Foreign Policy
National Security
-
WAR OF IDEAS
Has the U.S. Reached Peak Car?
-
KILLER APPS
Cyberspies Are Using PRISM for Spearphishing
-
PASSPORT
Remembering Michael Hastings
Posted By Thomas E. Ricks
Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 5:16 AM
Share
By Toby Harnden
Best Defense guest columnist
The catastrophic consequences of negligent discharges and the fact that a disproportionate number of them appear to be committed by officers was brought home to me during research for my book Dead Men Risen, about a British battle group in Helmand in 2009. Like battle shock, cowardice and the recovery of body parts, they are a taboo subject that is nevertheless a reality of every war. The Welsh Guards, the battalion around which the battle group was built, were no different.
Although the Welsh Guards pride themselves on their discipline on the parade ground (they have a ceremonial function and were on duty for last month's Royal Wedding) and with weapons, there were a number of incidents in which soldiers negligently fired shots.
The most serious one probably caused the death of an Afghan civilian. A Welsh Guards officer visiting FOB Keenan near Gereshk at the start of May 2009 was loading his rifle before a patrol when he accidentally fired a shot with his SA-80 rifle. He was facing south with his weapon pointed at a 45-degree angle, just above the heads of other members of the patrol. The platoon commander, a lieutenant, decided not to report the incident immediately, later citing the rank of the officer.
An hour after the ND, an Afghan man called Jabar, aged about 65, was brought to the FOB with a bullet wound to his neck that had paralysed him. He had been on his knees praying in a field when he had been shot. Jabar identified himself as a migrant worker who had come to the area for the poppy harvest. He told the Army medics that he had a wife but did not want her to be told what had happened because he would be ashamed if she saw him incapacitated. Jabar was evacuated to Camp Bastion hospital but later died.
A military police investigation was carried out into Jabar's death but it could not be established with certainty who had fired the shot that killed him - a soldier on the subsequent patrol had fired warning shots at a suspected Taliban dicker. I was told, however, that the direction of travel of the round, the entry and exit wounds on Jabar and the place where he was shot were all broadly consistent with the ND being responsible for his death.
Later the same month, another officer (attached to the battalion but not a Welsh Guardsman) had an ND and narrowly avoided killing the battalion commander, Lieutenant Colonel Rupert Thorneloe. Ironically enough, the officer was a junior Brigade legal adviser. Thorneloe, Jim Haggerty (the British stability adviser), Major Giles Harris (a company commander) and the Afghan army kandak commander for Nad-e Ali were inside PB Argyll when a shot rang out very close to them. Harris swung around and saw the legal officer standing aghast, his eyes bulging in shock. Unused to handling a rifle, he had pulled the trigger without realising there was a bullet in the chamber.
"He was about a metre away from me with his rifle on his hip like one of those prison guards in American films," Harris told me. "His finger was on the trigger and the rifle was at a 45-degree angle over Colonel Rupert's head about two metres away from him. It was one of those very British moments. Everybody pretended not to notice because they didn't want to embarrass him. No one was angry about the fact that he'd nearly slotted the Commanding Officer." Harris walked over, quietly took the captain's rifle from him and suggested he report to the ops officer and tell him what had happened. Afterwards, Harris joked with Thorneloe that perhaps he should have played it differently. "Would it have been better if I'd just gone over and punched his lights out, then walked back and winked at the kandak commander? I'd have been a legend!" Thorneloe, who had previously discussed with Harris the Afghan commander's fondness for bravado, laughed and said: "Actually, the British approach is probably better."
Thorneloe used up one of his nine lives that day. On July 1, 2009 he was killed by an IED beside the Shamalan Canal while riding top cover in a Viking tracked vehicle during Operation Panther's Claw. He was the first British battalion commander to be killed in action for more than 27 years, the previous one being Lieutenant Colonel "H" Jones of the Parachute Regiment, awarded a posthumous Victoria Cross in the Falklands War of 1982.
It was not, of course, just officers who were guilty of NDs. In another incident during Panther's Claw, Captain Terry Harman was taking refuge in a compound during a firefight when an NCO standing next to him discharged his weapon, just missing Harman's foot. Harman decided not to report the ND, partly because of the paperwork it would generate. Harman later told me that he would often pass the NCO back at barracks in Aldershot, smile at him and ask the man who had nearly shot him: "How's it going?"
Toby Harnden, a former Royal Navy officer, is U.S. editor for the Daily Telegraph of London, and author of the British bestseller Dead Men Risen: The Welsh Guards & the Real Story of Britain's War in Afghanistan.
