Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Under Obama, Rules of Engagement in Afghan War Are Political Correctness Which Slow Down US Troops
Associated Content (AC) ^ | February 20, 2010 | Marc Schenker

Posted on 02/20/2010 1:58:44 AM PST by Suvroc10

Under the Obama Administration, the rules of engagement in the Afghan War are extreme political correctness, and this has brought well-earned criticism of the military's prosecution of the Afghan War from a very decorated source, Major General Robert Scales. Imagine if you're a Marine in Afghanistan, charged with fighting terrorists, yet you can't shoot at Taliban terrorists unless you see them actually holding weapons in their hands! If the Taliban terrorists only temporarily put their arms down, Marines are forbidden from shooting at them! Imagine that you also can't treat the captured terrorists "roughly"—as in using "harsh" language against them that may hurt their little, wittle, terrorist feelings—and that you must release your terrorist foe after 96 hours if you don't hand them over to the Afghan police. Think this is a bad dream, a cruel joke or simply a liberal's wildest fantasy come true? Think again, for this is actual war policy going on in Afghanistan right now under Obama.

(Excerpt) Read more at associatedcontent.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; obama; rulesofengagement

1 posted on 02/20/2010 1:58:45 AM PST by Suvroc10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

Afghanistan = Vietnam II


2 posted on 02/20/2010 2:18:06 AM PST by myknowledge (F-22 Raptor: World's Largest Distributor of Sukhoi parts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

I couldn’t even speak the words I feel about Obama and his ROE. Makes me sick.

If this is the best Obama will allow the troops, I prefer they come home...we can fight the damn Muzzies here.

Round up any that complain of our laws and way of life, then send them home.

They attack us here, we are at war, so we KILL them.

Our troops are having to act like police officers of the USA, but they are policing and rebuilding another land.

This, at the cost of our sons, daughters, husbands, wives, brother, sisters and neighbors blood.

There is not enough money in the world for that blood.

Obama is playing like he’s something— when he’s clueless, he can’t lead our troops, bring them home.


3 posted on 02/20/2010 2:24:28 AM PST by Irenic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10
Under Obama, Rules of Engagement in Afghan War Are Political Correctness Which Slow Down KILL US Troops.

There.
Fixed it for you.

4 posted on 02/20/2010 2:24:32 AM PST by Publius6961 (You can't build a reputation on what you are going to do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irenic
If this is the best Obama will allow the troops, I prefer they come home...we can fight the damn Muzzies here.

I agree.I would not serve under those rules, and I would not advise any member of my family to serve, even if drafted.

War is war, not a game played by cowards who know they will always be thousands of miles away from where death waits.

Doesn't matter what their title is.

5 posted on 02/20/2010 2:28:28 AM PST by Publius6961 (You can't build a reputation on what you are going to do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10
Not just "slow down"; but this rediculous MO endangers our Troops.

You would think our soldiers are engaged in a paint ball contest rather than a war. This is outrageous. Add to that is the even more sickening mantra from pukey Libtards offering that we are 'good' and we are determined to show the world how much better we are because of our humanity. (Our enemy has their own laugh track for this one.)

OMG; God Bless and Save our Troops. And I challenge anyone's patriotism who has a 'Support our Troops' sticker on his car; and is a Lib who supports Obama; and/or has an Obama sticker pasted front/back or center. . .

6 posted on 02/20/2010 2:57:38 AM PST by cricket (Proud to be the 'Party of NO')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

Some more info for you:

CIA OBAMA Coverup Treason Trial set for May 14-19, 2010

So says the highly educated African American minister: (watch the videos below)

Rev. James David Manning, Ph.D.

The Manning Report Mon-Fri 12-3 www.atlah.org

Author: The Oblation Hour

watch this video first
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WedxY61d60

watch this video second http://www.veoh.com/videos/v187772093A3tzX4H

Hoax? or Real? From my research and that of many others, this appears to be real.


7 posted on 02/20/2010 3:00:05 AM PST by BIOCHEMKY (I love liberty more than I hate war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cricket

Some more info for you:

CIA OBAMA Coverup Treason Trial set for May 14-19, 2010

So says the highly educated African American minister: (watch the videos below)

Rev. James David Manning, Ph.D.

The Manning Report Mon-Fri 12-3 www.atlah.org

Author: The Oblation Hour

watch this video first
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WedxY61d60

watch this video second http://www.veoh.com/videos/v187772093A3tzX4H

Hoax? or Real? From my research and that of many others, this appears to be real.


8 posted on 02/20/2010 3:00:38 AM PST by BIOCHEMKY (I love liberty more than I hate war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Irenic

The great zero is doing exactly what he wants which is to protect his fellow goat fornicators at our troops’ expense. Our troops are the enemy as far as all liberals are concerned and even more so to Barak Hussein Obama, muslim commander in chief.


9 posted on 02/20/2010 3:20:17 AM PST by Scotsman will be Free (11C - Indirect fire, infantry - High angle hell - We will bring you, FIRE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

He is allowing them to KILL our children!


10 posted on 02/20/2010 3:27:28 AM PST by ronnie raygun (Cockblock the sock puppet in 2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

11 posted on 02/20/2010 3:45:45 AM PST by Brugmansian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

Under Obama, Rules of Engagement in Afghan War Are Political Correctness Which Slow Down US Troops

Amazing.

Amazing Sh*t !!!


12 posted on 02/20/2010 4:04:42 AM PST by DontTreadOnMe2009 (So stop treading on me already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

Speechless......


13 posted on 02/20/2010 5:15:11 AM PST by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

While the establishment of ROE is done by the admin in power, I fault the brass in the P’gon for this PC bullsh*t.

The MO in the P’gon for most officers is kiss a** to get promoted so they stick to PC battlefield tactics instead of tell it like it is...

The “Peter Principal” alive and well in the P’gon...


14 posted on 02/20/2010 5:55:14 AM PST by matginzac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

If my CO gave me orders to follow these suicidal ROE I would telling him to kiss my behind. I’d immediately resign and challenge the ROE with the help of a good attorney.


15 posted on 02/20/2010 5:56:30 AM PST by Jack Hydrazine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BIOCHEMKY; JustPiper; All
Hoax? or Real? From my research and that of many others, this appears to be real.

Have been checking this out myself and came up with few 'conclusions'. Possibilities minus some 'moves' here. Don't know what to think; save it sounds plausible; reasonable, really; but then given the empty Obama paper trail; along with what can only appear as a mysterious assent to power; why wouldn't it make sense.

Any info you can share that sheds more light on Manning's assertions? Rev. Manning often very funny; when hitting his target; but have yet to determine how this particular info sifts out. (Love his 'long-legged Mac-Daddy'tags for Obama/lol/ which he often uses; and of course he has some good ones for Michelle.) But to Manning's challenge; asked 'Just Piper' in another post; 'do we just wait for the trial'?/lol/sigh. . .

16 posted on 02/20/2010 6:05:30 AM PST by cricket (Proud to be the 'Party of NO')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: myknowledge
Thats right.

Obama means to make Afghanistan into a war of attrition.

As long as Obama is president there will be no victory in Afghanistan , Iraq provides the vistory template and Obama has no intention of following it.Obama is a treasonous , unqualified pretender pursuant to Article II of the Constitution,, disloyal to the nation, a perpetrator of criminal fraud.

17 posted on 02/20/2010 6:16:34 AM PST by Candor7 (((The effective weapons against Oba- Fascism are ridicule, derision , truth (.Member NRA)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

And this is one of many reasons that even if I could join the military right now, I would not. I love my country and I’ll glady fight for her, but I will not be turned into cannon fodder so some political wuss can tell the world what a great humanitarian he is.

Perhaps it’s time for soldiers to go Galt?


18 posted on 02/20/2010 6:17:20 AM PST by RWB Patriot ("Need has never produced anything. It has only been an excuse to steal from those with ablity.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

Grounds for Impeachment? Aiding and abetting the enemy-

Art.III Sec. 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.


19 posted on 02/20/2010 7:06:46 AM PST by bunkerhill7 (God bless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

Apparently these rules of engagement in Afghanistan come from the commander in the field, General Stanley McChrystal:

“THE RULES: Under new guidelines, NATO troops are not allowed to fire at the enemy without making a “positive identification” and seeing evidence “of hostile intent.” In practice, that means they can’t shoot if they don’t see the enemy physically carrying a gun or they personally see him drop one.

Some troops say it handicaps their ability to fight because an insurgent firing from inside a house could then lay down his weapon and walk out unarmed without being shot at.

WHY THEY WERE CHANGED: It was public outrage in Afghanistan over civilian deaths that prompted the top NATO commander, U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, last year to tighten the rules, including curbs on the use of airstrikes and other weaponry if civilians are at risk.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100217/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_war_rules_1

Maybe this is not the best way to win the war in Afghanistan, but it is the way that McChrystal wants to do things. Would you rather have him calling the shots or our inept president?


20 posted on 02/20/2010 7:40:40 AM PST by freethinker_for_freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suvroc10

The ONLY reason Obama wants us in Afghanistan is to get more of our troops killed. Soldiers tend to vote Republican and we can’t have any of that.


21 posted on 02/20/2010 7:50:18 AM PST by Soothesayer (The United States of America Rest in Peace November 4 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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