Defending Lt. Pantano

[themuffinman]

http://www.homestead.com/prosites-prs/pantano.html



A Marine accused

Marine Corps 2nd Lt. Ilario Pantano could face the death penalty if convicted of charges made against him last week. The charges? Premeditated murder. The facts? He shot two suspected terrorists during a mission in Iraq. The case is frought with second-guessing, and could be a disaster for future combat operations if the charges aren't dropped.
April 2004 was the cruelest month in the Iraq insurgency. It was when the assault on Fallujah took place, as did significant action in Najaf and Sadr City. About one-third of the 147 U.S. servicemen killed that month were Marines. They were killed in firefights and ambushes, and risked explosive devices in the streets " the kind of attacks that require split-second decisions to survive.
Lt. Pantano was in precisely such a situation south of Baghdad on April 15. He was leading a quick-reaction platoon raiding a house full of weapons. Two suspected terrorists had emerged from the house, got into an SUV and tried to flee. The lieutenant and his comrades shot out the SUV's tires and made the suspects search the vehicle. When the suspects unexpectedly turned toward Lt. Pantano as if to rush him, Lt. Pantano ordered them in Arabic to stop. They didn't. So Lt. Pantano made a split-second decision to preserve his life and those of his men. It turned out the two suspects were unarmed. Lt. Pantano reported the incident to his superiors, who investigated it and accepted his version of the story. He then served several more months with distinction.
Why, then, is he being charged with murder? There's seemingly no good answer.
Lt. Pantano is straight out of some romanticized war story. The 33-year-old Hell's Kitchen native left a six-figure salary in New York to serve his country. His mother says of him, "If he has a fault, it is that he is too idealistic and puts moral responsibility and duty to his country and his men before anything else." For that, Lt. Pantano faces criminal charges that could result in death.
At a time when the military is being stretched, the Pantano case sends all the wrong signals to servicemen. Finding a few good men will only get harder and harder if overzealous lawyers are permitted to intimidate the troops. In any army, that's a losing formula.
Unless it can be shown that Lt. Pantano isn't an exemplary Marine " that is, if new facts come to light showing he and his superiors are misrepresenting what happened on April 15 " we call on the Pentagon to drop the spurious charges against Lt. Pantano. As far as any outsider can tell, he acted in good faith in a life-threatening situation. He shouldn't be punished for it.

[thedrifter]

Is Pantano a Victim of PC?
By William F. Sauerwein
March 14, 2005

The continuing legal dilemma of Marine 2nd Lt. Iliario Pantano underlines our society’s obsession with political correctness (PC) at the expense of men and women we have sent into combat in our names.

Pantano, a Marine infantry platoon commander, remains under Article 32 investigation, and faces murder charges for his actions in combat in Iraq. He was charged on February 1, 2005, and it seems any logical investigation could have been satisfactorily completed. I believe that Pantano is the victim of this rampant PC attitude, while everyone above him franticly covers their butts.

George Orwell once wrote, “People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” Throughout history, “civilization” has been protected from the “barbarians” by those willing to fight those “barbarians.” Unfortunately, those enjoying the comforts of civilization normally shun any association with those who defend them.

However, these same individuals who avoid personally “dirtying their hands” in combat anxiously write the rules for those engaged in battle. While developing these rules, if an ambiguity surfaces they stop, get further clarification, and then continue defining the rules. Soldiers in combat do not have that luxury, and hesitation may jeopardize the mission’s success and threaten their lives.

Furthermore, these intellectual experts do not understand that the enemy in today’s ruthless wars does not follow the established rules of engagement or the Geneva Conventions. While the “book-smart” rule makers quickly acknowledge flaws on our side, they do not even consider the deliberate rejection of any civilized restraints by the other side.

Pantano, like most American combat leaders, struggled to accomplish his mission, to protect himself and his men and to follow the ever-changing rules of engagement in a fluid situation.

Before 9/11, Pantano earned a six-figure income as an energy trader with Goldman Sachs in New York city. Few people whom I know would give that up for the rigors of combat. However, Pantano was no ordinary citizen. An enlisted Marine veteran of the 1991 Gulf War, he left behind his pregnant wife, two-year old son and cushy lifestyle to rejoin the Marine Corps after 9/11, where he received a commission as a 2nd lieutenant.

Having addressed the specifics of the alleged Pantano incident in a previous article (“Second-Guessing the Troops Is Dangerous,” DefenseWatch, Feb. 19, 2005) I want to focus on several new, relevant issues here.

