Posted on 06/26/2010 12:10:04 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Fox News, outgoing Afghan commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s least favorite news channel (he banned it from the televisions in his HQ), reports that one of the first moves of incoming Afghan commander Gen. David Petraeus will be to loosen the controversial rules of engagement in Afghanistan to allow more artillery and air strikes. Troops in Afghanistan complain they’re fighting with one hand tied behind their back because of the various “directives” issued by McChrystal restricting the use of indirect fires in an effort to curtail civilian casualties.
Not so fast, reports Leo Shane with Stars and Stripes, who asked Petraeus’ spokesman, Col. Erik Gunhus, if the Fox report is true. Gunhus said Petraeus has made no such decision. Once he arrives in Kabul (he still has to pass Senate confirmation on Tuesday, which will be a formality), Petraeus will review the ROE and determine whether they should be modified.
At a Pentagon press conference yesterday, Joint Chief’s chair Adm. Mike Mullen said Petraeus is mindful of the sensitivity of Afghans to civilian casualties and that he also signed off on McChrystal’s directives, that have ranged from instructing troops on polite driving techniques on Afghan roads to curtailing raids on Afghan homes in the middle of the night, but that he also has the flexibility to “make changes as he sees appropriate.”
(Excerpt) Read more at defensetech.org ...
I wonder if this will cause some to retract their "great patriot" lines from just days ago...or is FOX controlled by Saudis and Murdoch wants to institute sharia law, so it just proves what a patriot he is...
The change in the rules of engagement would be welcomed, but I don't know if Obama will stand for it. He doesn't have much of an imagination when it comes to dealing with crises, and based on the hosannahs he got this week, he may just make firing military leaders his "crisis of the month" to up his poll numbers.
The first thought that went through my mind when I read this part was that the General has been brainwashed by the MSM or he's a liberal by choice.
I thought it was an odd choice, to ban FOX from the televisions in his HQ, but no other channel, apparently.
The more I learn about McChrystal, the happier I am that he’s gone.
Same here, especially wanting our troops to patrol without bullets in their chambers in a war zone.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37125
“He doesn’t have much of an imagination when it comes to dealing with crises”
He doesn’t WANT to deal with the oil. They have plenty of imagination when they want to use it.
The left aren’t liberals. They only feign liberality. Real pacifist liberals are dumped when they no longer need them (sheehan). They want to defeat the taliban because Russia wants that.
Possibly this whole thing has been a setup to make it look like Obama won Afghanistan.
I can (almost) overlook him voting for 0bama, but the R.O.E. issue has me steamed, and that’s putting it mildly.
Either kill the enemy, or GTF outta there, before pockystain nukes us.
No kidding! It’s been so comforting to know that our men and women cannot fire first. So, if they see an enemy combatant, I guess that they have to get his attention, let him fire first, hope that he misses and then he can fire back. What moron was in charge of that rule of engagement?
You can lose a lot of American lives with that kind of thinking.
It’s a pretty sad day when our combat troops have to see the enemy’s birth certificates before shooting them but some Marxist agitator can sit in the WH without showing his.
I’d feel guilty for laughing at that but I needed a good chuckle. lol
WHY is who developed--and ordered them implemented--the highly restrictive ROE's the most closely guarded secret since the Manhattan Project?
I understand the Pentagon's reason for the actual mechanics being classified (though it is been reported that the Bad Guys know exactly in detail, what they are) but to keep secret the author(s) thereof, appears to be simply an effort or exercise in CYA!
I for one did not lose one minute of sleep over McChrystal's departure, but now it appears that Patraeus will not--or will not be allowed--to do much in modifying the ROE's and if so, will be incrementally adjusted.
I know that Dear Leader--as our "supposed" CiC--is ultimately responsible (or could order them rescinded) for their practice thus no one wants to point the finger at what may be embarrassing to the Fascist, Community Agitator, but come on, are we to believe there is not ONE whistleblower in the entire Military who will not leak this to someone in the Media?
Something is rotten on the Potomac and until we know who is the ultimate authority, there is no way to exert any pressure to relax or remove the ROE's which are getting our Warriors killed, needlessly!
When you don’t know where an order came from, just start at the top of the heap with the directed indignation until the seat gets too hot. Either the top will find out or expose their glaring incompetence. The Peter Principle in action.
We already know where this crap comes from. We knew it in Vietnam and our guys over there know it as well. The NCO’s who are leaking out their real life and death dealings with this crap are the sources of directed indignation that are just now beginning to be publicized. I suspect the close association of them with Michael Yon was a threat to Obama and his lapdog Stanley. He had to be removed from the theatre of action but Stanley still had to pay the piper ironically at his own making. Adios, Stanley.
Consider Obama’s appointment at the Pentagon....as I recall it was a VERY liberal woman....and I have meant to look into that recently. I hope to take another look this week.
Here we go: Rosa Brooks, Pentagon’s far left Advisor
“In what has to be one of the most extreme appointments yet by the Obama Administration, ex-Los Angeles Times columnist and Georgetown law professor Rosa Brooks has just been made an adviser to Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michelle Fluornoy – a move Brooks describes as “my personal government bailout.”
Bailout is certainly the right word for someone who appears to have no relevant national security qualifications for the position. She does though have experience working as Special Counsel for George Soros’s Open Society Institute in New York, and as a former adviser to Harold Koh, the hugely controversial nominee for Legal Adviser to the State Department.
Brooks’ new boss Fluornoy holds one of the most powerful posts in the Pentagon, and is already playing a key role in shaping the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan as well as the wider war against al-Qaeda. She will also be a central figure in shaping U.S.-UK defence cooperation and Washington’s policy towards NATO. As an adviser to Fluornoy, Brooks will wield an extraordinary degree of influence in helping shape U.S. policy. Her extreme views should therefore be closely scrutinized.
Brooks’ description of the previous occupant of the White House as “our torturer in chief” is hard to square with President Obama’s call for bipartisanship. Nor is her ludicrous comparison of the Bush Administration’s legal arguments on the war on terror with Adolf Hitler’s use of political propaganda.”
Same here. What made me really certain was none other than Geraldo, blubbering on Fox about what a “loss” his dismissal would be for the Afghan war. If Geraldo likes him, I just have to know he’s a waste product.
More like both hands tied behind their backs.
Turn them lose to do their job.
Hard to believe these are warrior commanders with this kind of thinking. Our soldiers are not safe at home bases now and have to be unarmed also on the battlefield.
McCrystal learned a hard lesson about loose lips. He needed the time out.
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.