Go to the SwiftVets site and access their discussion boards. Look for a contributor named Navy Chief. I believe his wife is a moderator with the name Navy_Navy_Navy. He recently shredded the after-action report for March 13 and forwarded his analysis to Michael Dobbs. Dobbs contacted him for more info. If Dobbs flubs it, perhaps you'll be able to tell the truth.

Here's the url for the letter sent to Michael Dobbs:

http://www2.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4331&highlight=

Ace,

Ensure you get someone who knows how Navy small unit after action reports were written in Vietnam. There are different ways to do it, and different methods.

Ace-
Why don't you pop on over to http://froggyruminations.blogspot.com, it is run by a former Navy SEAL who might be able to put you in touch with someone.

Ace, if you break a big one here, do you think you can stay anonymous?

Did a year in Iraq with the 101st Airborne, lots of patrol work. The way we did it was the squad leader (usually a staff sergeant, E6), filled in a preprinted form when we came back to the base camp. If it was a particularly lively day when they needed more info logged, the platoon leader would sit the SL down and go in more depth.

The Swifties had an officer on each boat, which of course allows junior officers on scene to screw things up. We left ours back at the base as watch officers. I think we had a better system.

Well, this may not be 100 percent relevant to modern practice, but in the Civil War higher command would have the reports of subordinate commanders available when writing their report and could request that reports be written by particular commanders to clarify situations. This is in the spirit of your 'canvassing' for information that was not in view of the particular general.

In fact, in one case I know of, General Lee refused a report from a subordinate and made it be rewritten. It was Pickett's report after Gettysburg, and Lee did not like the tone of the report.

Since reports were parially history/explanation and partially a way to enhance promotion prospects for junior officers, requiring a general to report only his personal observations would mean the commander could virtually never mention his subordinates, since most of their actions are not within sight.

Thanks, all. I 'll follow up on those leads.

Well, not the Civil War one. Interesting, yes, suggestive, certainly, but I don't think anyone's going to be persuaded by a General Lee citation.

But still, thanks.

PS, I wasn't trying to be insulting, Christopher. I was trying to be funny, but I think maybe I failed at signaling that.

Again, the Civil War thing is interesting and suggests to me I'm on the right track, but obviously, it wouldn't stand up in court.

Hey ace, remember: not much stands up in court once you put a few beers into it. :-)

this is a pretty good link describing the after action review which is the process that generates the information used when preparing the after action report
http://ppt.armystudyguide.com/leadership/33.htm

and an example of a good AAR; http://cgsc.leavenworth.army.mil/carl/download/csipubs/chamberlain.pdf

buy stock newsletter
from our secure server! get next day delivery free! and save over 70% on all of our popular brand name medications. Delete if you dont like it.

buy merchant account
from our secure server! get next day delivery free! and save over 70% on all of our popular brand name medications. Delete if you dont like it.

buy pharmacy
from our secure server! get next day delivery free! and save over 70% on all of our popular brand name medications. Delete if you dont like it.