As 9/11 fades further into memory, it seems that too many of us have forgotten the barbarity of the enemy we face in this war. From our safety we can “Monday morning quarterback” the decisions made by those responsible for protecting us. That includes military JAG officers, safely working out of climate-controlled offices at stateside installations.

Defending civilization from the new barbarians is primarily done by combat arms personnel who sustain the majority of the casualties. Their mission is to “close with and destroy the enemy,” something drilled into us during the Vietnam War through Army infantry training at Fort Polk, La. In brutal reality, that means “kill or be killed,” because the enemy is prepared to act the same way.

A soldier’s duty is to complete the mission and do everything possible to survive. A leader’s duty is the same, with the added proviso of bringing home alive as many of his or her subordinates as possible. Both require split-second decisions based on the known situation, not something discovered after the fact.

If Pantano was criminally culpable for killing the two Iraqi insurgents last Apr. 15, why did his Marine superiors allow him to continue in command for the remainder of his tour of duty? Why did an immediate battlefield investigation clear Pantano after he fully reported the shooting incident to his superiors? Rowan Scarborough of The Washington Times obtained Pantano’s efficiency report which shows that no one gave this incident much notice. His company commander stated:

“Lieutenant Pantano’s progression as a young platoon commander and leader has been impressive …. He dedicated himself to subordinate development resulting in the weakest platoon becoming one that is often the Company’s main effort … He is a proficient communicator, who should be promoted with peers … I would proudly serve in combat with at any time.”

His battalion commander further noted:

“Lt. Pantano’s performance during the reporting period has been noteworthy and established his reputation as an accomplished infantry leader …. Leads from the front always and balances his aggressive style with true concern for the welfare of his Marines …. Ready for increased responsibility. Retain, promote and assign to challenging assignments.”

Instead, Pantano faces a different challenge altogether, a general court-martial that could result in the death penalty if he is convicted on the more serious charges. According to an article in The New York Daily News on March 6, the charge sheet portrays Pantano as a self-appointed executioner in lurid terms that seemed more to describe some domestic “gang-banger” instead of a Marine in combat.

The following day, the newspaper revealed the identity of Pantano’s accuser, one Sgt. Daniel Coburn, as the alleged “disgruntled” enlisted man. Described as a 10-year veteran with service in Panama, Haiti and Kosovo, Pantano reportedly had relieved Coburn from “several jobs” including by that of a squad leader – a death knell for a NCO’s career in the Marine Corps.

In the Daily News article, Coburn described Pantano as a “motivated” leader and noted that he did “not have any animosity against him.” I find this hard to believe, given the accusations Coburn made against Pantano two months after the incident. Coburn explained that he delayed making the charges “for the sake of the unit’s morale.”

As I stated in my earlier article, there are many avenues available for reporting UCMJ violations. As a veteran Marine, Coburn was well aware of these channels, yet did not use them. Since the chain of command had already conducted a battlefield investigation, everyone directly involved in the incident had already been interviewed. In other words, Coburn had no legitimate grounds to wait until two months after the alleged incident before reporting it.

Since I do not know Coburn personally, I will not make judgments of him, and instead work from my own personal experience as a career Army NCO. Pantano’s company commander stated that Pantano transformed his “weakest platoon” into a strong platoon. I know of only one reason for a “weak platoon.” The reason is weak NCOs not doing their jobs.

The only way of transforming a weak unit is to “kick ass and take names.” In other words, eliminate the deadweights and make the NCOs earn their pay. Perhaps Pantano regarded Coburn as part of this dead weight and relieved him in favor of someone who could perform better.

One curious item is that after being relieved, Coburn remained with his platoon. In my experience, a military leader will quickly transfer a relieved NCO to another unit. This not only allows a fresh start for the NCO, but helps alleviate any personality conflict that would arise between senior and subordinate. For some reason, Coburn remained there as a radioman, a duty for junior enlisted people and not a 10-year Corps veteran.

Several sources have stated that the platoon’s Navy medical corpsman – a direct participant in the operation where the shooting occurred – backed up Pantano’s story that he shot the two Iraqis only after they ignored his orders and moved toward the officer in a threatening manner. The only discrepancy is that the corpsman, who was facing away from the Iraqis when Pentaon shot them, said he believed that the Iraqis were running away, while Pantano reported they were running toward him. Pantano’s civilian lawyer states that if the corpsman were lying, both versions would be identical.

Further in Pantano’s favor is an unnamed source from The Washington Times of March 4, 2005. This “Inside the Ring” source states that the vehicle Pantano’s unit disabled did not have its seats bolted down. This has been identified as a terrorist tactic for hiding weapons, then being able to quickly retrieve them when needed.

Despite these aspects of the case working in Pantano’s favor, the Marine convening authority in Camp Lejeune, N.C., may not move to dismiss the charges against him. However, a groundswell of support for the lieutenant is gaining strength.

Last week, Rep. Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R-NC), whose congressional district includes Camp Lejeune, came out in support of Pantano. Jones stated in a radio interview that he will send President George W. Bush a letter regarding this case.

Such a movement will have scant odds of success unless it spreads to mainstream veterans’ organizations involved. To date, they have been silent on the lieutenant’s legal ordeal.

My personal assessment is that in this time of protracted war against a lethal terrorist enemy, our nation needs far more individuals like 2nd Lt. Iliario Pantano, and a chain of command with the moral courage to backing up young Marines who find themselves facing the ultimate, split-second decision of killing in combat.

>William F. Sauerwein is a Contributing Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at mono@gtec.com. Please send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.

Ellie

[sm@@thrider]

I had started the thread (Defending our brothers) Monday 14 Mar, our bike group is backing this Marine up if he gets an article 32.

[hrscowboy]

They are going to burn this Marine there is no doubt..

[themuffinman]

This incident would not have even been given a moment's consideration during WWII?

[hrscowboy]

yep Cpl your right but we dont live in a WORLD WAR 2 era anymore...

[muck]

So what I want to know is...

So where is the fitness report for the so called discruntled JACKA** that started this bull sh*t???



Fitness Reports:

Conclusions of Marine Second Lieutenant Ilario Pantano’s official record of Performance In Iraq covering 01 March 04 to 31 July 04.

His Company Commander states:

"Lieutenant’s Pantano progression as a young platoon commander and leader has been impressive. Initially, his one weakness, the desire to do everything, resulted in a platoon with underdeveloped small unit leaders. Upon recognizing this discrepancy, he has dedicated himself to subordinate development resulting in the weakest platoon becoming one that is often the Company’s main effort. With a calm demeanor that speaks of confidence, Lieutenant Pantano has led his platoon into urban combat in Latafiyah, and he has also conducted convention operations in Falluja and Zaidon Province, Iraq. He is a proficient communicator, who should be promoted with peers. A proven warrior, Lieutenant Pantano is a Marine that I would proudly serve in combat with at any time.

This is a Combat Fitness report due to participation in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom II from 01 March 04 thru 31 July 04."

His Battalion Commander, the reviewing Officer then noted:

"Concur with RS (Reporting Senior). Lt Pantano’s performance during the reporting period has been noteworthy and established his reputation as an accomplished infantry leader. His actions during the fighting in Falluja and Al Zaidon highlighted a solid understanding of tactics and an ability to anticipate the enemy. Leads form the front always and balances his aggressive style with true concern for the welfare of his Marines. Exceptional communication skills for a 2ndLt. Organized, aggressive, focused and driven. Ready for increased responsibility. Retain, promote and assign to challenging assignments."

What his Men say about him:

"…Sir, I want you to know I admired your type of leadership, and when we got back, once I became a squad leader I told myself, you were the person I was going to model myself after. Sir…I can sincerely tell you that it was an honor for me to be lead into combat by Lt Pantano. I’ll never forget the time in Falluja when you briefed the platoon in that dirty dusty little room in that run down house, you said ‘gentlemen, we will make contact.’ Sure enough we did and you sir brought us all back. Well I could go on forever sir, reminiceing, but that’s in the past, surely memories that will never be forgotten, but I got a new battle to fight now. As you would sometimes say sir "it ain’t over yet, it’s a marathon gents" and that’s exactly what it turned out to be sir.

Echo three Juliet…out"

-An email dated July 28, 2004 from a 19-year-old Marine, horribly wounded in an ambush, recovering at Walter Reed Hospital



What his Chaplain says about him:

"I have the utmost respect and admiration for 2nd Lt Pantano. He has the rare gift of grasping the essentials of a situation instantly and deciding quickly. Once he decides, he pursues a course of action with determination and skill. In a combat environment where seconds mean the difference between victory and disaster, whether in the Combat Operations Center or in the field with his platoon, he has repeatedly seen a situation and reached valid conclusions, decided and responded competently and skillfully well before either the enemy or his own peers were fully aware of what was happening. This gift of his is one of the primary reasons, in my opinion, that casualties in his platoon were relatively low while mission accomplishment was superb..."

"... He also has an excellent understanding of the moral issues at play in the conduct of war, both on a micro-level where the individual has to choose to pull the trigger or not, and on a macro-level where a society decides whether or not to go to war in the first place. This sense of morals comes into play not just in the conduct of war, but in leading Marines, assisting, guiding, and directing their interactions with each other, with the Marine Corps, and with society at large. I am extremely comfortable with his moral judgments. More than once, I have found myself advising him to do what he is already doing. I trusted his judgment with my reputation as a chaplain and my very life on numerous occasions over the last several months. I would do so again without reservation."

-Navy Officer, Chaplain

What Marine Staff Non Commissioned Officers (SNCOs) say about him:

"I’ve had the privilege of serving with many officers. Lieutenant Pantano is one of the finest officers I’ve had the pleasure of working with. While deployed to Iraq we lived in very close quarters. I would proudly serve with Lieutenant Pantano again. He is without a doubt a competent, and trustworthy individual. I would trust him with my life and the lives of Marines in My charge. He is extremely intelligent and is a valuable asset to the Marine Corps."

-Marine Staff Non Commissioned Officer

"I would have to say that Lt Pantano made it his mission to ensure that his Marines were not only in the best physical shape as well as being in the right frame of mind before our departure on our last deployment to Iraq. Once in country Lt Pantano and his Platoon Sergeant worked diligently to ensure that they stay focused on any and all missions that there platoon was tasked with…a very motivated officer and I would be honored to serve with him again anywhere."

-Marine Staff Non Commissioned Officer



"I found him to be professional, knowledgeable and truly passionate about the safety of our Marines and the Iraqi people who live in our Area of Operations (South of Baghdad). I found 2nd Lt Pantano always to be motivated and truly concerned about the battalion Operations, Forward Operations base security and the daily lives of the Iraqi people who live around our base. I would serve with in another combat tour with 2d Lt Pantano without hesitation."

-Marine Staff Non Commissioned Officer

What his fellow and senior Marine Officers say about him:

"Even when our physical and mental limits were tested he was a leader among men. His intelligence, charisma, and genuine care for others were apparent even in the worst of conditions. I have been in direct with Ilario throughout his time as an officer in the Marine Corps. He has always been an example for others to follow and is truly an asset to anyone he serves with. He proved to be a highly effective combat leader in Iraq, accomplishing every task assigned to him with the utmost care and diligence. The Marines that he commanded in Easy Company are no doubt better Marines and better people because of his leadership. 2nd Lt Pantano remains an example for Marine Officers and it was my honor to serve with him in Combat."

- Marine Officer



"Through the various missions we accomplished, I had the honor to serve with Ilario. I saw him turn a platoon that was desperate for central leadership into a cohesive fighting infantry platoon. His enthusiasm, charisma, and unswerving integrity became the backbone of his leadership style. His hard work and dedication paid off as he soon gained a solid reputation as an outstanding combat leader, and gained the respect of his Marines, peers, and his superiors. As a man, he was dependable, outgoing, friendly and would give the shirt off his back to help anyone. As a leader he inspired his men to fight and accomplish every mission in a deadly environment against a patient enemy. As a brother in arms, Ilario’s steadfast poise and dedication to his fellow brothers has etched his infallible image into my memory forever. It is truly was an honor to serve with a man of Ilario’s stature and I consider him a lifelong brother at arms."

- Marine Officer



"His military character is impeccable. His peers have always regarded Lt Pantano as a model Marine Officer. Having served in the Gulf War, Lt Pantano reentered the Marine Corps, giving up a lucrative and successful career, due to a sense of patriotism and lack of selfishness. From the day I met him, he displayed an aggressiveness tempered by a sense of caring for his fellow Marines that bordered on a maternal instinct. Lt Pantano was chosen by his peers to be the Class Commandant Infantry Officers Course (IOC) 1-04…Lt Pantano is a Moral and Just Man to whom I would entrust any member of my family. I do not hold these beliefs because he is my friend; he is my friend because I hold these beliefs. I have no doubt ion my mind that any actions taken by Lt Pantano were justified and done to protect his Marines. I look forward to testifying to the quality of Lt Pantano’s military character."

