Soldier gets Silver Star, reprimand for same battle
 

Soldier gets Silver Star, reprimand for same battle
By Mike Mount, CNN Senior Pentagon Producer
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Army Capt. Matthew Myer has Silver Star from actions during a Taliban attack
Letter of reprimand criticizes him for allowing attack to take place
Two of his superior officers also receive letters of reprimand
Site of attack was at bottom of a valley surrounded by high hills
RELATED TOPICS
U.S. Armed Forces Activities
Afghanistan War
Washington (CNN) -- A U.S. Army officer who was honored for valor after his combat outpost in Afghanistan was attacked has also received a letter of reprimand for failing to secure the base before the attack, according to Army officials. Such a letter normally would prevent career advancement.

U.S. Army Capt. Matthew Myer received the Silver Star for his part in repelling a Taliban attack on his small combat outpost in eastern Afghanistan in July 2008.

The attack, near the village of Wanat, is still the deadliest ground combat of the war involving U.S. troops. A coordinated Taliban attack from the steep hills surrounding the base almost resulted in the outpost being overrun.

According to troops who survived, the Taliban came at the base with about 200 fighters, outnumbering the U.S. forces at the base. In the end nine soldiers were killed and 12 were wounded. About 100 Taliban were killed.

Despite the heavy U.S. death toll, Myer was awarded the Silver Star for calling in aircraft to beat back the fighters, some of whom had breached the base walls, according to U.S. military officials in Afghanistan.

After the attack, the U.S. military scrutinized how enemy forces were allowed to get as close to the base as they did. Officials familiar with the after-action review said Taliban fighters got within grenade-throwing distance of U.S. troops.

Myer even called in close air support to hit enemy targets just 10 meters from his own position, according to officials familiar with the after-action report.

Four-star Gen. Charles C. Campbell was chosen to review the final investigation and make disciplinary decisions. Campbell decided Myer would receive a career-ending letter of reprimand for failing to prepare the base's defenses sufficiently against an enemy attack. Myer was informed this week of his punishment, according to U.S. military officials. CBS News first reported his punishment.

Two of Myer's senior commanders, who were not at the base during the attack, also received similar career-ending letters of reprimand. Officials would not elaborate on the reasons for the reprimands.

Army officials acknowledge the base, built to protect the people in Wanat, was at the bottom of a valley surrounded by high hills, an almost impossible location to defend.

According to one U.S. military official familiar with the general's decision to reprimand Myer, "He saw the evidence and made a decision based on that." However, the same official said, "Unless you've been there, you don't know how hard those places are to defend."

Myer and his two senior officers are allowed to appeal the punishment.

Another U.S. military official familiar with the review said he expects the three officers to meet with Campbell to plead their cases.








Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/03/12/sil....html?hpt=Sbin

Did you see the pic is that base? How could you possibly defend it?

three ring concertina wire and stakes are a good start

Another decision made by someone behind a desk in a nice cushy chair that isn't quite sure what "combat" really is.

I can hear the conversation now...
'Build a base to protect the civilians at Wanat'
'But Sir that area is not defensible'
Dammit the administration wants civilians protected!, Hold at all costs'
'Yes sir!'

Sounds great. Got any handy?

Roughly, by calling in CAS danger close. Repeatedly. While fending off attackers with a 4-1 advantage. Then receiving a letter of reprimand because you dared allow 9 of your men to die in the attack.

"Failing to prepare the base's defenses sufficiently" my ass. If anyone should be reprimanded it should be Schloesser. He's the one who wanted that COP there but didn't want to support it. And now, after 9 men died in its defense, he's the one who was ok with us just leaving it and letting come what may.* Same thing happened recently with Taliban Stan shooting down recommendations from his officers. We left COP Keating too, but not before we lost 8 lives defending it. Great fucking strategy.



* The Taliban were "what may"

the army has mountains of that shit. If he didnt have any he failed for not asking

Career-ending? Or, probably more accurately, career-limiting?

Let em have it Fatbuck! i am right behind ya!!

