CPT Ivan Castro

[Razor]

Originally Posted by blue02hd

So in other words you are saying Admiral Olsen, (who approved Ivans assignment) and Col Mulhalland are incorrect in their decision to assign Ivan to his C-Team?

Their decision isn't "incorrect" (I personally believe they're doing the "right" thing here), its just not in accordance with current regulations, hence my desire to see the regs re-written. Like I said, this option wasn't even a remote consideration a decade ago, before Army manpower started to suffer from the effects of OEF and OIF.

[Basenshukai]

I served with Ivan Castro while at 3rd Bn and he is an outstanding performer. We were looking forward for him to get back to us from the 82d Airborne Division when he went over as an OCS graduate. You can also find Ivan in the book "Imperial Grunts", when he was an SF NCO. However, according to him, he was a bit misquoted on the book. But, it is an interesting read anyway.

[MFFJM2]

I don't know CPT Castro, but that has nothing to do with my opinion or the regulation that stipulates he isn't "fit for duty." I don't think COL Mulholland and ADM Olsen are wrong. I know they're wrong, and I've presented the regulation that proves it. The case of CPT Castro is about letting him get to his 20 years (only three years away) so he can retire as a Captain and then get full VA disability (which is now permitted without any offset for holders of the Purple Heart). The amount he would receive from this longevity retirement and VA disability would be more than he would receive if he were to be medically retired.

This is also a PR campaign, to show the Army doesn't just throw away our wounded and heroic veterans; especially after the revelations at Walter Reed. If the regulations were to be re-written to allow disabled veterans to remain on active duty at least then ADM Olsen and COL Mulholland would not be violating the regs, but the decision would still be wrong. It's wrong for CPT Castro and for the Army.

CPT Castro must begin his new life without sight. He needs to learn Braille so he can continue to be a valuable part of our society. He may wish to go to law school, or obtain higher education and teach, or he may simply wish to write about his experiences, all of which are valid uses of his intellignce and abilities. He can only do these things once he has received instruction is Braille and living without sight. He cannnot do that while he's on active duty unless they violate further regs by allowing him to be paid without actually filling a duty position.

He has no place in the Active Duty military and certainly not in Special Forces. As a former Battalion and Group Adjutant and a Commander in Special Forces, I'm pretty familiar with the MTO&E. What position will CPT Castro fill..? What duties will he be expected to accomplish..? He isn't qualified to fire a weapon, drive a vehicle, or even complete the APFT. The regs on the APFT require the 2-mile run be conducted without assistance, including not allowing someone to pace you.

If it's fair for CPT Castro, why isn't it fair for every wounded veteran..? If the Army is going to allow CPT Castro to reach active duty retirement, can we bring back all the blinded and disabled veterans from WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam and let them reach their 20-year retirement..? We have medical retirement for cases just like CPT Castro. If you want to help disabled veterans including CPT Castro, get Congress to increase the VA disability or increase the medical retirement pay.

[Basenshukai]

Sir, that is an excellently written break-down of your points; all are valid and technically correct. But, this is where I depart from it:

First, in the interest of full disclosure, I want to state that "yes" I have a bias here. CPT Castro was a member of B/3/7 (as an NCO) and someone I know from having served with him in that unit. Also, while I was a part of that fine unit I fought with them and I personally saw several men die in combat - right before my eyes. B/3/7 is a unit that in 2006 returned from Afghanistan with 22 Purple Hearts, 2 Silver Stars, and well over 55 Bronze Stars; and we were only 74 men. We also lost a total of seven men (including attached and support personnel). So, yes I have a bias.

But, this is how I feel:


The US Congress just authorized a "bail out" valued well over $700 Billion and this will be transferred over to the very people that put our economic future in trouble through lack of leadership, mismanagement and greed. The very politicians that are responsible for this "bail out" are also responsible for the cause of it. But, they will look like they saved the day.

Anyway, I figure that if the Country can afford that, then it can afford to keep CPT Castro on for three more years. Heck, I agree with you on one point, let's do it for all other military members in that position that have - say - five years or less to go on their retirement.