- Marine Officer



"He is not only a dedicated Marine officer, but a loving husband and father. His unrelenting devotion to his family and country is proof-positive that he experienced a proper upbringing. Ilario is truly blessed and has generated tremendous success in both his personal and professional life. Ilario’s resolute moral strength and integrity is the bedrock to which his success is anchored…He served his country in time of need and made great sacrifices to answer his call to duty. I would entrust anyone to Ilario’s charge and in doing so would sleep easy at night."

- Marine Officer



"Lieutenant Pantano has consistently impressed me with his confidence, intelligence, and ability to make sound decisions in a chaotic environment. While he served as Watch Officer, IK witnessed his poise and leadership skills in the management of simultaneous contingency situations. Despite the hectic nature of the battalion’ Combat Operations Center (COC), I always felt comfortable with decisions and the overall command of the situation demonstrated by Lieutenant Pantano"

-Marine Officer



"Lieutenant Pantano has consistently impressed me with his confidence, intelligence, and ability to make sound decisions in a chaotic environment. While he served as Watch Officer, I witnessed his poise and leadership skills in the management of simultaneous contingency situations. Despite the hectic nature of the battalion’ Combat Operations Center (COC), I always felt comfortable with decisions and the overall command of the situation demonstrated by Lieutenant Pantano"

-Marine Officer



"On April 11, Lt Pantano’s platoon was the battalion’s Alternate Quick Reaction Force. On that day, my platoon became decisively engaged with an insurgent group that had ambushed an Army convoy carrying m113s (ambulances) and logistics. When dispatched to the scene, his reaction was swift, decisive and sound. His actions allowed the remainder of that convoy to break contact with the enemy force. He and his Platoon may have saved the lives of several soldiers in the ambushed convoy and may have saved the lives my Marines who were engaged with the enemy.

Later Lt Pantano served as a watch officer in the battalion Combat Operations Center, hearing his voice on the radio meant I would be well supported. With sound and timely decisions from my higher headquarters. Lt Pantano displayed a level of judgment and decisiveness not commonly seen in officers of his grade."

-Marine Officer

[thedrifter]

03-14-2005

From the Editor: A Marine’s Trial



By Ed Offley



To his family and fellow Marines, 2 Lt. Iliaro Pantano is a genuine hero of the ongoing war in Iraq. To some Marine prosecutors at Camp Lejeune, N.C., Pantano is an accused murderer in light of an incident nearly a year ago when he shot and killed two Iraqi detainees that the young officer and several eyewitnesses claimed were about to attack him.

2nd Lt. Iliaro Pantano USMC, a Gulf War enlisted veteran, rejoined the Corps after 9/11 and received an officer’s commission. He faces multiple charges of murder from an incident in Iraq last April in which he shot and killed two Iraqi detainees.




Since an Article 32 hearing process began last month at the North Carolina base, public interest in the case has steadily grown, and promises to become a major news event should the Marine Corps opt to try Pantano on charges that , if convicted, could result in the death penalty.



Pantano’s family has created a website, Defendthedefenders.org, which has a lot of relevant background material on the case. In addition, radio talk show host Michael Savage has posted numerous documents about Lt. Pantano’s situation on a special page at his website, “Defending Lt. Pantano.”



Documents available for reading include the Marine Corps charge sheet against the lieutenant, and an affidavit supporting Pantano’s account by a Navy corpsman who was on the scene at the time of the shooting.



We at DefenseWatch have been monitoring this case closely and intend to continue doing so in the weeks ahead. We encourage our readers and supporters to do the same.




Ed Offley is Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at dweditor@yahoo.com. Please send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com. © 2005 Ed Offley.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

03-11-2005

Pantano: The Charges Are Baseless



By Raymond Perry



In recent days, the case of Marine Corps 2nd Lt. Ilario Pantano has sparked consternation among many veterans, as well it should.



The 33-year-old New Yorker is charged with premeditated murder in the death of two Iraqi men in his custody. The charges were brought only recently even though the acts occurred nearly a year ago on Apr. 15, 2004.



Maj. Gen. Richard Huck, commanding general of the 2nd Marine Division, is processing charges for premeditated murder, destruction of property and desecration of property against Pantano for his actions surrounding the detaining of two alleged Iraqi insurgents. An Article 32 hearing, the rough equivalent of a civilian grand jury proceeding, is scheduled for early April.



