• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,745
Reaction score
7,654
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
FOXNews.com - Petraeus to Modify Afghanistan Rules of Engagement, Source Says

A military source close to Gen. David Petraeus told Fox News that one of the first things the general will do when he takes over in Afghanistan is to modify the rules of engagement to make it easier for U.S. troops to engage in combat with the enemy, though a Petraeus spokesman pushed back on the claim.
What is odd is Obi said McChrystal followed his orders.
COIN was a passive response.

This is not The Obi Plan we had.

Seems like the problem the foot soldiers complained about is about to result in more dead terrorists.
I wonder if Petraeus will ask for more troops.

.
 
Last edited:

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Obama firedMcChrystalandappointedPetraeus, people died? :lol:
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,275
Reaction score
32,389
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Conservatives get exactly what they want, still attack Obama over it?

The question mark is because the OP is rather incoherent so I'm not sure what he's getting at.
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,745
Reaction score
7,654
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Conservatives get exactly what they want, still attack Obama over it?

The question mark is because the OP is rather incoherent so I'm not sure what he's getting at.
There wasn't an attack. There was a statement of fact.

I am happy to see the troops be able to fight. They didn't like the existing rules of engagement. Some were so despondent they did not feel they were winning.

This is good news.
Now, will he ask for more troops and will Obama agree?

.
 

ric27

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
7,541
Reaction score
3,195
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Ya know, when a President like Obama is more interested in socialism than security nothing good will come out of this because Eikenberry and special envoy Holbrooke will still be pulling the strings
 

Opteron

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
629
Reaction score
136
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I think McChrystal was wrong with his strict rules of engagement and I think Petraeus is doing the right thing. He's doing it immediately so it must be pretty important too and maybe a kind of large mistake on McChrystal's part.
 

ptif219

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
This started in Iraq. The left wanted more politically correct fighting and the civilians that protect the terrorist are more important than victory.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,328
Reaction score
50,333
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
This started in Iraq. The left wanted more politically correct fighting and the civilians that protect the terrorist are more important than victory.
The tactics where designed by McCrystal. Have you read his document on the tactics and the reasons for him? The redacted version is available online, and is fascinating. Perhaps you can explain where and why you think he is wrong since you apparently have more knowledge and experience than McCrystal.
 

Opteron

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
629
Reaction score
136
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I don't think it had anything to do with liberal or conservative politics, I just think McChrystal was wrong and Petraeus is more correct.

The tactics where designed by McCrystal. Have you read his document on the tactics and the reasons for him? The redacted version is available online, and is fascinating. Perhaps you can explain where and why you think he is wrong since you apparently have more knowledge and experience than McCrystal.
Can you post a link to this? I'm interested in reading it.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,328
Reaction score
50,333
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal

ptif219

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The tactics where designed by McCrystal. Have you read his document on the tactics and the reasons for him? The redacted version is available online, and is fascinating. Perhaps you can explain where and why you think he is wrong since you apparently have more knowledge and experience than McCrystal.
This is a conrination of Iraq.

blonde sagacity: The Current Rules of Engagement in Iraq (i.e. Why We <i>Could</i> Lose)


(1) You must feel a direct threat to you or your team.
(2) You must clearly see a threat.
(3) That threat must be identified.
(4) The team leader must concur that there is an identified threat.
(5) The team leader must feel that the situation is one of life or death.
(6) There must be minimal or no collateral risk.
(7) Only then can the team leader clear the engagement.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,328
Reaction score
50,333
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
This is a conrination of Iraq.

blonde sagacity: The Current Rules of Engagement in Iraq (i.e. Why We <i>Could</i> Lose)


(1) You must feel a direct threat to you or your team.
(2) You must clearly see a threat.
(3) That threat must be identified.
(4) The team leader must concur that there is an identified threat.
(5) The team leader must feel that the situation is one of life or death.
(6) There must be minimal or no collateral risk.
(7) Only then can the team leader clear the engagement.
So you cannot refute McCrystal's strategy with anything other than some random blog? I see...
 

ptif219

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
So you cannot refute McCrystal's strategy with anything other than some random blog? I see...
It shows rules of engagement in 2007. This was a continuation of what started in Iraq. Finally Petraeus will untie the hands of our soldiers.
 

scottsoperson

Banned
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
350
Reaction score
11
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
petraeus says we need to talk to some of the taliban.
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,504
Reaction score
50,051
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
General Petraeus is an expert in this kind of warfare. He literally wrote the book on it. Assuming he is given reasonable independence of action, I expect he will do very well and achieve substantial results, though the effects may take time.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,275
Reaction score
32,389
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There wasn't an attack. There was a statement of fact.