And, there is the intangible effect that the treatment of CPT Castro has on other SF brothers. Imagine the confidence it creates when the phrase "no man left behind" is applied in this way as well? Who would not feel a little bit more secure in his sacrifices knowing that the unit will not just put you away when you are not useful due to your sacrifice? These things are not the sole motivators for service, but they contribute. I am glad this was done. It has made me feel better about things. I feel that SF is really a family after all; it was not just a catch phrase used at a commander's change-of-command.

That being the effect - I couldn't care less what the regulation states (and it seems that the 7th SF GRP CDR and the SOCOM CDR are in agreement with me). I'm glad these senior leaders have the intestinal fortitude to take this risk for the sake of an SF brother. If an SF Soldier is willing to risk his very life to accomplish a mission, the least we leaders can do is risk our careers for the sake of these Soldiers' lives.

[RB]

Originally Posted by MFFJM2

This is also a PR campaign, to show the Army doesn't just throw away our wounded and heroic veterans; especially after the revelations at Walter Reed. If the regulations were to be re-written to allow disabled veterans to remain on active duty at least then ADM Olsen and COL Mulholland would not be violating the regs, but the decision would still be wrong. It's wrong for CPT Castro and for the Army.

He may wish to go to law school, or obtain higher education and teach, or he may simply wish to write about his experiences, all of which are valid uses of his intellignce and abilities.

As a former Battalion and Group Adjutant and a Commander in Special Forces,
........

If it's fair for CPT Castro, why isn't it fair for every wounded veteran..? If the Army is going to allow CPT Castro to reach active duty retirement, can we bring back all the blinded and disabled veterans from WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam and let them reach their 20-year retirement..?

If the 21st century changes had been installed for returning VN vets, you would see a different attitude for soldiers in general. In that you are correct IMHO.

I find your spelling of the word 'intelligence' in your post #33 profound and ironic, to say the least.

It's more commonplace now for active duty soldiers to remain active even after injuries, of course on a case by case basis.

Stop living in the past and give soldiers their due.

Your posts sound more like a grudge against certain SF officers or a certain Major Castro than a grudge against the way the regs are written.

2cents.

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by MFFJM2

I don't know CPT Castro, but that has nothing to do with my opinion or the regulation that stipulates he isn't "fit for duty." I don't think COL Mulholland and ADM Olsen are wrong. I know they're wrong, and I've presented the regulation that proves it. The case of CPT Castro is about letting him get to his 20 years (only three years away) so he can retire as a Captain and then get full VA disability (which is now permitted without any offset for holders of the Purple Heart). The amount he would receive from this longevity retirement and VA disability would be more than he would receive if he were to be medically retired.

This is also a PR campaign, to show the Army doesn't just throw away our wounded and heroic veterans; especially after the revelations at Walter Reed. If the regulations were to be re-written to allow disabled veterans to remain on active duty at least then ADM Olsen and COL Mulholland would not be violating the regs, but the decision would still be wrong. It's wrong for CPT Castro and for the Army.

CPT Castro must begin his new life without sight. He needs to learn Braille so he can continue to be a valuable part of our society. He may wish to go to law school, or obtain higher education and teach, or he may simply wish to write about his experiences, all of which are valid uses of his intellignce and abilities. He can only do these things once he has received instruction is Braille and living without sight. He cannnot do that while he's on active duty unless they violate further regs by allowing him to be paid without actually filling a duty position.

He has no place in the Active Duty military and certainly not in Special Forces. As a former Battalion and Group Adjutant and a Commander in Special Forces, I'm pretty familiar with the MTO&E. What position will CPT Castro fill..? What duties will he be expected to accomplish..? He isn't qualified to fire a weapon, drive a vehicle, or even complete the APFT. The regs on the APFT require the 2-mile run be conducted without assistance, including not allowing someone to pace you.

If it's fair for CPT Castro, why isn't it fair for every wounded veteran..? If the Army is going to allow CPT Castro to reach active duty retirement, can we bring back all the blinded and disabled veterans from WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam and let them reach their 20-year retirement..? We have medical retirement for cases just like CPT Castro. If you want to help disabled veterans including CPT Castro, get Congress to increase the VA disability or increase the medical retirement pay.

I remember having a SGM that had a false leg. He jumped, worked out and still was a asset to the force. There are waivers to all regulations and since you were a paper pushing Adjutant you should have known it. If his GP commander and everyone up the Chain of Command to the CINC at SOCOM supports this than who are you to question it. The military has always helped or what we used to call Padded people to help them make retirement. This has not always worked out but he has the support so let him be. He is contributing and that is THAT.

