Posted on 09/16/2009 7:02:22 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
NATO-led forces are investigating the death of four Marines in eastern Afghanistan after their commanders reportedly rejected requests for artillery fire in a battle with insurgents, the Pentagon said on Wednesday. Tuesday's incident was "under investigation" and details remained unclear, press secretary Geoff Morrell told a news conference. A McClatchy newspapers' journalist who witnessed the battle reported that a team of Marine trainers made repeated appeals for air and artillery support after being pinned down by insurgents in the village of Ganjgal in eastern Kunar province. The U.S. troops had to wait more than an hour for attack helicopters to come to their aid and their appeal for artillery fire was rejected, with commanders citing new rules designed to avoid civilian casualties, the report said.
(Excerpt) Read more at military.com ...
Question: where in my previous posts am I suggesting to damn the commanders on an unfounded proposition?
I do believe that orders (ie ROE) that prevent self defense on the part of the soldiers are immoral and against natural law.
So do I.
DEFEND THE BORDER! A FEW 155s will make up for miles of fence
“>NOTE: Obama and McChrystal’s new ROE’s are protecting and defending the enemy.
This is commonly called TREASON; anyone who disagrees should be pointed to the Constitution, which defines Treason as follows:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The ROE orders are a signed document, and therefore witness against the issuers. The men in that unit can testify to the results.
Furthermore, when the law (ie orders) prevent you from exercising your natural right to defend yourself, then they are wrong and morally repugnant.”
Copy that.
I wonder how many more Sgt Hutchins and SSGT Wuterich’s will be coming out of Afghanistan with our current policy.
“BRING OUR TROOPS HOME AT ONCE!!!!!”
Either let them do the job they were trained for or bring em home!
There is no excuse to ignore a call for aid. Do you recall stories (with a source) in which ignored calls for aid were justified?
In a PC culture ANYTHING which transgresses upon a protected “truth” is denied. That is the nature of correctness.
Can't be said often enough. Does this remind anyone of Somalia? Dems have always considered our troops expendable in order to save scoundrels, terrorist and deviants. The next time some idiot tells you that overturning the libs in congress isn't important remind them of this and other moments in history where rats cost precious lives. The next life lost may just be the schmuck arguing about sitting out the next election or it could be you.
It makes me sick to my stomach!!! I cannot stand what Cindy Sheehan has done in the name of her son. But if I were the mother of one of those men, I would be out for blood right now.
Sheehan makes me sick too. I do want for conservatives to make an issue out of the ROE and not the war. Families have been complaining but it would help if conservatives would do the same.
100% Agreed!
You are crazy, stupid, and a scumbag. A great combination.
I just call them how I see them.
He has now abrogated faith with the Poles and the Czechs, bowing to the Neo-Soviets after having bowed earlier to the King of Saudi Arabia, refusing to take a stand with the Iranians, and putting the the Hugo Chavez book "Mein Kampf" on his nightly reading list.
How about these new "rules of engagement": any time Obama opens his mouth to LIE, the fawning leftwing press will fall speechless to the ground. Going to get awfully quiet around the White House!!! Except for Michelle-You-Are-All-Racists ordering her Division of Marines plus Air Power and palace thugs to carry her on a throne to the vegetable market.
The Long Commission, which was appointed by the Reagan administration in the aftermath of the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, was scathing in its criticism of the U.S. military chain of command in that incident. Among other things, the suicide bomber drove the truck through a checkpoint that was insufficiently secured against this kind of attack and was manned by guards who had no loaded weapons.
So yeah, I DO fault the "rules of engagement" in that incident.
You must be kidding me -- at least when it comes to Korea. Wasn't the sacking of General MacArthur by President Truman a perfect case of "politicians getting involved?"
You raise an excellent point, though. The brutal truth is that politicians have been running military campaigns in the U.S. ever since the U.S. stopped waging formal warfare and instead began resorting to these silly "police actions" all over the planet since the end of World War II.
I’m old enough to remember 1983 — that’s for sure. And no, I don’t think that post was a “cheap shot” by any measure.
Right. My point is that it was very much a function of idiotic “rules of engagement” established by people further up the chain of command.
Whiskey Tango...????
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.