Mercnbeth
Posts: 11766
Status: offline
|
I heard this about a week ago and couldn't find a source which documented it that I trusted, or even a FOX report for that matter. Although I found some general references to it in a variety of places, I couldn't find any source that specifically documented them. Today I found an article from November 16, 2009. I assume that the soon to be deployed new troops will be subject to the same. The background story is that General McChrystal claimed that casualties and collateral damage inflicted in Afghanistan had resulted in the legitimacy of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force being "severely damaged" in the eyes of the Afghan people" because of "an over-reliance on firepower and force protection". In other words - there was too much 'war' being conducted in the Afghan war. As a result new rules of engagement are in place. Among them: - No night or surprise searches.
- Villagers have to be warned prior to searches.
- ANA or ANP must accompany U.S. units on searches. (Local Police)
- 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.
These are stories and quotes from soldiers in the field, from the same link, regarding the new rules: - "It's OK for the insurgents to use their women to hide weapons but it's not OK for us [men] to search them," said Staff Sgt. Joshua Yost, 27, of Shelton, Wash. "So now, we have to break our own rules and bring women into combat just so they can search the women."
- The platoon members spread across and around the fields surrounding the village. An announcement from a dilapidated mosque alerted villagers of the impending search.
"Well, the bad guys know we're coming," said the interpreter, laughing. "They're probably hiding their weapons by now." Some of the men squatting outside the mosque looked stoic. Others stared in anger. In the mosque, the soldiers discovered a 9 mm handgun with clips. - "We have to follow the Karzai 12 rules. But the Taliban has no rules," he said. "Our soldiers have to juggle all these rules and regulations and they do it without hesitation despite everything. It's not easy for anyone out here."
- Then he added, referring to the rules of engagement that his forces try to observe, "For our guys, it's tough. Sometimes they feel they have their hands tied behind their backs."
- Interviewed by The Times, Sahed the imam said U.S. troops were "respectful to his people and provided security."
"I tell my people in the mosque to not become suicide bombers and to not kill those who want to help us," he said. However, asked about the presence of U.S. troops in his village, Sahed said they "need to go. Get out of Afghanistan or it will never be resolved. Between Islam and the infidel there can never be a relationship." - The last quote points to a positive result: Contacted by e-mail after The Times' reporter and photographer had returned to the U.S., Capt. Thoreen described a clinic his unit had since hosted, which treated 75 locals including 20 women.
"It was a huge success. The people are becoming much more open and friendly," he said. As evidence of that success, he cited a drop in IED attacks on his soldiers. We've been told by the Administration and the Pentagon that this is NOT another Vietnam. However once again - the US plays by one rule book, the enemy plays with another. I hope that our enemy believes our President when he says were are gone in 18 months and just takes a vacation. If not these rules insure ongoing reports of US casualties along with frustration for those placed in the battlefield. If it's not Vietnam - its damn close.
< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 12/8/2009 3:56:13 PM >
|