US combat role in Iraq set to end on schedule, says Barack Obama

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Paul3144, Aug 2, 2010.

  1. Paul3144

    Paul3144
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    0
    Read More

    This is good news that we are winding down operations in Iraq. By the end of next year, there will be no more U.S. troops in Iraq when the transitional force is removed.
     
  2. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Agreed...ready to see more soldiers come home.

    Two disturbing things, though...

    1. Obama takes sole credit for finishing the job. Baloney.
    2. We're in a bigger mess in Afghanistan now than we ever were in Iraq. With the engagement rules as they are, we can not, and will not ever, win that conflict. So, what do we do? Fight to win? Or send more human ammo?
     
  3. Tom Bryant

    Tom Bryant
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,439
    Likes Received:
    0
    or will the President declare "victory" and leave.
     
  4. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,592
    Likes Received:
    223
    Which rules of engagement are you referencing? McChrystal's, or Petraeus' new revision?
     
  5. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,128
    Likes Received:
    319
    The George W. Bush plan for prosecuting the war and disengaging continues to work well and on schedule.
     
  6. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    To be honest, I don't think we know what rules we're fighting under...
     
  7. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,592
    Likes Received:
    223
    We're still fighting under the ROE put out by McChrystal. Petraeus is working on (may have already sent out?) revisions to commanders who interpreted McChrystal's ROE in such a manner as to make them too restrictive.
     
  8. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    We've been fighting under too-restrictive ROE since Korea...or at least Vietnam.
     
  9. Paul3144

    Paul3144
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    0
    I mean this as a serious question- no hidden agenda or anything. I'm not familiar with the ROE. What is too restrictive about the current ROE?
     
  10. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    We no longer fight wars to win.
     
  11. Tom Bryant

    Tom Bryant
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Basically the ROE are that you must get permission in a situation to fire your weapon unless you are fired upon. There are certain times that on going out you are told you are in free fire zone which basically means that any human presence is viewed as an enemy combatant and is a target.

    The ROE also apply to certain places that cannot be violated such as a mosque or where there are a large number of non-combatants (ie women and children).

    In Viet Nam, we were not allowed to cross a borde such as in North Viet Nam or Laos or Cambodia unless given specific orders. That allowed the North Viet Namese army a sanctuary. I can imagine that the same status is given when an enemy force goes into Pakistan. These rules were designed to keep a localized war from becoming much larger. This is what happened when General MacArthur wanted to expand the Korean War into China. President Truman would not let him. (There was a lot more to their disagreement but this was basically the charge that was allowed to be printed)
     

Share This Page

Loading...