Are we the American Public allowed to know what the ROGs are (or Rules Of Engagement )for the current war? I am really interested in hearing what we think they are and what they really are. I would love for a Soldier or a Vet of the Iraq war to share with me what the ROGs are, how they effected the Soldier's mission/outcome and casualty rates, both on enemy forces and Our own forces. Will someone please tell me? I also heard that a Soldier was imprisoned for shooting a man he thought blew up his truck in the heat of battle, is this really happening?
Don't fire till the clearance returns from the A.C.L.U. The fax ought to be in any time now.
Not a direct and specific answer to your question, but this may help you understand some of what is going on from the perspective of soldiers on the front line.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline … urce=fixed
'91 Desert Storm
You must be observant of the current conditions of society. These expensive wars, although nobly fought in many ways, have been enabled and encouraged by powerful "behind the scenes" financial icons over the past hundred years. They sought out to acquire the leading press outlets in the very early 1900's and have retained those, and more, outlets ever since. They control the public sentiment through the media and press, all for the purpose of not only financial gain but also financial dependence of the people to the banking institutions on the federal level. The Rules of Engagement have altered and changed to reflect this growing social virus ever since WW1. Wars are no longer cut and dry but now have a whole array of benefactors behind it.
On a humanitarian standpoint we needed to go in and secure the situation in '91. I also stand by our going in '02 to Iraq and Afghanistan. However, knowing the resources we have, we could have cleaned house within the first three years of the current conflict. All the obstacles, regulations and suppressions on our own military are all due to this great scheme of public sentiment. Make no mistake! Regardless of what ANY executive official states in public they want this war to continue. Why? Because as things trickle down, it further makes the people more dependent on the federal government thus instituting the great destination of the original goal - socialism.
I promise you that one day we will wake up, one by one, and ask ourselves "how did we get to this point?" That has always been the inauguration of socialism. Little by little, precept upon precept we are stipped of rights and liberties largely without even being aware of it. By the time we realize what's been happening the noose has already been circled about our head and the floor dropped!
Sorry! It's a dim and grim run down of your question but I know it to be true to the core.
Thank you for your answer.... not at all what I meant, but thank you nonetheless. What I'm looking here is the Rules of Engagement. For example, one of the current ROG's is a Soldier my not fire his weapon if there is any risk of collateral damage.
As for the private benefactors, you are totally right, it makes me sad to think America still believes we went to war for oil... if only it were that simple...
GOLDENPATH - I quite like your amiable and mildly inane religious position in these forums - this post shows a side of you I have not seen before.
If you really believe that America's attack on Iraq was a 'humane' act you are as blind in politics as you are in your faith. The invasion and destruction of Iraq was ALL about the second part of your paragraph above until you twist it around, somehow, to socialism. How your illustrious leaders engineering and profiting from a war can be described as socialist requires a political thinking backflip with corkscrew!
This is a perfect example of someone attacking someone else's politics based on some idea that everyway but their own way is substandard. Please listen before yelling, please research before preaching.... I think you may surprise yourself, and even if you still retain the same opinion, perhaps you'll learn communication and tolerance for others ideas... I know I'm still working on it.
The actualy RoE's are classified. but some of them have ended up in the media. a Few reports have also indicated that the RoE's involve a long complicated Chain of approval for Flash fire missions, aircraft support, Gunship and Spectre missions in support of active operations under fire. Ala Vietnam.
• No night or surprise searches.
• Villagers have to be warned prior to searches.
• ANA or ANP must accompany U.S. units on searches.
• U.S. soldiers may not fire at the enemy unless the enemy is preparing to fire first.
• U.S. forces cannot engage the enemy if civilians are present.
• Only women can search women.
• Troops can fire at an insurgent if they catch him placing an IED but not if insurgents are walking away from an area where explosives have been laid.
July 9th tactical directive
http://www.pipelinenews.org/images/Tact … 090706.pdf
Thank you MISTER obama. and Peace at any price cowards.
actually im not sure why the Women searching women item is considered New. that was SOP when I was in. it was a pain and dangerous to have to wait for a Female to arrive to search a woman who might have been wearing or carrying a bomb
Brilliant! Thank you for the great answer.I find it interesting that most of America think the Military has free for all orders and shoot on sight.... Most Americans I talk to ask me how many Iraqis have We killed... I have to shake my head and say, "We don't kill Iraqis we kill the people that are blowing up Iraqi villages." I think it's interesting that the major information on what we are doing over-there is completely left out of the news... But then again, if everyone knew what our Soldiers were actually doing, the media wouldn't be able to manipulate us with the lies they broadcast....
I told you all. The fax will be in soon.
DO NOT SHOOT ANYONE YET.
You trying to get us arrested and sued.
by sabrebIade6 years ago
I have been trying to research just how many people have died in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003, and I cannot find any figures that confirm each other. I have seen anywhere from 5,000 plus to over 100,000. Pretty wide...
by kerryg6 years ago
Alan Grayson is one heckuva BAMF. I doubt this will get passed, but it's a fascinating idea.Grayson's speech:Mr. Speaker. Today I introduce H.R.5353: the "War Is Making You Poor Act." The "War Is Making...
by Susan Reid5 years ago
(Reuters) - Former President George W. Bush has canceled a visit to Switzerland, where he was to address a Jewish charity gala, due to the risk of legal action against him for alleged torture, rights groups said on...
by Ralph Deeds6 years ago
The foreign policy establishment, for the most part including the New York Times editorial page, has called our military activities in Afghanistan a "necessary war," in contrast to our invasion of Iraq....
by Mister Veritis5 years ago
Uh, well. Oh, Hmmm.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uyJSXCZRpc&NR=1
by lady_love1585 years ago
Do we really want to cut defense spending? Consider that already much of the military function has been outsourced to private companies that a making huge profits off the wars, one of the left's source of angry...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.