As I can best discern from the steadily growing public record, here are the facts of this incident:



* Lt. Pantano’s platoon was directed to search a suspected weapons storage and insurgent hiding place.



* Two men departed from this building in a vehicle giving the Marines a clear perception they were attempting to evade capture.



* Marines shot out the vehicle’s tires to stop it.



* Pantano ordered the Iraqi men to search this vehicle themselves as a method of reducing the exposure of U.S. Marines to injury.



* The vehicle was rigged in a manner consistent with hiding weapons and held hardware used in preparing improvised explosive devices (IEDs).



* The Iraqi men ignored orders to cease talking with each other during the search of the vehicle and gave the impression of secreting something on their persons.



* Pantano directed a Marine sergeant and a Navy corpsman attached to his unit to establish protective positions during the search.



* The two Iraqi insurgents stopped their search of the vehicle and began to move suddenly, ignoring Pantano’s shouted orders in Arabic to stop.



* Pantano shot both of them to death. He used two magazines of ammunition.



* Pantano later posted a sign on their vehicle quoting a senior Marine commander, then-Maj. Gen. James Mattis stating that Marines were the Iraqis’ “best friend and worst enemy.”



* Pantano correctly reported the shooting incident to his superiors as required.



* His on-scene commander conducted an investigation of the incident that cleared Lt. Pantano of any wrongdoing.



* His superiors subsequently wrote a fitness report on Lt. Pantano crediting him with superior performance of his duties in Iraq.



In order for the murder charges to be legitimate, Lt. Pantano’s actions must have been unlawful. In this case, the lieutenant believed that these men were insurgents. Their vehicle was rigged to hide weapons. The two men had the ability to retrieve weapons during their search of the vehicle. They had ignored previous direction from the lieutenant.



These facts appear to be uncontested. Pantano considered these men to be combatants who had possibly armed themselves. When they began to move suddenly and again ignored his order to stop, Pantano’s defensive response was reasonable. The charges of murder appear invalid on their face.



The charge of willful or reckless destruction of property appears to be based on “slashing of the tires” of this vehicle as a willful act. It appears uncontested that the tires were shot out during the initial attempt to escape instead of slashing as a vengeful act. If the evidence is as clear as it appears to be, that charge is baseless.



The alleged act of desecration described, that of posting a sign on top of the vehicle quoting Maj. Gen. Mattis, is not directly contemplated by the UCMJ. Rather it probably would be charged under UCMJ Article 134 for acts contrary to good order and discipline. Somehow the posting of a sign without profane or denigrating words just does not fit a reasonable definition of desecration.



Military law allows anyone to “prefer charges” so long as they are willing to swear to the truthfulness of them. Normally a criminal cover-up or other fraud does not surface for a while after the act. But the criminal charges against Pantano were not brought to light until nearly a year after the event.



What appears to me to be one of the most critical facts in this case was that Pantano himself properly and immediately reported the shootings to his superiors. His superior commander then conducted an investigation while maintaining Pantano in a full duty status. His immediate superior clearly did not contemplate charges as a result of his review. This commander later reported very positively on Pantano’s fitness in combat.



There is a separate issue alleged of premeditation. In my experience, when a person commits a premeditated act, as is alleged here, he is fairly precise in his actions. Pantano’s spraying of many rounds of ammunition appears to denote a reaction rather than a conscious, deliberate decision.



News reports have also noted that Pantano was a trained sniper in his previous service as an enlisted Marine. If there had been an act of premeditation on his part, I cannot imagine that a man trained for “one shot, one kill” would have acted as Pantano did. Such training ingrains in such men a precision that is almost reflexive in nature.



One more piece of information is even more revealing: As commentator Art Moore noted in an article in WorldNet Daily on Feb. 17 (“Accused Marine Featured in Gripping Story”), Time magazine reporter Paul Quinn-Judge was embedded in Pantano’s platoon just nine days after this event.



As a former career military officer, I find it inconceivable that had there been a cover-up of the two detainees who had been shot, this reporter would have heard about it and reported the incident. It belies common sense that it would not have leaked.



Quinn-Judge wrote movingly of the daily combat faced by these Marines.

He reported that what appeared to the public to be a disconnected series of skirmishes were in reality daily, grinding combat with “a well organized and relentless enemy.”



