By Jack Mandaville I want to make a few of my...
Don’t Shoot! The Locals are tired…
By Mr. Twisted
Clearly falling into the category of “W……..T……..F………” comes the recent story from Breitbart.com that US Military and British Royal Marines have been urged to stop shooting Taliban in Afghanistan if they are planting mines at night because…
…it disturbs the locals in their beauty rest.
The report in The Daily Mail, a UK-based news site, goes on to add that Royal Marines have reported not being able to engage an enemy even if they are positively identified as such. One Marine stated, after requesting permission to open fire, he was denied on the grounds that it might “alarm the population.”
That same Marine, Sergeant Rayner of the 2nd Battalion Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment, was killed a few days later.
Words fail me.
I was set to write humorous and scathing review of how ridiculous a rule of engagement like that would be until I read the part about Sergeant Rayner. Now I’m just confused and pissed off.
During the Vietnam War, our military made a number of very large mistakes all the way up the chain of command that led to a very poorly-managed engagement of our armed forces. Fighting a “limited war” strategy forced units that were fully capable of defeating the enemy to follow orders that tied their hands and prevented them from doing so. Our soldiers and Marines were prevented from doing what they do best and, as a result, many paid the ultimate price in what would become a cause we left behind.
And here we are. Again.
The issues surrounding our troops’ rules of engagement have been of concern for some time, but this recent story takes that to a whole new level. Telling our warriors to “be careful” and not to shoot civilians is one thing – there are both strategic as well as ethical reasons for taking care in not causing more damage than is necessary – but preventing combat units from engaging the enemy so that the local population isn’t disturbed in their sleep is entirely another, and it could be one of the most monumentally stupid ideas I’ve ever heard by military leaders.
Seriously, what in the goat-fuck are we doing there if our direct action units can’t engage in, well… direct action??
Though currently I am unaware if this “strategy” came from civilian or military leadership, the fact is that ours is a civilian-controlled military. Ultimately, the decisions of what our armed forces do and do not do fall to the hands of our elected officials. And in that regard, those elected officials must be in desperate need of a few, swift donkey-punches for allowing (or worse yet, advocating for) this kind of asinine way of thinking.
Either we fight or we don’t.
Either our warriors do what they do best or we let them come home.
We cannot – must not – allow a “war” to be prosecuted that puts our military in harm’s way without having the tools to win the battles they find themselves in. Those tools begin with a strategy that, get this, gives our armed forces a chance to kill bad guys when there are bad guys to be killed. It’s kind of the whole intent behind the term – “armed” forces.
Don’t let them be disarmed because of some candy-ass idea that the local population gets upset when they fire off their big scary guns. If our leaders – either military or civilian – think that the sleep patterns of local populations outweigh the strategic and tactical goals of our combat units, then it’s time to pack up shop and go home.
If we can find out more information on this story, we will update you as soon as it becomes available.