Lieberman: Rules of engagement hurting troop morale in Afghanistan

the hill ^ | 7/4/10 | Roxana Tiron

[Nachum]

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) on Sunday said that the U.S. military’s rules of engagement have hurt troop morale in Afghanistan and said that he hoped the new top commander there, Gen. David Petraeus, will clarify them as soon as possible.

The previous commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, placed restrictions on U.S. air strikes and artillery in Afghanistan, limiting the circumstances that allow troops under fire to call for fire support. Those rules of engagement have cut down on civilian casualties, but have been strongly criticized by American troops who say those rules have made the fight more dangerous.

[thethirddegree]

We need to turn our troops loose to do what they were trained to do: kill the enemy. Forget this hearts and minds crap—that’s how we lost in Vietnam.

[Diogenesis]

" .... who say ..."

Who say?

A majority of all combat-related U.S. casualties in the nine-year-long war in Afghanistan
have occurred since President Barack Obama was inaugurated 17 months ago

[presently no screen name]

that the U.S. military’s rules of engagement have hurt troop morale in Afghanistan

Obama's new ROE is doing what he intended it to do. No mystery here.

[dforest]

Gee Joe, The ROE are also getting them killed.

Its a waste Joe. The enemy knows when we leave.

[presently no screen name]

The TRUTH cannot be said enough. One more time..

A MAJORITY of all combat-related U.S. CASUALITIES in the nine-year-long war in Afghanistan HAVE OCCURRED since President Barack OBAMA was inaugurated 17 months ago.

[Sacajaweau]

I think that's why Obama REALLY changed the command. He finally realized that we need to win this if we're ever going to get out of there. After denying the means to McChrystal, he'll give Petreaus the tools to do it....

Obama is just plain ignorant, stupid, whatever....

[GoldenPup]

Lieberman: Rules of engagement hurting troop morale in Afghanistan.

Should read: "POLITICIANS in Washington hurting morale in Afganistan."

[Candor7]

Obama does not want us to leave Afghanistan unless it is in defeat. He wants our military ground down in a war of attrition. The US military is Obama's greatest obstacle to totalitarian control that he seeks. People do not yet understand that Obama is a fascist, seeking total control of our nation.

And so he is not an idiot, he is an cold, calculating enemy of the People.

[dforest]

bump

[Candor7]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2546723/posts?page=23#23

[ConservativeMan55]

[dforest]

Wow. nice post. The repubs are falling into another trap. Obama does not intend to win Afghanistan, but the choice of Petraeus was a move, a brilliant one for getting out, totally a political move.

You get Patraeus in there, a guy the GOP and Bush loved, make sure he has just enough to lose, then pull out and declare we gave it the best there is, didn’t we?

So why are you folks on the right complaining?

If Patraeus couldn’t do it, nobody could. Obama exonerated, Patraeus ruined and the right with egg on their sleeves.

Two birds with one stone.

In the words of the worst POS evah, “This war is lost”.

The sad and disgusting part are the troops and the families that will be devastated. Makes me ill.

All which makes your points in your link more important.

[paudio]

I think 0bama doesn't care whether the military win or not in Afghanistan. His intention is to show that it is possible to carry a war with his ROE. Win or lose doesn't matter.

[Candor7]

[Retain Mike]

I sent the following letter to a bunch of papers, talk shows, and the senate committee.

Successful counterinsurgency warfare first provides security by destroying or expelling the insurgent forces. Regardless of time or place, people suffering in these lawless, feral regions evaluate security by whoever is most lethal in firefights. Their allegiance goes to whoever wins the battles, regardless of civilian deaths due to collateral damage or deliberate executions by insurgents seeking to retain control. Only by crossing the armed conflict boundary at the cruelest point in revolutionary war can the next phases of counterinsurgency warfare commence.

Therefore, the Senate Committee on Armed Services should ask General Petraeus the following questions.

Will NCO’s be able to call for illumination rounds to reveal enemy firing positions?

Will troops be allowed a round in the chamber of their weapons?

Will troops be allowed to engage insurgents in the act of burying a roadside bomb?

Will troops engaged in combat now be able to call bombing and strafing runs to extricate themselves and win firefights?

Will crucial decisions be made by warriors in contact with the enemy, or by staff officers in remote bunkers?

Will you obey Articles 28 and 29 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which say Protected Persons within the enemy’s physical control cannot be used to render certain points and areas immune from military operations, or will you serve a political agenda?

Will our troops be given permission to win, or will the survivors be ordered to leave in 18 months after being regarded with derision and contempt by the Afghans?

[Henry Hnyellar]

“Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) on Sunday said that the U.S. military’s rules of engagement have hurt troop morale in Afghanistan”

Duh!

Say, Joe, can you tell us if the sun will come up tomorrow?

[BlueAngel]

Glad you did. I didn’t know that!

[Captain Kirk]

We need to turn our troops loose to do what they were trained to do: kill the enemy. Forget this hearts and minds crap—that’s how we lost in Vietnam

The Soviets were "turned loose" in Afganistan and they lost. Before them, the British were "turned loose" there too and they lost. If you expect miracles in that quagmire by guaranteeing more civilian deaths through another gimmick, you are headed for disappointment. Let's bring the troops home.

[BlueLancer]

"We need to turn our troops loose to do what they were trained to do: kill the enemy. Forget this hearts and minds crap—that’s how we lost in Vietnam."

Orchides Forum Trahite
Cordes Et Mentes Veniant

[Grab them by the balls
And their hearts and minds will follow.}