One of the problems with current assault rifles whether it be the British SA-80 (L85A1) or the American M-4 (M16 family), German G-36, or FN SCAR, etc., is the ease of which the safety lever can be switched from ‘Safe’ to ‘Fire’ (semi-automatic) by merely being brushed across the profusion of gear on ones body. In my view this is a design failure based upon the fallacious idea that the rifle should be easily switched from ‘Safe’ to ‘Fire’ by exercising a mere flick of the thumb. Military bolt-action rifles, even semi-automatic rifles such as the M1 Garand and M-14 had much more positive safeties than current issue combat firearms.
Some of the key firearms manufactures such as FN, HK and Sig are becoming more aware of this problem and have new ‘safety’ designs in the works but they have yet to arrive in the filed. Also, firearms safety is a ‘leadership’ issue that requires constant attention by NCOs’. All soldiers whether Welsh Guardsman or not are young eager beavers and prone to act like young people and need constant supervision and cautions about firearms safety and repetitive training.
I am not convinced, w M1 and M14 you had to put your finger in trigger guard to take it off safe. There is nothing wrong w trigger on M4/16, you don't want something big and clunky like the AK variants.
A lot of the NDs appear to be accidently having round in chamber (clearing barrel) rather than accidently off safety. You have some SOCOM types that don't even use a safety, but they don't walk around w their finger in the trigger guard all the time, and don't have many NDs.
Muscle memory is the key, everything needs to be automatic. That is why the JAG above had a problem.
I think you ned to do some risk assessment: am I more likely to lose a guy to JAG walking around w round in chamber? Do I expect the JAG to win the war? Do I expect Officers to make decisions and talk on the radio or do I expect them to be riflemen? W Magazine loaded, Chamber empty it does not take long to rock and roll.
I grew up in the country living w guns but they weren't MGs. In situations where I did not have a lot of confidence, like loading a coax in the dark, I'd just scoot up in the hatch and let SGT Fitz load the damn thing. What IS a plenum chamber anyway? Anything that fires from an open bolt is a lot easier to do something stupid.
BEARCAT per usual makes solid point but I disagree about his views on the current adequacy of the safety’s on modern combat rifles. As time goes on the detent plunger and spring lose some of its positive friction through wear. This issue is now recognized and is being addressed by engineers at FN, SIG and HK. We will likely see longer safety arms and more positive detent connections and they are already beginning to show up on SOCOM HK416’s and FN SCAR’s used for instance by Navy SEAL’s.
One of the advantages of the M1, M14 and bolt action rifle safety’s is that one was more aware of one’s weapon status at all times. That was party due to more intensive weapons training in years past and the nature of the design of the safety. Marines used to have a fetish about intensive small arms training hopefully they still do.
All weapons and their users are capable of ND’s. Even during the Civil War with muzzleloaders there was no shortage of ND’s. But with more intensive training, NCO supervision and better designs this can be reduced.
Not on the subject of today's posts from Tom
But on the topic of your post yesterday, I thought it was astonishing to see the overwhelming, bi-partisan Congressional smackdown of the President's taking the side of the Palestinians in essentially ordering Israel to withdraw to its 1967 borders. Prime Minister Netanyahu was received by Democrats and Republicans alike as a heroic David standing up to a menacing Goliath.
When a Democratic congressman accuses Mr. Obama of "taking the side of Hamas," it's pretty obvious there is a national consensus against the President's radical departure from 60+ years of US policy on Israel.
Only the furthest feathers of the left wing stand with Mr. Obama on this one.
Was the office of the President of the the United States of America abased by a foreign leader. You should be proud of that!
Actually I saw Congress rise up as one force, Democrats and Republicans arm-in-arm, to apply a bitch slap to the President of the United States. I think that says more about the occupant of the Oval Office than it does about any foreign leader.
CPT Noval, follow the lobbying money and watch what happens to any pol who dares question Israel's government du jour. The president showed real courage in standing up to our "friend."
"Would it have been better if I'd just gone over and punched his lights out, then walked back and winked at the kandak commander? I'd have been a legend!"
I had a situation in Iraq that (sadly) involved a donkey, actually two donkeys - no it wasn't that kind of situation, get your minds out of the gutter. Long story short they were in our way, and we had to get them out of our way. We eventually dragged them off the road - yes the image of a SQDN CDR dragging a donkey off a highway is an amusing one.
