Page 8 of 21 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 206

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

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Yank View Post
    What? do I look like an insider? Whether or not my theory is correct or not what you are hearing out of the administration is not the whole story and my theory is as good & sound as any.

    I mean why the change in ROE so fast after McChyrstal leaves? Unless maybe this was the issue all along & not the Rolling stone article, maybe the article was just an excuse to cover the real motive.
    I think that in order to pacify the American public, which has grown increasingly disenchanted with this war and is no doubt alarmed by the whole McChrystal debacle and wondering what replacing him will mean in regards to the safety of our troops and the "success" (whatever that's supposed to look like) of our mission, I think it is key that we bring down US casualty rates immediately.
    An immediate reduction in the deaths of American soldiers will placate, for awhile, an increasingly agitated public.
    All we ever hear about the war anymore is how we're accomplishing nothing (or worse, losing ground), how we're running into delay after delay, and how another American soldier has died today. And another. And another. And three more. And four more. And another.

    Unless they can pay off the media to quit reporting this crap, they need to have a day where no American soldiers die in Afghanistan.
    In fact, they need a whole bunch of them.
    Americans are not going to be content to continue financing this war with our tax dollars, when we don't know why we're even fighting it, and when all we hear in the media is how our own money is being used to fund Al Qaeda and or the Taliban; in effect, that our own tax dollars are being used to kill our children in uniform.
    You know, we're not just going to sit here like a bunch of complacent cows when we have to read stuff like this every day.
    Present a clear explanation of our objectives are over there, and untie our soldiers' hands so that they can attempt to accomplish it. Or bring them home.

    But either way, the alarming spike in the casualty rate needs to cease. It needs to slow down. The media needs to be able to report that it isn't even higher next month. People with loved ones over there need to hear it.

    I think that is why the ROE may be modified at this time.
    Perhaps- I hope- the recent casualty rate, combined with our failure to accomplish anything worth a damn over there, is unacceptable even to our president and our military brass.
    Even if it is acceptable to them, I'm sure they recognize that it's not acceptable to the American public, and that we aren't going to stand for it much longer.
    Our soldiers are human beings, beloved fathers and husbands and sons, not walking targets made out of meat.
    Let them defend themselves, or let them come home.

  2. #72
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TBone View Post
    All I want from ric27 is something that shows me I am wrong or he is right.
    Hmm...Just to name one. Janet Napolitano. Anita Hill's attorney during her lawsuit against Clarence Thomas and judging from what I've read on her, she has absolutely nothing qualifying her to run the DHS. No military or LE experience

    He is willing to sacrifice national security in the name of political expediency.

  3. #73
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Yank View Post
    What? do I look like an insider? Whether or not my theory is correct or not what you are hearing out of the administration is not the whole story and my theory is as good & sound as any.

    I mean why the change in ROE so fast after McChyrstal leaves? Unless maybe this was the issue all along & not the Rolling stone article, maybe the article was just an excuse to cover the real motive.
    No, you don't. But too many wildly reach for something as if they were an insider. Shoudln't there be a reasonable standard of needing some evidence to support what you present? And possing another wild leap is only more of the same. If just any silly thing we can think of ok, well, we can all have some fun.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  4. #74
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:14 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Rules of engagement are a great place to criticize leadership. People don't really understand the why, we all love our troops(even the liberals), so complaining about something that makes things harder for them and increases their risk is easy to do. What people tend to not do is look at the whys involved. In Afghanistan now, and in Iraq before, the overall strategy was not just to kill all the bad guys. It was a part of the strategy, but it was not the whole path to victory. What is also needed is the goodwill of the people and the government. Collateral damage reduces that goodwill. So while more strict RoEs made killing the enemy harder, it also helped in other areas of the overall strategy. Looser RoEs makes killing the enemy easier, but increases collateral damage and makes other aspects of the overall strategy harder. The question is where the balance point is, where things are best overall for victory. I am not a strategy expert, and not qualified to really say, nor is any one posting on these boards(cept maybe Msgt). What we should be doing is, instead of bitching about things we don't have enough information or experience to judge, simply hope that the military leaders who make the decision get it figured out.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  5. #75
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

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

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    What is odd is Obi said McChrystal followed his orders.
    COIN was a passive response.

    This is not The Obi Plan we had.

    Seems like the problem the foot soldiers complained about is about to result in more dead terrorists.
    I wonder if Petraeus will ask for more troops.

    .
    I'm not sure who you're talking about, no one in the high echelons of government is named Obi.
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  6. #76
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    01-17-15 @ 02:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    629

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Yank View Post
    I find it very interesting that all of a sudden the rules of engagement are under review just after McChrystal resigns. The fact is it was Petraus who was McCrystals boss & who originally designed the counterinsurgency strategy that McChrystal was employing with much the same ROE. My theory is that McChyrstal never decided on the "rules of engagement" and that this was pushed on him by the Obama administration probably with pressure from the commie lawyers over at the ACLU, one of Obamas constituencies. McChystal over time probably saw that there was no way his plan would work with these kind of rules. His pleas to the president & his minions probably fell on deaf ears so he decided to change paths not wanting to preside over a lost war and in the process bring attention to the problem. Falling over the sword for the good of the country so to speak. How else do you explain the timing of the changes in ROE ?

    I doubt whether any serious military man (McChrystal or Petraus) would impose rules that would result in more of there own soldiers being killed (especially a special forces guru like McChrystal) so these incredibly restrictive rules must have come from the the civilian leadership & was imposed on the military by someone who knows very little about how to win a war. Have any guess's? Could it possibly be the same guy who wants to impose his will over the banking indusrty, the car companies, the energy sector, ect. ect. ect .

    The stench of Obama & the left are all over this one, they griped & griped & griped until they twisted Gates arm enough to impose them, then when they found the results to be not very good for them politically (losing a war) they did a 180. How Ironic how they scorned Petraus when he "Bushes" man but when Obama apponted his own guy and he supposedly failed now we have Bushes man (whom they hated before) replacing him. Anyone see the Irony in this?
    The ROE are entirely McChrystal's, this is his plan. Obama just appointed him, he doesn't get involved with ROE's or day-to-day operations of the military. This is McChrystal's "win hearts and minds" campaign, which I think is wrong. Petraeus' counterinsurgency plan mainly was to get in the "suicide belts" with regional outposts and payoff the Sunnis. McChrystal even tries to sell the ROE's to privates and convince them of his "win hearts and minds" strategy when he visits the troops, as it said in the Rolling Stone article. The ROE's and the plan are entirely McChrystal's, don't try to blame Obama on this one. The change in ROEs are probably because Petraeus is a more competent commander than McChrystal, and with his juvenile comments I'm not surprised why McChrystal's credibility and competence might be questioned.

  7. #77
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    01-17-15 @ 02:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    629

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

    I don't agree with the "win hearts and minds" strategy of McChrystal's at all. I believe that no matter what we do there will always be a core minority of people who hate us and no matter how much you restrict our ROE's, it's not going to make a difference. The correct strategy should be to pump out massive amounts of Afghani troops and let them do the fighting and move our troops to a support role only. I just hope Petraeus figures stuff out and does the right thing whatever it is.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 10:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    143

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

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    What is odd is Obi said McChrystal followed his orders.
    COIN was a passive response.

    This is not The Obi Plan we had.

    Seems like the problem the foot soldiers complained about is about to result in more dead terrorists.
    I wonder if Petraeus will ask for more troops.

    .
    The ROEs in Afghanistan that US troops have been saddled with since the Hussein Regime took power, are criminal.


    My oldest son is a Recon Marine who just finished a tour in Afghanistan and they lost three men in their team as a direct result of the limitations which prevented them from engaging the Taliban.

    It's impossible to say how many US sons, fathers, uncles and friends have died as a result of these ridiculous Rules of Engagement.

    For instance, US troops cannot detain anyone that isn't armed at the point of contact. So, where US troops are engaged by a sniper, they determine that the sniper's hide is in a given building. They enter the building and meet an indigenous person leaving the building, but they're not armed. US forces cannot detain that individual.

    Now the Taliban and their Al Qaeda comrades know what US ROEs are, and as a result, they ambush US forces, then quickly stash their weapons, knowing that US Forces cannot do a thing to them, beyond simply stop and question and release them .


    It's CRIMINAL!

  9. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

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

    My oldest son is a Recon Marine who just finished a tour in Afghanistan and they lost three men in their team as a direct result of the limitations which prevented them from engaging the Taliban.
    Three out of how many total, if I may ask?

  10. #80
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

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

    My only thought on Petraeus is that it will be very interesting to see him and Obama butt heads - sadly - Pat is more of a stickler for secrecy and quelled communication. He won't be open about his thoughts like McChrystal - so we won't hear it as much.

    But they'll be bucking around like Rams on a mountainside.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

Page 8 of 21 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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