2008/05/01 00:00:00
One way MOAA attempts to fulfill our goal of being the professional association of choice for all military officers and their families is by promoting enduring values of military professionals, including the highest ethical standards.
Each month, this page will feature a different ethics case study provided by Capt. Rick Rubel, USN-Ret., distinguished Professor of Ethics at the U.S. Naval Academy. With each case study, Rubel will provide suggested questions, and readers will be able to discuss and comment. Whether you are currently serving, in a second career, or retired, there will be something here that makes you think. Unlike rules of engagement or standards of conduct, remember there is not necessarily a right answer to an ethical dilemma.
We hope you find this series interesting, but more important, we hope to promote discussion and thinking about ethical challenges facing people in uniform, whether in combat or in the normal course of duty.
By Capt. Rick Rubel, USN-Ret.
One of the most difficult decisions in military ethics is the determination of the value of the lives of your own troops compared with the value of the life of an innocent non-combatant. This decision often is complicated by the need to complete the mission. This three-way moral dilemma (fellow troops, non-combatants, and mission) requires a command decision that will determine life or death in combat.
In this case study, some Navy SEALS are confronted with that decision. Because their mission was compromised, they followed instructions and tried to call back to base for abort procedures, but they could not get through on the radio. This threw them into moral territory,y trying to determine for themselves: What is right?
Questions for the reader:
- Did the Navy SEALs make the right decision? Why or why not?
- Do you agree with Axelson’s statement? “We’re not murderers no matter what we do. We’re on active duty behind the enemy lines, sent here by our superior commanders. We have the right to do everything we can to save our own lives. The military decision is obvious. To turn them loose would be wrong.”
- Does this allow military fighters to do anything to defend themselves?
- Should there be a consequence short of trial for murder for this kind of situation?
- Should they have taken a vote, or should the lieutenant have made the decision?
- Is there any way to avoid these kinds of situations?
Marcus Luttrell was raised in north Texas. His father, a patriotic Vietnam veteran, taught him to love his country and work hard for what he believed. His father also told his two sons at an early age about a group of “elite warriors” and their courage, patriotism, strength, and determination — and their refusal to accept defeat. Luttrell even asked a local retired Green Beret to train him when he was 14 years old, to prepare him for the day he would become a SEAL. While other high school boys were involved with after-school activities and sports, Luttrell was lifting weights, running, learning martial arts, and training under his Green Beret taskmaster, who molded Luttrell into a determined man who could push through bodily pain to achieve his objective. After his brother became a Navy SEAL, there was never a doubt in Luttrell’s mind that he would follow in his brother’s footsteps.
At age 23, Luttrell enlisted and headed off to U.S. Navy boot camp, immediately followed by Basic Underwater Demolition/SEALs (BUD/S) training. In the grueling SEAL training, almost 65 percent of the original class dropped out. The motto “Never, never, ever quit” applied to the extraordinary remaining men, who refused to give in to pain and exhaustion. They had the concept of teamwork drilled into their heads until it became their nature to support their teammates.
Afghanistan missions
After graduating from BUD/S and serving several tours in Iraq, Luttrell was assigned to SEAL Delivery Vehicle Team ONE. He lived, trained, and fought alongside his SEAL teammates. Among the SEALs, the lines between officer and enlisted are more informal as they develop close personal bonds during the intensity of training and combat. Additionally, Luttrell had been trained to be the team corpsman to render medical aid.
In March 2005, Luttrell deployed with his unit to the U.S. Base in Bagram, Afghanistan. Similar to his Iraq missions, their job was to drop into areas behind enemy lines (although the lines were not clearly defined) and gather intelligence on high-value Taliban. Their goal was to capture these high-value men and turn them over to the interrogators to get valuable information. In some cases, their mission was to kill specific enemy leaders. When traveling in dangerous regions, the SEAL team moved by night with the most modern night-vision equipment available. During the day, they worked to remain undetected. As the SEALs like to say, they “own the night.”
Because their unit numbers were small, they relied on camouflage, stealth, and silence as their advantages over the larger Taliban forces. They often would fly into the Pashtun region of Afghanistan, a region near the Pakistani border that primarily is tribal and generally does not recognize any central government. The strong Muslim culture, shaped by centuries of fighting numerous conquerors, made this area a perfect haven for the Taliban to regroup, recruit, and launch attacks on the Afghan government and U.S. forces.