Career ending. The guy is a senior captain, he has met all the requirements for major, but I can guarantee you that no promotion board will promote him with a letter of reprimand. He will be passed over 2 times for major and after the 2nd time he will be given a competancy hearing where they will look at his entire career (10-13 years) and make a judgement based on his overall service. Then they will let him know if he is allowed to continue serving in the national guard and reserve. At that point he has 2 chances to be promoted again, if he fails those then he is released from the reserve. So maybe he has 2-3 years in the Active army and another 2-3 years in the USAR or Guard. If he can make it to 18 years total service he will be allowed to do his 20 then be retired or if he doesnt make 18 he will be kicked out completely. The chances of being promoted to major after being passed over the first time is something in the range of 1/300, once he hits the usar of guard the chance goes up to something like 1/5 then drops way down to 1/1000 if you get passed over the 3rd time.

The active army does have certain career performance goals that you have to meet to continue to serve, and as an officer he need to get promoted.

I understand, but career-ending to me means dishonorable discharge. As in, all of a sudden you don't have a job anymore. This dude might be able to serve a few more years. CNN needs to choose their words more carefully IMO.

I see your point. Us in the military understand what they mean by it, but I can see where it would be misleading to those not in the service.

No its career ending. Chances are he will get passed over 2 times then accept an honorable discharge. He has a year or two left. his career is over.


That being said, the guy doesnt deserve that, he was sent into an area to construct a vehicle based temporary outpost, he did just that, also had a number of observation posts. Resupply was set for the next day, and the defensive measures were set the same way hundreds of outposts have been set up before and since. They chose a crappy spot, that from what I have read was the best spot in the area. They were attacked by a far superior (numbered) force and and won. Read or watch 'when we were soldiers'. Same situation only they didnt serve in a tiem of insta news where some dud cutting a fingernail in afghanistan is a big story. Not saying that that much death and injuries isn't signifigant because it is, but its nothing to what has happened in the past.

Exactly.

I think CNN is just trying to make the story more sensational.

Note, I am not endorsing the judgement against the officer, I am just critiquing CNN's writing style.

I wonder if there might have been a more obvious failure there, like not properly posting sentries or something along those lines? I agree that such a forward base is a tough thing to defend, as they repeated found in Vietnam, but are we getting the whole story?

I doubt it was sensationalism. If anything I see it as "inside baseball". The first paragraph of the article also states "Such a letter normally would prevent career advancement". I have seen the phrase "up or out" associated with officers in the military. He isn't loosing his job tomorrow, but everyone knows his career is effectively over.

From the article Pauldun posted:

Could barely get water, much less concertina.

The army (and the military in general) has mountains of lots of things that don't make it to the warfighter on the ground. For instance, there are thousands of airmen who never leave their FOB running around with PAC-4's, CCO's, and every other piece of fluff known to man strapped to their M-4's, while grunts running daily missions that include CQB are pimping M-16's with iron sights.

In our case, when we were going to a similar COP all we wanted were NVG's and chem lights (two things the army also has mountains of, especially chem lights). After begging and pleading and sucking the right dicks we finally got NVG's, from a captain who had no resposibility to supply us whatsoever. When we got back, we found out why we couldn't find chem lights. They were all being used at Trance Night.

I can guarantee you two things from personal experience:
1) When you're at a COP like that, you don't fail to post sentries. It just won't happen.
2) If they somehow had failed to post sentries, the senior officers looking to cover their own asses by throwing this captain under the bus right now would be screaming that shit from the rooftops.

Agreed, I see it as a reporter asks a military source, military source says "his career is over," reporter repeats "his career is over." Letters of reprimand for officers are very commonly referred to as "career ending" among servicemembers.

Not having your experience on it, I'll take your word for that then.

There is a huge write up of the whole battle online somehwere. The unit was making a 3 day stop at that village when they got word that there was gong to be an attack, they stayed longer than they were supposed to. They had a ressuply expected the next day. They were attacked by a much larger force than intelligence had said. They won, but there were some KIA.

I wouldnt place the blame on anybody, shit happens in battle, the only thing you should really expect is that the battle plan is gonna go to shit once the first bullets start flying.

The only reason he got a letter of reprimand is because the news has been all over this story and someone is trying to prove put the blame on someone. Two decades ago a few deaths would have been buried deep inside a newspaper where none could read it. Not justifying those deaths its a waste of life but in previous wars we were not able to keep the death tolls nearly as low as it is now thanks to modern aromor and medical tech.