Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama’s Rules of Engagement In Afghanistan Will Ensure Our Failure
Flopping Aces ^ | 06-22-10 | Curt

Posted on 06/22/2010 3:00:51 PM PDT by Starman417

The new rules of fighting a war....Obama style, via George F. Will: (h/t The Captain's Journal)

… occasionally there are riveting communications, such as a recent e-mail from a noncommissioned officer (NCO) serving in Afghanistan. He explains why the rules of engagement for U.S. troops are “too prohibitive for coalition forces to achieve sustained tactical successes.”

Receiving mortar fire during an overnight mission, his unit called for a 155mm howitzer illumination round to be fired to reveal the enemy’s location. The request was rejected “on the grounds that it may cause collateral damage.” The NCO says that the only thing that comes down from an illumination round is a canister, and the likelihood of it hitting someone or something was akin to that of being struck by lightning.

Returning from a mission, his unit took casualties from an improvised explosive device that the unit knew had been placed no more than an hour earlier. “There were villagers laughing at the U.S. casualties” and “two suspicious individuals were seen fleeing the scene and entering a home.” U.S. forces “are no longer allowed to search homes without Afghan National Security Forces personnel present.” But when his unit asked Afghan police to search the house, the police refused on the grounds that the people in the house “are good people.”

[snip]

The NCO is the backbone of our nations military. They don't deal with the politics of the upper ranks, they operate to achieve the mission and keep their men save. They are on the ground, on the front lines with their troops. They see it all....and when they are seeing what the NCO wrote about above you just have to know we have already lost Afghanistan.

Read more at floppingaces.net...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans; Politics
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; obama; roe

1 posted on 06/22/2010 3:00:55 PM PDT by Starman417
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Starman417

“Obama’s Rules of Engagement In Afghanistan Will Ensure Our Failure”

...and ensure his success...it’s what he wants.


2 posted on 06/22/2010 3:04:51 PM PDT by jessduntno ( 'Joe Biden?' suggests a top adviser. 'Did you say "Bite Me?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

I heard stories about ridiculous rules of engagement in Vietnam, but this seems downright criminal. They are clearly not winning “hearts and minds”. Quite the opposite—they are becoming laughingstocks. No wonder the locals support the Taliban. Who would riks their life in such a situation?


3 posted on 06/22/2010 3:06:11 PM PDT by rbg81 (DRAIN THE SWAMP!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

Receiving mortar fire during an overnight mission, his unit called for a 155mm howitzer illumination round to be fired to reveal the enemy’s location. The request was rejected “on the grounds that it may cause collateral damage.”

Time to GTFO...


4 posted on 06/22/2010 3:06:44 PM PDT by jessduntno ( 'Joe Biden?' suggests a top adviser. 'Did you say "Bite Me?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

LBJ bomba


5 posted on 06/22/2010 3:06:55 PM PDT by bray (Did Rush say Complete Failure?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

Why our military in Afghanistan doesn’t resign en-mass is beyond me!


6 posted on 06/22/2010 3:09:35 PM PDT by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

May as well make RPGs out of hershey bars and bullets out of sparklers.

God bless you, guys. God help you.


7 posted on 06/22/2010 3:12:04 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spirito Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
Is this or is it not a NATO effort? If it is NATO, why does Obama make all the decisions? If it is not, why are other troops under the command of a US general?
8 posted on 06/22/2010 3:23:31 PM PDT by calmike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
Unless there is a change in policy by the Obama Administration there should be no more U.S. troops put in harms way either in Afghanistan or anywhere. The troops are being set up to be defeated and worse are not allowed to defend themselves. The deaths are tragic and a waste of good men. No more Americans should be subject to death or injury to support a policy that is destined to fail.

In March 2009 Obama replaced Gen. McKiernan with McChrystal. This was a very unusual move, the first field commander removed from his command in wartime since MacArthur. McChrystal has been promoting the Obama rules of engagement in which our troops are expected to act as community organizers instead of soldiers. Now the Democrats and the MSM are setting up McChrystal to take the fall and deflect attention from Obama.

The recent Rolling Stone article concluded:
“There is a reason that President Obama studiously avoids using the word “victory” when he talks about Afghanistan. Winning, it would seem, is not really possible. Not even with Stanley McChrystal in charge.”

Obama wants America to be defeated. He should not kill any more brave, young American men in achieving his goal.

9 posted on 06/22/2010 3:25:41 PM PDT by detective
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aquila48
Why our military in Afghanistan doesn’t resign en-mass is beyond me!

Sorry,, not an option, or did you not know that.

Once you raise your hand, you are commited for 4 yrs active. You can't quit, if you do, you go to jail!

10 posted on 06/22/2010 3:27:26 PM PDT by 2aberro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno
Time to GTFO...

sorry to say I agree,,,we now have another Nam.

11 posted on 06/22/2010 3:28:45 PM PDT by 2aberro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

My father was a career Army officer & SF advisor in Viet Nam in 1960-61.He steered me into the USAF in 1969 specifically because of the politician driven ROE at the time and commanders who were more concerned about their promotion points than the troops.My son is currently serving in an Army mechanized infantry unit deploying to Afghanistan in 2011.With this current ROE & gaggle of cowards & thieves running our country, I fear for his life.God protect our military from their enemies foreign & domestic.


12 posted on 06/22/2010 3:32:54 PM PDT by Apercu ("A man's character is his fate" - Heraclitus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2aberro

sorry to say I agree,,,we now have another Nam.

I think this is worse...if such a thing is possible...this one actually has the POtuS ACTIVELY working against the troops...let’s not forget that Zero left McChrystal on his own for MONTHS without talking to him and only gave him half of what he wanted...the ROE are a joke...a horrifying, dangerous joke...for instance...our guys are not allowed to use night illumination because the flares might cause “collateral damage.” Time to GTFO.


13 posted on 06/22/2010 3:35:07 PM PDT by jessduntno ( 'Joe Biden?' suggests a top adviser. 'Did you say "Bite Me?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

it sickens me


14 posted on 06/22/2010 3:44:29 PM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 2aberro

I was just dreaming.


15 posted on 06/22/2010 4:15:15 PM PDT by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson