Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says

Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says

This is a discussion on Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; FOXNews.com - Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says A military source close to Gen. David Petraeus told Fox News that one of ...

Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says

  1. #1
    Ex Member Array WhoWeBePart1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    762

    Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says

    FOXNews.com - Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says

    A military source close to Gen. David Petraeus told Fox News that one of the first things the general will do when he takes over in Afghanistan is to modify the rules of engagement to make it easier for U.S. troops to engage in combat with the enemy, though a Petraeus spokesman pushed back on the claim.

    Troops on the ground and some military commanders have said the strict rules -- aimed at preventing civilian casualties -- have effectively forced the troops to fight with one hand tied behind their backs.

    The military source who has talked with Petraeus said the general will make those changes. Other sources were not so sure, but said they wouldn't be surprised to see that happen once Petraeus takes command.

    The rules, put in place by outgoing Gen. Stanley McChrystal, are classified but generally aim to limit civilian casualties by prohibiting troops from firing unless they're shot at -- or from launching bomb or artillery attacks when civilians are near the target.

    Petraeus spokesman Col. Erik Gunhus disputed the claim that those rules will be revised, telling Fox News it's too soon to tell whether Petraeus would change the current rules. But he said it is one of many issues the general will take under consideration during his assessment after he's confirmed and after he takes over command in Afghanistan.

    Retired Maj. Gen. Robert Scales Jr., a Fox News military analyst, said there's no question Petraeus will have to make the changes.

    "First of all, to reinforce his commitment to take care of the troops and secondly, because he realizes as does virtually everyone in Afghanistan that these rules are getting soldiers killed," he said.

    Any adjustment to the rules of engagement does not mean the counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan will change. President Obama stressed Wednesday -- after he accepted McChrystal's resignation in the wake of a magazine article in which he and his staff were critical of the administration -- that the change-up does not represent a shift in war policy.

    Rather, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday that Petraeus, currently head of U.S. Central Command and the former U.S. commander in Iraq, will have the flexibility to reconsider "the campaign plan and the approach."

    At the same news conference at the Pentagon, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen said Petraeus will be able to make tactical changes. But he said that does not necessarily mean changes will be made and echoed the president's insistence that the strategy stays as he prepared for a visit to the war zone.

    "My message will be clear: Nothing changes about our strategy, nothing changes about the mission," Mullen said.

    The issue is likely to be front and center in Senate confirmation hearings for Petraeus next week.


  2. #2
    Senior Member Array Shadowsbane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,051
    Good. Nice to stop hamstringing our people.
    Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men.

    www.Lonelymountainleather.com

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,095
    Having read and practiced McChrystal's ROE when I was in Afghanistan last year, I truly believe the ROE is being mis-interpreted at the O-5 and O-6 level (tactical command-level) to preclude defending their actions in front of the 4-star.

    When we got the ROE, I went to my boss (O-6) and asked him how far he wanted me to "hang it out there". After a lengthy discussion, he told me the bottomline: "As long as you meet the intent of the ROE, I will defend your actions"....he gave the same brief to all of the O-5 leadership and the SJA. Afterwards, talking to other O-5s, they had a different view of the ROE!! Even after discussing with the commander.

    Fortunately for me, I worked for the commander....not the other O-5.

    Two words: Risk aversion.
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  4. #4
    New Member Array Funnyrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Small cave outside Atlanta
    Posts
    2
    The Brits couldn't beat the Afghans in 1838; the Russians couldn't do it in the 1970's. And, we are not going to win and never have been going to win. Nobody has beaten the Afghans since Alexander did 2000 years ago and his troops weren't hobbled by ignorant politicians and military leaders that imposed asinine "Rules of Engagement" that got soldiers killed because of political correctness and trying to be the nice guy.

    No conventional force has or will ever win a guerrilla war when the local populace doesn't care enough to fight for their own freedom. The Afghans will go back under Taliban rule as soonas we pull our troops out.

    I put my 8 years in...Airborne-Ranger & Drill Sergeant. I am tired of seeing my Infantry brother's lives being wasted on a people who won't fight for their own freedom.

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    No conventional force has or will ever win a guerrilla war when the local populace doesn't care enough to fight for their own freedom. The Afghans will go back under Taliban rule as soonas we pull our troops out.
    +1

    The Taliban will drag Karzai's body through the streets of Kabul behind a Toyota pickup like they did with Najibullah. It is truly sad that US troops are dying for the right of illiterate Afghan males to beat their wives and daughters.

  6. #6
    Member Array mangy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    23

    Afghanistan ROE

    I was at Da Nang AB in 1967 with Johnson calling the ROE. Now we have another Dem. with the same ROE. I feel for my brothers and sisters over there now.

  7. #7
    Member Array 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Afghanistan
    Posts
    448
    Again, having been there, and still doing that, NOTHING was wrong with the McC ROE. What happened, is that way too many O-5s and O-6s in our military are morons. I'm talking sub 100 IQ slobbering yes-men who only know how to protect their own precious behinds.

    SIGguy is absolutely right.

