A pair of U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagles fly over northern Iraq after conducting airstrikes in Syria, in this U.S. Air Force handout photo taken early in the morning of September 23, 2014. (Reuters/U.S. Air Force/Senior Airman Matthew)
Washington Post: As bombing in Syria intensifies, a debate about the rules of engagement
President Obama’s order to intensify air attacks in Syria has led to new internal debate over whether to loosen tight restrictions on strikes against Islamic State targets that risk civilian casualties, according to senior administration officials.
But so far, at least, the White House has resisted proposals to change the rules of engagement for the bombing. Each strike, whether against a pre-planned target or one chosen on a “dynamic” basis by patrolling aircraft, is weighed against likely collateral damage and must be individually approved by top officers at the coalition operations center in Baghdad.
“We are trying to develop intelligence to get targets, to leverage opportunities . . . to create strikes that have a strategic effect,” a U.S. military official said. “But we’re going to keep doing those the same way we have done. We will not willy-nilly go after a target because it’s right there, right now.”
Update #1: US Officials Discuss Whether to Change ‘Rules of Engagement’ in Syria, Iraq (Sputnik)
Update #2: U.S. officials discussing changes to 'rules of engagement' (CNN)
Previous Post: 75 Percent of U.S. Airstrikes Against The Islamic State Strikes Have Been Blocked Due To White House Rules Of Engagement
WNU Editor: Here is an easy prediction .... President Obama is not going to back down.
two ways of reasoning this crap...
ReplyDeletepseudo logic: you can't carpet bomb a key location with well known high level terrorist activity due to X number of civilian deaths that may occur....so as not to offend amnesty international or the feelings of the international community....and because those deaths would be our fault. its just not fair to the terrorists or their human shields.
normal logic: strike known target(s) relentlessly until enemy is eliminated despite the known enemy tactic of hiding amongst civilians and the inevitable civilian deaths that would follow. know that the fault lies with the terrorist force and their decision to use civilians as shields in warfare. thus, the blood is on the hands of the enemy that chooses said tactics.
here is an easy prediction: civilians will not be greeting terrorist forces (many of them foreign) with open arms like they are now.