In 2012, a Marine Corps staff sergeant was court-martialed for being among a group of snipers who urinated on the fresh corpses of Taliban fighters. In 2016, police in Tennessee say he saved a 3-year-old from being fatherless.
What may seem like a redemption plot from a Hollywood drama is the story of Joseph Chamblin, the former Marine who worked with Tennessee police to foil an alleged attempted murder.
The story is complicated. It involves a young woman trying to get custody of her son, her alleged search for a hit man and a staged death.
Chamblin’s career had been going well in 2011, the Military Times reported. He was chosen by the leaders of the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines, to be the scout sniper platoon commander in Afghanistan. The next January, it seemed likely that he would be promoted to gunnery sergeant. Then a video surfaced. In it, he and three other scout snipers are standing over the corpses of Taliban fighters, and they’re urinating on them.
(For Marine who urinated on dead Taliban, a hero’s burial at Arlington)
The footage sparked outrage around the world. The Atlantic suggested that “the Afghan video is of particular concern because it has the possibility of becoming one of the dominant images of the war.”
“This act by American soldiers is simply inhuman and condemnable in the strongest possible terms,” former Afghan president Hamid Karzai told the New York Times.
In an interview with WSOC-TV, Chamblin said he did it as a means of psychological warfare, implying that they defiled the corpses so that the fighters wouldn’t reap any rewards of the afterlife.
“Because of their cultural belief that if an infidel touches the bodies, they’re not going to Mecca or going to paradise,” Chamblin said. “So now these insurgents see what happens when they mess with us.”
When asked whether he would do it again, he didn’t pause.
“Yep,” he said.
The Marine Corps said Chamblin pleaded guilty to wrongful desecration, failure to properly supervise junior Marines and posing for photos with battlefield casualties. Lt. Gen. Richard Mills, who oversaw the Chamblin case, agreed before the court-martial to limit his punishment to the loss of $500 in pay and reduction in rank by one grade.
(...)
After being court-martialed, Chamblin left the Marines and co-wrote a book titled “Into Infamy: A Marine Sniper’s War” with fellow former Marine Milo Afong about both his experience in the war and with the video.
After the media firestorms over the video and his book, meeting Laura Buckingham must have felt like a fresh start. Buckingham was attractive, educated and ran her own bakery. Her customers and her town loved her. After all, she was something of a local celebrity in New Albany, Ind. Just last fall, she was on the cover of Southern Indiana Living with her son.
She was also a veteran who could understand Chamblin’s experiences. The two fell for each other, and soon Buckingham was pregnant again.
(...)
While she wasn’t baking fresh loaves of bread, she was busy allegedly trying to find someone to murder Sutherland.
The first person to whom she allegedly turned was Chamblin.
At first, when she allegedly asked him at the beginning of the year to make Sutherland “go away,” Chamblin thought she was kidding. A dark joke, no doubt, but a joke nonetheless. Slowly, though, her requests allegedly grew more detailed as she wondered aloud about the specifics — Where would it happen? How could Sutherland be killed? — and he began secretly recording their conversations, the Military Times reported.
(...)
But that same month, she ended her relationship with Bradley Sutherland, her son’s father, the Military Times reported. It had been a rocky relationship, and a rocky time in Buckingham’s life. She allegedly hit Sutherland, giving him a black eye. The two became engaged anyway
(...)
Beyond the simple fact that his ex-fiancee may want to kill him, what she was willing to pay struck a nerve. (Most outlets report that price at $3,000, though the Courier-Journal reports it as $30,000.)
“My life’s only worth $3,000?” he told the Daily Beast in an interview. “It’s like a … used car lot. Like bring us your tax check and we’ll get you a car — only this is more like bring us your tax check, and we’ll assassinate your ex-fiancee.”
But that isn’t what hurt the most.
The police decided to stage Sutherland’s death, fooling Buckingham into thinking the plan had gone off without a hitch, so she would pay the remainder of the fee.
“When the guy went to show the photos of my dead body — my son’s right there,” Sutherland said. “The fact that she would let a hired killer into the house while my son is there hurts me more than taking an attempt on my life.”
She was also a veteran who could understand Chamblin’s experiences.
this seems like it would be physically difficult
A taliban wouldn't let a U.S. marine potato on him
When I was a young boy my father, a veteran of World War II and Korea, schooled me on the downfall of Gen. Douglas MacArthur. MacArthur, he explained, had overstepped his authority and shown blatant disrespect for the civilian leadership of the country. President Harry Truman relieved him of his command, and MacArthur retired soon thereafter.
Civilian rule of the military was one of the most fundamental principles of the armed forces. To believe differently was dangerous, my father told me. Dad strongly supported Truman’s action, and he made me understand the value of the civil-military relationship — a lesson I never forgot.
But over the past decade I have seen a disturbing trend in how politicians abuse and denigrate military leadership, particularly the officer corps, to advance their political agendas. Although this is certainly not a new phenomenon, it seems to be growing in intensity. My concern is that if this trend of disrespect to the military continues it will undermine the strength of the officer corps to the point where good men and women will forgo service — or worse the ones serving will be reluctant to make hard decision for fear their actions, however justified, will be used against them in the political arena.
Take the recent case of Rear Adm. Brian Losey.
Adm. Losey is the commander of all Naval Special Warfare forces — the SEALs and Special Boat sailors. I have known Losey for more than 30 years. He is without a doubt one of the finest officers with whom I have ever served. Over the past 15 years no officer I know in the SEAL Teams has given more to this country than Brian. None. As a young officer he was constantly deployed away from his family. After 9/11, he was sent to Afghanistan in the early days to help fight the Taliban. From there, Losey participated in the final march to Baghdad and then stayed in country as a SEAL Task Unit Commander. Afterward he served as the deputy and then the commanding officer of SEAL Team Six during more tough fighting in Afghanistan.
Later he was posted to the White House in the Office of Combating Terrorism. He made rear admiral in 2009 while at the White House. He was subsequently sent back overseas to Djibouti, Africa, to do a 15-month month isolated tour as the commander of all U.S. forces in the Horn of Africa. As a result of that successful tour, he was given command of Special Operations Command, Africa (SOCAFRICA).
SOCAFRICA was a relatively new command, which had been established to address the growing threat in North Africa. Located in the beautiful Swabian city of Stuttgart, Germany, it was initially staffed with military and civilian personnel from another nearby special operations unit. Although most of the men and women were incredibly capable, hard-working staffers, there was a small core who had been living in Europe for years enjoying the comfortable lifestyle in Stuttgart.
Upon Losey’s arrival in Germany, the situation in North Africa changed dramatically, and the fledgling SOCAFRICA had to quickly get on wartime footing. Brian Losey did just that.
Losey is a no-nonsense officer who knows what it takes to get results. Combat is hard. Lives are at stake. Being genteel and considerate of everyone’s feelings are not the qualities that will engender success. But although Losey can be a tough taskmaster, he is a “by-the-book” officer. Unfortunately for Losey, along the way to strengthening the command there were those who fought the change and through a series of whistleblower complaints sought to seek his removal.
At the time, I was the commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa. I worked with Gen. Carter Ham, who commanded U.S. Africa Command and had operational control of Adm. Losey, to investigate the complaints.
The investigation we initiated determined that Losey’s leadership style, while brusque and demanding, did not warrant his removal. The Navy subsequently recommended Losey for two stars, and he was confirmed by the Senate in December 2011.
Although the Navy inspector general absolved Losey of any wrongdoing, his promotion was put on hold pending DOD inspector general resolution of the complaints. Nevertheless, the secretary of the Navy agreed to reassign Adm. Losey to the premier job in Naval Special Warfare — command of all the SEALs.
During the past three years as commander of Naval Special Warfare Command (WARCOM), his staff has consistently ranked WARCOM to be one of the best places to work in the Navy. He has passed all Navy IG inspections with flying colors, and the retention statics for his young officers and enlisted is exceptional.
However, in the course of those three years, the whistleblowers from Stuttgart continued to pursue Losey’s removal and resignation, routinely submitting new complaints to prolong the process and hold up his promotion.
