Posted on 03/26/2007 12:52:21 PM PDT by ScaniaBoy
The ROE for our unit in Vietnam were spelled out in Special Orders. I wish I had kept a copy of them. Of course, we never followed them. Only new officers, until they were told how it really was going down, made any attempt to make us follow them.
BTW, they looked like they were copied out of a Revolutionary War handbook (ask the target to stop, ask for permission to fire....good God..)
FYI...
Never start a war unless you intend to win it.
Never send troops into danger unless you are willing to back them up and allow them to defend themselves.
It is a general's responsibility to make good use of his troops and not to waste their lives pointlessly.
You could go on all day about this stupid and immoral nonsense.
I still have my ROE in Kuwait and the changed ones for OIF, but they are locked away somewhere, basically the OIF one said you had the right to self-defense and to kill anything that threatens that defense, more to it than that but thats the whole gist of it. I understand they have changed the ROE a couple of times but the basic premise for US Soldiers is still the right to self-defense.
Ah yes, but like Santa Anna said "What are the lives of soldiers but so many chickens"
Unfortunately, Iran's navy has been designed with a fight against the US in mind. While their weaponry is backwards and stands no chance against ours, I think their strategy is the best they could manage: large numbers of small, fast boats to "swarm" a target and leave before reinforcements can arrive. They stay dispersed most of the time so that even a nuclear attack wouldn't take out more than a few, and would probably use things like minefields, submarines, and hit-and-run tactics to isolate boats. The same strategy goes with their subs: tiny little subs, limited range, but hard to take out all of them. It's an elaborate form of human wave, designed to make the conflict last longer.
I think the big hole in their defenses (which the Russians are working to close, damn them) is their ability to take out high altitude aircraft. They're stuck with their falling-apart F-14s for that role, unless the Russians have already snuck them some S-300s to take out high altitude craft from the ground. And gee, guess whose air force has huge numbers of high-altitude bombers? :) If we can take out command and control, they should be pretty helpless. Not sure how decentralized theirs is, though. Hezbollah is pretty decentralized at the brigade level, but they're guerellas; they have to be. I'd imagine that the main army is pretty heirarchial.
Not to mention some of the French generals in the First World War. American troops serving in Korea solved that problem by fragging incompetent officers, who had been promoted beyond their abilities in peacetime. After a sufficient number had been fragged, the war began to be run more competently.
But in this case, I don't blame the officers, I blame the politicians and the top ranking military advisers who accepted these very dangerous rules of engagement.
Exactly...and what does this say to those still in harm's way...now prospective, future, hostages?? Stunning, demoralizing...
Our ROE do make it an OBLIGATION to defend and resist.
bttt
this PC bs started out in the UK shortly after WWII after the lefties defeated Churchill.
Yep, can't be insensitive.
We hit this PC bs in the Korean War. I had cousins in that war, and my Dad, Granddad and Uncles who were vets of WWI and II couldn't believe the ROE's their sons, nephews and grandson had to fight under.
General Mc was fired by Truman for wanting to forget the biggest ROE, not to cross the Yellow River and attack the ChiComs before they attacked us or to persue them when they retreated.
200 years ago the limies would have landed Troops, killed a third of the population, rescued those boys, hung the perps, and imposed government firm and fair.
If you put your military in harms way - and then tell them not to defend themselves - what do you call that?
Typical politician’s ignorance and lack of concern.
Yep.
This is a similar tactic to what the Arabs used against the Crusaders a thousand years ago: lightly armored horsemen would tempt the knights to chase them, then they would swarm knights that were drawn away from their buddies
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.