• Frank's Lesson's Contest

    We want to see your skills! Post a video between now and November 1st showing what you've learned from Frank's lessons and 3 people will be selected to win a free shirt. Good luck everyone!

    Create a channel Learn more

  • Having trouble using the site?

    Contact support

US Army Snipers face charges.

Sumpter Steve

Sumpter Steve

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 18, 2006
1,284
3
Gresham, Oregon
#1
Aparently they dumped a Taliban Commander who wasn't holding a rifle and now they face charges. WTF??? If you have a known Taliban Commander "dump his ass" and move on. Last time I checked the Taliban was still our enemy. These new ROE's are getting our troops killed and pissing me off.

The actual ROEs are said to be classified U.S. and NATO secrets, but based on individual soldier accounts, those restrictions include the following:

* No night or surprise searches

* Villagers are to be warned prior to searches

* Afghan National Army, or ANA, or Afghan National Police, or ANP, must accompany U.S. units on searches

* U.S. soldiers may not fire at insurgents unless they are preparing to fire first

* U.S. forces cannot engage insurgents if civilians are present

* Only women can search women

* Troops can fire on insurgents if they catch them placing an IED but not if insurgents walk away from where the explosives are

**Critics see the new ROEs being more oriented toward defensive rather than offensive operations, as evidenced by recent charges of murder against two U.S. Army snipers because they had targeted a Taliban commander who reportedly wasn’t holding a weapon.
 
#6
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

As far as I'm concerned if we aren't there to win and we arm tying our guys hands behind their backs with these ROEs WE SHOULD GET THE @ELL OUT. Is this Obama's idea of stepping up the war in Afghanistan?
 
#7
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JCummings</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is this Obama's idea of stepping up the war in Afghanistan? </div></div>

Soldiers & Marines don't tend to be liberals. Draw your own conclusions.
 
#8
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shark0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If there weren't so many cowboys out there these ROE's wouldn't exist. Just saying </div></div>

It's not about cowboys, it's about civil law, and not rules of war. This BS is making Soldiers into civilian law enforcement to reduce civilian casualties to "win hearts and minds".
There is extreme pressure to do this from the Afghan government. The contractor loss of freedom in Iraq set some of this in motion, along with the media presentation of the "out of controls" and the spin they put on it.
World wide pressure from media spin may soon win again.

You insult "real" cowboys by calling losers and rule-breakers "cowboys". Man on horse looking at cow and doing his job is not the problem...

And there is nothing new about those posted rules.
 
#10
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jhuskey</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shark0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If there weren't so many cowboys out there these ROE's wouldn't exist. Just saying </div></div>

It's not about cowboys, it's about civil law, and not rules of war. This BS is making Soldiers into civilian law enforcement to reduce civilian casualties to "win hearts and minds".
There is extreme pressure to do this from the Afghan government. The contractor loss of freedom in Iraq set some of this in motion, along with the media presentation of the "out of controls" and the spin they put on it.
World wide pressure from media spin may soon win again.

You insult "real" cowboys by calling losers and rule-breakers "cowboys". Man on horse looking at cow and doing his job is not the problem...

And there is nothing new about those posted rules. </div></div>

Come on dude...it's a euphemism

The commanders know that we will be bogged down like the Russian's if we try to use standard tactics.

Are our troops adequately trained for this particular mission? Some are some aren't.

Should these folks be tried for murder? Absolutely not

If they followed the ROE would they be standing trial? Nope

Was the unarmed individual a threat to them? Not at the time

Could he have been captured and interrogated? Maybe
 
#11
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

All it is, is a bunch of BS. My son came back from Iraq and told me about reports they were required to fill out, and explanations of the number of rounds in a bad guy. Give me a break, are we at war with these people or what. Why put our service men and women in harms way then hog tie them with all these rules. The Geneva convention which the enemy never obeys, is enough in my book. Also if you see a known bad guy, why would you not take him out and save lives, theirs, less suicide bombers, and ours? Just my opinion.
 
#12
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

ROE is ROE. You follow them or suffer the consequence. They were far worse when we deployed to Kuwait in 98 for what we thought was the 2nd Gulf War but we all knew the ROE. And what would happen if we disobeyed them. I'm not saying it is right. It just is what it is.
 
#13
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shark0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was the unarmed individual a threat to them? Not at the time
</div></div>

Unarmed? Are you f'n kidding me? He is a KNOWN Taliban Commander right? He's a known combatant, therefore a legal target.
Too many rules on how/when to engage are hurting us more than its worth, and helping our enemies at the same time. Especially letting villages know ahead of time we're coming to search them.
 
#14
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nine_Iron88</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shark0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was the unarmed individual a threat to them? Not at the time
</div></div>

Unarmed? Are you f'n kidding me? He is a KNOWN Taliban Commander right? He's a known combatant, therefore a legal target. </div></div>

Wrong...unless specified by your command you cannot kill known enemies just because you found one. At times your not allowed to kill them at all.
 
#15
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shark0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If there weren't so many cowboys out there these ROE's wouldn't exist. Just saying </div></div>


Ahhhh! Thats a big fucken NOGO! This is PC bullshit and nothing more.
 
#16
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alaskaman 11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Shark0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If there weren't so many cowboys out there these ROE's wouldn't exist. Just saying </div></div>


Ahhhh! Thats a big fucken NOGO! This is PC bullshit and nothing more.</div></div>

Unfortunately combating an insurgency is very different from fighting a uniformed enemy. If every swinging dick in country took the time to positively id there target we wouldn't need an ROE at all. The idea is not to unify the country against your ground forces but to eliminate specific hostile forces. What you do want to do is use the local populace as a collective asset to identify hostile forces and potentially eliminate them for you.

How the fuck do you think you are going to make that happen when you kill their family members and chalk it up to collateral damage?

That shit just doesn't work. Collateral damage is as much the enemy as the hostile forces.
 
#17
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

Quote Shark 0311: Come on dude...it's a euphemism. <span style="color: #3333FF">I know...</span>

The commanders know that we will be bogged down like the Russian's if we try to use standard tactics. <span style="color: #3333FF">Fact...</span>
Are our troops adequately trained for this particular mission? Some are some aren't. <span style="color: #3333FF">Most are not trained to be police in a war zone, you are correct again....</span>
Should these folks be tried for murder? Absolutely not. <span style="color: #3333FF">Again, 100%, absolutely NOT. </span>
If they followed the ROE would they be standing trial? Nope <span style="color: #3333FF">Fact.</span>

Was the unarmed individual a threat to them? Not at the time <span style="color: #3333FF">Fact.</span>

Could he have been captured and interrogated? Maybe <span style="color: #3333FF">Fact.</span> [/quote]

<span style="color: #3333FF">Remember though, these are the same rules that civlian LE has to follow here in the US when dealing with OUR criminals. We should not make our Soldiers be police.. Bottom line on this is the Afghans should be policing their own and WILL NOT DO IT, so we do and they fucking bitch about how we do it. JMHO Fuck them. (NOT the Snipers)..</span>
 
#18
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tex1970</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give me a break, are we at war with these people or what.</div></div>

The answer to that is what, or in more precise internet parlance "LULZ WUT?"

When one team has bottles of KY and Injectile devices and the other has a pillow to bite on, it is not war. You need an intent on winning and surviving to fight again to call yourself at war, IMO. I taught my brother growing up that he should be able to fight well, but never do so unless he was willing to get maimed over the issue at hand as you never know who is armed or what spectators might jump in while you handle a guy. Our policy is seeming more and more the exact opposite: show up to a nuclear war and throw rocks. Actually it's more like show up with nukes and get beat back by guys throwing rocks, because it's not nice to hurt them back.

Cowboys? There may be some but I seriously have not met anyone in real life that has heard a story from this engagement that has seemed even remotely out of bounds. Actually I'd love to hear of a cowboy over there actually instilling fear in someone. Unfortunately I'm fairly certain that were he to exist, he'd have been a daily news item for weeks or months while being tried for crimes against (in)humanity and subsequently handed over to the hosting country to execute. Having not seen that tale, I'm forced to realize he's a fictional character and we've forced 1000's of young men into an unfair situation that cannot be described as war.
 
