Friday, September 12, 2014

Fond memories and some tears as US Army leaves Bamberg


BAMBERG, Germany — As long as Sibille Krause has been alive, the American flag has flown in this old Bavarian city, where she was born 64 years ago.


A German, she worked nearly 10 years for the U.S. Army as an interpreter and has many fond memories of the times she’s had with her American friends.


From now on, though, when she looks to the flagpole at the Army’s Warner Barracks, the Stars and Stripes won’t be there. They were taken down for the last time Friday in a ceremony attended by hundreds of locals, as well as scores of current and former soldiers who used to be stationed here.


“This morning when I woke up, I almost broke out in tears, because I love the community, I love the Americans,” Krause said, tearing up. “Bamberg will not be the same as it was before.”


The German flag came down with Old Glory, and, unusually, the German color guard folded the black red and gold banner of the German Republic just as the Americans folded theirs — into a triangle. The tribute was a final show of unity before the Americans pull out of here for good.


That it was raining was the perfect symbol, said Greg Wallace, a former 1st Armored Division soldier who stayed in Bamberg after leaving the Army in 1992.


“It’s pretty depressing,” Wallace said.


A Medieval city with a beautiful downtown, American soldiers who were stationed here say that Bamberg is the type of fairy tale place that Americans envision when they think of Germany.


But soldiers who were in Bamberg Friday to watch as the Army closed a door on a piece of its history said the reason they love the place is because of the people.


About a year ago, Sgt. Cornelius Kettles, 26, of Alexandria, Va., said he went to get a crepe from a stand downtown.


“And this old woman was talking about how she remembers back in the day, 60-70 years ago, when the first American troops came and they were so nice,” Kettles said. The old woman told him “she’s going to be sad that we’re leaving. It’s like a part of Bamberg is going away.”


“I love this city, actually,” Kettles said. “Every chance I get, I always come back here.”


The Army moved in right after the end of World War II, basing a large constabulary force here.


Various combat and support units were stationed here over the next seven decades.


The Germans always made sure to include the Americans in their events, no matter how big or small, making them part of the community, said Col. Gary Rosenberg, who commanded the Bamberg garrison from 2007 to 2010.


In 2009, he faced off against the lord mayor’s brother in a water jousting competition before a crowd of some 70,000 people at the city’s big annual festival. Rosenberg smiles when recounting how the two faced off, each standing on the bow of a small boat, armed with a padded stick.


Douglas DeMaio, who worked as a public affairs officer for the garrison at the time, said, that moment “truly epitomized the relationship that took place in this city between the base here and the city itself and the people.”


Kettles, now based in Kaiserslautern, Germany, was a member of one of the last units to call Bamberg home – the 173rd Airborne Brigade’s Special Troops Battalion.


So was his friend, Sgt. Shawn Alexander, 28, from Baltimore. Alexander travelled to Bamberg from Vicenza, Italy, where the unit is now based, so he could see the colors come down one last time.


“I had to say farewell,” Alexander said. “The unit was good to me, the town was good to me. It seemed like it would be wrong for me not to come back and say bye.”


millham.matthew@stripes.com


Twitter: @mattmillham



Search continues for 1 of 2 pilots after 2 F/A-18 Hornets crash in Pacific


LEMOORE, Calif. — Two Navy fighter jets crashed Friday in the far western Pacific Ocean, with one pilot safely ejecting but the other missing in the waters off the U.S. territory of Wake Island.


The F/A-18C Hornet fighter jets were from Carrier Air Wing 17 based at Naval Air Station Lemoore in California's San Joaquin Valley. The air wing is embarked on the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson.


The crash occurred at 5:40 p.m. local time about 290 miles west of Wake Island, Navy Cmdr. Jeannie Groeneveld said from San Diego. Wake Island is 2,300 miles west of Honolulu.


Groeneveld said she couldn't release details of the crash, but an investigation already had started.


The rescued pilot was in fair condition in the medical department of the Carl Vinson, she said.


All other aircraft that were airborne at the time safely returned to the ship.


The search for the missing pilot involved the guided-missile cruiser USS Bunker Hill, the guided-missile destroyer USS Gridley, the USS Sperett, the USS Dewey and two helicopter squadrons.


The jets involved in the crash were from Strike Fighter Squadron 94 and Strike Fighter Squadron 113.


"Our thoughts and prayers go out to all involved," Groeneveld said.


The Carl Vinson strike group team departed San Diego on Aug. 22 for what was announced as a 9 1/2-month deployment.


The F/A-18C is a twin-engine, single-seat strike fighter, designed to function both as a fighter — in roles such as engaging enemy aircraft — and as an attack aircraft, bombing ground targets for example. Fifty-six feet long and with a wingspan of 40½ feet, Hornet C models have been deployed since the late 1980s.


Built by prime contractor McDonnell Douglas, the jets are capable of flying at speeds greater than Mach 1.7 and altitudes of more than 50,000 feet, according to the Navy.



What can we expect from the anti-Islamic State coalition?


U.S. officials are working hard to build a broad, international coalition to combat Islamic State militants in Syria and Iraq. What’s unclear is whether the international effort will produce a coalition of consequence or one in name only.


At the NATO summit last week, the U.S. announced formation of a 10-nation “core coalition” that includes nine NATO members plus Australia. It has since grown.


In all, about 40 countries have expressed solidarity in the effort, according to the State Department, although some countries have not spelled out in detail what they are prepared to contribute. So far, most contributions from allies have centered on ferrying humanitarian aid into Iraq and limited arming of Kurdish forces in the north.


Major Arab states are all likely to play a role in the fight against the Islamic State, said Shashank Joshi, a senior research fellow with the Royal United Services Institute in London.


“The bigger question is what type of cooperation,” he said.


Some Arab states may limit their contributions to allowing the U.S. to use their military facilities to launch airstrikes, Joshi said. But few will likely commit their forces with perhaps the exception of the United Arab Emirates, which is reported to have carried out airstrikes last month in Libya against Islamist-linked militia. The UAE has denied doing so. Jordan may also provide special forces, he said.


It will be difficult for the U.S. to persuade the mostly Sunni Muslim Arab rulers to play a more public role for various reasons, Joshi said. They include fears of Islamic State retaliation and inadvertently boosting the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad.


Arab countries in the Persian Gulf also risk domestic political problems due to public sympathy for the Islamic State, which some Sunnis believe are fighting for Sunni interests against Iran and its fellow Shiite allies in the region.


The U.S. has been urging Sunni allies such as Qatar and Kuwait to crack down on donations to the Islamic State by their citizens.


Not on the list of potential partners is Iran, though its interests coincide with those of the U.S. regarding the Islamic State’s threat to the Shiite-led Baghdad government. Nevertheless, Joshi does not expect the U.S. will seek overt cooperation because of Iran’s close ties to Assad and the delicate balancing act with Sunni Arab nations.


“At least publicly, a prominent Iranian role is not conducive to Arab participation,” he said.


For President Barack Obama, the decision to go after Islamic State militants in Syria also creates a dilemma, as doing so could help Assad, who Obama has said needs to relinquish power.


“Whilst it’s true that attacks will serve Syrian ends, it will also serve the ends of Syrian opposition groups, whom Obama has committed to supporting,” Joshi said. The Islamic State may be weakened, “but the opposition will also be getting stronger and that’s bad news for Assad.”


Below is a look at some of the key players and how they are contributing or may contribute to the international coalition or support U.S. operations.


The United States: On Aug. 8, the U.S. began a bombing campaign against Islamic State militants, hitting targets at strategic points in northern and western Iraq. So far, nearly 200 strikes have been carried out. In addition, President Obama announced on Wednesday that he would be sending 450 more U.S. troops into Iraq to work as advisers and to fly surveillance aircraft. That will bring the total number of military personnel in Iraq to 1,600. Obama has said the troops will not take part in ground operations against the Islamic State.


United Kingdom: Britain has dropped humanitarian supplies into Iraq and provided arms to Kurdish fighters and carried out surveillance flights. Government officials have not ruled out participation in the U.S. air campaign. Iraq’s new central government must first prove itself as inclusive, encompassing Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds before British forces get involved, government officials have said.


France: Paris has said it will send arms to Kurdish forces leading the fight against the Islamic State. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Wednesday that France “will participate, if necessary, in military air action.”


Germany: Berlin also has agreed to send weapons to semi-autonomous Kurdistan, marking a major shift for a country that has avoided foreign military entanglements since World War II. While it is unlikely Germany would participate in direct military action, it is conceivable that Berlin could take part in an advisory mission if Baghdad were to seek NATO training assistance.


Poland: Poland was named as one of the 10-core nations that are part of the U.S.-led coalition, but what it will contribute isn’t yet clear. Poland possesses experienced, battle-tested troops who have spent the past decade fighting in Afghanistan. Warsaw could contribute some of those soldiers as advisers to Iraqi forces. Like many others in the coalition, Warsaw already has helped in the delivery of humanitarian supplies to Iraq.


Australia: Australian aircraft took part in the initial humanitarian intervention in northern Iraq last month, and Canberra is supplying weapons to forces countering the Islamic State. Australian officials haven’t ruled out joining the U.S. in future airstrikes.


Canada: Canada has provided aircraft to help deliver humanitarian supplies into northern Iraq and has delivered weapons to Kurdish fighters. The Canadian government is also considering sending a small team of military advisers into Iraq.


