How Did Scores of Military Units Lose Combat Records in the War on Terror? A Q&A With Peter Sleeth

by Amanda Zamora ProPublica, Nov. 15, 2012, 5:31 p.m.

This week, Pulitzer-Prize winning reporter Peter Sleeth answered questions from Redditors on the revelation that field reports have been lost or are missing for many Army units deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Below, highlights of that discussion.

(Read: Lost to History: Missing War Records Complicate Benefit Claims by Iraq, Afghanistan Veterans)

Q: How far does this problem reach? Are you aware of any issues like this with the intelligence agencies? I find it funny/sad that veterans are losing benefits and care because the army couldn't get their version of Excel installed. But there are over 3,000 pages of documentation into the Petraeus affair. u2014 TommyFoolery

A: Senior officers tend to keep their own records quite well, they are conscious of their own history, for certain. We are now exploring whether these missing field records are causing problems with intelligence activities, as a matter of fact.

Q: How the military has dealt with what I'm sure is a recurring problem over the last several decades? Is the problem better/worse?u2014 amzam

A: My belief is that lost records are a constant in a large bureaucracy like the military since the beginning. However, what we are talking about in our story is a massive loss of field records in volumes never before seen. Understand that field records are a distinct category from medical or personnel records, which are kept in separate pipelines, so to speak.

Q: You document the impact on veterans seeking benefits. Are there implications for how the war is remembered? u2014 collo229

A: Yes, history is written from these records.Field records are used by historians for their singular ability to go to an exact spot in time. For example, a few years back I was working on a book about a company of Civil War soldiers. Using field records they recorded, I was able to follow them campsite by campsite through three years of war. I mean, they were so detailed I could go to each site across the South.

Q: Were you really that surprised to find the largest bureaucracy in the U.S. federal government was so inefficient? I'm surprised they can find any records. u2014 IhaveSomeQuestions56

A: I was surprised because the U.S. Army has an efficient track record in keeping field records back to the Revolutionary War. It only really fell apart with the onset of computers.

Q: Do you think this was the result of peacetime lack of diligence, and are veterans organizations going to coordinate a response, e.g. organize a massive organized march on the Pentagon? u2014 MomsHugs

A: Yes, I do think this was a lack of planning during peacetime. It is terribly sad the money and time that was wasted. As to vets organizations, it is a strange mix, some are so tied up with the VA, in my opinion, they cannot afford to anger them. Yet plenty of the vets organizations are mad about this and I expect you will see them petitioning Congress.

Q: How much of the missing records do you believe are due to commanders covering their (or others) ass(es)?[TD1] u2014 TommyFoolery

A: Good question, I imagine it happens occasionally, but in 10 months of reporting I did not find evidence of anything nefarious. Rather, it was a mix of poor training, worse execution and inexcusably sloppy behavior.

Q: That was my first reaction when I read that units were wiping hard drives before they left them for their replacements. Nothing says teamwork like making the new guys start from scratch. u2014 TommyFoolery

A: What typically happened was the departing unit would clear the hard drive to make room for the new unit's data. So the departing unit would leave maybe the last 60 days activity, then clean the rest of the hard drive to allow for more storage capacity. Or, they cleaned them because they were ordered to for security reasons.

Q: Do you reckon some records may have been consciously "lost" to bury the truth, perhaps, on atrocities military personnel may have committed while on the tours? What happens to accountability where there are no records? Who takes the fall for this? u2014 OjayisOjay

A: That is a popular thought out there; I really don't think it happened much, if at all. That said, it would be unwise to rule it out. Accountability is absent, in answer to your excellent question. As to who takes the fall, we shall see. We are going to keep pushing on this story. We think there is much more that is buried here.

Q: What do you think the best solution to this problem is? u2014 IhaveSomeQuestions56

A: the best solution would be rigorous training of senior officers and penalties for not keeping records properly, like demotion.

Q: What advice would you give to active soldiers in order to lower their risk of falling victim to this when their time comes? u2014 TommyFoolery

A: I would tell soldiers to get copies of everything from their deployment orders, to their medical records, to whatever field records they can that involve them and keep them safe, send them home, whatever. A soldier can always ask to see what relevant records they have through the U.S. Army's Joint Services Records Research Center, and for Marines, through the Marines. If there records are missing, field records in particular, make sure you keep a contact list for your commanding officers and other soldiers once you get home. You can use your comrades for "lay" testimony that will substitute for missing records.

