Posted on 05/13/2010 6:37:00 AM PDT by Federalist Patriot
Oh brother. Gen. Stanley McChrystal is wanting a new medal to be awarded to U.S. Soldiers for showing "Courageous Restraint" - not killing civilians.
In the report, CNN Reporter Barbara Starr said she asked one soldier what he thought about it, and he just "rolled his eyes." He told her they are already trained to be disciplined and not kill civilians and sees no reason for a medal like this.
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomslighthouse.com ...
New NATO idea to avoid killing innocent Afghans By SEBASTIAN ABBOT (AP) – May 4, 2010
FORWARD OPERATING BASE RAMROD, Afghanistan — NATO commanders are weighing a new way to reduce civilian casualties in Afghanistan: recognizing soldiers for "courageous restraint" if they avoid using force that could endanger innocent lives.
The concept comes as the coalition continues to struggle with the problem of civilian casualties despite repeated warnings from the top NATO commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, that the war effort hinges on the ability to protect the population and win support away from the Taliban.
Those who back the idea hope it will provide soldiers with another incentive to think twice before calling in an airstrike or firing at an approaching vehicle if civilians could be at risk.
Most military awards in the past have been given for things like soldiers taking out a machine gun nest or saving their buddies in a firefight, said Command Sgt. Maj. Michael Hall, the senior NATO enlisted man in Afghanistan.
"We are now considering how we look at awards differently," he said.
British Maj. Gen. Nick Carter, the NATO commander of troops in southern Afghanistan, proposed the idea of awarding soldiers for "courageous restraint" during a visit by Hall to Kandahar Airfield in mid April. McChrystal is now reviewing the proposal to determine how it could be implemented, Hall said.
Hall's visit came less than a week after U.S. troops fired on a civilian bus near Kandahar City, killing four people and wounding more than a dozen. Hundreds of Afghans protested the attack, chanting "Death to America," and President Hamid Karzai accused NATO of violating its commitment to safeguard civilians.
McChrystal issued strict guidelines last year limiting the use of force in an effort to reduce civilian casualties and curb public anger. The percentage of civilian deaths attributed to NATO and Afghan forces fell as a result, according to the United Nations.
But even sporadic incidents can damage the coalition's efforts, and the problem could get worse as thousands of additional NATO troops pour into the country ahead of this summer's planned offensive in the Taliban's spiritual heartland of Kandahar province.
There were 173 civilian deaths in Afghanistan from March 21 to April 21, a 33 percent increase over the same period last year, according to the Interior Ministry. The ministry did not provide a breakdown of who was responsible for the fatalities, but the Taliban often blame coalition forces regardless of the cause.
The idea of using awards as another way to encourage soldiers to avoid civilian casualties came from a team that advises NATO on counterinsurgency, or COIN, doctrine, said an official with knowledge of the process. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the proposal is still under review.
"We routinely and systematically recognize valor, courage and effectiveness during kinetic combat operations," said a statement recently posted on the NATO coalition's website by the group, the Counterinsurgency Advisory and Assistance Team.
"In a COIN campaign, however, it is critical to also recognize that sometimes the most effective bullet is the bullet not fired," it said. It highlighted an incident in Helmand province in January in which rumors that coalition forces had burned a Quran incited an angry mob to throw rocks and bricks at U.S. Marines and Afghan soldiers. The Marines had the right to fire in self-defense, but none did, it said. Six people were reportedly killed during the protest, but the shooting is believed to have come from Afghan security forces. "There should be an opportunity to recognize and celebrate the troops who exhibit extraordinary courage and self-control by not using their weapons, but instead taking personal risk to de-escalate tense and potentially disastrous situations," the statement said. At least 2,412 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting last year, an increase of 14 percent from 2008, according to the United Nations. About two-thirds died as a result of actions initiated by the insurgents, including ambushes, assassinations and roadside bombs.
NATO commanders are not planning to create a new medal or military decoration for "courageous restraint," but instead are looking at ways of using existing awards to recognize soldiers who go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties, Hall said. But some U.S. Army soldiers here at Forward Operating Base Ramrod in Kandahar province are skeptical that the chance of winning an award is going to change the way troops make decisions on the battlefield. "Not a single one of these guys does it for the medals," said Capt. Edward Graham, referring to the soldiers in his company. Graham, whose company is part of the 4th Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, said soldiers are constantly forced to weigh the duty they have to protect their colleagues against the goal of avoiding civilian casualties. "The bottom line is I have to find a way to go to sleep at night," said Graham. "If I hurt women and children, I'm not going to sleep. If I lose my men, I'm not going to sleep. I have to find a balance." Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. Add News to your Google Homepage
Unfortunately all medals will be awarded posthumously.
See my last post...if your reading comprehension is adequate.
Would this medal be awarded to the soldier who exercised *courageous restraint* and didn't kill the Vietnamese child who was dropping grenades in the laps of our guys as they were eating at a Saigon restaurant?
I believe he is considering it when his aide puts out a press release saying he is.
Any of those words too big for you?
Enough “couragous restraint” could get one killed.
Whatever happened to killing the SOBS before they kill you?
There an infinite number of permutations as to why “courageous restraint” could be necessary or could be a very bad idea. Cowardice is only one and is highly unlikely.
4-23 IN is in my BDE. CPT Graham said it all there.
I would be fundamentally ashamed if my son, a soldier, ever earned such a disgusting award. It could be easily in the shape of a yellow heart with a dangling white feather.
They can call it the Eric Holder Medal who coined the expression, a nation of cowards.
It’s a medal depicting a female civilian killing a US soldier suspended by a pink ribbon. Awarded posthumously, most of the time. Gold and Silver Kneepad clusters if awarded during an election year.
OK, bottom line up front: this award is a stupid idea.
Now, restraint is often required in a war like this. I was in several firefights during my tour in Iraq, and I never fired a shot. In one case, we were taking significant fire, I had rounds crack right past my head, but I didn’t see the shooters, I didn’t even see muzzle flashes. This was in a dense urban area late at night. I could have very easily and understandably opened fire with everything I had, ordererd all my Platoon Strykers to open up with all their .50-cal machine guns, etc (”death blossom” as we called it), but what would have been the likely result? Lots of dead/wounded civilians, little to no effect on the enemy. So we held fire.
If I’m a machine gunner who sees an armed haji who just popped a round off at me running around in a group of civilians, should I go cyclic and lay waste to everyone around him for a chance at getting him? Or do I let it slide with a “next time, haji!” yelled his way?
Not every instance of enemy contact is best met with overwhelming lethality. That’s just the way it is. Even if ROE wasn’t so restrictive, it would still be a good idea to ONLY fire when you have a clear target. Otherwise you’re just killing people who don’t deserve it. That’s not what professional Soldiers do, it’s what scared fools do. My Soldiers understood that and practiced it, and they did a magnificent job.
“Promoted to brigadier general on January 1, 2001” Yep he is one of Klintoon’s last General Officer appointees. George W Bush did NOTHING to clean out Flag/General Officer dead wood like his guy(and alot of others) are truely Bush’s Fault!
I thank you for your service to our country. I understand what you’re saying about being wise in discerning in engaging the enemy.
I just hope you don’t disgrace your men by recommending any of them for this medal.
McChrystal is on CSPAN now. A member of the press asked about the award. The response is that there are no plans for the introduction of such an award.
Great he flinched!
The Press Conference transcript will be available at www.defense.gov. Enmjoy.
You flinched.
Be safe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.