Italy: The NATO ally took part in initial humanitarian relief efforts in northern Iraq in August. At NATO’s recent summit in Wales, Italy also said it would join the U.S.-led coalition in the effort to counter the Islamic State. It remains unclear whether that support will involve airstrikes or sending in trainers to work with Iraqi security forces.


Denmark: Danish aircraft have delivered both humanitarian supplies and weapons into northern Iraq. Though Denmark is one of NATO’s smallest members, it often is a part of alliance-led military action, including sending forces into Afghanistan and taking part in the Libya intervention in 2011.


Turkey: The NATO member is among the “core coalition,” but its role remains murky. Allies have been pressuring Turkey to tighten controls along its border with Syria, which has functioned as a main transit route for those fighting the regime of Bashar Assad. Islamic State militants have been among the fighters moving through Turkish territory. U.S. plans to strike at Islamic State targets in Syria could undermine Turkey’s main objective in the region, Assad’s removal from power. Meanwhile, the Islamic State is holding about 40 Turkish government officials and aid workers hostage, which also could limit Istanbul’s willingness to play a prominent role in fighting the militants.


Saudi Arabia: U.S. officials say the kingdom on Wednesday agreed to host a program to train and equip moderate Syrian rebels fighting Islamic State militants and the Syrian regime.


Kuwait: The U.S. already maintains a handful of bases in the country, including an air base, a large desert ground maneuver training facility and a forward headquarters for the three-star Army component of U.S. Central Command. Kuwait was the primary logistics hub for the Iraq War. It also donated $10 million in July to help with the growing humanitarian crisis in Iraq.


Arab League: The league of 22 Arab nations on Monday agreed to confront the Islamic State militarily and politically, but hasn’t elaborated on how it would do so.


Bahrain: The U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet is based here. The U.S. maintains an airfield here and has had access to a second to move heavy equipment used in the war in Afghanistan. Bahrain’s prime minister on Thursday urged Muslim countries to strengthen cooperation to tackle regional threats, but did not mention Islamic State.


Jordan: The kingdom routinely hosts U.S. troops for training, but, despite speaking out against “transnational terrorists,” hasn’t committed to action in Syria.


Qatar: The country hosts two major U.S. installations, one an air base used for bombing missions over Afghanistan and cargo movement through the Middle East, the other an Army base used by Central Command to stage military equipment and supplies. The Qataris have also sent planeloads of aid to help with the humanitarian crisis in Iraq.


United Arab Emirates: The U.S. maintains an air base and has access to ports here.


vandiver.john@stripes.com


svan.jennifer@stripes.com


millham.matthew@stripes.com



Korea mayor boycotts concert after alleged US troop assault


SEOUL, South Korea — The Uijeongbu mayor boycotted a friendship concert at Camp Red Cloud last week after a 2nd Infantry Division soldier allegedly assaulted a taxi driver.


A second incident further exacerbated simmering resentment among local residents at what they see as a never-ending string of crimes by American soldiers, said a spokesman for Mayor Ahn Byung Yong.


2ID commander Maj. Gen. Thomas Vandal apologized in writing and in a telephone conversation with Ahn. Brig. Gen. Richard Kim, assistant division commander for maneuver, met with the mayor.


The soldier, identified by Uijeongbu police as a sergeant, is suspected of assaulting a taxi driver shortly after midnight on Sept. 2 on a road near the base’s back gate. The driver was taken to a hospital after losing control and running onto a curb. No information on his injuries was available.


After the incident, the soldier entered the base but was later questioned by South Korean police. Their investigation is ongoing; no charges have been filed.


The incident prompted Ahn to skip a Sept. 3 “One Mind Concert” at CRC hosted by 2ID and Gyeonggi province for the local Korean and U.S. military communities. South Korea’s Yonhap News reported that a ruling party lawmaker and other officials also stayed away.


The city spokesperson, said Ahn declined to attend because he was unhappy about misbehavior by U.S. Forces Korea personnel in general, not just the alleged assault on the taxi driver. But the soldier’s claims that he couldn’t remember what happened made the public and the mayor unhappy, he said.


“Residents know U.S. troops are here to defend our country, but they felt it was undesirable for the mayor to attend the event,” the spokesman said.


Another soldier was accused of flirting with a 26-year-old South Korean woman around 10 p.m. on Sept. 7 at Hoeryong Station, one stop from Uijeongbu, then shoving her toward a wall.


Arrested at the scene, the soldier admitted to being drunk and told police the woman, who was not injured, resembled his ex-girlfriend. A Uijeongbu police official identified the soldier as a private stationed at Camp Stanley. No charges have been filed. Police said they have completed their investigation and will forward the case to prosecutors.


Ahn’s spokesman said residents are skeptical that 2ID can do anything to stop troop misbehavior.


“I wouldn’t go so far as to say people can’t step out onto the street at night. But they are nervous, and they are scared (of U.S. soldiers),” he said.


Scott Rawlinson said in an email that although Ahn did not attend the concert, 2ID has developed a close relationship with Uijeongbu city leaders and “we look forward to future positive engagements with the community leaders.”


rowland.ashley@stripes.com


chang.yookyong@stripes.com



Petraeus talks about Obama's Islamic State strategy at 9/11 event


DENVER — The man who penned most of America's strategy to counter al-Qaida and stop the insurgency in Iraq told a packed theater here that a new strategy to roll back the terror group that calls itself Islamic State will likely work quickly in Iraq.


"In Iraq, all the ingredients are there," retired Army Gen. David Petraeus told an audience gathered by Denver's Counterterrorism Education Learning Lab to mark the 13th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.


Petraeus said America's years on fighting in Iraq put structures and an Army in place that will lead to the defeat of Islamic State, which now holds large swaths of Syria and Iraq.


"It's not that desperate," Petraeus said.


President Barack Obama announced a plan to strike the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria in a Wednesday speech. The plan includes bombing and arming opposition groups in Syria.


"This is not the kind of Iraq on fire, complete desperation we had during the surge," Petraeus said.


Petraeus made his mark in northern Iraq as a two-star general where his campaign to pacify Mosul in northern Iraq was seen as revolutionary. He used those techniques in 2007 when he led the American surge that slowed the erosion of Iraq. He went on to lead the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and served as director of the Central Intelligence Agency.


He resigned from the CIA in 2012 amid a scandal over an extramarital affair but remains one of the nation's most influential thinkers on defense issues.


In the two years since Petraeus left government, the Middle East has seen mass uprisings, a revolution in Syria and the rise of Islamic State, an outgrowth of al-Qaida in Iraq.


Petraeus claims that the new terror threats are weaker than their forebears in Iraq.


"It has nowhere the roots and the structure of al-Qaida in Iraq," Petraeus said.


Petraeus said the key to tackling the Islamic State can be found in America's surge. He said with the backing of American air power, Iraqis can clear and hold areas held by Islamic State and work to reconcile sympathizers.


"It's a new Iraqi government now," he said. "There's new hope, there's outreach."


Petraeus blamed the failure of the Iraqi military when the Islamic State invaded on sectarian loyalists and a failed chain of command.


"The third failing was the population was not happy with sectarian and loyalist leaders," Petraeus said.


The trouble faced by America and its allies, he said, is tackling the Islamic State in Syria, where it began. Petraeus said while America has ready-made allies in Iraq, the opposition to the militant group in Syria is scattered. Petraeus said American leaders need to build a credible force in Syria and support it by tackling both Islamic State and the Syrian military.


Petraeus said ridding Syria of the Assad regime could be a key to ridding that country of terrorists.


"This is going to be years, not months," he predicted.


©2014 The (Colorado Springs, Colo.) Gazette. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.



Thursday, September 11, 2014

Fijian troops freed from Syrian militants call home, celebrate


SUVA, Fiji — First came the emotional calls home and then the celebrations Friday as 45 Fijian peacekeepers held captive for two weeks by Syrian militants made it to safety.


Fiji's military chief described how his troops were released across the border at about midnight Fijian time and were immediately given access to telephones to call their loved ones. By 2 a.m., every affected family in Fiji knew the good news, Brig. Gen. Mosese Tikoitoga told reporters.


Then, he said, came the grog ceremony. In Fiji, at least, that would mean drinking a potent local brew, kava, although the chief didn't say whether that was the case.


"We could see the singing and drinking in the background, all the laughter, so they are all back to Fijian moods," said Tikoitoga, describing a video call he had with his troops. "And so I assume that all is well with them, at least emotionally."


The Fijians had been held captive by the al-Qaida linked Nusra Front since Aug. 28. They were part of a 1,200-strong U.N. force that had been stationed in the Golan Heights, the disputed buffer zone between Syria and Israel.


Fiji's prime minister hailed the troops as "heroes."


"They kept their cool and showed restraint under the most extreme circumstances imaginable," Voreqe Bainimarama said. "Because of their discipline, not one militant was killed and none of our soldiers were harmed."


Still, the capture of the troops has raised questions both about the preparedness of the Fijian troops and of the future of the U.N.'s four decade-long monitoring mission in the Golan Heights.


Tikoitoga said his troops had to make a decision to surrender Aug. 28, in consultation with U.N. commanders, based on their position and the firepower of the militants. He said they did so only after receiving reassurances from the Nusra Front that they would not be harmed.


He said his soldiers felt no hostility toward Filipino troops, who were also surrounded by the Nusra Front but who refused to surrender and later escaped.


"They made the choices they made in concurrence with their own government, and we respect that," Tikoitoga said. "For us, we've done what we needed to do for the safety of our people."