When taken in this context – and understanding the context of close combat in Iraq is crucial in this matter – it is clear that Pantano had a reasonable basis to believe that the two Iraqis were enemy combatants who were seeking to harm him or his men. So long as Pantano’s belief was legitimate when he pulled the trigger, that is legally sufficient to clear him of the charges the Marine Corps is now bringing against him.



What the editorial writers seem incapable of realizing is that in order to enjoy the protections available under the Laws of War, persons “hors de combat” must fully submit to all legal orders and cease all warlike acts. These men did not do so, and paid the price.



Precisely where the bullets struck these men and whether or not there were weapons in the vehicle or on their persons are irrelevant to the legality of the lieutenant’s response to their deliberate – and final – sudden movement. Pantano’s actions last Apr. 15 appear fully justified.



The only rationale for the late reporting of the event appears to be retribution by a former squad leader in Pantano’s platoon who reportedly was the individual who filed a complaint against him months after the incident had occurred.



Retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar has written about the social contract within the profession of arms that emphasizes the responsibility of seniors toward juniors. Unless a case can be made for cover-up or fraud of some sort on the part of Lt. Pantano for the Marines to give these charges any credibility shocks the conscience of the American people.



It should also shock the conscience of the entire U.S. Marine Corps.



The facts I cited above seem to be perfectly clear, with substantial corroboration: The charges against Pantano are baseless.



If Maj. Gen. Huck has any sense of Gen. Hoar’s concept of the social contract of leadership with his men, his course of action will be simple, quick and conclusive: Dismissal of all charges, and steps to ensure no stain lingers upon Lt. Pantano’s stellar record.



The American people expect their military leaders to have the knowledge, experience and moral courage to do the right thing.



Lt. Raymond Perry USN (Ret.) is a DefenseWatch Contributing Editor. He can be reached at cos1stlt@yahoo.com. Please send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.

Ellie

[sm@@thrider]

Please visit the Department of Defense web page and sign a brief message
> thanking the men and women of the U.S. military services. The compiled
list
> of names will be sent out to our soldiers at the end of the month.
> So far there are less than 9 million names. What a pity. There should be
> hundreds of millions of "Thank You's". Please forward this message to your
> friends, so they can do the same.
> It takes less than a minute to sign the card.


http://www.defendamerica.mil/nmam.html

[hrscowboy]

Too many different stories coming out of this deal. Theres something more going on then whats being told..

[d c taveapont]

2 magazines for 2 iraqis.......what a waste of ammunation...2-4 bullet holes would have been just fine...but too empty 2 mags...a little over the top if you ask me...and just maybe thats the problem....either way hes screwed. and a waste of one career in a screwed up war....

[themuffinman]

He is has been charged by the Corps with two counts of premeditated murder for the deaths of two Iraqi insurgents. not for emtying two mags and if he did so what. The scum bags murder over three thousand Americans and he kills two of them, and he is charged with murder? Why go to war? Are these men just supposed to let the enemy kill them or are they allowed to fight back?

What ever happened to the little scum bag traitor that threw the grenade into the tent of his own military bothers. Did they hang him. Does he get the death penalty? I sure hope so....Let this Marine go. Let him do what he was sent to do...May the Lord have Mercy.

[hrscowboy]

gentleman there have been so many different stories on this thats its hard to believe what is real and what is not. The bottom line is there are rules of engagement even in war... Even though I have of a problem with the engagement rules during war they are still there.. The bottom line is that the military has to teach the men and women what the threat is before you can open fire on the enemy. so where do we begin with this? Was these men a threat? Did these men have any weapons on there person at the time they where captured? I believe that was answered that they had no weapons on there persons at the time of capture. One story was these men started running from the Lt after he ordered them to stop and the Lt opened fire on these Men killing them both. Another story was that these men came at the Lt after he ordered them to stop and the Lt opened fire on both subjects killing them. The buttom line if there was all these witnesses and these men where that close to the Lt why was these men allowed to be standing on there feet and not on the ground where they should of been. The buttom line is if in fact these men where checked for weapons and found not to have any weapons, Where is the threat??? as i said there has been so many stories on this you really dont know what to believe. rules of engagement gentlemen I know i have been there 2 tours in Nam.

[d c taveapont]

muffinman, My point was that ; To empty two magazines IS a little over kill, 2-4 Bullet holes would have been fine, and what is sad about the whole thing is the R.E. has NOT been explained to our troops....its a DAMN shame to have this happen...