[Razor]

Is Firewolf here on the site still on active duty?

[greenberetTFS]

Originally Posted by SF_BHT

I remember having a SGM that had a false leg. He jumped, worked out and still was a asset to the force. There are waivers to all regulations and since you were a paper pushing Adjutant you should have known it. If his GP commander and everyone up the Chain of Command to the CINC at SOCOM supports this than who are you to question it. The military has always helped or what we used to call Padded people to help them make retirement. This has not always worked out but he has the support so let him be. He is contributing and that is THAT.

CPT Castro exemplifies what our "QP"signifies.....I take offense to MFFJM2 stubbornly adhering to his position like "a dog chewing on an old bone". Sir, with all due respect, can you really believe this hard nose attitude of yours is Special Forces?

GB TFS

[Richard]

Guys,

Blind on AD? IMO there's a BIG difference between losing a limb and being able to function--e.g., deployable--vs being blind. Why not a DAC assigned to SWC/EAG staff to utilize his expertise w/o the "fully deployable" aspect of the slot hanging over anyone's head? I'm struggling with the concept of this one.

Richard's $.02

[RB]

Originally Posted by Richard

Guys,

Blind on AD? IMO there's a BIG difference between losing a limb and being able to function--e.g., deployable--vs being blind. Why not a DAC assigned to SWC/EAG staff to utilize his expertise w/o the "fully deployable" aspect of the slot hanging over anyone's head? I'm struggling with the concept of this one.

Richard's $.02

In every walk of life, everything that's ever been done, there has always been a first.

I can think of no better example to show the world a blind Green Beret is just as important as the next Green Beret.

As was stated before, for every shooter, there are 10 support soldiers. This man is now a support soldier. He is not deployable, just as many soldiers with P3 profiles are non-deployable.

The book is being re-written from Maj Castro's example and a fine book it will be.

[Richard]

I understand the 'band of brothers' ideal--but still worry about the 'precedent' and a foreseeable Army of so many 'exceptions' that it cannot adequately perform the tasks for which it is charged.

OK--I've said my piece and I am done. It will be what it will be. I hope it will be for the best for all of us, however it turns out.

Richard's $.02
--
BT

[RB]

Originally Posted by Richard

I understand the 'band of brothers' ideal--but still worry about the 'precedent' and a foreseeable Army of so many 'exceptions' that it cannot adequately perform the tasks for which it is charged.
BT

Understand your concern for 'precedent', but I can also see the 'precedent' that should have been put in place decades ago for our 'forgotten heroes' coming back from VN.

I'm not saying this to get in good with that era. I'm saying this because of the way the warriors were treated coming back from DS 1.

Parades, medals, and I know of several warriors that were given staff jobs because of injuries suffered during that war.

Is it wrong to take care of warriors that offered their lives for their countries? Rhetorical, regs or no regs.

I attended the 1st ANCOC/O & I [May '94] with an SFC from 5th SFG with half a calf [SFC Powers]. He had been shot by an Iraqi but was still allowed to stay on active duty and did a great job, fulfilling the requirements of an active duty E-7, minus the PT.

I could not then nor can see now throwing these warrior hero soldiers to the whims of the civilian world solely because they were injured in defense of their country, basically, you, and I.

Notsomuch you Richard, but try turning out the lights, walking around with a blindfold on, and still trying to defend your country.

That, my friend, takes Patriotism to a new level.

[blue02hd]

It really is unfortunate that this thread has changed tone from one of show-casing a true modern inspriration, to what we have here,, As he is my brother that has been on my left and right, let me respond once again:

Originally Posted by MFFJM2

The case of CPT Castro is about letting him get to his 20 years (only three years away) so he can retire as a Captain and then get full VA disability (which is now permitted without any offset for holders of the Purple Heart). The amount he would receive from this longevity retirement and VA disability would be more than he would receive if he were to be medically retired.

He has no place in the Active Duty military and certainly not in Special Forces.

The regs on the APFT require the 2-mile run be conducted without assistance, including not allowing someone to pace you.

Brother, with all due respect, you are out of line.

In all the time I have spent with Ivan, both on and off the battlefield, I have never once seen the selfish and greedy behavior that you are claiming his appointment is all about. This is a man who always put his troops first, would give you the shirt off his back, and had a way of making every facet of our existence in the box better. His soldiers loved him, his peers respected him, and his superiors trusted him. This is an observation from the 5 meters line. As others have posted: You bet I'm Biased.

Now, before anyone has a right to explain the true actions and intent of another person, they had better have atleast met the individual, done their research, and confirmed those claims. To say this is a decision motivated by money is sad. Very sad. I won't speak for his finances, that is not my place, nor is it anyone elses. Thats like saying "He only joined SF for the hat". I am still in the belief that we have guys on the teams that love what they do, and the ones they work with as they do it. Maybe things have changed since other posters have served, but for me, this has not.

Ivan continues to give all he has in order to become a better soldier, leader, and person. Hell, he motivates me just thinking about what he and his wife went through, and he still chooses to lace those boots up after running PT everyday. By a show of hands, who else has ran the Boston Marathon with a respectable time even?

It is far easier for me to see that Ivan was offered a job back in the Group he loved because the Commanders saw something in him that they felt was still important, and worth supporting, as opposed to worrying about "the bottom line". Either way, the decision has been made, and I for one believe it will add to and not take away from 7th.



If I am wrong, then I'll smile through the retest,,,,,

[MFFJM2]

Originally Posted by blue02hd

It really is unfortunate that this thread has changed tone from one of show-casing a true modern inspriration, to what we have here,, As he is my brother that has been on my left and right, let me respond once again:



Brother, with all due respect, you are out of line.

In all the time I have spent with Ivan, both on and off the battlefield, I have never once seen the selfish and greedy behavior that you are claiming his appointment is all about. This is a man who always put his troops first, would give you the shirt off his back, and had a way of making every facet of our existence in the box better. His soldiers loved him, his peers respected him, and his superiors trusted him. This is an observation from the 5 meters line. As others have posted: You bet I'm Biased.

Now, before anyone has a right to explain the true actions and intent of another person, they had better have atleast met the individual, done their research, and confirmed those claims. To say this is a decision motivated by money is sad. Very sad. I won't speak for his finances, that is not my place, nor is it anyone elses. Thats like saying "He only joined SF for the hat". I am still in the belief that we have guys on the teams that love what they do, and the ones they work with as they do it. Maybe things have changed since other posters have served, but for me, this has not.

Ivan continues to give all he has in order to become a better soldier, leader, and person. Hell, he motivates me just thinking about what he and his wife went through, and he still chooses to lace those boots up after running PT everyday. By a show of hands, who else has ran the Boston Marathon with a respectable time even?

It is far easier for me to see that Ivan was offered a job back in the Group he loved because the Commanders saw something in him that they felt was still important, and worth supporting, as opposed to worrying about "the bottom line". Either way, the decision has been made, and I for one believe it will add to and not take away from 7th.



If I am wrong, then I'll smile through the retest,,,,,

I haven't made any suggestions about CPT Castro's motivations because I've never met CPT Castro. My issue is not with him, but rather with the decision to continue his active duty service in violation of the regs. What specific job will he be doing..? If you think I'm wrong fine, tell me what position he will fill in the MTO&E; every duty position has a minimum PULHES.

I too remember a SGM with a prosthetic leg in 7th Group, but he was able to do all his job requirements, including taking the APFT.

I don't think a typo shows disrespect, just imperfect typing. It is not commonplace for blind soldiers to be kept on active duty for an extended period, and three years is an extended period. I have no grudge against SF or SF officers, especially officers I've never met. I do know COL Mulholland quite well, as we served together, and friend or not he's still wrong.

I'm surprised that I've either been told I'm living in the past or that I'm showing disrespect to one of our fallen heroes by suggesting we follow the regulations for the severely wounded. The purpose of the US military is the defense of our national security, and Special Forces has an extremely important part of that mission.

I said from the start I was going to get heat about this because I wasn't saying the popular thing, which is that CPT Castro is an inspiration and should be allowed to remain in Group. He is an inspiration, and that won't change even though someday he will take off that uniform. However, that doesn't mean he should fill a position that he is physically incapable of handling.

Please understand I have nothing but the deepest respect and admiration for CPT Castro and all the other wounded veterans who have given so much to their country.

[gksweeney22]

Had the honor to meet him today. What an inspiration.