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.

 

9 Comments

1. 

   Burning_hXc_soul

   October 9, 2012 at 1:43 pm

   I thought I was reading a duffel blog article. Thats sad……

   Reply
2. 

   Matt

   October 9, 2012 at 6:07 pm

   Christ… that’s pretty much like doing combat patrols with each soldier’s weapon safety engaged. Sounds like Vietnam so nobody accidentally shot some asshole’s cow…

   Reply
   • 

     F'd-n-da-A

     October 13, 2012 at 7:14 pm

     Maybe my experiences are an anomaly, but in all of my deployments we kept our weapons on safe until we were in a position(as dictated by ROE, of course)to engage or were being engaged by the enemy. Makes sense to me personally. It only takes a second(if that)to flip the selector switch…the possible outcomes from not implementing that safety measure…not so quickly…

     Reply
3. 

   defensor fortissimo

   October 12, 2012 at 6:16 am

   The part about the locals needing their beauty sleep actually makes sense. If you saw them you’d understand

   Reply
4. 

   Chinook Pilot

   October 16, 2012 at 10:40 am

   While on a night mission in Afghanistan my helicopter started taking automatic weapons fire. I did not see the tracers because the shooter was on my 6, but my Apache escort saw them and reported the fire to me. I asked him what he wanted me to do about it and instructed him to return fire. He told me he couldn’t because he couldn’t identify the target. I said the target was the source of the tracers. He said that by the ROE he had to be able to make sure the shooter wasn’t some kid out having fun at 0200. Fortunately for me, whoever it was, was not a good shot.

   Reply
5. 

   Neil

   October 17, 2012 at 4:47 am

   Ridiculous. Just when you think they couldn’t possibly tighten ROE’s anymore, some ass hat sitting in an air-conditioned office makes another sweet decision rendering us USELESS on the battlefield.

   When are we going to get fucking serious about winning this God damn war on terror???

   Reply
6. 

   Cobalt Spider

   October 18, 2012 at 9:26 am

   Of all the trusted names in “Journalism” – Brietbart.com doesn’t come to mind. Remember the fake pimp coming in with videotape trying to get a loan for his “business” from ACORN. That story was courtesy of Andrew Brietbart. Congress was outraged, until they found out that this guy WAS reported to the police. He also went to 25 separate offices before he found someone to talk to him. Only then, they went along to get information to turn him in for prostitution.

   Brietbart.com isn’t interested in anything other than headlines. Every time they get a hit about the president being a Mooslim, Rupert Murdoch sends them a dollar. File that under scuttlebutt printed just before an election.

   No Marine would issue ROE’s to improves the beauty rest of indigenous farmers. We regularly send Predators thru Pakistan’s Swat Valley and the locals fear for their goddammed lives whenever they hear them pass overhead. Ya never know if your hut looks “suspicous” to a camera from 10,000 feet.

   Like that story about Marines in Lybia not getting issued ammo. Unbelievable. What Soldier peeks over a perimeter fence and yells “Boo?”

   Any that you’d know?

   Reply
   • 

     Mr. Twisted

     October 22, 2012 at 1:57 pm

     Cobalt,

     Agreed that Breitbart is not the end-all, be-all of trustworthy, factual reporting. However, we wouldn’t have done the story if it only came from them. As I wrote in the story, the Daily Mail also covered this. And, though a lot of their stories are a bit on the tabloid side of things, they are a fairly major news source across the pond.

     Reply
   • 

     Mr. Twisted

     October 22, 2012 at 2:08 pm

     Cobalt,

     And, for the record, I would love to be proved wrong on this. Saying Breitbart isn’t credible doesn’t disprove the story.

     If there is a credible source saying that this is bogus, I will happily adjust fire.

     Reply