#20
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kcbaird</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This aint a fuckin game. </div></div>
Oh yes it is. You obviously have never read KIM or carried a pack with Sir Harry Flashman or you would know that even the specific territory is spot on, not to mention the 'great' concern that Afghanistan could be used as a staging area for a larger invasion. You have players, coaching staffs, fans in the stands, goal posts...and inevitably...rules.

This is not to say ce n'est pas grave, but to suggest that c'est la guerre! The Westphalian moment is mostly over and the state's (or in this case whatever) soldier does not stand out like he once did.

What bothers me more is that it is often Western media or politicians screaming about wrongdoing, and the enemy knows. The Haditha story, for instance, was told by Time magazine after extensive interviews with the insurgents. WTF? Whose side are they on? And then a certain senator got involved blaming the Marines. Again, WTF? The commanders and leaders should be able to handle their issues without help from the press. Warriors understand rules and the enemy knows the importance of opinion. So they work it.

Fans screaming from the stands for more blood can certainly fire up the players, but the more disciplined team continues to master the basics and stick to their game plan.

The only real weakness I can see is that one side uses a clock.
 
#22
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

Let me ask:

Did they violate ROE? seems so

Did they get approval to shoot after identifying the target had no gun? don't know


Just because the guy is a known Taliban leader does not make him a threat to them at that time. Essentially the ROE states to defend yourself or unless commanded. There is probably more to this then we know or will know. How did the Sniper team know this guy unless they were tasked to watch him, maybe got overzealous and took a shot, maybe they thought he was armed, maybe they were commanded.

But debating it and blaming DC is just something that is always going to happen, be it when Bush was in the house, or Obama, or Clinton. Unless your Starred or oak leafed the likly hood of you knowing all of the details on why the ROE is the way it is is slim.
 
#23
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

The ROE is the equivalent to a police officer having a warrant to arrest a criminal for murder. The police officer runs into the suspect at a local grocery store and reocognizes him as having a warrant out for his arrest....

The catch: According to the arrest warrant, he can only arrest the suspect if he is caught in the act of commiting another crime....

Just because the taliban commander was not a visual threat does not mean he was not a threat... He could have commo and tell someone to execute an ambush, etc. etc. They know our ROE and they play off it...
 
#24
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

This is why I am no longer an active Service Member. For a modern Militry to be successful, the politics needs to stay out of it.

The Polititians need to tell the leadership what needs to be done and get the fuck out of the way and let them do their job.

I understand the advantage of people liking us, but to be honest, I would rather them respect us. Appearantly, you can't have it both ways. You can not bow over and kiss everyones ass and them still respect you.

Again, we see a situation where the enemy has more rights than those men and women who are protecting us against them.

We are screwed. The only way out of this current downslide of the USAs global position is to again find a COWBOY attitude, not the other way around.

If you don't like us...fine, but if you fuck with us, we will kill you. Simple, easy, everyone understands and they respect that.

CKA, are you sure it was 98? I thought it was 94.
 
#25
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gugubica</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
CKA, are you sure it was 98? I thought it was 94. </div></div>

Yeah 98.... you may not remember but 3rdID was activated and deployed to the Iraqi DMZ over the UN Inspection crap. Congress spent all of their money to send us there and had no money to bring us back. The second we hit the ground he allowed the UN Inspectors to do their thing. So we sat there for frigging months in the desert. I became a Spades Jedi Master there.
 
#27
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

I can see personal agreement with everything you said earlier. Again, personally. Here is a carrot, and here is a stick. Choose wisely.

Alas, it is not so binary with 1's and 0's in complex systems.

War is an element of politics and not vice versa. It always has been but the rules oscillate based on who is in power and how business is conducted, and, I must mention that modern technology allows just about everyone to be superconnected. Gen. Patton slapped a soldier and then fought on. What if all those nearby had got to twittering immediately following the incident, or one of the docs filmed it with his cellphone? Immediate public outrage and overnight, youtube video showing him repeatedly smacking people and saying "son-of-a-bitch" with the background beat of Party in the USA ?

This is the newer way. There is no state to focus on, and no political rivals faces to be seen, making it harder to control the outcome, and later, the historical meaning. It is much harder to defeat the army that will not take the field.