Q: Given your line of work, how much do you wish your name was Peter Sleuth? It's only one letter away. u2014imnotyourbloke

A: I've been doing this work for nigh on 30 years. I have heard that, and much worse versions of my name. Although I am a fan of the PBS show "Sherlock Holmes" with Jeremy Britt.

Peter Sleeth is a veteran investigative reporter who covered the Iraq war for The Oregonian and helped the paper win a Pulitzer Prize in 2007 for breaking news. Now freelancing, his most recent piece for the Oregon Historical Quarterly is a profile of progressive-era activist Tom Burns.

SHARE YOUR STORY: Are you a veteran who can't obtain your military field records? We want to hear from you.

WATCH: Peter Sleeth and Seattle Times reporter Hal Bernton discuss veteran benefits on Huffington Post Live. 

On: Bonfire

by: Lilly McAlister

Bonfire is one of A&Ms most distinctive traditions, not only for the now student-lead burning that takes place in the fall semester, but also for the way in which we commemorate the tragic event which lead to the end of the official on-campus one. I think one of the most remarkable things about this service is how little formal organization it seems to require. Unlike Muster which takes place in the spring there is no army of dedicated students passing out fliers at every major building on campus weeks in advance, there is no table set up with pens, buttons, bags and other assorted swag to remind us of the date. There are no sandwich boards placed around campus or signs on the doors as we see for our monthly Silver Taps. There was no university-wide email reminding us to go. The service itself is not even clearly marked as an event on the university calendar or on the memorial's own website.

I discovered the 2:42am service quite by accident my freshman year, having finished another late night working in the commons food court around 1am. Deciding that I was feeling too tired to walk straight home, I went down to Studio 12 for a nap. At 2am when the studio closed and I moved upstairs, I saw that there were large groups of students gathering in the commons, all apparently headed to the same place. I followed them out and was lead to the bonfire memorial where a member of the Traditions Council handed me a candle and waved me on down the line. In spite of the lack of direct advertising, every year since then, on November 18th at 2:42am, I have found myself standing on the grass at that memorial. I am never alone. There are no programs, no written instructions, no PA system, and we don’t need them. The gathered stand together in the quite darkness until our collective silence is broken by a single “Howdy” from the center of the crowd. A few words are spoken, the roll call is made – twelve names, each followed but a dutiful “here” from the crowd.

This is followed by Amazing Grace and perhaps the most subtle and reverent version of the Aggie War Hymn that you will ever witness. After some closing remarks the families make their way through the crowd, people make their way to the center to pay their respects, and -- each in their own good time -- those gathered disperse as silently and spontaneously as they arrived.

There is something powerful about our annual service that I cannot quite put my finger on. As I watched groups and individuals proceed to the center and kneel down with flowers or pennies, I asked myself why we all had come there that night, thirteen years after the accident, for a service that barely lasted twenty minutes. For a while, I debated whether I should approach the center with the others, whether I had enough of a connection to justify that sort of personal gesture. When I was the only one left, I looked up at the family members of those who had died as they disappeared over the hill heading back toward their cars, and I moved to the center to kneel and lay down a penny I had located in my pocket.

I may not know exactly why I originally felt the need to go, but if it is worth it to the families to return each year and stand with us, then it is worth it to me to meet them there.

On: Diversity -- A compelling government interest

by: Joshua Howell

My first memory of college is being called a “nigger” on the way home from the grocery store. Appreciating the irony, I thought: “Welcome to the friendliest college in the nation. Enjoy your stay.”

Since then, my school has provided me with continual reminders that, “Yes, Josh, you’re black, and we aren’t.” There are the edgy jokes gone awry, the girls who won’t date you because of your race, and the request that I (invariably being the questioner’s only black friend) should explain why so many African Americans vote Democrat.

