Rules of Engagement (ROE) CHANGED...Hurray!!!

[healthmyths]

ROE from Obama...
"Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force."

Watching President Trump speech moments ago and during it he mentioned that the "Rules of Engagement" have changed since he became President.

During the Obama administration, the military had to follow standards set by the president in 2013 to carry out airstrikes or ground raids in countries like Somalia, where the United States was not officially at war. Those rules required that a target had to pose a threat to Americans and that there be near certainty that no civilian bystanders would die. Under the Trump administration’s new rules, some civilian deaths are now permitted in much of Somalia and parts of Yemen if regional American commanders deemed the military action necessary and proportionate.
The Obama administration process frustrated many in the military.

Now for a perfect example of one of the many many onerous ROEs...
A laminated card with the following text was distributed to all U.S. Army and Marine personnel in Iraq.
Policies about limiting civilian casualties have soldiers complaining they can't effectively fight;
one showed author Michael Hastings a card with regulations including:
"Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force."
For a soldier who has traveled halfway around the world to fight, that’s like telling a cop he should only patrol in areas where he knows he won’t have to make arrests.
“Does that make any f–king sense?” Pfc. Jared Pautsch.
In Afghanistan, a New General -- But An Old Strategy

 

[Claudette]

Bout damned time.

Who the hell expects soldiers to fight with one hand tied behind their backs?

Men forced to use ridiculous Rules of Engagement prepared by folks who are sitting on their big fat asses safe at home??

 

[washamericom]

leading from in front is back.

 

[The Original Tree]

ROE from Obama...
"Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force."

Watching President Trump speech moments ago and during it he mentioned that the "Rules of Engagement" have changed since he became President.

During the Obama administration, the military had to follow standards set by the president in 2013 to carry out airstrikes or ground raids in countries like Somalia, where the United States was not officially at war. Those rules required that a target had to pose a threat to Americans and that there be near certainty that no civilian bystanders would die. Under the Trump administration’s new rules, some civilian deaths are now permitted in much of Somalia and parts of Yemen if regional American commanders deemed the military action necessary and proportionate.
The Obama administration process frustrated many in the military.

Now for a perfect example of one of the many many onerous ROEs...
A laminated card with the following text was distributed to all U.S. Army and Marine personnel in Iraq.
Policies about limiting civilian casualties have soldiers complaining they can't effectively fight;
one showed author Michael Hastings a card with regulations including:
"Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force."
For a soldier who has traveled halfway around the world to fight, that’s like telling a cop he should only patrol in areas where he knows he won’t have to make arrests.
“Does that make any f–king sense?” Pfc. Jared Pautsch.
In Afghanistan, a New General -- But An Old Strategy

In other words, just like Obama Ordered in Iraq...

Drop your weapons and RUN AWAY!

 

[Crixus]

Bout damned time.

Who the hell expects soldiers to fight with one hand tied behind their backs?

Men forced to use ridiculous Rules of Engagement prepared by folks who are sitting on their big fat asses safe at home??

Shouldn't be there.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I wonder what the Soviets' rules of engagement were when they ultimately got driven out of Afghanistan?

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's our vital interest in staying in Afghanistan at this point?

 

[Crixus]

I wonder what the Soviets' rules of engagement were when they ultimately got driven out of Afghanistan?

Point towards Russia and start walking.

 

[BluesLegend]

I know vets who fought under Obama the ROE's were stupid as fuck. If a scumbag was sneaking up on you with an RPG you could not fire at them, you had to wait until the scumbag fired his RPG at you first, then if you are not blown up you could fire back

 

[JoeB131]

Bout damned time.

Who the hell expects soldiers to fight with one hand tied behind their backs?

Men forced to use ridiculous Rules of Engagement prepared by folks who are sitting on their big fat asses safe at home??

Why are we still there again?

When you can tell me that, then we can discuss the Rules of Engagement.

 

[TNHarley]

What's our vital interest in staying in Afghanistan at this point?

at this point, IMO only, the only thing is not creating a power vacuum.

 

[healthmyths]

I wonder what the Soviets' rules of engagement were when they ultimately got driven out of Afghanistan?

That is a good point!
Fortunately at the time a STAUNCH DEMOCRAT Charlie Wilson from Texas helped drive the Soviets out with the Stinger missiles provided by
The Democrat Charlie Wilson. See the movie with Tom Hanks in Charlie Wilson's War... Charlie Wilson's War (2007) - IMDb

But it was a Democrat so that's OK!

 

[JoeB131]

That is a good point!
Fortunately at the time a STAUNCH DEMOCRAT Charlie Wilson from Texas helped drive the Soviets out with the Stinger missiles provided by

Uh, no.

Ronald Reagan continued the policy even after Gorbachev BEGGED him to stop destabilizing the country, even after the Soviets agreed to withdraw.

Then we acted all surprised when the crazy people we supported turned on us. .

 

[healthmyths]

Bout damned time.

Who the hell expects soldiers to fight with one hand tied behind their backs?

Men forced to use ridiculous Rules of Engagement prepared by folks who are sitting on their big fat asses safe at home??

Why are we still there again?

When you can tell me that, then we can discuss the Rules of Engagement.

A) May I remind you that this happened?

B) The above was planned by Al-queda in Afghanistan remember???
C) Now let's return to the Rules of Engagement!

"Can you tell them that (the 9th Division) is receiving fire?" he told his coalition colleagues at another forward base overseeing the operation. He asked them to pinpoint where the attack was coming from using coalition aerial surveillance and take it out.

Just a few months ago, Lt. Col. Browning's phone conversation would have been impossible. Rather than request assistance directly, his call would have likely been routed through a joint command center much farther from the battle zone.