I reflected afterwards that had I racked a round into my 9mm and blown the donkey's brains out I would have been a legend too. Shades of the movie Patton. Sadly, I also would have undermined everything I was teaching my troopers about COIN and how to win in COIN.
As for NDs every situation is different and needs to be evaluated thus. In our setting and with our mission I encouraged but didn't demand that my guys run AMBER instead of RED. I went RED exactly once in my whole time in Iraq - the same night as the donkey episode.
Is muzzle control and muzzle awareness not being stressed anymore? Before I got out in 2006 if a soldier had his muzzle pointed anywhere besides 5-7 o'clock when not engaged in a fire fight they get got cuffed on the side of the head. Your muzzle shouldn't be pointed anywhere unless there is a suspected enemy, need to use your optics or you're clearing a house (room).
As for the safety lever being easily manipulated by equipment, I don't buy it, well I don't buy it for the M4 and M16. I was constantly loaded up with a crap load of gear and my equipment never caused my safety to switch to semi or 3 round burst. Of course, I wasn't covered in Crye and didn't have a million straps hanging from every part of my body either.
Growing up in a hunting family gun safety (ya I know its not a gun) was almost an instinct, or muscle memory as some else said. After joing the army, even when cleaning weapons I never layed a disasembled barrel down pointed toward someone, and would even move if one was pointed toward me.
And you never put your finger inside the trigger guard unless you plan on pulling the trigger
Having said all that as a kid I had an "unloaded" rifle go off once inside the house with a group off friends standing around looking at the rifle while I was holding it . Luckily it only it the ceiling. We laughed it off but 40 years later it still scares the piss out of me that I did it. Maybe that was the moment I learned those lessons so well
Turnover and factory workers...
War is a serious business with serious tools. Safety isn't sexy, but it is important. Some of our risk aversion has gone a bit too far (cue refective belt jokes). Still, if you work construction or in a factory, you know accidents are going to happen.
Their are two big differences between between the factory floor and war. In the factory, the tools are designed to be safe. In war, the tools are designed to be deadly. The other big difference is experience. The Marine Corps is a first term force, with almost 40% of its personnel being in their first 4 year hitch. The Army is slightly lower. Still, that is a lot of young guys with weapons and not much supervision.
The JAG's story reminds me of why the guys on the factory floor don't like it when "suits" mess around with their tools. Inevitably, they will break them or hurt themselves. I think Tom is correct that NDs are a symptom of poor leadership and disipline. One moron can ruin an otherwise spotless factory safety record, but a manager can reasonably assume that a factory with a lot of safety problems has other problems as well.
It's always interesting to me that the Brits react in a polar opposite fashion to the way Americans would. And it's not just the ND itself that's the same, it's the emotional reaction to it. Both Americans and Brits feel embarrassed by the event. Why is it that, regardless of nationality, we allow our sense of ego to dictate how we address a matter of life or death? I think this is why Americans resort to overreacting and the British don't react enough. In either case, it's still incorrect. To borrow from the industrial analogy, if you have an accident at the plant you make sure you retrain everyone and address the problems. You don't call the guy who had the accident an idiot and tell everyone to get back to work. How do you break through that barrier?
JG’s is an interesting observation of national character. While I don’t place too much emphasis on national stereotypes there probably is some small amount of truth between American and British reactions. The British have always seemed keen on sangfroid and understatement while American’s seem more emotive and demonstrative. Even during the 2nd World War German officers commented on British imperturbability under fire but sluggishness to adapt while the Americans seemed to be a little more jumpy but learned faster and innovated more rapidly. However, in our own era these differences are likely less pronounced as a result of the ease of the global mixing of cultures.
Many negligent discharges are a function of Soldiers being taught from Day 1 of basic training to be afraid of weapons and ammunition. Anyone remember the old "keep your weapons up and down range"? Now privates are taught to walk with weapons at the low ready, there are no clearing rods on the range, and Drill Sergeants aren't getting shot in the foot by privates walking by...surprise, surprise.
It extends to combat too. How many of us have seen negligent discharges as a result of clearing barrels and the procedures put in place by the REMFs that run Super-FOBs. Since when is pulling the trigger a step of clearing the weapon?
The Army culture is finally changing from the peacetime mentality of fearing weapons to teaching weapons safety. Talk to a cop, they walk around all day in RED status...even at their desk in the station. Do we need to go to that extreme? No. But there are a lot of places we go in combat where AMBER weapons status is just an unacceptable risk...me and my Soldiers went RED every day without a single ND. Proper training and leadership of your troops can mitigate the risk of accidental discharge.
