home for me. USMC sent me to Arty first. 12 Mar Arty.
Rode in a c 130 from RMKBRJ to LZ Vandergrift. Deuce and a half from there to Camp Carroll. All we had between us and Charlie was a wooden slat about a 3/8ths of an inch wide. We were supernumary. Main Cargo was ammo (Arty Shells, HEAP Rounds, and Powder Charges for 105 MM) and some water cans. Didn't even think about not going. Did think, I was sure out there for everyone to see.
Our Col (Commander) at the Depot was the FRA Commander in Kuwait up until last month. This is getting a lot of play with us and Red River. We are the two primary Depots responsible for up grades, and Depot level Maint. ANAD had most of the AIMS (Marine) Vehicles. So we are paying close attention to this.
All this is Gen Info the press already has. Had them out there today asking questions.
Spinning Wheel, Spinning on

Did you find
Your directing sign
On the straight and narrow highway

Would you mind a reflecting sign
Just let it shine
Within your mind
And show you, the colors
That are real