I hear this alot and to be honest I'm not sure what it means in terms of specific examples. I never hear those examples in the context of this discussion.
I know there are rules of engagement - seems like many people think these or some other set of rules is holding our military back - this going back to I guess Vietnam
I'm interested in what conditions/restraints have been placed on our troops in fighting Al Qaeda/Taliban/Iraqi National Guard - etc., that has hindered our ability to effectively take them out.
Seems like Russia and France now have the same opportunities and I'd like to know what they'll do differently.
Well, the U.S. Military is not particularly concerned with collateral damage, but the Russians will totally disregard it in the areas controlled by ISIS.
From what I can determine, it's no secret where they're holed up.
Russia will just use air strikes to contaminate the entire area.
Each 'ground-pounder' gets a Barney Fife; one cartridge!!
I believe the current rules of engagement are that you have to be shot and killed before you return fire. That has to change.
Our military needs to come home. There will be work to be done here.
Our military needs to come home. There will be work to be done here.
Brilliant.
for me, it would be old school take names and kick azz. The military's job is to break things, and kill people.
I'd like to see the World rid of every sheep molesting muslim,
Our military needs to come home. There will be work to be done here.
Brilliant.
Yeah sure, so stuff happens here. Who ya gonna call the UN?
Maybe baby blue is your color...
Our military needs to come home. There will be work to be done here.
Brilliant.
Yeah sure, so stuff happens here. Who ya gonna call the UN?
See, this is why the 19th Amendment NEEDS to be repealed.
for me, it would be old school take names and kick azz. The military's job is to break things, and kill people.
yea but what exactly does that mean compared to what we've been doing since 2002?
For example, carpet-bombing the entire city of Raqqa, would be a good start.
For example, carpet-bombing the entire city of Raqqa, would be a good start.
Exactly. As you stated elsewhere, politicians and many people here don't want the blood on their hands.
So we'll continue with the 'soft' target bombing ourselves and hope that a Starbucks on every corner in Raqqa will fix everything.
Rules of engagement are for civilized people.
Raqqa should be a pool of glass ASAP. That would significantly alter ISIS morale. Then the fleeing rats should be eradicated to the last one. If there is not a significant whiff moderation in the air, hogs should be airlifted to feed on the remains.
The message needs to be unequivocal.
We've been leading with øur behind.
For example, carpet-bombing the entire city of Raqqa, would be a good start.
Not just there, but anywhere they are holed up. No troops on the ground.
No more scalpel, time for the machete.
I'd outsource the whole damn thing to Chuck Norris!!
It means to let the military be unrestricted and without worry regarding any potential "collateral" damage. Carpet bombing Raqa into a pile of rubble would be an example of "turning our military loose".
Right now we are making an honest effort not to kill any civilians who are not a part of Daesh/ISIS.
From Wikipedia.
LeMay commanded subsequent B-29 Superfortress combat operations against Japan, including massive incendiary attacks on 67 Japanese cities. This included the firebombing of Tokyo — known in official documents as the "Operation Meetinghouse" air raid on the night of March 9–10, 1945 — which proved to be the single most destructive bombing raid of the war.[14] For this first attack, LeMay ordered the defensive guns removed from 325 B-29s, loaded each plane with Model M-47 incendiary clusters, magnesium bombs, white phosphorus bombs, and napalm, and ordered the bombers to fly in streams at 5,000 to 9,000 feet (1,500 to 2,700 m) over Tokyo.[9][10][15]
The first pathfinder airplanes arrived over Tokyo just after midnight on March 10 and marked the target area with a flaming "X." In a three-hour period, the main bombing force dropped 1,665 tons of incendiary bombs, killing 100,000 civilians, destroying 250,000 buildings, and incinerating 16 square miles (41 km2) of the city. Aircrews at the tail end of the bomber stream reported that the stench of burned human flesh permeated the aircraft over the target.[16]
The US military for a long time has been hamstrung by rules that make it more likely that our soldiers will be shot or killed first.
If the bad guys have a weapon and have been shooting at them,our guys have to stop shooting/killing them if they drop their weapon.
They won't let us go after the bad guys if they are hiding among them for fear of hitting some that might not be active against us.
When we leave an area these same folks help the bad guys.
We are being to nice to the folks that want to kill everyone else.
An interesting concept is the correlation between a religious entity and a governmental entity. Following up on my cite of the fire bombing ok Tokyo, Japan attacked china, Pearl Harbor, the Philippine islands, etc.
We did not restrict our warfare only to those theaters. We fought all jap citizens and soldiers where we found them.
Why should the rest of Islam get a pass likewise. We should engage all of Islam wherever we find them. The actions of their representatives, which most of their members support (probably deep down) should subject their members to reprisals and their facilities to obliteration, starting with Mecca.
It means making the cost of actions such as the killings in Paris, MUCH greater than any benefit to a group like ISIS. Basically remove any incentive on the part of ISIS leaders or individual fighters, to try it here.
It means making the cost of actions such as the killings in Paris, MUCH greater than any benefit to a group like ISIS. Basically remove any incentive on the part of ISIS leaders or individual fighters, to try it here.
I think its going to come to that
"Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war. That this foul deed shall smell above the earth, with carrion men groaning for burial......."
Or my personal favorite
"Why if not in a moment look to see the blind and bloody soldier, with foul hands defile the locks of your shrill shreaking daughters, your fathers taken by their silvery beards and their most reverend heads dashed to the walls. YOUR NAKED INFANTS SPITTED UPON PIKES, while their mad mothers with their howls confused, do break the clouds as did the wives of Jewry to Herods bloody hunting slaughtermen......"
Thank your very much!
I'm all for as much collateral damage as possible.
It's only collateral when innocent people are killed, since there is no such thing as an innocent Muslim there can be no collateral damage. Kill them all!
I'm a bit non-plussesd when someone who has not served says "turn our military loose," because it means by definition sending someone else or someone else's sons and daughters into a fight they personally do not see the need to have skin in.
The argument, "Well, I'm paying for it" falls short as well, as I'm also paying for it, and going.
I prefer to say "We should kick their a$$es" and by we, I mean to include me personally. Which I'm up for.
But that's just how I am.
I'm a bit non-plussesd when someone who has not served says "turn our military loose," because it means by definition sending someone else or someone else's sons and daughters into a fight they personally do not see the need to have skin in.
The argument, "Well, I'm paying for it" falls short as well, as I'm also paying for it, and going.
I prefer to say "We should kick their a$$es" and by we, I mean to include me personally. Which I'm up for.
But that's just how I am.
You are right about that,
That's why all attacks should come for above.
They way I interpret "turn our military loose" has less to do with making the decision to send them into a fight than it does with eliminating ridiculous ROE and PC restrictions which hamper their efforts.
Yep, here is an example of the short leash our military is currently operating under.
U.S. Warplanes Strike ISIS Oil Trucks in Syria - New York Times According to an initial assessment, 116 trucks were destroyed in the attack, which took place near Deir al-Zour, an area in eastern Syria that is controlled by the Islamic State.
The airstrikes were carried out by four A-10 attack planes and two AC-130 gunships based in Turkey.
Until Monday, the United States had refrained from striking the fleet used to transport oil, believed to include more than 1,000 tanker trucks, because of concerns about causing civilian casualties. As a result, the Islamic State’s distribution system for exporting oil had remained largely intact.
To reduce the risk of harming civilians, two F-15 warplanes dropped leaflets about an hour before the attack warning drivers to abandon their vehicles, and strafing runs were conducted to reinforce the message.
David,I am one of those and have given it a lot of thought.
After talking to my Son who is active with the Navy Spec.Ops ,he seems to have no problem with doing it again as long as the gloves come off and the military are allowed to do what they do best.
He does not want to build schools,water plants because it's not what he has trained for and has trained others to do.
He is my only Son.
For example, carpet-bombing the entire city of Raqqa, would be a good start.
Exactly. As you stated elsewhere, politicians and many people here don't want the blood on their hands.
So we'll continue with the 'soft' target bombing ourselves and hope that a Starbucks on every corner in Raqqa will fix everything.
You mean that France dropping 20 whole bombs on Raqqa (probably being careful not to hurt anyone), doesn't send a strong enough message that they are really mad now??????
I agree- carpet bombing would be a hell of a lot bigger deterrent then the current precision "don't hurt anyone" bombing.
Remember in Saving Private Ryan when they come across that machine gun position and the Captain explains they need to take it out?
And his men get pissed and state it's not part of their objective? And the Captain states "Our objective is to win the war."
That (to me) is "turning our military loose." Killing the enemy as you locate the enemy and allowing the commissioned and non-commissioned officers in the field to make tactical decisions as they arise.
Sure some bad/wrong decisions will be made and the wrong people may die and a church or three might get blown to schit. But as long as the overall strategy is being executed, the army/military continues to move forward.
Travis
Travis, haven't seen the movie in a long time. Is the scene you refer to where they showed some mercy to one of the Germans, who later killed one of them in return? If so, that might be a lesson as well.
Yes. They release one of the Nazis.
Travis
Remember in Saving Private Ryan when they come across that machine gun position and the Captain explains they need to take it out?
And his men get pissed and state it's not part of their objective? And the Captain states "Our objective is to win the war."
That (to me) is "turning our military loose." Killing the enemy as you locate the enemy and allowing the commissioned and non-commissioned officers in the field to make tactical decisions as they arise.
