In late summer 2012, Army First Lieutenant Clint Lorance ordered one his “marksman to engage” Afghan men approaching their position on a motorcycle. The marksmen killed two of the three men; because they were unarmed, Lorance was charged, tried, and, in just over a year, sentenced to 20 years in Leavenworth.
Yet as the Washington Times reports, the charges ignore the fact that “a common enemy tactic is for unarmed fighters on motorcycles… to track [U.S.] unit movements… with cell phones.”
On the other hand, after Army Major Nidal Hasan killed 13 soldiers and wounded more than 30 during his Nov. 5, 2009 shooting at Ft. Hood, it took four years for him to be sentenced.
Lorance was charged, tried, and sentenced in just over a year for ordering his marksman take out two men who were using the exact reconnaissance tactic Lorance had been trained to recognize. Lorance did not choose or arrange the situation, rather, he was confronted with it.
However, Hasan chose his targets and arranged his situation carefully. His goal was to get in close proximity to as many unarmed U.S. soldiers as possible to cause maximum carnage. He boasted of killing for “Allah,” and during the trial admitted that evidence would “clearly show” he was the shooter.
Why does it seem our soldiers are facing swifter justice than those who admit to killing our soldiers?
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins.