Sgt Meyer's situation typical?

whitehall

Diamond Member
Dec 28, 2010
66,734
28,852
2,300
Western Va.
Medal of Honor recipient Marine Sgt. Dakota Meyer was ordered four times by senior Marine Corps officers not to rescue Marines caoght in an ambush two years ago in Afghanistan. He finally disobeyed orders and risked his life to rescue fellow Marines and was awarded the MOH. A subsequent investigation revealed that Marines requests for extra firepower and helicopters were routinely denied by senior officers. WTF is going on? Are some officers so afraid to risk their careers that they would rather see Troops die than be criticized by politicians?
 
Last edited:
We bombed the snot out of Lybia to pave the way f0or the victorious muslem brotherhood to sieze control of the country but we deny artillery support to front line Troops in Afghanistan. Anybody have an opinion?
 
It happens due to the nature of the war we are fighting air support may not always be possible. Anything from rpg's to civilian population of the area of operation also weather conditions and current operations being supported by air units.
 
How is air and artillery support "not possible" in the greatest Military in the world? It's not possible because politicians have determined that American Troops have to fight according to rules set by the enemy. We saw all kinds of media coverage of the NATO support of muslem rebels in Libya including indiscriminate bombing of civilians and yet there hasn't been a media news feed of the fighting in Afghanistan in months. I say again, a relatively un-reported investigation has determined that American Troops aren't getting the freaking support that they deserve in Afghanistan. Unless stupid Americans and left wing sissies get off their asses and support the Troops with more than concerts and phony windy rhetoric we might as well get the hell out.
 
Last edited:
How is air and artillery support "not possible" in the greatest Military in the world? It's not possible because politicians have determined that American Troops have to fight according to rules set by the enemy. We saw all kinds of media coverage of the NATO support of muslem rebels in Libya including indiscriminate bombing of civilians and yet there hasn't been a media news feed of the fighting in Afghanistan in months. I say again, a relatively un-reported investigation has determined that American Troops aren't getting the freaking support that they deserve in Afghanistan. Unless stupid Americans and left wing sissies get off their asses and support the Troops with more than concerts and phony windy rhetoric we might as well get the hell out.

The ROE exists for legitimate tactical reasons.

By your logic "free fire zones" in Viet Nam would have been the safest place in the country.

That wasn't the case.

As always, there aren't simple answers to complicated problems.
 
There may not be "simple rules to complicated problems" but there are simple rules to simple problems. "Free fire zones" are not the issue, support for American Troops in combat is the issue. Even radical left wing administrations like LBJ (who set the rules that guaranteed defeat in Vietnam) authorized air support and artillery support for American Troops who came under fire in combat.THE FREAKING INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT AMERICAN TROOPS WERE NOT GETTING THE SUPPORT THEY NEEDED. WHAT MORE INFORMATION DO YOU SISSIES NEED? It's simple people. Either you support the Troops with the technology available or you get the hell out.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top