Some troops say strict rules of engagement slow their advance on Taliban stronghold

[sabra]

Source: Chicago Trib/AP

MARJAH, Afghanistan (AP) — Some American and Afghan troops say they're fighting the latest offensive in Afghanistan with a handicap — strict rules that routinely force them to hold their fire.

Although details of the new guidelines are classified to keep insurgents from reading them, U.S. troops say the Taliban are keenly aware of the restrictions.

"I understand the reason behind it, but it's so hard to fight a war like this," said Lance Cpl. Travis Anderson, 20, of Altoona, Iowa. "They're using our rules of engagement against us," he said, adding that his platoon had repeatedly seen men drop their guns into ditches and walk away to blend in with civilians.

If a man emerges from a Taliban hideout after shooting erupts, U.S. troops say they cannot fire at him if he is not seen carrying a weapon — or if they did not personally watch him drop one.

What this means, some contend, is that a militant can fire at them, then set aside his weapon and walk freely out of a compound, possibly toward a weapons cache in another location. It was unclear how often this has happened. In another example, Marines pinned down by a barrage of insurgent bullets say they can't count on quick air support because it takes time to positively identify shooters.

"This is difficult," Lance Cpl. Michael Andrejczuk, 20, of Knoxville, Tenn., said Monday. "We are trained like when we see something, we obliterate it. But here, we have to see them and when we do, they don't have guns."

Read more: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-as-afghan-rigid-rules,0,1243336.story

[T Wolf]

1. Aw, poor babies. It IS so much easier to just go in and kill everything they encounter. If

they were home instead of occupying a foreign country, they would not have these difficult decisions to make.

Rules are for others, I guess.

[humbled_opinion]

2. Solution.....

Lets not kill anybody else and we won't have to worry about all the technicalities of who is shooting at whom.

[Autumn]

3. Color me shocked,

sure sounds like gorilla warfare. Enough is enough.

[Mari333]

4. brainwash the kids to be killing machines

then send them home with PTSD.

just bring them all home. enough.

[Fumesucker]

5. Kill them all, God will know his own..

Papal Legate Arnaud-Amaury, the Abbot of Citeaux

[msongs]

6. "some troops" also say we should get the heck out of there - where is THAT headline? nt

[Goldstein1984]

7. The fault is not with the frustrated soldiers

It ultimately rests with the Commander-In-Chief who sends them into battle where such rules are necessary.

As another post said, if these soldiers were at home, this wouldn't be a problem.

Blame the old wealthy men who start wars, not the young poor men sent to fight them.

This reminds me of the "no fire zones" of Vietnam infamy.

If one of these soldiers were to react reasonably to an unreasonable situation, violating the rules of engagement, they would be held personally responsible. But who will hold the fools we have for leaders accountable for putting soldiers into no-win scenarios?

Stop these wars. Hold the war criminals who started them and who continue them accountable.

[winyanstaz]

8. K & R......

I hear you....

[Winterblues]

9. I don't recall the no-fire zones but I certainly recall the free-fire zones.

Most cities I guess would have been classified as no-fire zones since we were not allowed to carry weapons ito them. However it was the free-fire zones that created so much publicity.

[Goldstein1984]

11. I wasn't in Vietnam

By the time I finished Boot Camp and my aviation training there were already Vietnamese refugees living on Camp Pendleton.

(But I have a "Kill a commie for Christ" patch, handed out by a Marine Padre, on my old flight jacket from operations south of the U.S. We had no "no-fire" zones. Every potshot we took was returned with overwhelming fire from the Marine Huey adaptation of the Gau 2B. At that age, it's not as offensive as it is decades later. No wonder rich old men need foolish young people to fight wars.)

Many of the senior NCOs I served with complained about no-fire zones, in which they were not permitted to return fire from their aircraft. I don't know how common they were, only that they existed, and the purpose was to prevent noncombatant casualties. The concept of no-fire zones came up again in counterinsurgency training, where they were mentioned as a politically-motivated impediment to conducting military operations, and methods of circumventing them were discussed.

We also once delivered supplies from a carrier to Philippine forces, and were forbidden to return fire. Fortunately, the only evidence we had taken fire were holes in the aircraft skin not discovered until back on the carrier. We were told that it was because, in all likelihood, it would be inexperienced Philippine soldiers firing on us.

My son deploys to Iraq tomorrow. It is precisely this kind of political stupidity, not the "enemy," that I fear the most.

[cowman]

12. I didn't

have to worry about it. As a Navy Seabee stationed in Con Thien, we were generally left alone because whatever we built the VC and the NVA could use also, of course we made sure that our big ass bee symbol was there for all to see. Of course we did take occasional fire but we had no restrictions on firing back.

[proteus_lives]

14. My dad complained about no-fire zones.

He's a combat vet of Vietnam.

[peace13]

10. I am sure that it is hard to fight after being under the lawless * or eight years.

* and shooter have put the troops in harms way, pure and simple. After eight years of kill anything, screw whatever gets in your way even if it's your fellow female soldier. Sorry but this just sucks. I don't blame the soldiers I blame the chicken-hawk fools that never fought a war before. Let's call in Shooter, Rummy and * to head this mission. They can see first hand just what they have done to the US military!

[jwirr]

13. Too bad. Strict rules of engagement have been needed in all wars

and when they are absent then we have anarchy.

[bemildred]

15. Any army that is worth spit requires fire-discipline from its troops. nt