Since when is pulling the trigger a step of clearing the weapon?
Since at least 2003 when the war in Iraq first started. Aim weapon into the barrel, pull back charging handle while looking into the chamber, release charging handle, pull trigger, repeat, put weapon of safe.
Please tell me you dropped the magazine first. Otherwise we're gonna have to conduct a 15-6...
Of course we dropped our magazines first! That would be a site though, a line of guys firing off a couple rounds into barrels half filled with sand before they put their weapons on safe, lol.
Btw, with all that is going on in the world right now, why is Mr. Ricks so obsessed with NDs? I read Ricks precisely to GET AWAY from such boring topics!
What's next, a Friday afternoon safety brief?
nice...I think your right, perhaps Tom can post up a Summer Safety Brief prior to the 4-Day Memorial Weekend
it was really in 2008 when the FM was revised. In the old FM 23-9 it wasn't a part of clearing procedures. Now the FOB Mayors are our doctrine writers...
J, the weapons are being given better safety switches because they are easier to use and more comfortable. The type of selector most guys have come to love is the HK paddle that was on the old MP5s and other HK models, it was easy to manipulate and that is a reason behind the big push for those type of selector switches. Try manipulating a HK paddle from safe to fire vs a Colt M4 from safe to fire, much smoother on the HK and easy to hit. I am betting you have both? ;)
As for not loading weapons at all times in a combat zone-through experience and validation by training via combat and history reaction is ALWAYS slower than action and if you have a guy who is walking around with an unloaded weapon then he is a dead man if something happens, plain and simple. Go get a cap gun and try this game out with two people, one guy turn his back to the other. The person whose is facing the back of the man, have your gun out and pointed at the guy with his back to you. Now, do not fire until you think the guy with his back to you is going to turn and fire or just shoot over his shoulder. I am betting that you will lose every time and the cap gun is a fun and safe way to prove it. Essentially you are putting people at risk if you do not have them in a war zone loaded and ready to go. Reaction vs Action has a lot to do with the rest of this post.
NDs- Look, I am currently hanging out in Khandahar waiting for some regular Army Infantry guys to come in, we are going to put them through some training to go out to isolated sites with us after about a little more than 2 weeks and I want every one of them locked and loaded once they are out there. Why? They are going to be with us on patrols and acting as force pro at times and we cannot afford them to be behind the 8 ball in a fire fight. Every gun that is not loaded is essentially a gun that is down. I have to trust them, they have to trust us, this is an essential point in preventing NDs for NCOs and O's both. Trust.
We have even had people slip through the wires in Afghanistan and cause havoc, this happened at Salerno not to long ago. That happened and yet we still make military personnel walk around with a weapon that is both unloaded and no magazine in it on large bases here, if an attack happens I can only hope that the person who came up with that policy is charged criminally. The guys at the airport who got shot all had unloaded weapons. Examples are everywhere.
Now, how do we stop the NDs, establish trust with the NCOs and Os? J had a great point, it falls a lot on the NCOs to train the guys. Most importantly though it falls on the training that happens before they deploy and the NCOs should be the ones getting a hold of that and making it happen, shame on them if they didn't. So, what we have to do is drastically increase the troopers shooting time. When I say shooting though, I mean getting the ammo and range time and making that range time count, none of that "Ready, Fire two rounds, safe and unload" silliness. The soldiers need real tactical shooting that builds up to live fire and movement in small groups or squads and evenutally even platoon size, this is manpower intensive but worth the time and expense. They shoud be allowed to let them hang loaded on safe and walk around as much as possible and be made to pay a sever price if they are not keeping track of their muzzle and keeping their fingers out of the trigger well unless they are going to shoot. Any screw up is documented via a counciling chit, eventually the professionalism and skills in the troops will grow exponentially. I swear it is not rocket science, all it takes is time and trust and you have to accept that over time you will have an accident. Senior Officers and some NCOICs need to get over their risk aversion and make it happen. As long as basic rifle and pistol skills are not emphasized in the Army or other branches you will have NDs continue. In the end I think it all comes down to training and leaders just like everything else in the military.
"As for not loading weapons at all times in a combat zone-through experience and validation by training via combat and history reaction is ALWAYS slower than action and if you have a guy who is walking around with an unloaded weapon then he is a dead man if something happens, plain and simple. Go get a cap gun and try this game out with two people, one guy turn his back to the other. The person whose is facing the back of the man, have your gun out and pointed at the guy with his back to you. Now, do not fire until you think the guy with his back to you is going to turn and fire or just shoot over his shoulder. I am betting that you will lose every time and the cap gun is a fun and safe way to prove it. Essentially you are putting people at risk if you do not have them in a war zone loaded and ready to go. Reaction vs Action has a lot to do with the rest of this post."
