Should Three Officers Who Failed To Halt The Construction OF A New Command Center In Afghanistan Now Be Held Accountable?

Sir-

Why stop with those 3? They weren't the people who managed the whole occupation. This is just pinning the tail on scapegoats. Prosecute them, prosecute all who made similar 'blunders'. If not, leave them alone.

Having only two actual choices for this is wrong in my opinion. As military leaders we do not live in a world of absolutes. We live in the gray areas we are forced to make decisions with incomplete information.
Is this wrong, what we spent this money on? You're damn right. Should people be held accountable? Yes. Should we roast these three individuals over the coals for making the decisions that they did with incomplete information? No way.

Where do we draw the line on wasting money in Afghanistan? The kind of Fraud Waste and Abuse I was exposed to by the Ministry Of Defense was likely way more then 36 million. The ANA have billions, yes billions of dollars worth of vehicles and equipment that they cannot maintain. They receive repair parts for no apparent reason. Once a vehicle is demolished they continue to leave it on their books so they can keep the fuel the authorization. The extra fuel that they have is soldi to the Taliban. They do not have the educational background to do so. These three officers are not the problem.I am sure their intentions were to build a building that can be used by both the coalition and Afghan forces.

Why should we hold generals responsible when we don't hold congress responsible?

With all the facts not present, Trying and Convicting them on a website is ludicrous. Once all the facts are presented in a court of law and those responsible are properly charged then yes if convictions are warranted then they should be fully prosecuted. But until then everyone is innocent until proven guilty. 

I've served at Leatherneck (running convoy's between Kandahar leatherneck and Dwyer) I saw this "Ark" as it was being constructed. I also served at Bagram in RC East in two different positions, logistic acquisition and fuel management. I've sat in on many JARBs, (Joint Acquisition Review Boards) FARBs (Flight line acquisition review boards?) and whatever other acronym based funding meetings could be dreamt up. Sometimes commanders had direct control of funds other times they did not. The bulk of the operational budget in Afghanistan when I was there was locked (Untouchable) the remainder (scraps) were fought over by Colonels and the occasional SFC. Just like fuel at one point I was responsible for 2/3 of the fuel (much of it being stolen) by the 700 contracted Afghani trucks operating loosely under 7 subcontracted companies I was in charge of. I pinpoint identified theft and withheld millions in payments to these companies due to their theft of fuel. After I left it was rumored they were paid anyway. I suppose I should be responsible for that right?

I want more info. Who came up with this project in the first place? Who contracted it? When was the contract signed, and with what company(ies)? What was the completion date in the contract? Was the drawdown/pullout date for US troops in Afghanistan known at the time? Which politicians were involved in pushing this project? Why nail two generals and a colonel, when the project was probably pork for some congressman or senator?

This is nothing new or an incident that only occurred in Afghanistan. When I was in Germany back around 2000, the consolidation of US Bases was in full swing. We had a DFAC that we hadn't even broken ground on paid for when we learned our post was being closed. I was told the money had already been appropriated and the contracts signed so it had to be built. We ended up closing the post a few months after the DFAC was finished. Maybe it was just poor judgement on those officers behalf to request a facility of that magnitude in a CZ, but I don't think they should be punished.

This is realistic, not sarcastic: If they stopped the project, what would their OERs say?

I am surrounded by people all day everyday who live to be handed control of a project. It is the holy grail of the DA Civilian/DoD Contracting world. If you point out any flaws or concerns with their project, they will come after you hard core.

Money is life in America. If you threaten someone's livelihood by challenging the project that they think will earn them a promotion, raise, or next contract, you will find yourself on the outs. It is not as easy as just speaking up. There is really no reason to think that they didn't speak up or ask questions, but you know as well as I do, sometimes you get told to shut up and color. I think our leadership is more and more being comprised of people who are more willing to go with the flow than fight the system...but that's a different topic.

You cannot punish individuals for functioning within a desperately flawed system. That contract made civilians rich, not Soldiers. We shouldn't take the fall for it.

That depends. This about the harder right over the easier wrong. Lying can be an act or an omission. I say yes, solely based on the information I have seen, which is what the media wants us to see.

While complex SGT David Thomas MAJ (Join to see) Leaders, especially senior officers, have a duty to provide due diligence, and to be good stewards of US tax dollars. If they in fact knew, we would never use it, and it would be a waste of US tax dollars, then they should have made that known. I don't buy keeping quieting was the best option.