The chief said the released soldiers would go through medical and psychological testing before a decision was made about whether they would remain on duty in the region.


"The general feeling is that they want to stay," he said.


Perry reported from Wellington, New Zealand.



Obama hasn’t given specific order to strike in Syria, officials say


WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama has not yet authorized U.S. Central Command to conduct offensive combat operations in Syria, two senior defense officials told McClatchy on Thursday, underscoring the uncertainty that U.S. officials still have over how best to counter the rise of the Islamic State in that country.



Speaking anonymously to discuss sensitive military operations, the officials said that although U.S. CENTCOM commander Army Gen. Lloyd Austin has been granted the authority to expand the U.S. effort in Iraq to offensive operations, that authority has yet to be extended to Syria. Austin’s authority for Iraq operations was explicit in Obama’s national address Wednesday, the officials said, and official written authority, called an execution order, is expected to reach Austin from the Joint Chiefs of Staff sometime next week, a defense official told McClatchy.


But despite the assertion by White House officials in background briefings with reporters that military action in Syria is a certainty, Pentagon officials said they think direct military action there is at least weeks away. In his speech Wednesday, Obama said that he would not hesitate to strike in Syria, but he gave no indication of what developments would lead to an actual authorization for a strike, and other U.S. officials have acknowledged that the United States is still determining what to do.


Several major issues remain unresolved regarding Syria, the Defense Department officials said. They include what weapons systems would be employed in strikes on Syria, what targets would be struck, how long an aerial campaign might last, and what impact the strikes would likely have on the Syrian civil war.


The officials said U.S. military planners are also considering the possibility that U.S. aircraft would launch an attack from outside Syrian airspace — something the Israelis apparently have done on at least two occasions in targeting Syrian missile systems they feared were about to be transferred to the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.


Of greatest concern is whether aerial strikes would end up strengthening the government of President Bashar Assad, whose ouster Obama called for in August 2011. The Islamic State currently controls about a third of Syrian territory.


The Pentagon also is weighing whether strikes on the Islamic State might strengthen other armed groups whose goals the United States doesn’t share, such as the al-Qaida-affiliated Nusra Front or Kurdish insurgents linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK by its Kurdish initials, both of which have been designated foreign terrorist organizations by the State Department.


With such major questions outstanding, a decisive strike is far from certain. In addition to tactical questions, there are political ones. According to the Interfax News Agency, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said his country would consider strikes on the Islamic State inside Syria without a U.N. Security Council mandate “an act of aggression, a gross violation of international law.” And Syrian government officials said any strikes inside their borders must receive their approval.


Perhaps the biggest challenge confronting Pentagon planners drafting an attack plan inside Syria is their lack of intelligence on possible targets inside Syria. That is particularly true if such strikes are aimed at the Islamic State’s leadership. The United States has only recently begun surveillance flights over Syria; before air assaults can begin, the officials said, planners need to accumulate the kind of intelligence they’ve gleaned in Iraq, where, for nearly three months, the U.S. military has conducted between 50 and 60 surveillance flights per day.


“In Iraq, we have developed tremendous clarity over the past weeks and months,” one of the officials said. “We have gone from a defensive position … to taking the fight to ISIL.”


Those more aggressive actions are expected to begin in Iraq once Austin receives the execution orders, after which U.S. operations will shift from protecting U.S. personnel and property and endangered minority groups to rolling back Islamic State militants.


Such action in Syria may still be weeks or months off — something that was largely lost in the news coverage of Wednesday’s speech as White House officials, briefing reporters anonymously before Obama spoke, stressed their conviction that a strike in Syria was certain. “We will take action on the Syrian side of the border to degrade ISIL,” one official said. “But we’re not going to telegraph our punches by being specific about the time and nature of the target.”


The complexity of the issue also was underscored Thursday by Secretary of State John Kerry, who in an interview from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, told CNN that the United States was not launching a war against the Islamic State.


“What we are doing is engaging in a very significant counterterrorism operation,” Kerry said. “It’s going to go on for some period of time. If somebody wants to think about it as being a war with ISIL, they can do so, but the fact is it’s a major counterterrorism operation that will have many different moving parts.”


©2014 McClatchy Washington Bureau. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.



Billionaire Paul Allen sues over rare WWII Panzer tank he says he bought


SEATTLE — Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen has seen his share of court fights, what with a patent war he launched a few years ago against pretty much all of Silicon Valley, and other high-profile business battles.


But few lawsuits have been like the one filed on the billionaire’s behalf Wednesday in San Mateo County (Calif.) Superior Court. That legal action, complete with a temporary restraining order, is not about software, but rather concerns the hardest of hardware — a 70-year-old German tank known as the Panzer IV that weighs 27.6 tons.


Allen owns a lot of things. The Super Bowl champion Seattle Seahawks. The NBA’s Portland Trail Blazers. A chunk of the Seattle Sounders soccer franchise. He founded the Allen Institute for Brain Science. He has given away more than $1.8 billion. And there’s a lot more left over.


Now, he says, he spent $2.5 million on the Panzer IV, a choice bit of history that he bought in July to add to his museum of military memorabilia housed in his Flying Heritage Collection in Everett, Wash.


But the Panzer’s owner (in Allen’s world, the “former owner”) says that the sale never occurred. And therein lies the legal action.


The tank in question was built in 1944 and used as part of the German effort during World War II. It was eventually bought by Syria in the 1950s. The Israelis captured the Panzer in 1967 during the Six-Day War and used it to train soldiers before retiring it to the Israeli Armor Museum.


In 2003, the behemoth was purchased by the Military Vehicle Technology Foundation in Portola Valley, Calif., which oversees the so-called Littlefield Collection, described on its website as “one of the largest and most significant collections of historical military vehicles in the world.”


But Jacques M. Littlefield, the Stanford-trained engineer who amassed the collection of 240 vehicles, died in 2009. In early July, the collection was donated to the Collings Foundation in Stow, Mass., which is dedicated to preserving military and aviation history.


Collings held an auction later that month to sell some of the Littlefield Collection so that it could build a facility to showcase the rest. The Panzer IV was sent to the auction block.


“It’s very historically significant,” said Rob Collings, executive director of the foundation. “It’s the most produced German tank of World War II. There’s only two privately owned such vehicles in the United States. It’s got a lot of historical significance to it.”


And that’s where Allen comes in. According to court documents, Allen has “a passion for aviation and military history.” His company, Vulcan Warbirds Inc., buys and sells military planes and vehicles and leases them to the Flying Heritage Collection, which recently opened a 26,000-square-foot “tank arena.”


“Warbirds has been seeking to find a Panzer IV Tank for over five years,” the lawsuit says. “Panzer IV Tanks are extremely rare and rarely are available for sale. Once acquired, the Panzer IV Tank will be on display at the museum.”


When Flying Heritage Collection officials saw the Panzer on sale as part of the Littlefield auction, they jumped. But not very high.


According to the auction catalog, the tank was expected to bring $2.4 million to $2.6 million. Allen’s group bid $1.5 million. There was a second bid by another tank lover of $1.75 million. Neither bid was high enough to meet the reserve, or minimum price.


The tank went back to Collings.


Not long after, the court documents assert, Allen’s group got back in contact with a representative of Auctions America, which had led the auction, and negotiated a purchase price of $2.5 million for the Panzer and wired the auction house $4.2 million — which covered the cost of the tank and other items that had been purchased at auction.


“Then, in a complete about-face almost one month after Warbirds paid in full for the Panzer IV Tank, on August 20, 2014, Rob Collings informed (Flying Heritage Collection Executive Director) Adrian Hunt that the board of the Collings Foundation had not agreed to sell the Panzer IV Tank.”


The only way a sale would go through, the documents quoted Rob Collings as saying, was if he could “first source an equivalent piece.”


Hence the suit. And the temporary restraining order prohibiting the Panzer from going anywhere.


Vulcan Warbirds released a statement about the suit: “Auctions America has failed to honor our agreement and yesterday we sued it and the Collings Foundation, the former owner of the tank, to enforce our contract. We look forward to restoring the Panzer IV Tank and having it join our Sherman tank and other historic military aircraft and vehicles at the Flying Heritage Collection.”


Collings, however, was happy to talk.


“We do not have an agreement to sell a Panzer IV to Paul Allen or Flying Heritage Collection or Vulcan or any of his companies,” Collings said. “I heard the comment made from someone at Flying Heritage Collection that this was a case of sellers’ remorse. No it was not. We didn’t ever sell it.”


©2014 Los Angeles Times. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.



Woman says Alaska National Guard ignored her rape complaints


ANCHORAGE, Alaska — A woman said Thursday she was drugged and raped while a member of the Alaska Army National Guard, but her complaints to guard commanders went nowhere.


"It was all just ignored," said Melissa Jones.


Jones, who now lives in Paris, Illinois, spoke at an Anchorage teleconference by phone Thursday at the invitation of the Alaska Women for Political Action. She said the trauma of the experience and the way she was treated by the guard led to a suicide attempt in 2011. She got counseling that same year and continues to get counseling today, said Jones, now a sergeant with the Illinois National Guard.


Jones said she and a large group of Alaska National Guard peers were at an Anchorage bar in 2007 when someone slipped something into her drink. She was incapacitated when she was sexually assaulted later at her apartment, and has no idea who her attacker or attackers were, she said.


Her accounting came days after Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell came under fire following the release of a report detailing allegations of fraud and sexual assaults in the Alaska National Guard. Parnell forced the resignation of his adjutant general overseeing the National Guard, but that didn't stop criticism against the governor, who has made reducing violence against women a hallmark of his administration.