In the fight against the Islamic State group in Mosul, the United States has adjusted its rules of engagement as American and other international troops are now closer to front-line fighting than before.
US Changes Rules of Engagement for Mosul Fight in Iraq | Military.com
Obama's ROEs were based on political considerations FIRST then military success second.


Obama severely restricted rules of engagement. The U.S. was only allowed to intervene on behalf of the Afghans about to suffer a particularly devastating military setback. These rules of engagement, coupled with an increasingly corrupt Afghan government, led to the Taliban’s best year since the U.S. invasion and, later, fertile ground for a new ISIS branch.

Obama’s Terror Legacy: While ‘Ending’ One War, Making Two Much Worse

NOW give me counter argument facts to support a military that doesn't have the authorization to KILL the enemy being successful?

 

[washamericom]

Trump's not going to give the enemy our plans, libs aren't going to like that.

 

[The Original Tree]

Bout damned time.

Who the hell expects soldiers to fight with one hand tied behind their backs?

Men forced to use ridiculous Rules of Engagement prepared by folks who are sitting on their big fat asses safe at home??

Why are we still there again?

When you can tell me that, then we can discuss the Rules of Engagement.

A) May I remind you that this happened?
View attachment 145349

B) The above was planned by Al-queda in Afghanistan remember???
C) Now let's return to the Rules of Engagement!

"Can you tell them that (the 9th Division) is receiving fire?" he told his coalition colleagues at another forward base overseeing the operation. He asked them to pinpoint where the attack was coming from using coalition aerial surveillance and take it out.

Just a few months ago, Lt. Col. Browning's phone conversation would have been impossible. Rather than request assistance directly, his call would have likely been routed through a joint command center much farther from the battle zone.

In the fight against the Islamic State group in Mosul, the United States has adjusted its rules of engagement as American and other international troops are now closer to front-line fighting than before.
US Changes Rules of Engagement for Mosul Fight in Iraq | Military.com
Obama's ROEs were based on political considerations FIRST then military success second.


Obama severely restricted rules of engagement. The U.S. was only allowed to intervene on behalf of the Afghans about to suffer a particularly devastating military setback. These rules of engagement, coupled with an increasingly corrupt Afghan government, led to the Taliban’s best year since the U.S. invasion and, later, fertile ground for a new ISIS branch.

Obama’s Terror Legacy: While ‘Ending’ One War, Making Two Much Worse

NOW give me counter argument facts to support a military that doesn't have the authorization to KILL the enemy being successful?

WHAT DOES THE SLAUGHTER OF 3,000 MEN, WOMEN, & CHILDREN IN THE WORLD TRADE CENTER?
OBAMA FINANCING AND ARMING TERRORISTS "DIRECTLY" IN THE MIDDLE EAST?
OBAMA STANDING IDLY BY AS 500,000 CHRISTIANS & MODERATE MUSLIMS WERE SLAUGHTERED BY HIS "JV TEAM" in THE MIDDLE EAST, have anything to do with Winning a few elections in 2018 and 2020 for LEFTIST LIARS?

Lefty wants to pretend like it never happened, like his president and their candidate weren't both corrupt failures more interested in sucking our enemies cocks than they were defending America and innocent victims of their cowardly policies.

But....But....MUH ELECTIONS?

 

[washamericom]

I wonder what the Soviets' rules of engagement were when they ultimately got driven out of Afghanistan?

charlie wilson's war ?

 

[washamericom]

What's our vital interest in staying in Afghanistan at this point?

it's a great question. it's as much to do with pakistan.

foxnews
We must stay in Afghanistan. For certain it would look bad for the United States president to apologize as the condition for our continuing presence in his country. But stay we must.

Frankly I don't believe this apology issue will last. Karzai needs us in his country as much as we want to stay. Without American money and backing he would surely be pushed out very quickly.

We must stay in Afghanistan because it will be our national interest to do so.

Remember that Al Qaeda started their jihad in Afghanistan and should we leave they will come back to rebuild training camps and recruit a new generation of jihadists among disaffected young men in the region.

[pullquote]

Remember the mess Obama left when he removed our troops from Iraq three years ago. The country is tumbling into chaos, thousands are being murdered by Al Qaeda gangs every week and the remnants of the Iraqi insurgency are moving into Syria to cause more carnage.

But Iraq is a relatively wealthy country with some elements of western culture. Imagine the total chaos that would result should we leave Afghanistan. The country would be penniless and torn apart again by horrific internal chaos.

We must stay to insure that we have at least one sanctuary from which we can watch, track and, when the occasion demands, kill insurgents who inevitably will restart their insurgency against us should we be foolish enough to leave a vacuum in Afghanistan. A small residual American force of 10,000 will be able to operate about three small bases near the Pakistani border.

Drones would be dispatched from these camps to keep an eye on the enemy.

Small teams of special operators would launch from these bases to carry out clandestine "night raids" like the one that killed Usama bin Laden in Pakistan.

Finally, an American intelligence and strike base in Afghanistan will allow us to keep an eye on Iran.

Should military action against Iran's nuclear facilities be necessary an American Afghan base would be the ideal tactical "lily pad" from which to launch and recover American strike forces.

No one dislikes the Afghan leadership more than me. Karzai and his band of extortionists have taken our aid and stashed much of it in Middle Eastern banks. But we should stay in spite of Karzai because American national security would be better for it

 

[healthmyths]

I wonder what the Soviets' rules of engagement were when they ultimately got driven out of Afghanistan?

charlie wilson's war ?

Obviously you
A) never heard of the Democrat Charlie Wilson and therefore
B) Charlie Wilson's War (2007) - IMDb " Charlie Wilson's War (2007)"

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Why didnt I hear liberals crying about being in Afghanistan over the last eight years?