Sure some bad/wrong decisions will be made and the wrong people may die and a church or three might get blown to schit. But as long as the overall strategy is being executed, the army/military continues to move forward.
Travis
...Yup,...a PERFECT call out.
180* opposed,... we have the pilot of the Memphis Belle turning her around for a second pass, so's not to hit the orphanage /convent beside the evil Nazi ball bearing works.
In synch with Private Ryan's Captain the copilot delivers one of the best lines in the entire flick,...." They're all just Nazis".
reflecting on alla' this , Hollyweird, and those involved should be KEPT (forcibly, if so indicated) the hell away from "War" ,...unless they do some sorta' 180* turnabout.
GTC
I believe the current rules of engagement are that you have to be shot and killed before you return fire. That has to change.
Not far off, and I was there 10 years ago
Re: so what does it mean to you when someone says "turn our military loose"
Let them fight the war like they were supposed to win. You ever saw a WW2 movie? They killed the enemy without regard for collateral damage. If they hit a Muslim town and destroyed it, there would not be ANY collateral damage.
Put the frickin JAG lawyers in a box and ship them home by slow leaky boat and have the state dept weenies with them.
Between those two entities, they have devised the most PC panty waist ROE ever imagined. War is not proportional, it is to win, not trade equal numbers of dead. You make the other die and in numbers that they cannot sustain.
Then tell the Marines and Army to kill all the bastards where ever they find them.
To me, it means let them do what they are trained do do.
Get rid of the lawyers, stop bringing troops up on charges because they piss on a couple dead hajjiis, stop charging them because they take some gold out of some rich rag heads palace. Stop making them fill out reports every time they shoot someone it's war. Collateral damage happens, as long as it's our guys killing them, they should have unfettered access to do so
The weak ROE comes from a SENSE of superior overall strategic/operational/tactical position, by those in DC.
I don't think it will change much, until there is a true sense of vulnerability to losing EVERYTHING.
In other words, when the vast majority realize we are in a survival fight, the ROE will be simplified to "locate, close with, and destroy". Probably not before.
in the 60's the objective was to win the hearts and minds of the enemy. didn't happen, couldn't happen, will never happen. they have no heart and their minds are fgged up!
they just don't think like us.
The way to "win the hearts and minds" of your enemy is to make them tremble with fear that messing with you will be 10 times worse than messing with the goat fugger in the next hovel over.
We have the means and ability to make that happen, just not the will.
This, right here. A single B-83, maxed out to 1.2 MT, dropped over Raqqa would send a good introductory message. Follow with Tridents or Minutemen, if needed.
As far as Rules of Engagement are concerned, have Sgt. Robert Bales write them.
It would have to start with overwhelming firepower and shock. Much like dropping the bomb on Japan. There can be no mercy...they chose their fate. The damage must be so severe, cost of life so great that they will fall in terror. There will be severe casualties, both civilian and terrorists. But there can be no remorse, no hesitation, no regret...after the initial assault and killing of a couple million of them, we must pause and listen...much like after a game animal is shot in the field. We must listen for scurrying, murmuring; if they so much as whisper another threat or hostile word, we hit another million or so. Then we tell the Middle-East that the attacks will only stop if all of the terrorists are executed. We must FORCE these governments to do the work...not because they like us, because they fear us.
Turn the sand into glass to start.
Having served in that theater myself there seems to be a few things folks here at home don't understand.
We are fighting DAESH, not a "state" of any kind. They should not be given the recognition due an actual gov't that can be taken over, overthrown, or surrender. They are religious extremists nothing more.
They welcome death, and death is the only thing that they will stop for. There isn't anything we as "westerners" will ever be able to do to "civilize" the people in the whole area. They've literally been at war since Jesus Christ was crucified. We will not change 2000 years of hate.
Our people need to be able to fight, kill, and destroy as needed, without the second guessing, Monday morning QB type response by politicians. They should not be afraid to engage the enemy due to legal actions against them. I should not have to wait for one of our guys to get hit, or come under fire before I engage. If they appear to be bad guys they are. If you start killing everyone they are with, around, associate with, etc. it will not be long and those who genuinely are opposed will make an effort to not only separate themselves, but inform on the bad guys.
Even the "good" people there are scum for the most part. I can't begin to tell you how worthless they are.
Not only did I serve, but I have a son currently serving, and another that will be soon. I do have "skin in the game", but if they'd let me I'd go back even as a civilian contractor if they'd let us do our thing. Being brought up on charges for manslaughter state side for something that happened in a war zone is total crap. With that kind of help from behind who needs enemies?
Thank You for serving and Thank your boys. You know first hand what we are dealing with. Take the Jags out of the field decisions and let our professional Soldiers get the job done.