That story is a little different and doesn’t confirm the don’t shoot back that this article implies.
I don’t agree with the limited ROE, but do see the need to reduce the civilian casualties as the Taliban have used that as a weapon effectively against the US in the propaganda war.
This ROE will push the Taliban to surround itself with civilians to survive. I wonder how the civilians will like this new policy when the Taliban is pushed to the wall?
___________________________________________________
A little perspective is necessary. In Iraq AQ controlled certain areas (ie Haditha) through the following method...
They would enter a town, identify the prominent families, drag every member of that family into the street (men, women, children), behead them and video the killings. They then created CDs of the beheadings and made sure that everyone in the town saw what would happen if they so much as talked to US forces. I have seen pieces of one of the CDs.
AQ then forced women and children to act as shields and human bombs to attack our troops. Haditha remained an AQ safe haven until we took the gloves off and fought to win. It was ugly but Haditha was cleansed.
AQ is as active in Afghanistan as the Taliban. They are both beyond savage. They will see these Rules of Engagement as the weakness that they are.
How long do we expect our troops to maintain morale when they will watch their friends blown to pieces and then be told that they can't chase and kill the enemy? This policy will prove disastrous.
If we continue with it then I will channel Jane Fonda and demand that we bring them home now.