“…only those who will admit defeat can be defeated. . . . Or, conversely, when the populace admits defeat, the forces in the field might just as well surrender or withdraw.”Ancient history, that. Hardly news by any definition. ***** General Dave Pe…

A member of the Canadian Parliament named Kennedy (there’s a shock!) has introduced a bill changing their Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to allow “…other countries’ military deserters…” stay in Canada without fear of being deported. How many “…other countries’ military deserters…” from someplace other than the United States do you guess they get in Canada?

I’m disgusted.

ECS
Captain, Armor
US Army (Ret.)

On one hand, you state that there might be a good reason that artillery was withheld.

On the other, you definitively state that they should have used artillery.

Which is it?

Do you wish to immediately reiterate your definitive statement that they should have used artillery?

Or would you like to back away and agree that there may have been good reasons for it to have been withheld?

I said it before that statement as well. I am saying that based off of the report we have so far (the reporter with the unit) and articles published since then (which only reveal that the helicopters were far away) we can try and talk about what happened, but we must be aware that something not revealed thus far may have been what lead to the artillery strike being withheld.

Should as in they dont have to but they ought to. Kids should respect their elders, you should love the person you marry, etc. And while I guess no artilleryman HAS to send fire down range in support of men in contact, it would appear downright reckless not to if ROE does not prohibit it.

On September 17th, 2009 at 10:00 am, rugger said:

But again, we’ll have to wait for a report to see what happened and why the strike was denied.

It’s strange that you say that “we’ll have to wait for a report,” immediately after definitively stating;

The means when they were under fire that resulted in the deaths of 3 Marines and a sailor, and several other Marines wounded, their chain of command should have authorized the artillery strike.

Again, please explain your use of the word, “should.”

KABUL – The top U.S. general in Afghanistan will soon formally order U.S. and NATO forces to break away from fights with militants hiding in Afghan houses so the battles do not kill civilians, a U.S. official said Monday.

The order would be one of the strongest measures taken by a U.S. commander to protect Afghan civilians in battle. American commanders say such deaths hurt their mission because they turn average Afghans against the government and U.S. and NATO forces.

Civilian casualties are a major source of friction between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the U.S. The U.N. says U.S., NATO and Afghan forces killed 829 civilians in the Afghan war last year.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who took command of international forces in Afghanistan this month, has said his measure of effectiveness will be the “number of Afghans shielded from violence,” and not the number of militants killed.”

In the same way that “jobs saved” is not a measurable goal, “civilians saved” is not either. This is a deadly serious problem with people whose heads are stuck up their in academia and government rather than business.

corkie– the ROE does not prevent commanders from using artillery or other indirect fire when their troops cannot disengage. And while we still need to wait for a full report to come out, it seems that these troops were not able to disengage from the enemy. The means when they were under fire that resulted in the deaths of 3 Marines and a sailor, and several other Marines wounded, their chain of command should have authorized the artillery strike. But again, we’ll have to wait for a report to see what happened and why the strike was denied.

the U.S. advisors assisting Afghan forces had been assured before the operation that “air cover would be five minutes away.”

It didn’t take long for commanders in the field to begin acting just like their Commander In Chief — say one thing and do another. Promise anything to get what you want and then throw them under the bus — they’re all expendable.

On September 17th, 2009 at 12:00 am, rugger said:

In case I wasnt clear, I am saying that under the current ROE the artillery should have been fired.

I’ve never read a set of ROE which require engagement.

On September 16th, 2009 at 5:32 pm, zyzzyg said:

Cork Soaker, you have got to know by now that I don’t care what you say. I have no respect for you, why do you bother commenting on what I have to say?

You take tangents, don’t answer questions, and offer insults. I have no respect for you.

I enjoy making you cower.