    BTW, there was not a perceptible rise in US or ISAF casualties while the ROE was in effect. So the "them ROE are gittin' R 'murrican boys kilt" argument is b.s..

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array automatic slim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    The western edge of The Confederacy
    Posts
    2,198
    Afghanistan is another politically correct war we're going to lose.
    "First gallant South Carolina nobly made the stand."
    Edge of Darkness

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array old grunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    2,080
    OUTSTANDING. The bottom line is these people in A-Stan(and Iraq)understand and appreciate power. They also want to be on the side of the winner,hopefully a more realistic R.O.E. will make this possible while keeping more of our troops safe!
    "We deal in lead friend">Steve McQueen The Magnificent Seven
    82d Abn(1983-86)OIF 2007-08
    Glock 19&26/ Colt Gov't & OM/Ruger SP101
    Retired NYS LEO / NRA Life Member
    Still Love Ya Sarah !
    "no kidding,gun slinging,spurs hitting the floor"

  10. #10
    VIP Member Array old grunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    2,080
    SigGuy and 120mm speak from experience. The "power-point"military has produced too many mid-level officers at the battalion and brigade level that care more about their careers than exercising commonsense and true leadership!
    "We deal in lead friend">Steve McQueen The Magnificent Seven
    82d Abn(1983-86)OIF 2007-08
    Glock 19&26/ Colt Gov't & OM/Ruger SP101
    Retired NYS LEO / NRA Life Member
    Still Love Ya Sarah !
    "no kidding,gun slinging,spurs hitting the floor"

  11. #11
    VIP Member Array old grunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    2,080
    OUTSTANDING. The bottom line is these people in A-Stan(and Iraq)understand and appreciate power. They also want to be on the side of the winner,hopefully a more realistic R.O.E. will make this possible while keeping more of our troops safe!
    "We deal in lead friend">Steve McQueen The Magnificent Seven
    82d Abn(1983-86)OIF 2007-08
    Glock 19&26/ Colt Gov't & OM/Ruger SP101
    Retired NYS LEO / NRA Life Member
    Still Love Ya Sarah !
    "no kidding,gun slinging,spurs hitting the floor"

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array First Sgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florence, SC
    Posts
    7,967
    Quote Originally Posted by Funnyrunner View Post
    The Brits couldn't beat the Afghans in 1838; the Russians couldn't do it in the 1970's. And, we are not going to win and never have been going to win. Nobody has beaten the Afghans since Alexander did 2000 years ago and his troops weren't hobbled by ignorant politicians and military leaders that imposed asinine "Rules of Engagement" that got soldiers killed because of political correctness and trying to be the nice guy.

    No conventional force has or will ever win a guerrilla war when the local populace doesn't care enough to fight for their own freedom. The Afghans will go back under Taliban rule as soonas we pull our troops out.

    I put my 8 years in...Airborne-Ranger & Drill Sergeant. I am tired of seeing my Infantry brother's lives being wasted on a people who won't fight for their own freedom.
    +1...That kinda sums up my thoughts as well. Sad but true.
    Sometimes in life you have to stand your ground. It's a hard lesson to learn and even most adults don't get it, but in the end only I can be responsible for my life. If faced with any type of adversity, only I can overcome it. Waiting for someone else to take responsibility is a long fruitless wait.

  13. #13
    Member Array TheoryRealm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    177
    1) Iraq doesn't want to be occupied
    2) Afghan doesn't want to be occupied
    3) They don't want our version of "freedumb"
    4) We aren't paying for "freedumb" in either place for them, nor us, but we are paying with our future economy and our blood for the corporate interests of WAR.
    5) "Terrorism" is an ideal, not a PLACE that can be "bombed". If we carpet bomb/turn the place into glass, we aren't changing a thing, but making it worse....(again, "terrorism" is an ideal, not a PLACE to bomb.) Don't take my word for it, HISTORY proves me right. Every...single...time. We aren't fighting with our hands behind our back, we are fighting the WRONG war.....
    For God's sakes, we could BUY the "Taliban", "AQ", "Hamas" and anyone else for the 12 BILLION a month we spend in the occupation of Iraq. (Ok, $500k and 20 goats a month for each organization would do it.......zzz)


    Oh and 6) been there, done that, got the friggin' t-shirt...
    Stop acting like we're fightin' for "freedom". We are ALREADY....free.

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. New Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan
    By Sig 210 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: August 10th, 2010, 10:12 AM
  2. US Military Rules of Engagement
    By Paco in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 5th, 2009, 12:35 PM
  3. New Rules of Engagement
    By Patti in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: December 5th, 2009, 12:00 AM
  4. Rules of engagement is an oxymoron
    By ExactlyMyPoint in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: May 16th, 2008, 07:26 PM
  5. Klein's Rules Of Engagement
    By Captain Crunch in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: August 12th, 2007, 04:16 AM

Search tags for this page

afghanistan rules of engagement ppt

,

karzai 12 rules of engagement

,

powerpoint afghanistan rules of engagement

,

roe rules of engagement afghanistan powerpoint

,

rules of engagement ppt afghanistan

,

what is karzai 12 rules of engagement

Click on a term to search for related topics.