SwiftVets.com

[oldkayaker]

Subject: Free Fire Zones

Hi O'Neill, Hoffman and group

I served on the USS White River (LSMR-536) a rocket ship used for gunfire support in Vietnam. I was the GQ OOD. I brought the ship into position so that we could fire our rockets at targets on land and offshore in Vietnam. My tour was from 1967 to 1968.

In 1968 the White River almost blew a US Swift Boat out of the water. It was a typically hot, clear morning and we were on a routine cruising mission steaming up and down the Vietnam coast in our normal operating area. I was just getting near the end of my watch when we cruised by a beach area with a huge mass of sampans and people in black pajamas. I notified the CO of the sampans and people and was at the same time relieved by the next Officer of the Deck. The CO came up to the bridge shortly after the watch change and ordered us to return to where I had spotted the mass of Vietnamese sampans. During this return trip, a matter of 10 or 15 minutes, we checked with our land based operational command and verified that these people and boats were in a designated "free fire zone" and consequently, anyone in that area was considered to be "unfriendly." The CO called GQ and I returned to my GQ OOD position to take the ship into a firing position. Someday, I will be able to fully understand the feeling I then had knowing we could be setting up to kill what appeared to be hundreds of people right in front of us. Suffice it to say, to this day, it is a disturbing feeling to recall.

We took a position about 2000 yards from the mass of people and sampans and followed our usual procedure of "bracketing" the target. We were firing at what we thought were VC in a "free fire zone." After a long shot that went up on the beach, and a short shot that landed between us and the floating mass, the next one would have been right in the middle of a group of sampans and people in black pajamas.

As you can well imagine, with each rocket, more and more of the mass of people and boats began to disperse. Gradually, there, in all its glory, was a genuine US Swift Boat. Our bridge radios were going nuts and I heard our call sign "Jiltfoxtrot, Jiltfoxtrot, this is {Swift Boat call sign} interrogative your intentions" I rushed out on to the bridge wing and pointed the CO's attention to the rapidly thinning mass of people and sampans. I think he saw the emerging Swift about the same time as I did, called a cease fire and also ended our GQ!

The CO was absolutely livid and got on the communications net and asked the operational command just what the heck was going on! There was quite a lively exchange of dialog. White River was cleared of any error and it became a matter for the operational command people to resolve. Fortunately, I don't think we actually killed any friendlies that day.

From the above true account, you can clearly see some of the basis of Kerry's Senate Testimony comments pertaining to frustrations about authorized, Rules of Engagement that could lead to killing of non-combatants in Vietnam.

I saw your C-Span comments and I don't believe Kerry ever said that swift boat people engaged in war crimes. I read Kerry's Senate Testimony and I can hear his frustration regarding misuse of the Rules of Engagement and how that misuse can lead to killing of non-combatants (as our free fire zone near fatal incident above attests).

If your organization is upset because Kerry is the Democratic candidate and you guys support the Republican candidate then have the courage to come out and be honest about your bias. I personally am non-partisan and I base my views on facts. I hope you do the same.

John

[KeithNolan]

John, since no one else responded, I thought I should offer some support to someone willing to wade into this hate-filled website and offer at least a partial explanation for why Kerry said what he did about free-fire zones while with the VVAW.

I've tried to say the same thing (see "this website is fueled by lies and innuendo" and "this website is fueled by lies and innuendo (part two)"), and have been swarmed by the haters and idealogues.

Good Luck!
Keith Nolan

[Craig]

[95 bxl]

[LewWaters]

Kerry didn't confess to war crimes in his Senate testimonial, he confessed in several interviews later on. Foxnews has shown some of them.

Since we Army dudes also had free fire zones, let me ask you, do you want us to believe that it was a policy of you had to shoot any and everything that moved within one? If so, then you had a different set of rules than we did.

What you describe sounds more like what could have been a "friendly fire" incident and thankfully, it didn't happen. Lack of coordination seems to be more what I would call it, neither boat knowing the other was in the area.

As for our rules, I have a copy of the card, Rules of Engagement, given us by the 1st Aviation Briagde scanned. Any who wish to see it email me at lewwaters@msn.com and I'll send a copy to you.

[sparky]

If those actually were war crimes than it's incontrovertible that war crimes during Vietnam were routine, pervasive and based on orders from the top brass. You call Kerry a war criminal and you're calling every Vietnam vet who experienced combat a war criminal.

There's no way around it.

[carpro]

I know what free fire zones are and worked in them many times.

No OIC ever said we were to shoot ANYONE we saw in thos areas.

We were never instructed to turn off our decency or our brains. Some chose to. Kerry was one of them. He'll have to live with his choice.
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service."

[DougReese]

[oldkayaker]

I have read your replies and none of them change my conclusions that:

From the above true account, you can clearly see some of the basis of Kerry's Senate Testimony comments pertaining to frustrations about authorized, Rules of Engagement that could lead to killing of non-combatants in Vietnam.

Kerry was/is not condemning the soldiers and sailors who put their lives on the line, as he did, in Vietnam. He was condemning the policy makers, the people who came up with Free Fire Zones, Search and Destroy, H & I, as war tactics which were prone to misuse and to excessive killing of non-combatants in Vietnam.

[95 bxl]

[95 bxl]

[Greenhat]

Lews rules

http://www.socnetcentral.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=417913
_________________
De Oppresso Liber

[colmurph]

Lew Walters wrote,

Since we Army dudes also had free fire zones, let me ask you, do you want us to believe that it was a policy of you had to shoot any and everything that moved within one? If so, then you had a different set of rules than we did.

I agree with you. At times we operated in the western part of the Que-Son valley to the point that it opened into the southern part of the A-Shau valley. The entire area was a "Free Fire Zone" which only meant that we did not have to call back to BN or Division to get "Political Clearance" to return fire when we were fired upon. It did NOT mean that we could indescriminatley "shoot whatever moved". The "Rules of Engagement" still applied.
_________________
CO ODA-14, B Co. 3d SFG (Abn) 66-68
CO A Co. 4/3 INF, 11th LIB, Americal Div. 68-69

[oldkayaker]

Several replies indicate that "Free Fire Zones" in Vietnam ROE usually meant only fire unless fired upon....but...as our near miss incident shows, it was sometimes misused.

Does that misuse make the soldier or sailor who fired into a FFZ . unintentionally killing non-combatants, a war criminal?....NO! But ,that doesn't make the sailor or soldier with a conscious feel any better about what he or she may have done or helped to do.

Kerry's 1971 Senate Testimony tries to explain how the FFZ policy and its occasional and sometimes frequent misuse was affecting the Vietnam warzone vet.

[Greenhat]