It is an interesting time but something tells me that I will not like where it is headed. All systems, but in this case game theory, work toward equilibrium or break down. Such a huge worldwide religion cannot be both for and against a splinter movement, or hide their choice forever.
 
#28
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Forty-One</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kcbaird</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This aint a fuckin game. </div></div>
Sir Harry Flashman or you would know...</div></div>

41, would this be the same Harry Flashman who is the one credited for actually starting the 'Charge of the Light Brigade'
grin.gif


Each and every time we get into a good solid place in a war where we can see a solid victory the politicians decide it's time to defang the grunt once more. We have seen this one too many times to believe it isn't true. I believe it good on the snipers for removing an enemy commander, afterall, that is what they are supposed to do, remove command and control. DOes it really matter if he was appearing to be unarmed? Who's to say he didn't have a pistol on his ankle under his jammies, or maybe one under his rolled up hat? Perchance it was in his beard or behind his back. Can anyone prove that wrong?
 
#29
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

If the topic is "loud" enough to be discussed on the internet, someone, somewhere has screwed up.

BTW, Harry not only started the Charge, but also had a loose bowel from all the brandy he had tried the night before, so he fell off of his horse in the middle of the charge to relieve himself. As he finished, he noted the straggling survivors heading back to safety so he joined them. Not a scratch! LOL.
 
#31
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

I cant help but to this this is BS. War is people killing people for whatever reason. It means that diplomacy has failed. If the big dog wages war upon you, than youd be lucky to not be dead. If you wanted to negotiate some "terms" then its time to yield to the big dogs war machine and discuss terms.

This might seem harsh, but we have our sons there getting killed. Who cares if the Afghanies are offended(or dead)? If they dont like it, then lend a hand or get out of the way. If they handled the Al Qaeda situation according to our non negotiable terms, then there would have been no problems.

If a world superpower tells you to turn in terrorists or we'll kill you all, and you say no, then deal with it. If they say that they are unable, then its "get out of the way then" so they dont get killed.

Too much "nice guy discussion". I think we need to unleash our troops to make this campaign over quickly, or bring them home. Im tired of seeing this PC crap handcuffing our guys and putting them at risk
 
#33
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DaveV</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"He should have armed himself." Clint Eastwood </div></div>

Made me LOL. Good one.
 
#34
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

Blah, blah, blah. War is BS. In my mind most politics start local, so being PC here is to continuously preach hitting the wreak havoc button.

I have no knowledge of soldiers being charged recently and there was no reference, except for a twitter hit and this story about a Chihuahua hit

Who is it that would negotiate with us? Where are they? You probably have access to a lot more info than I do...give me some hints.

From what I am reading, the troops are unleashed and more are on the way, and COIN is very PolCor.
 
#35
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Isn't this how we lost Vietnam?

Too many politicians controlling something they know nothing of?</div></div>

+1
 
#36
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Forty-One</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Alas, it is not so binary with 1's and 0's in complex systems.

...snip...Immediate public outrage...snip...
</div></div>

I agree completely with all points.

But you should realize that this is a product of our times and our society, not of technology.

If there would have been youtubes of the slapping when it happened, people would have thought- "well...the soldier must have desearved it, he will become a better fighter because of it."

Now, people would say- "oh, that poor mistreated young man. I am furious that a leader would stoop to such a degrading and physically dangerous action. I want to see his head on a platter!"

The same is true of the enemy we are facing (or any enemy in the future). We have allowed ourselves as a society to become weak, we are more concerned with "hurting someones feelings" and "understanding WHY they feel the way they do" than just fucking killing them and setting an example to the rest of the world. This societall attitude has seeped into politics now, the ones making choices about our defence have been replaced with those of the same mindset.

We are screwed.

I do understand that it is more complex than what I have outlined, but I feel that an attitude shift is going to be the first neccesary step to resolving this issue. If we continue to cowtoe to our enemies, any one seeing it will think "they don't scare me" and, it will continue to get worse.

A sniper taking out a high level enemy combatant IS A GOOD THING, but we live in an age where the masses are worried that the poor man was just standing there, not doing anything, and these evil men and their evil rifles ended his life. Maybe we could have talked to him and learned why he did not like us, maybe we could have helped him...