I am happy to see the troops be able to fight. They didn't like the existing rules of engagement. Some were so despondent they did not feel they were winning.

This is good news.
Now, will he ask for more troops and will Obama agree?

.
Oh ok then, I thought this was something that you guys were going to attack Obama over. My mist-
Ya know, when a President like Obama is more interested in socialism than security nothing good will come out of this because Eikenberry and special envoy Holbrooke will still be pulling the strings
Nevermind.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,328
Reaction score
50,333
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
It shows rules of engagement in 2007. This was a continuation of what started in Iraq. Finally Petraeus will untie the hands of our soldiers.
Have you managed to even show where you disagreed with McCrystal's rules of engagement with an actual reason? Or are you going to expect us to just assume you know what you are talking ab out despite no evidence?
 

apdst

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
131,998
Reaction score
30,544
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The tactics where designed by McCrystal. Have you read his document on the tactics and the reasons for him? The redacted version is available online, and is fascinating. Perhaps you can explain where and why you think he is wrong since you apparently have more knowledge and experience than McCrystal.
Obviously the operational tempo wasn't set by McChrystal. If McChrystal had been getting his way, he wouldn't have laid his career on the line to publically expose Obama for the goofball he isl.


I heard on Rush Limbaugh's show, that Moveon.org took their, "Betrayus", ad down.
 
Last edited:

ptif219

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Have you managed to even show where you disagreed with McCrystal's rules of engagement with an actual reason? Or are you going to expect us to just assume you know what you are talking ab out despite no evidence?
I am a veteran of course I disagree. The point is these rules started before Chrystal back in Iraq. It is about time the soldiers hands were untied. Chrystal just fine tuned them and took them to another level. I would guess it is possible Obama wanted these rules and approved them.
 
Last edited:

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,328
Reaction score
50,333
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I am a veteran of course I disagree. The point is these rules started before Chrystal back in Iraq. It is about time the soldiers hands were untied. Chrystal just fine tuned them and took them to another level. I would guess it is possible Obama wanted these rules and approved them.
No, they did not. He set the rules of engagement in Afghanistan. I even linked to a document which gave you the information. You might read it, and explain where you disagree, and with what reasons. Right now you sound as if you are just disagreeing so you can bitch about "the left".
 

ptif219

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No, they did not. He set the rules of engagement in Afghanistan. I even linked to a document which gave you the information. You might read it, and explain where you disagree, and with what reasons. Right now you sound as if you are just disagreeing so you can bitch about "the left".
You miss the point this started under Bush in Iraq.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,328
Reaction score
50,333
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
You miss the point this started under Bush in Iraq.
Except it did not. McCrystal designed the rules of engagement in Afghanistan.
 

apdst

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
131,998
Reaction score
30,544
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Except it did not. McCrystal designed the rules of engagement in Afghanistan.
You can prove that McCrystal organized the ATO, without any say-so from Obama? It was McCrystal's idea to only send 30,000 troops? Oh, wait, didn't Mac ask for twice that number and Obama determined that he didn't need them?

How many times have you ever seen Obama not micro-manage everything? Please, be honest.

No, the reality is, that if Obama hadn't been impeding McCrystal from the git-go, McCrystal wouldn't have done what he did.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,328
Reaction score
50,333
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
You can prove that McCrystal organized the ATO, without any say-so from Obama? It was McCrystal's idea to only send 30,000 troops? Oh, wait, didn't Mac ask for twice that number and Obama determined that he didn't need them?
Don has documented this. Total troops sent 39 k of 40 k requested, 30k of ours, and 9k from allies.

How many times have you ever seen Obama not micro-manage everything? Please, be honest.

No, the reality is, that if Obama hadn't been impeding McCrystal from the git-go, McCrystal wouldn't have done what he did.
You will find exactly zero evidence that you can document that Obama impeded McCrystal in any way from any credible sources. He gave McCrystal the troops and the authority to design the strategy.
 

apdst

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
131,998
Reaction score
30,544
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Don has documented this. Total troops sent 39 k of 40 k requested, 30k of ours, and 9k from allies.



You will find exactly zero evidence that you can document that Obama impeded McCrystal in any way from any credible sources. He gave McCrystal the troops and the authority to design the strategy.
I see. Then, how do you explain McCrystal's actions? It wasn't because Obama was playing ball with McChrystal. Or, are you accusing McChrystal of being a mad-man, or something? He is a treehuggin', Fox News hatin', Libbo, so that's not a stretch.
 
Top Bottom