New Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan

This is a discussion on New Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; General Petraeus has implemented new stricter rules of engagement in Afghanistan. This is pure political correctness. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2010080...08599200886300 Now, rather than loosen the rules of engagement ...

Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: New Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,007

    New Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan

    General Petraeus has implemented new stricter rules of engagement in Afghanistan. This is pure political correctness.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/2010080...08599200886300

    Now, rather than loosen the rules of engagement as many would have preferred, General Petraeus has tightened them. Under General McChrystal, NATO forces were prohibited from calling in air strikes or artillery fire on village compounds where the enemy might have been mixed in with civilians. Going several steps better, General Petraeus has reportedly expanded the ban on air strikes and artillery fire to all types of buildings, tree-lined areas and hillsides where it is difficult to distinguish who is on the ground. Although the military has kept much of the directive's fine print classified for operational security, other measures are said to include a curb on small-arms fire that has yielded a steady trickle of fatalities at checkpoints and in night raids on private residences.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Distinguished Member Array Tally XD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Tallahassee, FL
    Posts
    1,825
    I guess the next move is to issue Ari Soft versions of rifles and handguns?
    “I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.”
    - Barack Obama Chicago Tribune, April 27, 2004

  4. #3
    Senior Member Array Tyler11B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    646
    dislike
    U/315
    KY Concealed Carry Instructor
    Taser X2/X26 Instructor
    "It is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs. He does not have to…[he] is entitled to stand his ground, and meet any (life-threatening) attack made upon him with a deadly weapon…." Gibson v. KY, 34SW936(Ky.1931)

  5. #4
    VIP Member
    Array 1 old 0311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,120
    As our death toll, including my Nephew, continues to climb.

  6. #5
    Senior Member Array Sig35seven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,115
    He is trying to prevent killing innocent people. They are trying to reduce civilian casualties. Every time an innocent non-Taliban civilian gets killed it creates anger and distrust and hatred towards American troops. This severely hinders the progress of the war effort. In order to win the Afghan people over you can't kill a few of them along the way and not expect them to be angered and no longer want to help in the war effort.
    "Confidence is food for the wise man but liquor for the fool"

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    6,999
    I'd have to read the directive myself versus a "news reporter's" commentary on the "new" ROE.

    As I mentioned before, McChrystal's ROE as written allowed a lot of latitude in the field (I know, I lived it). The problem was at the O-4 or O-5 level where they were adding additional restrictions more stringent than the original intent....and then internet rumor took over.
    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

  8. #7
    GM
    GM is offline
    VIP Member Array GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,866
    IMO this is crazy.
    "The Second Amendment: America's Original Homeland Security"

  9. #8
    Member Array Deuce130's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Destin
    Posts
    291
    Quote Originally Posted by Sig35seven View Post
    He is trying to prevent killing innocent people. They are trying to reduce civilian casualties. Every time an innocent non-Taliban civilian gets killed it creates anger and distrust and hatred towards American troops. This severely hinders the progress of the war effort. In order to win the Afghan people over you can't kill a few of them along the way and not expect them to be angered and no longer want to help in the war effort.
    +1. It's a bad business but this is the war we've got.

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array ctsketch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    2,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Sig35seven View Post
    He is trying to prevent killing innocent people. They are trying to reduce civilian casualties. Every time an innocent non-Taliban civilian gets killed it creates anger and distrust and hatred towards American troops. This severely hinders the progress of the war effort. In order to win the Afghan people over you can't kill a few of them along the way and not expect them to be angered and no longer want to help in the war effort.
    I have to agree, we need to play this one smart when in such sensitive territory. if we want Afghanistan on our side in this, we can't kill their civilians.
    Glock 19
    Kahr PM9
    LMT-M4
    Mossberg 590
    Shodan, Jujutsu

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array Guns and more's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Fl
    Posts
    2,372
    He is trying to prevent killing innocent people. They are trying to reduce civilian casualties. Every time an innocent non-Taliban civilian gets killed it creates anger and distrust and hatred towards American troops.
    Then get out. You can't win when you can't shoot back. Where do the taliban hide? In villages.
    Get out today, thinking you could change the 12th century was noble but stupid.

  12. #11
    Member Array Benthic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by Guns and more View Post
    Then get out. You can't win when you can't shoot back. Where do the taliban hide? In villages.
    Get out today, thinking you could change the 12th century was noble but stupid.
    Agreed. I don't understand what we're doing there anymore. I really feel bad for the troops there who are being asked to do a job that was difficult to begin with, and has now been made that much more difficult. Ostensibly we were hunting Bin Laden when we arrived. Clearly that didn't work out for us. So we should pack up and come home. The Army is a broadsword...not a scalpel.

    Brian

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. Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says
    By WhoWeBePart1 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: June 29th, 2010, 03:52 PM
  2. US Military Rules of Engagement
    By Paco in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 5th, 2009, 11:35 AM
  3. New Rules of Engagement
    By Patti in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: December 4th, 2009, 11:00 PM
  4. Rules of engagement is an oxymoron
    By ExactlyMyPoint in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: May 16th, 2008, 06:26 PM
  5. Klein's Rules Of Engagement
    By Captain Crunch in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: August 12th, 2007, 03:16 AM