Chris Sullivan of KIRO 97.3 has done some solid reporting on this, getting some insightful interviews from rank and file soldiers who are wondering what the mission is in Afghanistan these days. I wonder too. Are we there for counterinsurgency? Are we there to win a war? Win hearts and minds?
As an example, I've spoken to two troops in just the past two weeks who have come home from Afghanistan and they're PISSED about the Rules of Engagement (ROE) there. They believe the mission to 'win' a 'war' has morphed into a tub of goo with no apparent direction. They believe the 'end' of the war is set to a political time table and not to a time table connected to the real world and to a victory. This comports with the recent speech by CBS News's Lara Logan. See my post here.
The Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan have stymied efforts to win a "war." The war has morphed into training Aghan troops, which sounds nice, except it doesn't appear to be working. Witness the recent murders of US Troops at the hands of Afghan "trainees." If this happened in a US work place it would be called a massacre (unless, of course, it happened at Fort Hood by a radical Islamist and then it would be classified as workplace violence).
The author of the book about the mission to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, "No Easy Day," writes about the Rules of Engagement when he left the zone:
"Everything in Afghanistan was getting harder. It seemed every rotation we had new requiments or restrictions. It took pages of PowerPoint slides to get a mission approved. Lawyers and staff pored over the details on each page, making sure our plan was acceptable to the Afghan government.We noticed there were fewer assaulters on missions and more "straphangers," each of whom performed a very limited duty. We now took conventional Army soldiers with us on operations as observers so they could refute any false accusations.
Policy makers were asking us to ignore all of the lessons we had learned, especially the lessons learned in blood, for political solutions. For years, we had been sneaking into compounds, catching fighters by surprise.
Not anymore.
On the last deployment, we were slapped with new a new requirement to call them out. After surrounding a building, an interpreter had to get on a bullhorn and yell for the fighters to come out with their hands raised. It was similar to what police did in the United States. After the fighters came out, we cleared the house. If we found guns, we arrested the fighters, only to see them go free a few months later. Often we recaptured the same guy multiple times during a single deployment.
It felt like we were fighting the war with one hand and filling out paperwork with the other. When we brought back detainees, there was additional two or three hours of paperwork. The first question to the detainee at the base was always, "Were you abused?' An affirmative answer meant an investigation and more paperwork."
This is no way to win a war. It is no way to fight a war. Perhaps that's President Obama's point.
I don't blame these men if they don't wish to go. We need a leader who will clarify the mission and who, instead of sending troops to manage a long slow surrender, will manage a war to kill these bastards.
As a Veteran.. I too can understand the troops frustration. Too many times Political figures ties the hands of the military in many actions. Including in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan
ReplyDeleteBUT saying that. I have HUGE issues with protesters trying to encourage troops to dessert. I also have no sympathy to those soldiers who DO commit the act of Failure to Go (A punishable offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice) or to do the other ultimate problem.. Desertion.
It's time the American Public put pressure on our elected leaders to allow the military to define their rules of engagement under the over all direction of the mission. Instead of allowing the Administration put the handcuffs on the troops.
But I fear that our public has forgotten the true meaning of fighting liars like in our administration today.
It is a political obscenity for Barack Hussein Obama to order Americans to go to fight the war in Afghanistan when Obama has no intention of fighting to win that war; has drawn down "surge" troops during the fighting season (over objection of military commanders in the field) and, thus, endangers the troops there and those who will be there; and when Obama has doubled down (including through Joe Biden) on his decision to withdraw on 2014 no matter what military conditions then exist, thus giving to the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and other Muslim jihadists, all of whom have revived under Obama's mis-leadership, to commit any atrocities they choose with impunity, since they know that no matter what they do, Obama is leaving.
ReplyDeleteBut, while all of the above is true, it is dangerous, indeed, for Americans, including liberal Obama-supporters like the so-called Veterans For Peace, or anyone else, to urge troops being trained for deployment to Afghanistan to refuse to go, either by disobeying orders directly, or by contrived artifice, i.e., belated claims or conscientious objection. That puts those troops at risk, and can ruin their future lives.
The solution is not to urge troops to place themselves at risk by disobeying orders to serve where ordered. Rather, the solution is to remove them, and the nation, from further risk by removing the incompetent Barack Hussein Obama, who has utterly failed to competently achieve victory against terrorism overseas or jobs at home, as president and commander-in-chief on November 6.
Hi Guys,
ReplyDeleteI know this is an emotional issue, but as a soldier you don't get to make up the rules. Victoria, I can't disagree more with your support of those who don't wish to go. The foundation of good order and discipline in the military is the adherence to lawful orders, not allegiance based upon the "popularity" of the political strategy. Any soldier worth his salt wouldn't seriously consider it because he knows someone else will have to take his place. You see what happens when civilian leaders like the President, Kitzhaber, Sam Adams, and dozens of others choose the rules they wish to follow. It took 6 years to put the Army back together after the failure of discipline in Vietnam, I know, I was there.
I am suspect of Mr Condon because most soldiers in this war don't just do one tour....they do multiple tours. The fact Mr Condon went to Iraq once is suspect. I'd like to see his discharge or service record. And the other doofus that claims to be a Vietnam Vet that went off, I assume to Canada, has no credibility either.
There is no way to sugar coat combat, it is brutal, dirty, and doesn't always make sense when it is your skin on the line. But they are heroes for doing so, as are the millions who went before them.