Operation Redwing
After detailed planning, Operation Redwing was approved June 28, 2005. Petty Officer Luttrell and his three SEAL teammates, Lt. Michael Murphy, Petty Officer Matthew Axelson, and Petty Officer Danny Dietz boarded a CH-47 to be inserted in the Hindu Kush Mountains in the Pashtun region to search for a Taliban leader named Ben Sharmak. It was believed that capturing him would provide information about other Taliban strongholds and bomb-makers; killing him might reduce the armed threat in the region.
During the preparation phase, Murphy and Luttrell were worried about the aerial photos of the mission area. The terrain they would be dropped into did not seem well-suited for camouflage and concealment. They also noted their selected observation point (the side of a steep mountain) was several miles from the only flat area that could serve as a helo drop site.
In the darkest part of a moonless night, after several deceptive maneuvers (called “touch and goes,” to confuse an enemy who might be watching), they were inserted into the drop zone. After a period of quiet, motionless listening, they believed they were alone on the high, flat field. They gathered their equipment and made their way up the mountain to their pre-selected area where they could observe the small town below. The hike in full battle gear was harder and took longer than they had anticipated — about seven hours. When they reached their observation area, it was almost dawn. As they settled into concealed positions, they realized they could not see the town. They left their concealed positions and found a spot with good observation potential but less concealment. From their new position, they could see, but it would be hard to launch an offense or maintain a defense because the high ground above gave them little chance for escape. However, their mission was to observe the town and find Sharmak, and this position would support that.
Life or death
After a short time of waiting and watching, an unusual thing happened. Luttrell looked up and saw an Afghan man approaching. Luttrell stood and pointed his rifle; the man stopped. Even stranger, about a hundred goats soon surrounded the four SEALs and the goatherd they had just confronted. Two more Afghans joined them — 14-year-old boy and another man.
The SEALs asked the men if they were Taliban, and they immediately said, “No Taliban. No Taliban.” Luttrell noted that the men glared and scowled at him with obvious dislike.
The SEALs spent the next hour or so discussing among themselves what to do with the three Afghan goatherds. First, they discussed the Geneva Convention, which protects unarmed civilians. They also seemed to agree the strictly tactical military decision would be to kill them. There was no way to determine if the men were associated with the Taliban, but the glares and scowls indicated they were not friendly to the American cause. The worst-case scenario for the SEALs’ mission would be for them to be detected. They did not have rope or duct tape to bind the men, and they reasoned that even if they did, someone would come looking for them — and the goatherds’ location would be obvious from the hundred goats that would remain in their vicinity. They quickly rejected the option of binding them.
Axelson thought they should kill the men, telling Murphy, “Just give me the word.” Murphy reasoned that if they killed the men, someone would find the bodies (because of the goats), and the Taliban would play this to the Arab media. Once the press had the story, the SEALs would be tried for murder back in the U.S. Initially, Luttrell thought from the military view it made no sense to let the goatherds go and allow the team to be discovered. Knowing they were outnumbered by Sharmak’s army 140 to 4, they would be killed if their location was compromised.
The team agreed to get some guidance from headquarters. Things went from bad to worse, as their radio inexplicably would not connect with HQ.
At this point, Murphy outlined their three options:
- Kill the goatherds quietly with knives, and throw them off the cliff.
- Kill them right where they were, and cover up the bodies.
- Turn them loose, and “get the hell out of here.”
Murphy pointed out that with option 1 or 2 they would all have to remain silent forever, so they would not be tried for murder in the U.S.
Axelson insisted: “We’re not murderers. No matter what we do. We’re on active duty behind the enemy lines, sent here by our superior commanders. We have the right to do everything we can to save our own lives. The military decision is obvious. To turn them loose would be wrong.”
At this point, Murphy took a vote. Axelson quickly voted to kill them. Murphy favored letting them go. Dietz basically abstained from the vote by saying, “I don’t [care] what we decide, just tell me what to do.”
Then they asked Luttrell what he thought. He fully understood his comrades’ arguments, but as he said later, “My Christian soul was whispering something in the back of my mind. It would be wrong to execute these unarmed men in cold blood. And the idea of doing that and then covering our tracks and slinking away like criminals, denying everything, would make it worse.”
Finally, Luttrell cast the tie-breaking vote by saying, “We gotta let them go.” They motioned to the three men to leave. Although the SEALs and their captives did not share a common language, the Afghan men knew they had been discussing their fate — life or death.
After the decision
After watching the goatherds walk out of site, Luttrell immediately said to himself: “We must be crazy. Let’s get out of here!”
