McChrystal’s “courageous restraint” putting soldiers’ lives in danger in AfghanistanJuly 7th, 2010 - 2:51 pm ICT by ANI
London, July 7 (ANI): Troops serving on the front line in Afghanistan have complained that restrictive rules on firing upon the Taliban are putting soldiers’ lives in danger.
According to the Telegraph, soldiers in Helmand have claimed that the policy of “courageous restraint” is forcing them to fight with one hand tied behind their backs.
“The policy was making troops think twice before pulling the trigger which endangers them. A couple of times I’ve hesitated in shooting someone when I should have done. Some lads have put themselves in danger by allowing a possible suicide bomber too close,” the paper quoted a Royal Marine, as saying.
The doctrine was introduced by Gen Stanley McChrystal, the former American commander, to reduce the number of civilian casualties, which are mainly caused by aircraft bombs or artillery missiles.
The report stated that General David Petraeus, who took over when General McChrystal was sacked, is believed to be reviewing the policy in place since the fighting began in June 2001.
A senior Non-Commissioned Officer, on his third tour of Afghanistan, said that the rules of engagement had ‘gone too far one way’ in favour of the insurgents.
“Our hands are tied the way we are asked to do courageous restraint. I agree with it to the extent that previously too many civilians were killed but we have got people shooting us and we are not allowed to shoot back. Outrageous restraint is a lot easier to say than to implement,” the paper quoted him, as saying.
Earlier, in guidlines issued on August 2009, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, former US commander in Afghanistan, stated that “destroying a home or property jeopardises the livelihood of an entire family and creates more insurgents” and that “large scale operations to kill or capture militants carry a significant risk of causing civilian casualties and collateral damage”.
“It’s a major bugbear for the British Army, it affects us massively. Thank God we have the ANA (Afghan National Army) here because they have different rules of engagement to us and can smash the enemy,” the paper quoted a junior officer commanding a small fort in Sangin, as saying.
Meanwhile, Some locals in Sangin have criticised the troops for “not taking out” the Taliban who intimidate and harm them. (ANI)
- Afghans see change in US command as a threat to civilians - Jul 05, 2010
- Obama fires top Afghanistan commander McChrystal (Second Lead) - Jun 24, 2010
- Ex-NATO commander McChrystal cleared of wrongdoing in Rolling Stone piece - Apr 19, 2011
- Petraeus vows to keep Afghan civilian deaths down - Jul 01, 2010
- General Stanley McChrystal's "Rolling Stone" Story Creates Waves - Jun 23, 2010
- Obama in dilemma over sacking McChrystal, Afghan war effort - Jun 23, 2010
- Mentor Mullen Says McChrystal Is 'crushed' over his sacking - Jul 03, 2010
- US-led military's curbs on civilian attacks led to 'reduced' Afghan Taliban retaliation - Jul 24, 2010
- McChrystal brings erring US Special Forces in Afghanistan under his direct control - Mar 16, 2010
- US commander McChrystal derides Vice-President Biden, Holbrooke and envoy - Jun 22, 2010
- Petraeus to take control of Afghan NATO forces Sunday - Jul 04, 2010
- Obama Speaks: Gen Stanley McChrystal Resigns & Gen David Petraeus Steps In - Jun 24, 2010
- Petraeus rules out drastic changes in Afghan war policy - Jul 02, 2010
- Afghan war is at a stalemate: General McChrystal - May 14, 2010
- US official feels substantial progress has been made in Afghanistan - Oct 29, 2010
Tags: american commander, artillery, british army, bugbear, civilian casualties, collateral damage, david petraeus, general david petraeus, helmand, insurgents, lads, livelihood, missiles, non commissioned officer, possible suicide, report stated that, restrictive rules, rules of engagement, scale operations, suicide bomber