How about riding around in a vehicle or helicopter? How do you do that quick draw thing from back of a Bradley or Stryker? I did an investigation where the guys fired MG in the back of a M2, I don't know if they were getting ready to "stand back to back" or not, but rode the bolt forward and pow, it pinged all over the back (full of GIBs) didn't hit anyone and buried itself in the bumper on TOW rack.
Once again, I am advocating risk assessment, not just assuming doing the same thing (culture, rule of thumb, SOP whatever) automatically lowers your risk. Like I alluded to above, anything that fires from an open bolt is a little more delicate, they can literally (and figuratively) "go off half cocked".
Here is the problem Bearcat, it is not a quickdraw, its not even a back to back thing, nothing to do with being in a helo or what not, not sure how you got that out of that post, the idea behind the drill is that it is a tool used to illustrate that action is always quicker than reaction and hence why you should not have an unloaded weapon. Here is another example, you are walking down a road, you get fire from an ambush site, you want to take the time to load your weapon now or before? You are in a Stryker, you are getting ambushed with a combo of IEDs and RPGs and small arms fire, would you want to take the time to load your heavy weapons now or before? You are in a helo, you are about to get off and go onto a patrol from your drop off point, lets say a 1000mts away from the target, you want to have your weapon loaded then or wait till you are on the ground when fire could be coming at you? Anytime you are outside the wire it should be mandatory you are going out with a hot weapon.
Look, we always travel hot- on foot, in a helo, MRAP, MATV, car, whatever it was and I always assumed everyone else did too, kind of shocked to find out that might not be the case. In simple terms, being in a combat zone with an unloaded weapon is dangerous and a policy that pushes that is borderline negligent IMO. If you are on a FOB I can see not having to have a loaded weapon but you should have the option, it should not be mandated and the clearing techniques they show are another example of bad information and not giving the troops the tools they need to be comfortable with their weapons. It is not about risk assesment as much as it is training, risk assesment is a tool that had good intentions but is now used mostly to cover someones behind if an accident happens. I think if we spent the amount it cost for one F-22 on ammo we would make huge strides in our troops competence with their weapons but since I do not see that happening the military should at least invest the time in some of the people to make them Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) on small arms in each platoon and have them train their people in a realistic manner and make what little training time they get count.
Eric
There are plenty of troops that actually fight that don't primarily fight w personal weapon. You're driving, you're on M2HB or MK19, you're gunning or loading tank, you're firing 81 or 120mm mortar, you've got GPS in one hand and handmike in the other. They're already fighting, the question is what is best status for personal weapon that is: in the rack, slung over your back, stacked, laid on ground, hanging from window latch, or bouncing around under your feet.
Bearcat, MK19s and M2s are usually in a turret or on a Remote Weapon System for those of us who do not ride in tanks and I think they should be loaded. If you are in a tank, heck yeah you might get some lag time but we are talking about NDs with small arms I thought? And if I had my weapon slung, loaded. If it was at my feet, loaded. Etc...as long as it is on safe and you do not have your finger in the trigger well it is not going to go off. I just cannot see having a guy on the ground without his weapon loaded. I understand you have seen some nasty NDs but it goes back to training, we need to do a better job for all the troops.
I did my first deployment as an enlisted MP mostly on RED weapon status and my second deployment as a JA almost always on GREEN.
It was a little emasculating to never chamber a round in a 12-month (ahem) combat deployment, but it makes total sense from a risk management perspective. Part of the problem is the push to make every Soldier think he's a "warrior." You end up with support troops who think they're John Rambo but have nowhere near the weapons training/discipline necessary to carry a weapon on RED.
Case-in-point: I caught at least 25 Soldiers (mostly officers) with thier safety off during my most recent deployment at a mega-FOB in Iraq. It was quite sickening.
Train with magazines - brilliantly simple fix?
To quote: "The problem is that when you clear a weapon 1000 times WITHOUT dropping the magazine (because there is no magazine loaded in the training environment, not even an empty one), you bypass the crucial magazine drop step of the clear, 1000 times. So when you're sick, tired, or distracted, your muscle memory kicks in, and it kicks in wrong....."