Most grating, though, is when some assert that because of the way I act, I am not black. Pants around your waste? Phillip Glass on your iPod? A vocabulary that extends beyond the ninth grade? You, sir, regardless of skin pigmentation, are white. Welcome to the club.

To be fair, it isn’t as if my collegiate experiences have been totally poor. There is little doubt that I’ve met wonderful friends who haven’t hesitated in assisting me through terrible times. Truthfully, I spend more time thinking about my GPA and girls (not necessarily in that order) than mulling over fears of Southern-fried Caucasians in pick-up trucks, cowboy boots and Confederate flag emblazoned trucker hats. I know too many of them personally to apply that crass stereotype.

Nevertheless, while the majority of my concerns are similar to those of other students, some aren’t, and the rest are heavily tinged by unwarranted reactions to my race.

No, jokes about “hanging niggers” are not funny. No, I do not understand why your parents won’t let you date black people. And African Americans vote for Democrats because… well, it’s complicated.

Inexorably, this brings us to Fisher v. University of Texas, and the revisitation of whether colleges can use “narrowly tailored” methods to ensure a “critical mass” of diversity -- whatever that means. Sentences in which the word “diversity” is the least ambiguous term are destined to be fraught with controversy.

And so it is here. Quota systems have been disallowed since 1978, when the Supreme Court said as much in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. Yet SCOTUS has also said, in Grutter v. Bollinger, that race may be used as a factor in admissions, so long as it isn’t a gratuitous determinant.

I agree with those rulings, and accept their unsavory implications: There is no denying that an occasional member of the racial majority will unfairly get swept into the crossfire. And it is true that there may be some in the racial minority who will get an unfair advantage.

But while it has been argued that, for these reasons, college admissions should only consider what benefit an applicant will receive from the school, such a mentality is over simplistic, and therefore flawed: Colleges should also consider what benefit a prospective student will be to their future companions.

It’s why there’s an application process in the first place. It’s why, in addition to making good grades, we also had to write those god awful essays about the books we read, our life experiences, and those who inspire us. It’s why they ask high school students about their religion, their economic status and, yes, their race.

For centuries, higher education was reserved for those well-endowed and socially privileged. But now colleges have realized that providing students access to the top educators and researches is insufficient. They’ve realized that students can benefit from a diverse body of peers as well -- whether we mean religiously diverse, economically diverse or racially diverse.

There is sloppiness, to be sure, and ramifications for that sloppiness. But diversification doesn’t just provide opportunities for historically underrepresented minorities. It doesn’t just ameliorate the pressures I feel to be a spokesperson for my race.  It also ensures that students have the ability to befriend and familiarize themselves with different people of different cultures. It assists them in learning that culture, which influences experience, is a complex thing. One culture may bleed into another while retaining much of its integrity; and even within a culture, there is much variation.

Some of us prefer suits to sagging pants, most have a vocabulary which extends beyond the ninth grade, and some (precious few, but some) will cross the political divide to vote for a Republican. 

There is knowledge to be gleaned from these distinct experiences and beliefs, not all of which can be conveyed in often reductive classrooms and media.

So let’s allow our colleges to get back to the business of educating, shall we?

On: The Election

All told, Tuesday was an excellent day for liberals, as well as their causes. Same-sex marriage is the most popular it's even been, two states have removed their state laws which bar marijuana used for recreational purposes, not to mention that the President was re-elected and Democrats kept the Senate by a wider margin.

Gay marriage, perhaps, is the best example. The first president to openly support same-sex marriage (and who helped to swing many personal opinions in that direction) has been re-elected, three states legalized same-sex marriage by referendum, and Wisconsin elected Tammy Baldwin, America's first openly gay Senator.

It was also a great night for women. There are now 20 women in the Senate (a record), and New Hampshire is sending to Washington its first all female delegation.

And you say politics is pointless.

Meet the women in Congress with the Washington Post

On: October's Economy

According to a report issued by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the economy continues to improve, albeit slowly. In September, the unemployment number finally fell below 8 percent, to 7.8 percent. In October, the number ticked up to 7.9 percent.

In the month of October, 171,000 jobs were created. However, because more people -- perhaps buoyed by the previous announcement's good tidings -- reported looking for work, the unemployment number increased.

Read more from The New York Times.