This is just the way I see it, I know I am in a minority.
 
#37
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

I agree with your "good thing," I just cannot find the details behind this story. Someone, somewhere, in the chain of command had to start the charges. Right? This concerns me more than "public outrage" since fear of legal action can cripple the OODA Loop more than the fear already felt. And technology is merely an enabler for the whims of society, whether info flow or fat girl picture collections.

As for whether it is a sign of the men or a sign of the times, I do not have the answer but I lose sleep every night wondering.

Alexander would hear that some element was slowing down his troop movement or that some wall could not be breached, and changing for battle he would ride to that point and lead the charge. The Marines now have something like 75 more Generals than it had at the height of the Pacific Campaign but they are stacked in HQ's. This was done in attempt to match star for star with the other services. It is becoming more and more like getting elected, and if "their" hands are tied surely they are complaining, or are they not?

Also, I am not certain that it is weakness in society. Weakness tends to be generated when one's conviction is not strong. Maybe that is it.
 
#38
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

thats bs, wut i want to know is when american ppl say enough is enough and step up for wut they believe in instead of walking away or turning the other cheek, weve allowed congress to be so corrupt and take over everything, congress doesnt care about our men and women in this war that they set stupid rules and its getting our soldiers murdered wtf!!! it bs and when is enough enough, give our soldiers a fighting chance in this war
 
#39
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

This is gonna be a poke in the eye but to hell with it...

I think most guys joining up don't have a clue for what they are signing on for. Yeah gonna go kick ass, free the people or whatever your poison is... Once there you see it's not all that clear on who is the enemy, who to do in and who to let go, discovering you are being run by some prick who can't walk 10 feet let alone run. I think noone with half a grain of brain really believes US is in any theater of war to win you are there because to your politicians prolonged low intensity conflict comes in handy for various reasons. Also most of your high ranking officers are more politicians and modern "managers" then they are soldiers i think there is no army in the world that allows for a hardcore warrior to become anything above the colonel cause being a warrior requires traits politicians never had (honor, integrity, compassion, clear mind, selflessness etc...).

In short you have a capacity to win, however your leadership has no desire to and that just plainly sucks.


PS: It's not just you don't misunderstand (as US bashing) it's the same in basically any armed force in western world as old saying goes "one does not go without a dick to a wedding..." same would go for whole war business.
 
#41
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Too many politicians controlling something they know nothing of </div></div>

True words. However, when you have a martial entity led by a civilian who is appointed by a politically elected civilian, how can one seriously find separation between warfare and politics?
 
#46
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

If they had killed one of our commanders they would dance in the streets and burn American Flags. We kill their commanders and WE prosecute the hero. How can you win a war when your soldiers are afraid to pull the trigger?
 
#49
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

I have question then: how can you use a Predator with a Hellfire missile and shoot at a known Terrorist or insurgent target in Pakistan where you have no idea who has or does not have a weapon. You target because of intelligence that has been provided in a target package. The two snipers positively ID a known Taliban bad guy and then all of sudden the ROE changes and they are wrong.

I think there could be too many lawyers in this mix.

It is funny how the rules are different for the Predators then they are for troops on the ground. This war is getting murkier as we go.
 
#50
Re: US Army Snipers face charges.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JSTARSZ</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have question then: how can you use a Predator with a Hellfire missile and shoot at a known Terrorist or insurgent target in Pakistan where you have no idea who has or does not have a weapon. You target because of intelligence that has been provided in a target package. The two snipers positively ID a known Taliban bad guy and then all of sudden the ROE changes and they are wrong.</div></div>

Excellent point
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Ukrainian sniper who claims new world record. He’s 58 years old. (WSJ article)
Replies
50
Views
4K
Edsel
Edsel
L
Combat FlipFlops - Written in Taliban Post
Replies
30
Views
3K
918v
918v
ChristianSilver
Maggie’s What a terrible, sad loss. The 11 Marines killed in Kabul identified.
Replies
14
Views
2K
pmclaine
pmclaine
Maggot
Si Speigel
Replies
3
Views
1K
lonegunman762x51
lonegunman762x51
ArmyJerry
SF Solider Charged
Replies
34
Views
2K
Soulezoo
Soulezoo
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts