We need to study each case in their entirety **without** the TDS spin before rushing to judgement.
Study this you miserable POS.
Clint Lorance ordered two of his soldiers to go up into a tower and shoot harassing fire in the general direction of villagers. Hearing the shots, the Troop TOC radioed for a report. Lorance instructed a noncommissioned officer to respond by falsely reporting the Strong Point was receiving fire.
During a patrol, PFC Skelton called out to Lorance that he observed a motorcycle with three passengers. PFC Skelton did not report any hostile actions, but simply that he spotted a motorcycle with three passengers in his field of view. Lorance did not ask whether the motorcycle passengers were presenting any threat. Lorance ordered PFC Skelton to engage the motorcycle. PFC Skelton complied and fired his weapon, but missed. At trial, PFC Skelton testified that he would not have fired upon the motorcycle or its passengers on his own, because "there was no reason to shoot at that moment in time that presented a clear, definitive hostile intent and hostile act."
"Apparently in response to the impact of PFC Skelton's rounds, the motorcycle stopped, the male passengers dismounted and began walking in the direction of the ANA unit. The ANA soldiers did not open fire, but rather gesticulated to the men, who then headed back to their motorcycle. As the three men returned to the motorcycle, Lorance, over his portable radio, ordered the platoon's gun truck to engage the men. Private E-2 (PV2) Shiloh, the gunner on the 240 machine gun in the gun truck that had overwatch of the patrol, had continuous observation of the victims from after the first set of shots by PFC Skelton. Upon receiving appellant's order, Private Shiloh fired his weapon, killing two of the riders and wounding the third. The third victim ran away into the village. Prior to the engagement, the victims had no observable weapons or radios, and were not displaying any hostility toward U.S. or Afghan forces. According to PV2 Shiloh, the only reason he engaged the men was because he was ordered to do so by Lorance. Following the engagement, the two deceased victims were on the ground, and the motorcycle was standing up, kickstand still down. Upon learning that the motorcycle was still standing, Appellant ordered PV2 Shiloh to engage and disable the motorcycle. PV2 Shiloh refused this order, noting that a young boy was nearby.
The fact that the surviving victim was linked to hostile action against U.S. forces only after his compatriots were killed illustrates that Lorance's actions directly resulted in a significant adverse impact on the mission of the command. This is also supported by detailed defense counsel's affidavit when he discussed his rationale for being unable to make a site visit. That is, after the village elder was killed in this incident, the area became so kinetic that U.S. forces withdrew from there altogether.