The SEALs quickly repositioned to a different site. About 10 minutes after they had settled in, their worse fear came true. They looked up to the ridge and saw 80 to 100 well-armed Taliban fighters coming down the ridge toward them. This was serious, and they now knew they would be fighting for their lives, just as they recently discussed. The problem was that their firing position was not good — neither defensively nor offensively. To get away from the overwhelming enemy, they would have to go down the mountain, and in some cases, off the cliffs.
The four men fought a horrific gun battle that lasted most of the day. They fought like American warriors, like Navy SEALs, like teammates, and like close friends. As the Taliban sprayed a high volume of inaccurate AK-47 fire and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), the SEALs took sharp aim, conserved ammo, and used teamwork. As they continued to fight and retreat down the mountain, they fell several hundred feet down steep cliffs. The volume of Taliban firepower was relentless, wounding the SEAL team.
Murphy was shot in the stomach and the back but continued to fight as he bled to death. Axelson continued to fight with several body wounds. After killing about 40 to 50 of the enemy and with three of the SEALs mortally wounded, they tried to make a last stand. In an extraordinary act of heroism, Murphy took out his cell phone to call HQ. To get reception, he had to stand up on a bluff in the open. In his call, he explained the desperate situation. His final words on the phone were, “Roger that, sir. Thank you.” — professional to the end. Shortly after, he was fatally shot in the chest.
As Luttrell watched his best friend die, there was little he could do to help, even though he was the corpsman of the team. He was shot in the leg and bleeding from both entry and exit wounds. He had broken some vertebrae in his back during one of the falls and could not stand up on both feet. Then he watched as his other two best friends and teammates, Axelson and Dietz, were killed by relentless enemy fire. He was the lone survivor of the SEAL team. To get away from the AK-47s and RPGs, he jumped down steep cliffs, falling hundreds of feet at a time.
Luttrell didn’t know until later, but the special forces put together a quick response to Murphy’s cell phone call for help. Seven SEALs and seven Rangers, along with commanding officer Lieutenant Commander Kristensen, immediately volunteered to save their fellow Americans and boarded an MH-47. As they were landing in the drop zone near the firefight, an enemy RPG was fired into the back of the helo, causing an explosion that killed everyone aboard.
Pashtun hospitality
Bleeding, thirsty, and numb, Luttrell crawled on his hands and knees for hours, looking for water. Some local Pashtun tribesmen, apparently not Taliban, found him. In an unusual tribal custom, the town elders not only took him into their houses to heal his wounds and feed him, but they also invoked a tribal custom (unique to that area) called “lokhay.” Lokhay literally means “put on a pot,” and this goes far beyond normal hospitality. Because the Pashtun region is remote and tribal, recognizing no central government, the people have maintained this extraordinary “all or nothing” custom when encountering strangers for hundreds of years. If they vote to let you go, you are on your own. But if they extend this ultimate hospitality of lokhay, you essentially have become part of their “family” and will be protected even if they have to fight to their deaths. The village that was sheltering Luttrell was surrounded by Taliban for days during his recovery. His hosts made good on their promise to protect him, as they moved him from house to house.
After days of recovery with food and medicine, Luttrell was able to put together a makeshift battery arrangement for his distress radio. He sent a one-way message asking for rescue. After dodging the Taliban for a few more days, he was rescued by Army Rangers.
Aftermath
After returning to the U.S. and receiving medical attention, he was awarded the Navy Cross by President George W. Bush in the Oval Office. His three teammates posthumously received the Navy’s highest honors.
He then fulfilled his final promise to his three best friends. He traveled to San Diego; Long Island, N.Y.; and Las Vegas to tell the families of his fallen teammates that they all died heroically, serving the country they loved.
About the Author: Capt. Rick Rubel, USN-Ret., currently is the distinguished military professor of Ethics at the U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, Md. After a 30-year career in the Navy, he has taught the Core Ethics Course for 10 years and has served as course director for the past six years. He is coauthor and coeditor of Case Studies in Military Ethics
(Pearson Publishing, 2006).
Copyright: Rick Rubel, 2007
For copy or use, e-mail rubel@usna.edu.
Read the author's analysis and tell us what you think.
Rate This Item:
Please Sign in to rate and comment this page
 |
Colonel Eagen |
2/11/2009 5:06:47 PM |
Had the real story been that this team killed the Afgans, I'd have had more trouble with it b/c having been a trigger puller for some years, I hate second guessing guys on the ground. HOWEVER, the scenario leaves no doubt that to have killed these unarmed goatherders would have been murder. On the practical side, our units have once again learned that you cannot kill your way out of an insurgency. Turning highly trained warriors into murderers is blasphemy. There are gaps in the law of war which must be addressed to meet the so called Long War against terror. No new law was needed here: the 10 commandments pretty much answered this situation. Those who parse the game to justify killing these guys don't know the law, don't know the warrior creed, and are simply wrong. IF the Taliban wore uniforms and carried ID cards and IF these guys wore said uniforms and had the ID cards, they were unarmed and subject to being taken prisoner but they were not subject to summary execution.