Jones said not only were her complaints ignored, her confidentiality was breached and many of her fellow guard members learned about the assault, she said. One member even told her he had heard two stories, one that she was gang-raped by her entire company and another that someone broke into her apartment and raped her.


The Associated Press usually does not identify people who may be victims of sexual abuse, but Jones spoke publicly about her allegations.


She never reported the assault to Anchorage police. In hindsight, she said, today she would have stood up more to commanders and would reach out to law enforcement. But then she was full of self-blame, as victims can be, she said.


"I was shocked, I was humiliated, embarrassed," Jones said. "As a victim, you initially go through so many ranges of emotion. You don't even know which way is up or down, even."


Jones agreed with critics who have said Parnell did not do enough in response to sexual assault allegations within the guard since allegations began emerging in 2010. Parnell is seeking re-election in November.


Parnell said Thursday he had the same concerns as Jones. After the report was released last week, Parnell said his office would hear concerns and go to guard leaders and be assured the matter was being handled and given descriptions of how it was handled.


He noted that investigations requested by Alaska's two U.S. senators found the same thing. He said it was only in February that he obtained concrete examples of how the command structure was failing guard members. He took those concerns to the National Guard Bureau, whose Office of Complex Investigations conducted the review that led to the 229-page report.


The report, released Sept. 4, found that victims do not trust the system because of a lack of confidence in the command to handle sexual assault cases. In a statement released at the time of the report, Parnell apologized to those who had been victimized.


"I am extremely frustrated that it took so long to get to the root of these issues," he said. "Our Alaska Guard members deserve better; the victims who have been hurt and discouraged deserve better; and those who have brought complaints forward deserve better."


Independent gubernatorial candidate Bill Walker said Thursday that Parnell should immediately have called for an independent investigation in 2010.


"It was absolutely not handled properly," Walker said. "There's no question about that."



Texas Rangers coach Bobby Jones presented with Bronze Star at game


ARLINGTON, TEXAS — Texas Rangers bench coach Bobby Jones heard fans cheering Thursday night, rather than the repeated boom of a 105-millimeter howitzer.


As part of the team's remembrance of the Sept. 11 attacks, Jones was formally presented with a military medal he earned in Vietnam.


The former Army corporal officially received the Bronze Star before Texas played the Los Angeles Angels. A colonel from the Army Corps of Engineers pinned the medal on the left side of Jones' No. 5 jersey, and they saluted each other.


Jones also received a framed citation and a frame holding the other medals he earned.


"It's pretty special. I didn't expect any of this," Jones said.


Jones served in Vietnam for 14 months as the artillery section chief in a howitzer battery. He now wears hearing aids after the noise from the weapons caused hearing loss.


"I had six or seven men under me. We were at Fire Support Base Siberia, out in the middle of nowhere," Jones said.


Jones said he couldn't remember whether he was handed the medal in Vietnam or in February 1971, when he returned to the United States.


"I actually got the medal before, but didn't get the citation," he said.


The former major leaguer was drafted into the Army at age 19 in July 1969, when he was playing Class A ball in the Washington Senators' organization.


Jones said he extended the usual one-year tour in exchange for an early separation from the Army. Thus, he was able to report for 1971 spring training with the Senators, who became the Rangers the next season.


Jones played the first of his nine major league seasons in 1974. He also managed for 24 years in the Texas organization.


When Tim Bogar moved up from bench coach to interim manager Sept. 5, Jones was promoted from assistant hitting coach to bench coach.


"People need to see what Bobby's done for this country. It makes you realize how fortunate we are here to have people willing to go over there," Bogar said.


Jones said public reaction to returning soldiers is much more favorable than when he came home from Vietnam.


"When you get soldiers on an airplane, everybody claps. It's so cool," he said.



Retired Marine Gen. John Allen to coordinate Iraq, Syria effort


WASHINGTON — Retired Marine Gen. John Allen will coordinate the broad international effort to battle the Islamic State militants, as the campaign against the extremist group ramps up and nations begin to determine what role each will play, U.S. officials said Thursday.



Allen, who has been serving as a security adviser to Secretary of State John Kerry, is expected to work with the almost 40 nations around the world who have agreed to join the fight and help them coordinate what each will contribute, several officials told The Associated Press.


The officials spoke about Allen's expected appointment on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter ahead of an announcement.


Allen comes to the job with vast experience coordinating international allies on the warfront. He served as deputy commander in Iraq's Anbar province from 2006 to 2008, working with Arab partners on organizing the Sunni uprising against al-Qaida. He moved from there to serve for two years as the deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, which oversees military troops and operations in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia.


Allen next became the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan from 2011 to 2013, where he worked with international allies who sent troops to the battlefield.


As a result of his experience, Allen is very familiar many of the Middle East nations and leaders considered crucial to the latest effort to degrade and destroy the Islamic State group militants who have seized control of portions of Iraq and Syria in a ruthless reign of terror. He also has worked closely with most of the key military and diplomatic leaders, including Gen. Lloyd Austin, the current head of U.S. Central Command, who will oversee America's military campaign.


President Barack Obama announced Wednesday night that the U.S. will be expanding airstrikes in Iraq and into Syria, in an aggressive move to root out the Islamic State group extremists where ever they are. Obama, Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel have spent the last week meeting with international leaders overseas in an effort to build a broad coalition of nations — particularly Arab countries in the region — to aid the fight.


Officials are looking for partners to help train moderate Syrian rebels, work with the Iraqi security forces, contribute equipment, ammunition, intelligence, logistics and funding, as well as possibly also launch airstrikes.



'American War Generals' a sobering reflection on U.S. failures in Iraq


As the U.S. escalates its campaign against jihadists in Iraq and Syria, a new documentary offers a cautionary tale about putting too much faith in technology and forgetting hard-fought lessons from the past.


“American War Generals,” which airs Sunday at 8 p.m. on the National Geographic Channel, looks at how the U.S. military recovered from its disastrous endeavor in Vietnam, remade itself into an all-volunteer force that focused on fighting conventional wars, and then came close to defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan as it faced a type of enemy it vowed never to fight again.


The documentary provides access to many of America’s top current and former commanders, including retired Army Gens. David Petraeus, George Casey, Jack Keane and Stanley McChrystal and Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, currently with U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command.


McChrystal provides the film’s most candid and forthright commentary. The former head of Joint Special Operations Command, who went on to lead all U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan, waged a brutal war against al-Qaida in Iraq. Despite the U.S. military’s successes in Iraq after 2006, he calls the invasion a mistake.


“Before that war, if we’d looked at the cost — not just in Americans but in Iraqis and others — if we’d looked at the distrust that it created — or loss of trust — around the world for America; I don’t think a rational person would have ever said, ‘Yeah that’s worth it; we’ll do that,’ ” he said.


“American War Generals” illustrates how the U.S. military did not train to fight guerrilla wars after Vietnam, preferring instead to prepare to fight large-scale conflicts against well-equipped, traditionally trained adversaries.


“Most of my professional life, the Army put Vietnam in the rear-view mirror and focused on this major conventional warfare,” says Petraeus, a past commander of U.S. Central Command who led all coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. “That’s all well and good if that’s what you end up fighting, but if you then end up in small wars, as they’re called — counterinsurgency efforts — you then have to go back to the drawing board and do some serious thinking.”


McMaster, who in 1991 led an armored cavalry troop during the Battle of 73 Easting in the Persian Gulf War, sets the stage for the history of the post-Sept. 11 wars by explaining that the U.S. military took away the wrong lessons from that conflict by believing technology had beaten Saddam Hussein’s army.


“There are two ways to fight the United States military: Asymmetrically and stupid,” McMaster says. “ ‘Asymmetrically’ means, you are going to try to avoid our strengths. In the 1991 Gulf War, it’s like we called Saddam’s army out into the school yard and beat up that army.”


When the insurgency in Iraq began, the U.S. military refused to accept that it was fighting an unconventional war, McMaster says.


“We didn’t have enough forces for what the situation required and we didn’t adapt fast enough, largely because in the beginning of the war in Iraq, we were in denial,” McMaster says. “We were in denial about it. We wouldn’t even call it an insurgency. We wouldn’t call it an insurgency because it evoked the images of Vietnam.”


The documentary also examines the tension between Casey, who opposed sending more troops into Iraq, and those who advocated for the eventual surge of forces there. Casey led all U.S. troops in Iraq from 2004 to 2007, before he became the Army’s chief of staff. His philosophy differed from that of retired Gen. Jack Keane, who in December 2006 gave President George W. Bush a blunt assessment of the situation.


“I told him that we had run out of all options to succeed in Iraq but one,” says Keane, the Army’s former vice chief of staff. “I said ‘There is only one thing that would be decisive and that is to change our strategy and begin to protect the people.’ And I said ‘You have to understand that right now the U.S. military strategy is not designed to defeat the insurgency. And based on his body language, I know he reacted to that statement.”


Filmmaker Tresha Mabile co-produced “American War Generals” with her husband Peter Bergen. The documentary is the culmination of two years of work.


She hopes audiences take away that the U.S. military has to be able to fight different types of wars, she told Military Times on Thursday.


“War is a human endeavor and technology doesn’t always solve all of the problems,” Mabile said. “I think you heard that a lot from the generals in the film. Having been in war zones, you see that. War is a people venture and you just can’t solve all problems by dropping bombs from the sky.”


For Mabile, the most difficult part of making the documentary was selecting which scenes had to be left out to avoid the film running too long, she said.


“There was one point where the vice president called General Keane and said, ‘We want you to go to Iraq and implement this strategy;’ and General Keane said ‘I’m retired; it would look like an act of desperation if you called me out of retirement; you need to get this guy Dave Petraeus on the ground and things will be OK,’ ” Mabile said.


Mabile also wishes she had more time to explain how the U.S. military was not trained to fight an insurgency at the start of the Iraq war. She believes Casey gets a “bad rap” for his tenure as commander in Iraq because it took time to retrain the military in counterinsurgency.


In “American War Generals,” Casey explains how the death of his father — a two-star general killed in Vietnam — shaped the way he made decisions as an Army commander.


“I never made a decision to put forces in harm’s way without thinking of the consequences,” Casey says.


Casey also says he feels a connection with each of the more than 2,000 U.S. troops who died under his command during his tenure in Iraq. He still wears a bracelet with the name of a soldier killed in Iraq that was given to him by the soldier’s spouse.


“I don’t take it off,” he says. “The cost — the human cost of war is something, as a leader, you can never allow yourself to forget.”



The old ways are no way for Army drill sergeants


COLUMBIA, S.C. — Drill Sgt. Danielle Brooks watched patiently as a squad of recruits at Fort Jackson tried haplessly to get a bloodied mannequin, representing a wounded soldier, across an imaginary creek. They were allowed to use only a zip line, stretcher, two carabiner clips and some nylon rope.


They fumbled. They fussed. They failed.


“Time’s up,” Brooks barked. “You just killed your battle buddy. How’s it feel?”


In the old Army, this probably would be accompanied by a torrent of curses and oaths. Butts would be kicked. But this is the new Army and Brooks just shakes her head, sternly calls the group together and starts teaching the recruits the right way to do the exercise.


“I don’t like to yell and scream a lot,” said Brooks, who has trained recruits for nine 10-week cycles over the past three years. “If you’re yelling and screaming all the time, when are you going to teach them? Patience is a virtue when you are trying to instill discipline.”


Brooks recently left her post training recruits to become the newest teacher in the U.S. Army Drill Sergeant School at Fort Jackson, which marked 50 years of the drill sergeant program this week. It is the only place in the nation where the Army trains drill sergeants. Brooks was chosen by the academy’s commanders – all drill sergeants themselves – to wear the distinctive belt, brass buckle and badge that proclaims “This We’ll Defend,” the drill sergeant motto.


Brooks doesn’t fit the image Hollywood usually assigns to Army drill sergeants or Marine drill instructors. They most often are portrayed as hulking, red-faced, profanity-spewing brutes, a terror to any recruit unfortunate enough to enter their universe.


Take Hollywood’s most most famous: R. Lee Ermey’s Sgt. Hartwell in the movie “Full Metal Jacket.” He’s a full throttle Marine drill instructor who calls his recruits “maggots,” punches one in the gut for an infraction and forces another to choke himself “with MY hand.”


In contrast, Brooks is 5 feet 4 1/2 inches tall, and proud of the half inch. She lives in Northeast Richland with her wife, Shakerian. And she spent five years as a vocalist with the U.S. Army Europe Band and Chorus.


But watch her and her team of drill sergeants train new recruits in the sweltering fields, forests and firing ranges of the Army’s largest basic training post, and you see that the difference between real drill sergeants and movie drill sergeants isn’t all about gender, sexuality, ethnicity or profanity.


It’s about results.


“You don’t want to spend so much energy on the screw-ups that you don’t spend enough time with the ones who want to learn,” said Sgt. 1st Class Nicole Brannan, a drill sergeant leader.


But make no mistake: Brooks and Brannan, like any top drill sergeant, absolutely can dress down a recruit who is slacking off or, even worse, smarting off. Yelling comes in long, loud bursts when it comes and it is a fearsome thing to witness.


“We don’t smoke people anymore,” said Brooks, meaning using excessive physical training – running or push-ups – to break or wash out a recruit. “But sometimes you have to give them a little extra TLC.”


Drill sergeants are chosen from the top 10 percent of soldiers in the Army. Drill sergeant leaders represent the top 1 percent of drill sergeants.


When they don the distinctive wide-brimmed campaign hat, or bush hat for female drill sergeants, they say they are “on the trail.” It recalls the Old West, where cowboys would wrangle large herds of cattle across the plains from range to railhead.


Some sergeants volunteered to be on the trail. Some were “volun-told.” They represent every ethnicity, class and social strata. But they are all “on point,” meaning they look and act like model soldiers, examples for the herds of new privates they are charged with molding.


They are the first authority figure a recruit sees in the service. They are also the person who will teach them such things as how to make a bed, how to fire an M240B machine gun and how to clear a building of the enemy. A bad drill sergeant can screw up a soldier for his entire career. A good one can shape the next chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.


“You will have a future battalion commander in your platoon,” Command Sgt. Maj. Lamont Christian, the academy’s commandant, told a group of drill-sergeant candidates who graduated recently. “Show them what right looks like.”


All drill sergeants have completed the school’s nine-week course, going through every step of basic training again. But at the same time, they learn how to lead it. And they will lead it over and over again in the two years to come, in 10-week cycles, with only a few days off in between.


Their day often starts at 4:30 a.m., before the recruits wake up, and ends at 9 p.m., when the recruits have lights out.


Drill sergeants are required to do everything a recruit does – the marches, the runs, the obstacle courses, the PT – and then some.


“You don’t ask a private to do anything that you wouldn’t do yourself,” Brannan said. “You show them what’s right and tell them why.”


The “why” is one of the main differences between real drill sergeants and the Hollywood image. And so is the discipline.


In Hollywood movies, and often in the old Army, if a soldier asked why he should do something, he was punished swiftly – maybe by a punch to the stomach, a brutal round of push-ups or a back-breaking run with a full pack.


“When I went through, you just did it without question,” Brannan said. “But this generation is different. We’re telling them, ‘Do as I say, but learn to think for yourself, too.’ That’s how things have changed.”


Military studies show that in the post-Cold War and pre-9/11 Army, recruiters could be very selective about who they accepted. But after 9/11 — and particularly during the surge in Iraq from 2005 to 2007 — the Army was forced to accept a lower level of recruit. That could change now that the Army’s ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan seem to be at an end after 13 years and the Army is poised to shrink significantly.


Brooks said she wanted to become a drill sergeant leader in part to instill a high level of discipline in the Army. “Drill sergeants have the most impact on the Army,” she said.


She will be patient with a private who is trying. But she will light up a private who is “jacked up,” meaning intentionally sloppy in dress or execution.


“We’ve been so busy getting soldiers ready for war that disciplinary standards have dropped,” she said. “We have to get out of that in-theater mind set. I feel like I can motivate NCOs to care (more about discipline). If they care, then everything else is easy.”


Training at the academy has changed as well under Christian, the commandant. Drill-sergeant candidates used to just complete basic training again and then were sent to a cadre – made up of a first sergeant and about six drill sergeants for each company of about 200 recruits – to learn how to teach on their own.


Now, Christian requires the candidates to lead their fellow candidates in drill and training exercises, all of which is overseen by the drill sergeant leaders. Candidates also are embedded with basic training companies, to see first-hand how training is conducted with actual recruits.


“While soldiers in earlier days of the Army may have been taught with brutal approaches and harsh treatment ... what we’ve done is understand the adult learning model,” Christian said. “That Hollywood image of the drill sergeant constantly screaming is not the drill sergeant of today.”


The 10-week basic training cycle is broken up into three phases: Red, White and Blue.


The first phase – Red – happens in the first three weeks of training. It is during this time that drill sergeants come as close to the Hollywood version as the regulations allow.


On the first day, recruits in all manner of dress and hair lengths are kept up all night during reception. They are issued uniforms, immunizations and buzz haircuts, and then are bused to their battalion’s barracks.


There, they meet their drill sergeants for the first time. It is not a pleasant experience.


There is intense yelling as the recruits get off the bus and are shaken down for contraband. Their bags are dumped. Every misstep is loudly noted and loudly corrected. It’s called “shock and awe.”


The drill sergeants even are trained to yell properly, from the diaphragm, to save the throat and achieve that distinctive drill sergeant bark.


“There is nothing more powerless and embarrassing than a drill sergeant who can’t yell,” said Sgt. 1st Class Matthew Torres, a drill sergeant leader.


Then, the stunned recruits immediately are herded to Victory Tower where they have to climb ropes and nets and rappel down a 40-foot wall. The rappelling is mandatory for all soldiers.


Yelling has its limits. While profanity in some battalions or companies is common, it is forbidden altogether in others.


“It depends on the battalion commander or the company first sergeant,” Brannan said. “You can drop an F-bomb in some battalions. In others, it will cost you your hat.”


Army training regulations say only that profanity cannot be “extreme.” But they also say recruits can’t be touched in any way, nor can recruits be “degraded.”


But in theory, drill sergeants, if allowed by their superiors, can tell a recruit to “get the (expletive deleted) off my obstacle.” But they can’t call a recruit a “(expletive deleted) scumbag” or say they or going to “(expletive deleted) you up.”


“That would cost them their hat and probably a stripe,” Brannan said.


Christian teaches restraint, even in allowed profanity.


“At some point the private will stop listening,” he said. “So you save that for when you really want it to count. Otherwise it won’t have the impact. Sometimes a little ‘hell’ or ‘damn’ can make your point.”


For Brooks, the reward for patience comes at the end of the cycle, when she leads her soldiers onto the parade ground at Hilton Field to graduate. Sometimes, when family members rush out to reunite with their soldiers after 10 weeks, they’ll walk right past, not recognizing this new person the drill sergeant has created.


Many soldiers want their parents to meet their drill sergeants. Often, they will ask Brooks how their son or daughter did in basic.


“I’m honest with them,” she said. “I’ll say, ‘Little Johnnie was a knucklehead. But look at him now.’”


———


© 2014 The State (Columbia, S.C.) Visit The State (Columbia, S.C.) at www.thestate.com Distributed by MCT Information Services



Widow fights Army ruling of Green Beret's death as overdose


Debbie Venetz heard the doorbell ring and saw those familiar Army boots as she peeked through the window onto her front steps.


Her husband, Sgt. 1st Class Anthony Venetz, was back from Afghanistan, in time for their daughter's seventh birthday party the next day.


That's what Venetz thought, until she opened the door and saw the chaplain.


It was Jan. 28, 2011, and Anthony Venetz, a 30-year-old Green Beret, had become the latest U.S. soldier to die in Afghanistan. Two weeks later, the recipient of two Purple Hearts and two Bronze Stars was buried at Arlington National Cemetery.


Years later, Debbie Venetz is still fighting to learn the circumstances of her husband's death and to claim benefits the Army has refused to pay after it ruled he died of an accidental drug overdose and, therefore, not in the line of duty.


"It's a daily thing. For over 3 1/2 years now, this is all I've been dealing with," she said, sitting at a table in her parents' home in this suburb of New York City. "But nobody has ever said to me, 'Just move on,' because they know something is not right."


She seems an unlikely candidate to be taking on the military, but by all accounts, her husband was an unlikely person to risk tarnishing his military career by voluntarily taking the toxic cocktail of opiates that killed him.


For almost seven years, Venetz was the epitome of a supportive Army spouse, hosting gatherings for other soldiers and their families, first at Fort Hood in Texas and later at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, where they moved in 2007 after he qualified for the Army's Special Forces.


She trained as a special volunteer to help families of fallen soldiers. She developed a large circle of friends among the troops and their spouses.


Anthony Venetz's courage in battle was unquestioned after 10 years in the service. In addition to the Purple Hearts and Bronze Stars, he had earned a series of commendations from two tours in Iraq and two in Afghanistan, including four Army Commendation Medals, with two for valor, and an Army Good Conduct Medal.


Interviews conducted in 2011 as part of the first military investigation into his death paint Venetz as a steadfast serviceman whose only crutches were cigarettes and long Skype calls with his wife and their two young children.


"Exuded confidence." "Natural leader." "Straight up. … I'd follow him anywhere." "Everybody liked him." "He would always follow the rules."


When word filtered back to fellow soldiers that his death was the result of drugs, the reaction was disbelief.


"There was nothing but shock," one soldier who had been in Afghanistan with Venetz said in the investigative report, which had most names redacted. "It just dumbfounded me," another said. "It just seemed out of character … not the Tony I knew."


Nonetheless, the Army's Criminal Investigation Command, which investigates noncombat deaths, ruled that Venetz died as a result of his misconduct, based on autopsy findings. That meant his widow, now 33, would not receive benefits that included compensation of more than $1,200 a month and coverage of some school costs for her children, who were 6 and 3 when their father died.


At her urging, the 7th Special Forces Group, to which her husband belonged, conducted its own investigation the following year, and that convinced her she didn't have the whole story.


"The initial … findings should be re-evaluated," it said. "No reliable indications or evidence of wanton illegal drug use or intoxication … prior to the night of his death could be attained." It also said the drugs found in Venetz's bloodstream, but not in his organs or fatty tissue, indicated their use was an "acute, isolated event" and not habitual. The drugs found included codeine, morphine and heroin.


"This does not preclude the possibility SFC Venetz was given the substances under false pretense by a third party," the report concluded.


But the Army reaffirmed the original ruling, so Debbie Venetz is preparing another appeal, to the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records. If that fails, she plans to sue the Army.


Since her husband's death, Venetz estimates she has collected about 3,000 pages of documents from her fight, which she has detailed on a Facebook page called "Justice for SFC Venetz."


The papers sit in plastic bins in her home in San Antonio and include the autopsy report, hundreds of pages of interviews conducted in Afghanistan and the United States as part of the follow-up investigation, and its summary questioning the conclusion that Venetz was to blame for his death.


An Army spokeswoman, Tatjana Christian, said Debbie Venetz had six years from the original ruling to appeal. "So while that window is still open, it would be inappropriate for us to comment," Christian said.


Another Army spokesman, Wayne V. Hall, said he did not have a number of how many of the U.S. military deaths related to the war in Afghanistan had not been in the line of duty. Defense Department records indicate it is a small percentage.


Of the 1,654 Army deaths, 334 are listed as the result of nonhostile activity, but Hall said most of them would fall within the line of duty. They include accidents such as vehicular rollovers and most suicides.


Only deaths blamed squarely on a soldier's misconduct fall out of the line-of-duty realm, and such determinations "must be supported by substantial evidence and by a greater weight of evidence than supports any different conclusion," according to Army guidelines.


That evidence does not exist, the second investigation concluded: "Since there were no direct witnesses, evidence of a method of delivery, or evidence of any containers for the illicit substances, one cannot, without speculation, conclude that SFC Venetz knowingly, under willful negligence or misconduct, consumed the illegal substances on his own free will."


Former Army Capt. Danny Fields, Venetz's commander for four months in Afghanistan, agrees.


Fields said in the time he served with Venetz, they were crammed with other soldiers into tiny rooms in a mud house serving as a base for U.S. forces. That was in the fall and winter of 2010, just before Venetz headed to Bagram air base to begin his journey back to the United States, where he was to attend jumpmaster school.


With four to five men in rooms that had space only for their bunks, it was virtually impossible to hide drug use, Fields said. He also agreed with other soldiers interviewed by investigators that Venetz was a popular, upbeat soldier who enjoyed his job and never showed signs of depression or drug use.


"This guy has won multiple Purple Hearts, multiple valor awards. By all accounts he has one of the best service records I've ever seen," Fields said.


"I was absolutely, incredibly surprised," he said of the initial ruling. "It doesn't make any sense to me."


By all accounts, Anthony Venetz, who grew up on Long Island, was looking forward to returning home to see his family and start his next assignment.


He had met Debbie in December 2001 through a cousin who was serving alongside him at Fort Hood. When Venetz saw a picture of the Myanmar-born woman with long black hair and brown eyes, he begged the cousin for her phone number. Phone calls led to a long-distance romance and in-person dates, sometimes on the firing range so that Venetz, an Army sniper, could show off his skills.


They married on Sept. 11, 2004. "We picked that date because we wanted to make a bad day into a good day," Debbie Venetz said.


By then, Venetz had been deployed once to Iraq. In 2005, he returned to Iraq before moving into the Special Forces and making two trips to Afghanistan.


When the doorbell rang that January day more than three years ago, the Venetzes' son, Jace, was watching cartoons. Daughter Alexa was in school.


Seeing the chaplain and the concerned stares of neighbors who had gathered on the street outside, Debbie Venetz collapsed, as much from shock as from grief.


"I thought that was him at the door, surprising me," she said. She assumed her husband had been killed in a plane or helicopter crash while making his way home. Then, the chaplain said he had been found unconscious in his bed. Later, Debbie Venetz would be told that Anthony was found on the floor, and that he had been moved onto the bed by others so they could perform CPR.


It is one of the seemingly small gaps that nag at Venetz, leading her to suspect her husband was a victim — of faulty medical care, perhaps, or of foul play. "I'm no CPR expert, but why would you move someone from the floor to a bed to do CPR?" she said.


Medical paperwork that should have been filed at his time of death was never found, according to the second investigation. Also lost were medical records showing the treatment Venetz received for headaches after a bomb blast in November 2010. Venetz also never received the hard drive from her husband's laptop.


On her Facebook page, Venetz has posted the angry letters she has sent to military officials, her suspicions that something is not right, and her daughter's handwritten appeal to President Obama asking for help in unraveling the case.


"I can see why other families would give up. Who would want to go through this? But he gave 10 years to the Army," she said. "I think the thing that angers me most is we can't let him rest in peace."


©2014 the Los Angeles Times. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.



Fort Bliss soldier gets 30 years for brutal attack on pregnant woman


Jurors on Wednesday evening sentenced a Fort Bliss soldier to 30 years in prison for brutally attacking a pregnant woman last year, leaving her partially blind and with extensive injuries.


Corey Moss, 20, initially didn't show any emotion after 210th District Judge Gonzalo Garcia announced the jury's sentence. Jurors also assessed a $10,000 fine.


Moss will be eligible for parole after serving 15 years of his sentence. He will receive credit for time spent in jail awaiting trial.


El Paso police arrested Moss on Oct. 30 for the brutal stabbing of Rachel Poole at her Northeast home. She was eight and a half months pregnant at the time but her baby girl was born healthy.


On Monday, Moss pleaded guilty to a charge of burglary of a habitation with the intent to commit aggravated assault and opted to have a jury decide his punishment.


At the time of the attack, Poole had been using the FaceTime app on her phone to video chat with her husband, Army Spc. Justin Poole, who had been deployed to Qatar. State prosecutors said Moss attacked Poole over a $3,000 debt Moss owed to the Pooles after damaging one of their vehicles.


The couple has since moved from El Paso and now live in Virginia, where Justin Poole is stationed.


During a victim-impact statement after the jury's sentence was announced, Rachel Poole told Moss she forgave him.


"I forgive you not for you, but I forgive you for myself, my children and my husband," Rachel Poole told Moss as he sat in the courtroom jury box.


Moss wept as Rachel Poole told him she forgave him "so that I can continue the way I live my life the way I have to" for her family.


Justin Poole also gave a victim-impact statement. He told Moss he forgave him, but will never forget the pain Moss inflicted on the Poole family.


"I don't need to express to you how disappointed I am in your actions," Justin Poole told Moss as Moss sniffled loudly. "I took you in as family."


Justin Poole said during his statement that he also used the FaceTime app to speak with Moss about the debt. He said he told Moss he could only pay half the debt, and that he would be back in El Paso in early November.


"Thirty years is not a long time," Justin Poole told Moss. "People question Rachel about her injuries, but they don't question you about your motives."


Justin Poole also reminded Moss that he once considered him family and often helped him out financially.


During closing arguments Wednesday morning, state prosecutors pointed out Moss once told Army officials his father had died in a tornado in Oklahoma. Army officials and friends hosted fundraisers for Moss but later learned Moss lied about his father's death.


Assistant District Attorney Bill Anderson had urged jurors to sentence Moss to life in prison, arguing Moss intended to kill Rachel Poole and her unborn baby. Rachel Poole suffered serious injuries, including a broken neck and nose and broken facial bones. The attack lasted about a minute, Anderson told jurors. He then paused his argument for a minute.


"If that minute was long for you, that minute will last the rest of her life," Anderson said during his closing argument. "I want you to make that minute last just as long for Corey Moss."


Moss' attorney, Rafael Morales, said he feared jurors would sentence Moss to more than 30 years.


"The verdict was not unjust," Morales said after Wednesday's verdict. "It was a generous verdict. I hope (Moss) uses that time to grow up and mature."



Wednesday, September 10, 2014

5 potential pitfalls in Obama’s plan to combat Islamic State


WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama sounded confident about his multi-pronged strategy to defeat the Islamic State.



He said the United States would bomb the extremists whether in Iraq or Syria, train local partners to conduct the mop-up effort on the ground, expand humanitarian aid to suffering communities and work closely with allies to prevent attacks on Western targets.


So, what could go wrong? Quite a bit, according to longtime observers of U.S. involvement in the Middle East.


Below are some potential pitfalls to Obama’s campaign against the Islamic State, as gleaned from interviews, analysis, social media postings and other commentary by foreign policy specialists who focus on the Middle East and North Africa.


Using Yemen and Somalia as success stories


Obama cited Yemen and Somalia as precedents for the kind of air-focused campaign he envisions to rout the Islamic State. But neither conflict has dealt a death blow to its intended target; they might even have strengthened the Qaida affiliates.


In Yemen, at least three key figures have been killed, but al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula’s senior leadership is largely intact and still appears capable of carrying out sophisticated, deadly attacks. In fact, the group has seen significant growth in the past three years, expanding from longtime desert bastions to more populated areas south of the capital, Sanaa.


In Somalia, the United States spent more than five years and close to $2 billion to fight al-Qaida’s al-Shabaab affiliate through the training and equipping of African Union and Somali government troops, and the Somali fighters are nowhere near as sophisticated and deep-pocketed as the Islamic State. But the group remains dangerous: Shabaab’s rampage through an upscale shopping mall in Kenya — the group’s deadliest attack on a Western target outside of Somalia — occurred after the group was weakened inside Somalia.


Touting the new Iraqi government as 'inclusive'


Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have praised the new Iraqi government as inclusive or representative — code words that amount to “more power for Sunni Muslims,” the minority sect whose marginalization by Shiite leaders only helped the Islamic State gain a foothold. Iraq observers caution that it’s still too early to slap labels on the government; so far there are fewer Sunnis in Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi’s Cabinet than in the previous administration. Neither the defense minister nor the interior minister have been appointed.


Training local fighters in Iraq and Syria


The Obama administration has acknowledged that training a foreign force is difficult and risky, as evidenced by the vast American arsenal the Islamic State amassed after overwhelming U.S.-trained Iraqi forces that crumbled when tested.


For Iraq, Obama pledged more support for Kurdish militiamen, pro-government fighters and a new National Guard-style force that he suggested would be primarily Sunni. Each recipient of the U.S. largesse is problematic.


The Kurds have used Iraq’s crisis to expand their northern autonomous region and make big oil plays without Baghdad’s consent; there’s no guarantee that any training they receive would go toward keeping Iraq intact and sovereign. At the moment, the pro-government forces are mainly Iranian-backed Shiite militias. And it’s hard to imagine Shiite leaders swallowing the creation of a Sunni armed group that one day could challenge them for sectarian supremacy.


In Syria, it’s still unclear which “opposition” Obama means. He made no mention of the Free Syrian Army or the Supreme Military Command, two previous groups the U.S. government said it was equipping. Analysts say there’s no quick way to recruit, vet and train a rebel force in Syria; any such endeavor would take years and is no guarantee of success, as the United States saw with the collapse of its trainees in Iraq. And the U.S. won’t work with the two existing forces — the Syrian army and Kurdish rebels in the north — that could challenge the Islamic State.


So there’s still a huge question as to which power will seize control when and if the United States strikes the Islamic State inside Syria. Even the prospect of airstrikes raises questions: Administration officials said they have been authorized, but they also cautioned that they won’t take place anytime soon.


Pursuing a political solution in Syria


Obama was adamant that there’s no room for the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad in his anti-Islamic State coalition. He promised to boost U.S. support for the Syria opposition, despite its failure to coalesce into viable entities on either the military or political fronts, and to revisit a plan for a negotiated solution to the crisis.


But the goal of a peaceful transfer of power has defied international diplomacy since the early days of the war, and circumstances haven’t changed enough on the ground to believe that this time would yield more success. Indeed, for the United States, one of the unwelcome realities of this campaign is that weakening the Islamic State is only likely to strengthen the Assad regime.


Foreign fighters and funding


The U.S. plan calls for enlisting Arab allies, especially Persian Gulf powers such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, to crack down on the flow of fighters and funds to the Islamic State. Here, the fighter pipeline issue might be better addressed with Turkey, whose borders are the key entry point for jihadists, and have been for years. And the idea that foreign donors “created” the Islamic State overlooks the remarkable self-sufficiency of the extremists, who’ve built a corporation-style management team, boast a diversified portfolio with revenues from stolen oil and kidnapping ransoms, and are adept at harnessing the Internet for propaganda that helps recruiting and donations.


McClatchy special correspondent Adam Baron contributed from Baltimore.


©2014 McClatchy Washington Bureau. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.



In reversal, Obama to expand campaign against militants, orders Syria strikes


WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama in a major reversal ordered the United States into a broad military campaign Wednesday night to "degrade and ultimately destroy" Islamic State militants in two volatile Middle East nations authorizing airstrikes inside Syria for the first time as well as an expansion of strikes in Iraq.


In an address to the nation, Obama also announced he was dispatching almost 500 more U.S. troops to Iraq to assist that country's besieged security forces. And he called on Congress to authorize a program to train and arm rebels in Syria who are fighting both the Islamic State group and Syrian President Bashar Assad.


Saudi Arabia, a crucial U.S. ally in the Middle East, offered to host the training missions, part of Obama's effort to persuade other nations to join with the U.S. in confronting the militants.


"This is not our fight alone," Obama declared. "American power can make a decisive difference, but we cannot do for Iraqis what they must do for themselves, nor can we take the place of Arab partners in securing their region."


"Our objective is clear: We will degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy."


The president adamantly ruled out the prospect of putting American troops in combat roles on the ground in Iraq or Syria.


Even so, Obama's plans amount to a striking shift for a president who rose to political prominence in part because of his early opposition to the Iraq war. While in office, he's steadfastly sought to wind down American military campaigns in the Middle East and avoid new wars — particularly in Syria, a country where the chaos of a lengthy civil war has given the Islamic State space to thrive and move freely across the border with Iraq.


Speaking on the eve of the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Obama's plans also amounted to an admission that years of American-led war in the Middle East have not quelled the terror threat emanating from the region.


While administration officials have said they are not aware of a credible threat of a potential attack by the militants in the U.S., they say the Islamic State group poses risks to Americans and interests in the region. Officials are also concerned about the prospect that Westerners, including Americans, who have joined the militant group could return to their home countries to launch attacks.


In recent weeks, the militants have released videos depicting the beheading of two American journalists in Syria. The violent images appear to have had an impact on a formerly war-weary public, with multiple polls in recent days showing that the majority of Americans support airstrikes in both Iraq and Syria.


The U.S. began launching limited airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq earlier this summer. But officials said Obama was waiting for Iraq to form a new government — a step it took Tuesday — before broadening the effort.


Officials said strikes in Iraq would now be wide-ranging and extend into Syria. Obama plans to proceed with those actions without seeking new authorization from Congress.


Instead, officials said Obama will act under a use of force authorization Congress passed in the days after 9/11 to give President George W. Bush the ability to go after those who perpetrated the terror attacks. Obama has previously called for that authorization to be repealed, he has also used the measure as a rationale to take strikes against terror targets in Yemen and Somalia.


Officials compared the new U.S. mission in Iraq and Syria to the actions in Yemen and Somalia, campaigns that have gone on for years.


Obama is seeking authorization from Congress for a Pentagon-led effort to train and arm more moderate elements of the Syrian opposition. Ahead of Obama's remarks, congressional leaders grappled with whether to support that request and if so, how to get such a measure through the fractured legislature before the November elections.


The White House wants Congress to include the authorization in a temporary funding measure they're expected to vote on before adjourning later this month. Republicans made no commitment to support the request and the House GOP has so far not included the measure in the funding legislation.


A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the Nevada Democrat might opt to seek separate legislation to authorize the president's request.


While the CIA currently runs a small program to arm the rebels, the new program would be more robust. Obama asked Congress earlier this year to approve a $500 million program to expand the effort and put it under Pentagon control, but the request stalled on Capitol Hill.


Some of Obama's own advisers, including former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, pressed him to arm the rebels early in their fight against Syrian President Bashar Assad. But Obama resisted, arguing that there was too much uncertainty about the composition of the rebel forces. He also expressed concern about adding more firepower to an already bloody civil war.


Separately, the White House announced Wednesday that it was providing $25 million in immediate military assistance to the Iraqi government as part of efforts to combat the Islamic State.


In the hours before the president's remarks, the Treasury Department said that Obama's strategy would include stepped-up efforts to undermine the Islamic State group's finances. David Cohen, Treasury's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, wrote in a blog post that the U.S. would be working with other countries, especially Gulf states, to cut off the group's external funding networks and its access to the global financial system.


The U.S. has also been pressing allies in Europe, the Middle East and elsewhere to help with efforts to degrade the terror group.


France's foreign minister said Wednesday that his country was ready to take part in airstrikes against extremist fighters in Iraq if needed. And the German government announced that it was sending assault rifles, ammunition, anti-tank weapons and armored vehicles to Kurdish forces in Iraq fighting, breaking with Berlin's previous reluctance to send weapons into conflicts.


Secretary of State John Kerry is traveling to Saudi Arabia and Jordan this week. He first made a stop in Baghdad to meet with Iraq's new leaders and pledge U.S. support for eliminating the extremist group.


Associated Press writers Donna Cassata, Andrew Taylor and Josh Lederman contributed to this report.



Kerry: US troops might deploy to Iraq if there are ‘very dramatic changes’



BAGHDAD — U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry raised the possibility Wednesday that U.S. troops might be committed to ground operations in Iraq in extreme circumstances, the first hedging by an administration official on President Barack Obama’s pledge that there will be no U.S. boots on the ground to battle the Islamic State.


Kerry made the comment during a news conference after a day of meeting with Iraqi officials, who he said hadn’t requested or shown any desire to have U.S. troops or forces from any nation in Iraq to confront the Islamic State, the extremist organization that’s now in control of more than a third of the country’s territory.


Kerry reiterated that Obama has said no U.S. combat troops would be deployed to fight the Islamic State in Iraq, before adding, “Unless, obviously, something very, very dramatic changes.”


That formulation hasn’t been used previously by administration officials in discussing the growing U.S. confrontation with the Islamic State, and it’s sure to feed concerns that the United States may be making a greater commitment to a new conflict in the Middle East than it first intended.


In announcing the authorization for U.S. airstrikes in Iraq in August, Obama said they’d be limited to preventing Islamic State attacks on the Yazidi religious minority and to stopping any Islamic State advance on the Kurdish capital of Irbil. Since then, the U.S. has provided close air support for Kurdish troops fighting to recapture the Mosul Dam, Iranian-trained Shiite Muslim militias breaking the Islamic State siege of Amerli and Sunni Muslim tribesmen battling to push Islamic State forces from towns near Haditha.


Kerry didn’t elaborate on what dramatic change might prompt the U.S. to commit ground forces, and it wasn’t clear whether his statement reflected administration policy. There was no immediate reaction from the White House.


Kerry said Iraqi leaders had promised him that they’d move swiftly to resolve the grievances of the Sunni and Kurdish communities, both of which are unhappy with the way the new Iraqi government was assembled.


Kerry praised the newly elected government, headed by veteran Shiite politician Haider al-Abadi, and said he’d received assurances that addressing the grievances of Iraq’s Sunni Arabs and Kurds was a top priority of the government.


He said Obama had sent him on the unannounced visit “to underscore to the people of Iraq that we will stand by them in this effort … and overcome the threat they face today.”


In the meetings with al-Abadi, President Fouad Massoum, Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari and parliamentary Speaker Salim al-Jabouri, Kerry said, he also discussed ways to reconstitute the Iraqi army, which collapsed in June under attack from Islamic extremists.


All, but al-Abadi in particular, were focused on creating a national guard in Iraq’s major regions, an institution favored especially by Kurds, who have the peshmerga militias, and Sunnis, who chafe at operations carried out by the Shiite-dominated national army.


Kerry said the national guards, who’d be integrated into the national security forces, would “protect the population of Iraqi cities and towns and deny space” to the Islamic State, which has introduced a brutal reign of terror where it’s conquered.


He said that all of Iraq’s new leaders had agreed on the importance of enhanced regional autonomy, resolving the issue of territories disputed between Kurds and Arabs, and resuming budgetary payments to the Kurdistan Regional Government, which former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had cut.


Kerry said he was very encouraged by his meetings. “I’ve been here many times and in many meetings, and never in any of those meetings seen the unanimity — without complaint — of a sense of direction and commitment to the concept of inclusivity, and of addressing the unaddressed issues of the past eight years or more,” a reference to the divisive rule of Maliki.


Kerry had arrived here as part of a hurriedly arranged Middle Eastern tour that coincided with Obama’s address to the nation Wednesday night on how he intends to combat the Islamic State insurgents.


Kerry then flew back to Jordan and was to travel Thursday to Saudi Arabia, where he’ll urge leaders of Arab nations to form a coalition to fight the Islamic State, which also controls more than a third of the territory in neighboring Syria. Kerry said nearly 40 countries had already committed to contributing military or humanitarian aid to Iraq.


Kerry also noted that the Saudis had invited Iraqi Foreign Minister al-Jaafari for one of the first such visits after years of bitter enmity between the Sunni royal family and al-Maliki’s Shiite-led government.


Kerry said he thought Iraq’s new government, sworn in Monday night, was a historic step forward and that Iraq’s leaders seem determined to keep the country together.


“Every single leader I talked with today in the strongest terms possible affirmed that they had learned the lessons of the past years” and were determined “to move in a different direction from the direction of years past,” he said.



Dispute arises from apparent misunderstanding on vet education comments


Two veterans service organizations expressed outrage over comments made by an official from an organization that represents public universities in early September — but the dispute appears largely to be the result of a misunderstanding.


Barmak Nassirian, director of federal policy for the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, was quoted in a September Stars and Stripes article criticizing a law passed by Congress that pushed public universities to offer in-state tuition to students using the GI Bill.


Nassirian objected to the fact that Congress was saddling public universities and states with new costs, while offering no federal financing to cover those costs. But officials from the American Legion and Student Veterans of America interpreted him as saying that veterans didn’t deserve the lower tuition — something Nassirian said he absolutely did not mean — and they had sharp retorts.


“That some believe this earned benefit did not cost the men and women who utilize it is astonishing,” D. Wayne Robinson, president and chief executive officer of SVA, said in a written statement.


The measure in question, signed into law as part of a larger veterans’ health care bill on Aug. 7, will require public colleges and universities to offer Post-9/11 GI Bill and Montgomery GI Bill recipients in-state tuition, regardless of normal residency rules, under certain conditions. If the schools do not, they will not be able to accept GI Bill benefits.


Central to the objections of SVA and the Legion was this excerpt from the Stripes article quoting Nassirian about Congress’ action: “It legislated ‘the proverbial free lunch by mandating in-state tuition for veterans and their dependents’ without covering ‘the significant costs this will impose on public colleges.’ ”


Nassirian made similar comments to Military Times in February: “For Congress to simply come in and basically legislate a free lunch without paying for it ... would throw an enormous monkey wrench into the operation of public institutions.”


When Nassirian spoke with Military Times, his meaning was clearly that the undeserving recipient of the “free lunch” was Congress — not vets and GI Bill users — because lawmakers were establishing policies it didn’t have to pay for. This month, Nassirian said, his meaning was the same.


“I think any reasonable person who reads the entire quote would grasp what I’m saying,” he said. “Congress failed to pay for a benefit that it legislated. .... I leave absolutely no ambiguity that I actually believe that vets deserve it.”


Nassirian added that he continues to advocate for veterans in public higher education, considers veterans service organizations to typically be allies in this effort and took “personal offense at a huge misinterpretation of my plain meaning.”


After an initial statement criticizing Nassirian, the Legion later sent Military Times a short statement indicating that it misunderstood Nassirian‘s comments and now realizes they were directed at Congress, not vets.


William Hubbard, SVA’s vice president of government affairs, was not entirely swayed.


“We are still concerned and the reason for that is ultimately even if he alleges his words were misconstrued ... we really take contention with even remotely, in any sense, comparing the GI Bill to something that’s free.”


Nassirian, who expressed regret for any misunderstanding, said his concerns about the law remain, but they will not stop him, his organization or public institutions from working to attract and educate vets.


“Veterans are getting the benefits that we, as a nation, have quite correctly decided to provide for them,” Nassirian said. “Whatever the problems [with the law] may be, we will work through them, because we’re very committed to veterans education within the public sector.”