I was there in 04. When we cleared Al Fallujah in November of 04......about 3000 dead terrorists in that city alone during two weeks would disagree with your assessment of the ROE.
I was there in 06......that was NOT the ROE.
I was there in 07....there was relative calm in Al Anbar, yet if you or your Marines were under threat, ROE = shoot to kill.
I was there in 08......the ROEs were the same.
We just weren't going to start firing willy nilly or leveling a city block over 5-6 guys.
I'm not sure where you're getting your information from, but it starkly contrasts with the ROE briefs I had to sit through before nearly every single combat patrol or raid.
From ADs who were there as well including someone who I am intimate with, a head shrinker who treated PTSD and various other civis policy wonks.
As far as non-ancedotal there are plenty of other studies and assessments on the record. This came out right before the surge...
“More than one third of all Soldiers and Marines continue to report being in threatening situations where they were unable to respond due to Rules of Engagement (ROE). In interviews, Soldiers reported that Iraqis would throw gasoline-filled bottles (i.e., Molotov Cocktails) at their vehicles, yet they were prohibited from responding with force for nearly a month until the ROE were changed. Soldiers also reported they are still not allowed to respond with force when Iraqis drop large chunks of concrete blocks from second story buildings or overpasses on them when they drive by. Every groups of Soldiers and Marines interviewed reported that they felt the existing ROE tied their hands, preventing them from doing what needed to be done to win the war”.
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/05/04/mhat.iv.report.pdf