A series of DOD inspector general investigations were reviewed by the Navy leadership and, once again, Adm. Losey was found not to have violated any law, rule or policy. In fact, it was clear to the Navy that the personnel action taken by Losey against the complainants was not reprisal. He was recommended again for promotion to two stars.
Despite the Navy’s multiple endorsements, certain members of Congress chose to use Losey’s case to pursue their own political agenda. They held hostage other Navy nominations until Losey’s promotion recommendation was rescinded. The ransom for their congressional support was Brian Losey’s career and, more importantly, his stellar reputation.
They portrayed Losey’s actions as a case of the big guy seeking retribution on the little guy-whistleblower. In fact, it was a case of a few guys fighting to maintain their comfortable life at a time when others were at war and needed their support.
However, in today’s environment, when a leader challenges a whistleblower, there is an automatic indictment of the leader’s character. Questioning the whistleblower makes you guilty until proven innocent. And it is clear in this case that certain members of Congress didn’t care about Losey’s innocence. Nor did they seem to care that he has sacrificed more for this country than most members on Capitol Hill — or that the emotional strain of this investigation was devastating to his family. It is clear that all these lawmakers cared about was political leverage.
The case of Brian Losey is a miscarriage of justice. But the greater concern for America is the continued attack on leadership in the military.
During my past several years in uniform, I watched in disbelief how lawmakers treated the chairman, the service chiefs, the combatant commanders and other senior officers during Congressional testimony. These officers were men of incredible integrity, and yet some lawmakers showed no respect for their decades of service. I saw the DOD Inspector General’s Office frequently act as judge and jury, apparently accountable to no one, dismissing the recommendations of the services and ruining officer’s careers. I watched time and again how political correctness and pressure from Capitol Hill undermined command authority and good order and discipline.
Although we in the military understand the absolute necessity to serve and respect our civilian leaders — and every good leader understands and appreciates the value of anonymous complaints to ferret out bad leadership — we also need civilians to understand that a strong military, particularly an all-volunteer one, needs the support of our civilian leaders, not the constant refrain of disrespect that seems so common in today’s political narrative.
Last month, after the decision to rescind Rear Adm. Brian Losey’s promotion recommendation became public, Losey addressed his junior officers. Instead of being angry and bitter over the outcome, Losey had nothing but praise for the Navy and the nation for which he has served so long. He encouraged the young officers not to get discouraged about the ruling against him, but to recognize that this is the greatest military in the world and we are fortunate to be part of it.
I would echo Losey’s sentiments. But to keep this the greatest military in the world, to preserve the strong civilian-military relations we have so long enjoyed, we must recognize that respect works both ways. Every time an individual lawmaker’s political agenda undermines the integrity of the men and women in the military, we weaken the fabric of the uniform.
In light of the challenging times in which we find ourselves, politically and strategically, we cannot afford to have a military that loses respect for its civilian leaders. My father was right. The strength of America always rests with our nation’s civilians. God forbid we should ever see it differently.
tl;dr officer whinges about whistleblowing and civilian oversight of military in the most fascist terms possible over some buddy of his not getting promoted
Edited by Bablu ()
Rear Adm. Brian L. Losey was investigated five times by the Defense Department’s inspector general after subordinates complained that he had wrongly fired, demoted or punished them during a vengeful but fruitless hunt for the person who had anonymously reported him for a minor travel-policy infraction, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post.
After conducting separate, years-long investigations that involved more than 100 witnesses and 300,000 pages of e-mails, the inspector general upheld complaints from three of the five staff members. In each of those cases, it recommended that the Navy take action against Losey for violating whistleblower-protection laws, the documents show.
The Navy, however, dismissed the findings this month and decided not to discipline Losey, a preeminent figure in the military’s secretive Special Operations forces who once commanded SEAL Team 6, the clandestine unit known for killing terrorist targets such as Osama bin Laden. He now leads the Naval Special Warfare Command and has served in Afghanistan, Iraq, Panama, Bosnia, Somalia and other conflict zones.