One thing that always surprised me was that the rules of engagement that everyone is so upset about,and rightly so, were actually devised by McChrystal from what I have read.
I think a lot of people are letting their disdain for Obama affect their opinions in this matter, but this is one thing he got right. I don’t understand all the sympathy McChrystal has been getting around here. No one can name one postive thing he has accomplished in fifteen months. Even he describes his signature effort, Marja, as a bleeding ulcer. The much ballyhooed offensive in Kandahar still hasn’t gotten off the ground, and the restrictive rules of engagement are McChrystal’s not Obama’s. And finally, i don’t think a commander who would lie on a Silver Star citation has enough integrity to be trusted with my son’s life?
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies
“were actually devised by McChrystal from what I have read.”
See this comment re;ROE: “The mistaken notion pushed by the media is that the General is the one who is behind this reduction of air and arty and restricted ROE. Not exactly true. the rules of engagement that everyone is so upset about,and rightly so aim was to reduce civilian deaths but NOT by reducing the protection and support of our troops to the reduction of the use of air and arty to the level it has been. That has been pushed by the Afgan Government and our State Dept. as well as NATO brass. http://tinyurl.com/25atz84
The ISAF ROEs current directives (tho we don’t know the absolute specifics out of necessity) are “…are consistent with NATO publication MC 362/1 NATO Rules of Engagement.” McC’s predecessor, McKiernan, tightened up on the ROEs via NATO orders back in Dec 2009. (Nato tightens rules of engagement) http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/09/nato.afghanistanMcC tightened them further in July 2009 because of criticism of collateral damage.
Per a Congressional Research Service Dec 2009 release about NATO in Afghanistan, the UN Security Council governs NATO’s responsibilities in Afghanistan, and the ISAF is a NATO led force. NATO generally operates strategy by committee, and no single commander calls the shots. Therefore I have to assume that any ISAF ROEs are a product of NATO rules, tempered perhaps by any additional agreement with the Karzai government. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33627.pdf However to lay them solely at the feet of McChystal is not entirely accurate.