| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front |
| 507th weapons records lost in combat. |
| 2003-09-17 |
| The U.S. Army on Tuesday revealed that all records and documents about the weapons that jammed during the March 23 ambush that led to the death of nine Fort Bliss soldiers were destroyed in the Iraqi attack and that there is no way to trace the weapons’ histories. The Army, responding to an El Paso Times request under the Freedom of Information Act, said any official information about the weapons used by Fort Bliss’ 507th Maintenance Company was lost on a supply truck taken into combat. An official report on the ambush near Nasiriyah said that several weapons, including M-16s, M249 Squad Automatic Weapons and a .50-caliber machine gun, jammed or failed to operate properly during the firefight. The disclosure that the records were lost shocked, bewildered and further angered relatives of soldiers who were killed in the early morning ambush, which is among the worst losses for the U.S. military during Operation Iraqi Freedom. In addition to the nine Fort Bliss soldiers killed, two from the 3rd Forward Support Battalion were killed, five soldiers were wounded, and seven soldiers were taken prisoner. I am not shocked by this, but then I was not in the Army. Even when I was on the rapid deployment force we only fired (and cleaned) our weapons once a year. Does the Army REMFs (Support personnel) do it differently? Do any of you other Vets out there remember ever keeping duplicate copies of your armor records? Someone has an agenda here but I am not sure who. "Capt. Troy King (507th commander) stated that he does not have any historical data on weapons involved in the enemy contact," June Bates, Fort Bliss freedom of information officer, said in a written response. "He lost his motorpool truck and all documentation." Bates said King’s records, which were kept in the motor pool, were stored in his supply truck, which was also "involved in the enemy contact." The official 507th report, which was released by the Army on July 17, suggests that the "malfunctions may have resulted from inadequate individual maintenance in a desert environment." This is plausible since they thought they were not combat troops. They probably hadn’t clean (or in some cases saw) their weapons before they began the convoy. Please Army types check me on this. Nancili Mata, the widow of Chief Warrant Officer 2 Johnny Villareal Mata, who was killed in the ambush, said she was shocked to learn that no duplicate records were kept on the weapons. "They should have copies here. It doesn’t sound right," she said. "They are blaming the soldiers for not keeping their weapons clean, but my husband knew better than that. He did everything right." Arlene Walters, mother of Sgt. Donald R. Walters, who died in the attack and would have celebrated his 34th birthday Tuesday, said her son was dedicated to his job and to details. She said she finds it hard to believe that her son’s weapon wasn’t kept clean. "He kept his guns as clean as can be," she said. "He even talked to his dad about it." Because the circumstances surrounding the death of Walters are unclear, his parents continue to ask questions about anything involving their son, including the history of his weapon. "Nothing surprises me anymore, but what I don’t understand is why would you carry that kind of information into a battlefield," Arlene Walters asked. "It seems to me that if those weapons were issued out at Fort Bliss, then the records should have stayed at Fort Bliss." Ruben Estrella, father of 18-year-old Pvt. Ruben Estrella-Soto, from El Paso, said he no longer believes anything the Army tells him. "They told me that my son was shot in the head, and now they are saying that he was struck by a tank," he said. "I think the Army or the government is hiding something, but sooner or later the truth will be told." Losing a loved one is NEVER easy, but I hope that someone helps them dispel the conspiracy theories. The Army needs to talk to these people who are definitely in pain and help them cope as best they can. Fort Bliss responds The El Paso Times had requested the history of 31 weapons the soldiers carried during the ambush. The request sought information about weapon repairs, the weapons’ ages, and the manufacturer and condition of each weapon assigned to the 507th soldiers involved in the attack. Officials at the Department of Defense referred all questions to Fort Bliss officials. Jean Offutt, Fort Bliss spokeswoman, said that taking all data regarding a company’s weapons into battle is standard practice. "When we deployed, all our active-duty soldiers had to take their documents with them because we mobilized a lot of reservists who lived in the emptied barracks," Offutt said. "So all of their personnel files as well as files on weapons were taken with them." Because personnel files were lost in the ambush and no duplicates exist, the 507th is now trying to re-create the information. Also, Offutt said, some of the weapons the 507th used haven’t been recovered. "But shortly before the soldiers deployed, all of the weapons were certified and serviceable," Offutt said. "The weapons were fired on the firing range before they deployed." Official answers Retired Lt. Gen. Don Lionetti, the commander who led Fort Bliss during the 1991 Persian Gulf war, said he could not speculate on what Fort Bliss soldiers do or don’t take into combat, but he said if the records are "in-country, I imagine that they would have to take the records with them." "Once they leave Kuwait to go into Iraq they may not come back through Kuwait, so they have to take the information with them," Lionetti said. U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-El Paso, who called for a congressional hearing in March to determine what happened during the attack, said he believes Fort Bliss’ response is logical. "The Army wouldn’t lie, especially when a Freedom of Information Act request is made," he said. Ok I have a Rant here: Even if the records were available, what would they prove? If I fired/sighted/cleaned my weapon a month before I deployed, what would that prove? What were the storage conditions? Were the weapons sighted/fired/cleaned before the convoy? Were there complaints about malfunctioning weapons BEFORE the deployment? I think this is a witch hunt on the behest of somebody that does not support the Army or the admistration (my theory). |
| Posted by:Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) |
| #7 Can anyone comment on how these GI's could have kept their weapons clean driving day and night through dust storms? |
| Posted by: Tresho 2003-9-17 11:56:34 PM |
| #6 Sounds like a lot of the records are hard copy. Adding some flunkies to manage a website of personnel/maintenance records in Quatar would be doable in my book.I would audit teh records of another maintenance company leaviung the op area to see whether there is a systematic problem. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-9-17 5:47:11 PM |
| #5 Equipment history records go along with the equipment. On high end items, nowadays, you'd have a computerized database. In the field, I'd wager it would be on a laptop with the maintenance unit. Since this was the unit that got ambushed, I'm not suprised that records were lost. I'm betting that the firearms records are still paper. The only entries would be for last maintenance performed, not including cleaning. |
| Posted by: Steve 2003-9-17 3:19:40 PM |
| #4 This was a supply unit and they weren't expecting to run into a significant body of bad guys (otherwise they would have been escorted by regular units). They were probably short of sleep, as it is usual in a sustained advance. In those conditions having the drivers sleep a bit so they don't have an accident seems more important than cleaning weapons. |
| Posted by: JFM 2003-9-17 3:17:12 PM |
| #3 Hmmmmm. Hard to think back that far, when such things were of very little importance. I was only rarely issued a weapon, and seems to me I got a card with it that I was supposed to keep up to date - when the weapon was last fired, when it was last cleaned, and any problems. Usually kept it in my ammo pouch. I wouldn't be surprised that killed/captured soldiers would either have lost those records, or had such records captured along with their weapons - and themselves. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2003-9-17 2:44:31 PM |
| #2 I agree with CyberSarge. This is being pushed by someone else who is using people in pain to push an agenda. I don't know much about the administrative/supply side of things, but in 1968, in the Marines, in Viet Nam, I wouldn't have had the slightest idea where the paperwork regarding my weapon was. No conspiracy. |
| Posted by: Sgt.DT 2003-9-17 2:19:42 PM |
| #1 I should point out, however, that "lost due to combat" is an old Army way of disposing of material that vanished in a variety of other manners. You might be surprised, for example, at the amount of petty cash that has been "lost due to combat". An old vet will try to keep a personal copy of his records for this, and other such emergencies. Like fires in Army warehouses. Given all that... the records, as pointed out, would prove nothing relevent to the incident. They were either up-to-date or not. If not, nothing proved. If so, guess what, they were all in working order (on paper). |
| Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2003-9-17 2:05:31 PM |