Now look at the commanders who set up this mission, look at the casualties, now ask who should be examined for negligent homicide.
 |
Commander Donahue |
2/8/2009 11:12:46 AM |
With NO combat experience but 32 years in uniform
conducting law enforcement and security operations
I agree the lack of a back-up or extraction plan seems to support the discussion of failed strategy from the outset. There is a line between murder and preserving your own life, however, as articulated in the article - I am inclined to believe Petty Officer Luttrell's instincts regarding the "glare" and "scowl" of "obvious dislike" with which they were met by the goat herders served him well. In the law enforcement community it is thought you are better judged by twelve then carried by six. I am glad these men and others like them fought for our freedoms and securities but I do not envy the position that task puts them in. Despite the relative few instances where innocent people are murdered compared to the thousands of incursions that take place; men and women in uniform will alwaysd get my benefit of the doubt.
 |
Colonel Howard |
2/2/2009 8:06:26 PM |
Highest regard for these men. It seems obvious that the "goat herders" were not innocent country folk. Probably joined their comrades in the attack on the team. In combat indecision can be fatal.
|
Colonel Lucas |
2/1/2009 10:20:41 PM |
Again, I am glad most of the respondents value what our country stands for. These men are heroes. For a person to say this is an easy decision and quickly, eagerly kill innocent civilians demonstrate a total lack of moral compass. Unfortunately, they exist in all organizations at all levels. Even if they are our superiors, we should oppose them at all costs.
 |
Colonel Blakemore |
1/30/2009 4:37:20 PM |
I am appalled by this situation. Without reducing the of the Navy SEALS at doing what they are supposed to be doing, what is a commander thinking in giving this mission to SEALS, in
Afghanistan, a landlocked nation. Navy SEALS are trained to at or near the oceans, not in the remote mountain ranges of Afghanistan. I was not a combat arms officer in the U.S. Army; I was originally commissioned in Ordance, served briefly in Infantry, and ended my military career in Civil Affairs. But in my humble opinion, the mission is clearly for Army combat troops. I would be interested in seeing the opinion of somebody at Fort Leavenworth or the Army War College.
David M. Blakemore
COL, USA, Retired
|
Colonel Allen |
1/29/2009 8:24:57 PM |
This is classical Special Operations decision making. LtGen William Donovan USA, designed an assessment program for potential military personnel serving in the Office of Strategic Services during World War II. It was initially called “Project X” and some form of it is used in behind-enemy-lines mission assessment used in all the Military Services Special Operations Forces Training. Some of the tenets of assessment are that there are no right or wrong answers. Another tenet is that you must always consider the strategic consequences of your actions. And another very important tenet is to use the ideas of everyone in your team to solve unconventional problems. This SEAL Team did exactly what they were trained to do and under extraordinary circumstances. As a result, they killed a considerable number of the enemy, prevented noncombatants from injury or death and won the hearts and minds of the local Pashtun populace--it just doesn’t get any better than that! Corpsman Luttrell was awarded the Navy Cross, our Nations second highest award for valor. His CO, Lieutenant Murphy was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor posthumously. The other members of the team were awarded our nation’s highest awards for valor. And in the Christian grand scheme of things, their awards are heavenly.
GERRIT J. ALLEN, Lt Col, USAF Retired
 |
Major Tolbert |
6/20/2008 11:17:04 AM |
With all due respect to the men in the story/event, the dilemma was a "false dilemma". The issue was not ethics, it was judgment. The choice was not between "kill them" or "let them go". There were other options that needed to be found under pressure--the second right solution--which is what advanced training is all about. CWO Sturgill had it right. They should have bound and gagged the three and either concealed them or taken them with them as they aborted. The fact that it became a "either/or" vote by the men is the saddest part of this story...next to losing three good men. Major Tolbert
|
Major Lariviere |
6/16/2008 9:34:54 AM |
|
Colonel Ratliff |
6/15/2008 7:06:50 PM |
Voting was totally out of place. A combat unit is not a democracy. The officer in charge may seek input but has the responsibility to make the decision. Having said that, they made the right decision. They are all great Americans.
|
Colonel Day |
6/15/2008 6:59:51 AM |