This comment by "Voodoo" (6:54 PM ET, May 16, 2011) strikes me as profoundly useful -- a fix simple to the point of genius, even -- and since it's not been getting much attention, I wanted to bump it up. Certainly it'd be nice to get a straightforward "I screwed up" from the original, anonymous author, but people do get sick, tired, and distracted, especially in war, and training should burn firearms safety into muscle memory precisely to combat this.
Perhaps someone who's served (I haven't) will comment on whether this is as good an idea as I think?
In close to a decade (pre-SA80) I never saw anyone train without a magazine. Mag off, cock the weapon three times, look inside the chamber (or, in bad light stick your finger in) and pull the trigger to ease springs. I can still feel it in my hands some 30 years later.
Upset because the fixed machine gun on his armored car was defective, young officer Auberon Waugh stood in front of it and shook the barrel vigorously. This sent several rounds through and through his chest and flung him to the roadway. He lived for another 50 years. In his memoirs he reported that, lying under the bright Cyprus sun and expecting to die, he had remembered the last words of the Napoleonic wars naval hero Horatio Nelson and said to his platoon sergeant "Kiss me Chudleigh". Alas for the historical knowledge of the British noncoms of the day, "Chudleigh did not recognise the allusion and from then on treated me with extreme caution." Nelson's the guy atop that absurd stone pillar in London's Trafalgar Square.
With a father like Evelyn a few rounds in the chest can be sniffed at!!
'Bron, in his regular Telegraph column (when not berating the "Thank you for not smoking" sign in the taxi..... Reply: "Thank you for not expecting a tip!") once told a story of an Oxford don who would regularly roll his sons in a carpet and beat them indiscriminately to demonstrate to them just how unfair the world was.
House passed Mica's amendment to NDAA...
The amendment::
"Would require that the rules of engagement allow any military service personnel assigned to duty in a designated hostile fire area to have rules of engagement that fully protects their right to proactively defend themselves from hostile actions"
Still has to pass the Senate & POTUS.
I don't know anything about this specific amendment but I don't think I have ever seen a ROE that doesn't allow the soldier to "defend themselves from hostile actions." Now the word "proactive" is pretty loaded, but I am not sure I see the point?
While not specifically stated in the amendment...
My gut tells me this is a response to the Kabul shootings a couple of weeks ago...with the intent to let troops everywhere walk around in Red or Amber but not specifically specifying that...naturally leaving flexibility for the DoD to interpret how to meet this legislation.
It is a good call if that is the intention
IF the reasoning behind that is due to that incident I think it is a good thing but that it also sucks that it takes an incident like that for it to happen. The guys at FOBs, large AOBs and at the airports, unless they are on guard duty, are forced to walk around without a weapon in Red, usually not even a mag in it yet the Afghans are all over the place with loaded weapons. ROEs always give you the right to defend yourself but if you are walking around without a loaded weapon you are already at a huge disadvantage, the Afghans know how we operate, they work on the bases, they work with us, patrol with us, etc....That Col. who shot the troop at the airport I am sure was well aware of the weapon status, he may have been taking a chance but it was calculated risk with the odds in his favor.
My spidey senses smelled BS and I was right.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/05/26/the-second-amendment-for-troops/
This sounds like a dumb Congresscritter who went on a fact-finding boondoggle and hears from a handful of soldiers that they don't like the ROE. Of course McChrystal tightened the ROE during his brief tenure, and I don't think Petraeus made any substantial changes since.
The problem here is likely ROE shift where commanders down the line make it more and more restrictive - akin to having a formation called by the CO at 0630 and by the time it makes it through the PL, PSG, SL to the Joe their TL has said they all need to be standing outside by 0400, so as not to be late. Petraeus ensured that there would be only one ROE and it could not be changed without his approval. Good call.
Regardless, this has nothing to do with carry in RED or AMBER on base as ESIII alludes to.
The last two paras of this article validate what I remarked before:
-----------------------------------------------------
Those rules were a source of frustration for some troops. Nonetheless, military rules of engagement typically make it clear that troops always have the right to self defense. As this 2005 “ROE card” from Iraq puts it: “Nothing on this card prevents you from using deadly force to defend yourself.”
A spokesman for U.S. Central Command, the military headquarters that oversees operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, said the amendment, as worded, would likely not change a thing. “Troops always have the right to protect themselves in combat,” the spokesman said.
------------------------------------------------------
This is worthless legislation. Were I a Floridian in Mica's district I would be asking him to concentrate on more meaningful tasks.
Read More
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(36)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE