Posted on 12/05/2016 12:55:23 PM PST by ColdOne
Obama’s use of force rules can be summarized as — if it promotes the interest of the United States, the use of force is prohibited.
Good. Now we know what rules of engagement to abort. As Obola wants a mother to be able to do, to abort them a few weeks after the baby (er, law) is born.
As Mrs.Brown would say,FECK OFF.....
If people had any clue about how many soldiers we have lost because of ridiculous rules of engagement they would be as furious as I have been for the past ten plus years. The ROE for our soldiers are so stupid that our men are forced to sit a hundred meters away and watch insurgents (who don’t carry a rifle) implant IED’s in the road.
Yes. It is that bad. It is so bad that our soldiers nickname the insurgents who attack them as they are forced to sit and watch them move freely while commanders are paralyzed over the decision to engage or not engage.
Real simple rules would save lives and heartache and make us much more effective. If you are in an area occupied by U.S. troops there should be a curfew and if you dig in the roadway for any reason you will die. Even the most ignorant inhabitants of a region would quickly understand the rules.
61 pages of paper & copying while wasting taxpayer money....
Obama needs to find a new home in Kenya.
WASHINGTON – The incoming administration has released it’s simplified version of the Obama administrations 61-page document that outlines eight years of administration legal opinions, executive orders and military directives compendium of its own policies governing the use of force.
The new single word directive is composed of one word. Win.
There.
Fixed it.
War on the rocks is a conservative think tank blog on the military that some of you Wonks may be familiar with.
They just published their new POV on engagement
Wondering if any of you are familiar with this group and if so what is different between what Obama has now putout?
http://warontherocks.com/2016/09/new-rules-for-u-s-military-intervention/
Not in my wheelhouse, just my interest bucket.
I like “win”, but let’s say “win with the fewest casualties possible while taking reasonable steps to avoid civilian casualties while giving the benefit of the doubt to our soldiers and their commanders”.”
I hear you. I’ve done enough TDYs in the sandbox to have heard the same thing over and over. Before Trump finally gets us the hell out, he will make sure they can actually fight back and kick ass. One reason I’m glad Mattis will be running DoD, he will have the guys’ backs.
Obama rolls out new rolls of toilet paper.
The only thing hussein knows about violent conflict he learned in a pillow fight with reggie.
Obama executive orders/memos erased in ten, nine, eight...
disclose “as much information as possible to the public. . .so that an informed public can scrutinize our actions and hold us to account.”
Or lie and mislead like Obama did with Benghazi.
Whoever wins gets to rewrite the Rule Book.
I wish this bum, Clown Prince nobama, would stop wasting trees. No one really cares what he says about anything except to humor him so he doesn’t go further off the deep end. What a horrific president, complete loser and affirmative-action hire.
OK, I will give you that one.
ROE will change from lose to win in January -
what a friggin joke,lying pos
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.