Skip to comments.Troops: Strict war rules slow Afghan offensive (Obama handicaps our troops against the enemies)
Posted on 02/15/2010 4:22:28 PM PST by tobyhill
Some American and Afghan troops say they're fighting the latest offensive in Afghanistan with a handicap strict rules that routinely force them to hold their fire.
Although details of the new guidelines are classified to keep insurgents from reading them, U.S. troops say the Taliban are keenly aware of the restrictions.
"I understand the reason behind it, but it's so hard to fight a war like this," said Lance Cpl. Travis Anderson, 20, of Altoona, Iowa. "They're using our rules of engagement against us," he said, adding that his platoon had repeatedly seen men drop their guns into ditches and walk away to blend in with civilians.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
i’m not surprised. grrr.
“The aim of the operation is not to kill militants,”
Why the F are we still there?
So now our troops don’t matter to their so-called leaders?
They must all want to be buried in an Obama T-shirt.
The military should NOT put up with this. The Pentagon should just declare to the Kenyan Usurper that the military’s OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION is paramount — and that all “presidential” orders will now be evaluated within that context. If there is a conflict between what Barry wants and what the OATH requires, then the OATH should win.
Obama is an abject coward not a leader. All he cares about is his sorry ass.
“NATO and Afghan military officials say killing militants is not the goal . . . More important is to win public support.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe this was the strategy we used to gain unconditional surrender from Germany and Japan. /sarcasm
That's a marked change from the battle of Fallujah, Iraq in November 2004. When Marines there encountered snipers holed up in a building, they routinely called in airstrikes. In Marjah, fighter jets are flying at low altitude in a show of force, but are not firing missiles.
We endured this kind of BS in Beirut, where many men died without a chance and for no reason at all. I had hoped we'd never see it again, but this restrictive ROE is a leadership betrayal of the lives entrusted to them.
President Karzi has demanded strict rules of engagement to keep civilian casualties, “collateral damage”, to a bare minimum. We are there to free Afghannies who are our allies from militants. It is in our best interest to keep the civilians on our side. This only makes sense.
If the goal is not killing militants—dumbest thing I ever heard. We know from Gitmo that most of them cannot be “turned”. If the aim is not to defeat Al Queda this is all a waste of American lives, time and money.
Contrary to what Murtha said, our troops don't murder innocent civilians in cold blood.
No. It isn't.
I long for old school warfare.
To show that our president is being Tough and has a heart. My son is headed over there. I was all for him going B.S.(before Soetoro. I am not any more. This Rules of nonEngagement are insane.
Individual lives of simply do not matter to leftists other than for their political value. With these rules Soetoro is telling the enemy that he is really on their side but has to go through the motions of fighting them in order to keep his job to be able to continue to promote eventual universal sharia.
The General is the agent of the Administration and is following orders.
But stupid can not learn from past mistakes.
Where these ROE’s also in place during Bush’s terms in office?
Were these ROE’s also in place during Bush’s terms in office?
Damn right. Bravo for reminding us.
Yes,and they seemed to change every day.It made things tuff,I was in Tikrit March 2003-2004.
Well God Bless you and thank you for your service. Were you Army? I can’t imagine your being hobbled like this. It’s beyond insane. Desk-bound bureaucrats and politically-correct pencil-necks who’ve never been where the rubber meets the road and they presume to tell a soldier how and when he/she can fight. Amazing.
This reminds me of the air war in Vietnam. Rats every time.