tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post3028929524257288581..comments2024-02-06T08:33:52.695+02:00Comments on Eeben Barlow's Military and Security Blog: RULES OF ENGAGEMENTEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comBlogger28125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-26092310262744076722010-08-29T18:09:34.635+02:002010-08-29T18:09:34.635+02:00All wars are dirty wars, Nick. However, by denying...All wars are dirty wars, Nick. However, by denying that they are dirty, some politicos try to gain kudos from their uniformed utterances. The impact of this on the uninformed is a desire to either get the troops home or belittle them and label them as the “bad guys”. <br /><br />Soldiers view life differently as the majority of them believe in the profession of arms, honour, integrity and loyalty to each other, the unit and their country. Political correctness is not possible to adhere to when someone is trying to kill or main you or your fellow comrades. <br /><br />I believe that if the politicians who are so quick to declare wars had to spend a year in that war as a soldier, they would very quickly alter their views on ROEs, PC-ness and so forth. Those politicians who have passed through the military understand that all too well. <br /><br />Good luck with your studies – your Old Man told me of your future plans and I wish you well.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />Eeben<br /><br />PS: Pleased to hear you are enjoying the book.Eeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-63579196464653632522010-08-29T17:05:32.357+02:002010-08-29T17:05:32.357+02:00Well many people see the war in Afghanistan as a d...Well many people see the war in Afghanistan as a dirty war which the government have tried to cover up with a politically correct veil over it (But fortunately the soldiers out there are greatly praised). Where there is little politically correct about a war of druglords and insurgents but to the soldiers it's just about the guys next to them so political correctness is the last thing on their minds in a firefight. <br /><br />But overall if the government can't trust our soldiers to make an informed decision on the ground regarding who to engage using the correct trigger discipline there are obviously some very serious problems. Especially when agression is the only thing that will truely drive the taliban back and this is why 16 Air assualt brigade have operated so effectively in theatre in 2006 and 2008 due to their nature of controlled aggression. It will be good to see redeploying in the coming months.<br /><br />Thanks a lot for your views on this and I'm glad to see you share mine.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />Nick.<br /><br />P.S i am greatly enjoying your book at the moment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-39892361735231749692010-08-29T15:10:26.015+02:002010-08-29T15:10:26.015+02:00IEDs and similar unseen threats have a massive psy...IEDs and similar unseen threats have a massive psychological impact, Nick. <br /><br />It is indeed ironic that when units such as 3 Para are aggressive (a fundamental factor in offensive operations) they are regarded as being overly aggressive. I am sure the idiot who thought that out has kept himself hidden behind a desk. <br /><br />But as long as the senior officer kow-tow to these comments and indeed even agree with them, the soldiers will continue fighting on two fronts – the enemy and the homefront with its humanitarian restriction imposed on the soldiers. Sadly though, we cannot fight a war in a “politically correct” manner and the sooner this is realised, the better.<br /><br />The RoEs are usually imposed by the armed forces command structures in consultation with the politicians. <br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-49984029709304274242010-08-29T14:54:33.930+02:002010-08-29T14:54:33.930+02:00Yes it's me,
Unfortunately I can't see an...Yes it's me,<br /><br />Unfortunately I can't see any let up regarding the IEDs either (even though the losses on the ground due to IEDs and other such devices are being sorely felt and a constant lingering threat. I'm sure they also have a horrible mental effect aswell.) and there is an urgent need to review these procedures.<br /><br />In 3 Para's tour of Afghanistan they were accused of 'over-agression' and this was as you say operating in a purely reactive way. But I'm sure these observations were made by someone who had'nt been attacked in Sangin and Musa Qaleh for 6 months. Considering the ferocity of the fighting in Helmand agression is needed when fighting such a relentless war. Unfortunately the RoE do not allow the men on the ground to act in such a fashion.<br /><br />I was curious who decides the restrictions of the RoE?<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />Nick.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-7489173721467753762010-08-29T12:27:19.489+02:002010-08-29T12:27:19.489+02:00Now I wonder if you are the son of an old friend o...Now I wonder if you are the son of an old friend of mine, Nick? <br /><br />A very valid question you pose: We have become so tied up in RoE that we are unable to actually perform our missions. Whereas ROE are important in limiting collateral damage and alienating the local population, they nevertheless should not be all restrictive. <br /><br />By telling soldiers that they may only react under certain conditions, we lower morale and allow the enemy to cause us to be reactive. Being reactive means that we are no longer offensive but rather defensive. We cannot retain initiative in a defensive posture – unless it was a planned defensive action to achieve a certain strategic or tactical goal. <br /><br />“Hearts and Minds” are of course important but this aspect aimed at “getting the locals on sides” is not achieved by allowing the enemy to increase his successes over us. <br /><br />But, we also need to examine our TTPs when it comes to IEDs, landmines and so forth. I somehow suspect that we are not doing so.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-89456821066368485602010-08-28T23:04:33.888+02:002010-08-28T23:04:33.888+02:00Thanks for the interesting read Eeben. From speaki...Thanks for the interesting read Eeben. From speaking to a couple of people who have served in Afghan and whaat I have read they have found the RoE very restrictive especially in deliberate operations. I find it ridiculous how they cannot engage an unarmed hostile planting an IED and how snipers have been told to (but ignored) to adopt a policy of 'warning shots' which is horribly impractical especially with the nature of combat which is occuring in Helmand currently. I think they're is a desperate need for a some let up in these rules which could be inderictly linked to the huge IED threat but unfortunately in a war of supposed 'hearts and minds' I doubt this will happen. What do you think about this?.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-83678767371244741992010-07-12T09:27:34.850+02:002010-07-12T09:27:34.850+02:00I am sure Ken will gracefully accept your apology,...I am sure Ken will gracefully accept your apology, John.<br /><br />I wonder what happened to all of the doom and gloom prophets that predicted the SWC would be a disaster fraught with danger to tourists? Indeed, I recall the German football team being on the hunt for body armour to protect them – and that is not a joke. <br /><br />I guess that the RoE the media tend to follow are based purely on sensationalism and to hell with the truth. The active measures they follow have a massive effect on all readers/listeners out there. Now if only they could turn their efforts into a positive contribution...<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-59393711721978254372010-07-11T19:38:28.701+02:002010-07-11T19:38:28.701+02:00Good Morning Eeben,
Very true and much apologies ...Good Morning Eeben,<br /><br />Very true and much apologies to Ken - it is a great analogy. SA is certainly getting a great showcase with the SWC here in the US which is a great thing for all involved.<br /><br />Ill-discipline is always a negative force - Mr. B. may find this weekend was his last of the tri-nations if the commission takes a dim view of his antics that weren't penalized yesterday. The whole tourney will be awesome as usual. Enjoy the game tonight - our broadcasters here are certainly having fun with your home country.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />JohnJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14052355800345172823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-52687566820192072342010-07-11T17:10:00.604+02:002010-07-11T17:10:00.604+02:00Hi John,
It was actually Ken who brought the refe...Hi John,<br /><br />It was actually Ken who brought the referee into the equation...I simply took his idea and used it.<br /><br />Yes, I am rather proud of how SA hosted it. SWC 2010 was a great success and I will be definitely be watching tonight. <br /><br />Our rugby went wrong when they chose a good player but with an appalling record for wanting to brawl on the field. But fortunately, another game is close – let’s see what happens then.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-70175270981218549212010-07-11T16:27:26.355+02:002010-07-11T16:27:26.355+02:00Eeben,
Very apt analogy to a center referee setti...Eeben,<br /><br />Very apt analogy to a center referee setting the attitude and flow of a game, though football will not get as out of control as rugby if the ref calls poorly in the beginning - much as a president or prime minister can change the path of a conflict from the beginning.<br /><br />As to SA hosting the 2010 SWC - they have done a fabulous job. Now after what the All Blacks did to the Springboks yesterday the 2011 RWC may be an interesting affair.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />JohnJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14052355800345172823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-57826798469620204802010-07-11T09:44:37.592+02:002010-07-11T09:44:37.592+02:00Hi tyhz1995,
Yes, sadly some politicians want to ...Hi tyhz1995,<br /><br />Yes, sadly some politicians want to play soldier and some soldiers (senior ones at that) want to play politics. This blurring of the lines prevents both parties from doing their jobs correctly and leads to a weakness in command and control structures. But, as you point out, this may just give them an excuse to lay the blame elsewhere when things go wrong.<br /><br />War is not an exact science and despite the best laid plans, things can still go horribly wrong. But, if we are flexible, well trained and well led, we can overcome these lapses in the plan. However, we need strong command and control to help us overcome them and not RoE that surrender initiative and break our momentum.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-17621186894891252472010-07-11T09:38:04.760+02:002010-07-11T09:38:04.760+02:00Hi Ken,
There have been some very good comments t...Hi Ken,<br /><br />There have been some very good comments to the RoE.<br /><br />If the SWC 2010 referee does not take control and impress his “RoE” on the players, he will lose control of the match – and make poor calls. Much the same in a combat situation. <br /><br />Yes, everyone who predicted doom and gloom in the SWC may be wondering why they took “poor intelligence” as “fact” without confirming it. I am proud of how the country hosted this tournament – even though I am not much of a football fan.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-40507522189930774172010-07-11T09:32:31.312+02:002010-07-11T09:32:31.312+02:00Hi John,
You have raised some very valid points i...Hi John,<br /><br />You have raised some very valid points in these two posts of yours. <br /><br />Being “free” does not imply being weak to the advantage of opposing forces. Whereas it is good and well to speak of “human rights”, “kindness” and so forth, there are cultures that view these tenants as a weakness and will exploit them. This we will only know about if we know and understand the culture in the AO. <br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-77039652470890273102010-07-11T09:26:12.885+02:002010-07-11T09:26:12.885+02:00Hi John,
To answer your question – I believe the ...Hi John,<br /><br />To answer your question – I believe the decision lies at political level and is supported at the military level. If we look at the aims of war, this is what we judge success against. If we don’t, we will simply continue to fight in square circles. And then, we will miss recognising the finish line.<br /><br />Intelligence is more than just knowing something about the enemy and making wild conclusions. We also need to look at aspects such as the terrain, how it will influence our logistical supply lines, the local population and their beliefs, cultures and traditions, etc. Indeed, we need the political and military understanding of everything in our Area of Responsibility, Area of Influence and Area of Interest. If we miss these, we do so at our own peril. As you point out the central tenet is intelligence. Without it we are blind.<br /><br />But this also leads to a decision on sound RoE and not ones based on “I think...”. That attitude smacks of a lack of intelligence (on both counts!), a lack of understanding the operational environment and area, not understanding the mission, etc. <br /><br />It is ironic that a platoon commander can call in an airstrike on an enemy position but cannot decide when to open fire – such important matters being left to someone at HQ. If we do not allow decentralised command and control, we risk losing the initiative. Once lost, it is very hard to gain at some cost. <br /><br />Atrocities are the result of poor discipline and poor fire control, supported by poor command structures. At least, that is how I see it.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-28093936669181485652010-07-09T02:26:04.741+02:002010-07-09T02:26:04.741+02:00I believe Roe can stymie soldiers in an already da...I believe Roe can stymie soldiers in an already dangerous situation to such an extent that they are in fact placed in jeopardy.Intel should dictate Roe in a real time and must be gathered and evaluated in the theatre,not thousands of miles away.I believe for the man in the field it is a balancing act,IE survival without atrocity.I also know that in war all can go wrong at once and one does the best one can.Especially when one is young and inexperienced.One would hope that command would correct for this but sometimes command is weak and far away leaving NCOs to make decisions.Sometimes I think command likes it this way as it can give them an out if something goes wrong.In closing I think Roe need to evolve as the conflict evolves and the intelligence dictates,though from my own experience one should err on the side of caution.That's alltyhz1995https://www.blogger.com/profile/05547474699979686364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-16896561909539969142010-07-06T04:49:32.455+02:002010-07-06T04:49:32.455+02:00Good topic. Good discussion. Just
seems to me that...Good topic. Good discussion. Just<br />seems to me that ROE decisions can<br />cause a muck up of a situation as bad as the refs calls in world cup.<br />Though, I am enjoying the world cup<br />better.<br /><br />regards,<br />kenken borrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11468394163502457653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-630461950229688582010-07-06T00:45:21.200+02:002010-07-06T00:45:21.200+02:00GoodAfternoon Eeben,
To finish my previous train ...GoodAfternoon Eeben,<br /><br />To finish my previous train of thought...<br /><br />As to our current RoE - it stinks of Vietnam, which is what the media wants to repeat, not realizing that we won the war and lost the peace due to weakness of political leadership, compounded by Nixon's botched exit. <br />The current RoE US/Coalition and PMC soldiers find themselves in seem to be a guaranteed loser and have to be delegated and changed by the commanders on the ground to get our success assured. Our soldiers will fight with honor and we won't be seeing the atrocities passed out by communist, nazi and fascist (nee UN) soldiers because the modern armies of the west are based on the ideals of free men - guaranteeing that the enemy will be killed with minimal spillover to the innocents involved. Now if the local population shelters terrorists willingly they throw those protections out the door. That is also the responsibility of free choice.<br /><br />Best Regards,<br /><br />JohnJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14052355800345172823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-39820806196693885122010-07-06T00:09:23.939+02:002010-07-06T00:09:23.939+02:00Good Morning Eeben,
I indeed have been thinking a...Good Morning Eeben,<br /><br />I indeed have been thinking and the first step in all these tasks is to have a set finish line - how do we know we are done? Do we simply pacify a region, knowing full well that we will be back shortly or do we fight to win. The issue is always the definition of "win." As for any major undertaking we have to have a distinct finish line or we will muddle around - and lose the peace. <br /><br />Now that we have our finish line the central tenet is intelligence, strategic and tactical. If we just wish to pacify weakly we will essentially irritate the population - and be thought of as occupiers (remember that we do not have the media on the side of freedom). The strategic intel tells us what to expect at first and the general direction to go, the tactical intel will give us insight to the populations reaction to our presence, and where exactly we need to pierce and destroy our enemies - from there the RoE can be developed. The strategic RoE is to not violate the first set of victory tenets - the tactical RoE has to be set on the ground by the local/district commanders. Every time we set up a centralized control for action it fails, Vietnam, Laos (post "Vietnamization), Jutland (Hugh Evans-Thomas control was a crime) - but we have to have almost instant communications. With the world media in bed with those who oppose freedom the message has to get out lightning fast. In an earlier age Nelson's Frigate captains had free reign within his strategic RoE - and this sounds very much like your RoE within EO.<br /><br />As to our current RoE - it stinks of Vietnam, which is what the media wants to repeat. The current situations US/Coalition and PMC soldiers find themselves in seem to be a guaranteed loser and have to be delegated to the commanders on the ground to get our success assured. They will fight with honor and we won't be seeing the atrocities passed out by communist, nazi and fascist soldiers because the modern armies of the west are based on the ideals of free men - guaranteeing that the enemy will be killed with minimal spillover to the innocents involved. Now if the local population shelters terrorists willingly they throw those protections out the door. That is also the responsibility of free choice.<br /><br />More thoughts to come.<br /><br />Best Regards,<br /><br />JohnJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14052355800345172823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-69874291831889593952010-07-01T13:02:49.362+02:002010-07-01T13:02:49.362+02:00I too value everyone’s comments on this matter, Jo...I too value everyone’s comments on this matter, John. I just find it hard to believe that troops are deployed with their hands tied behind their backs and expected to deliver results. <br /><br />I look forward to your thoughts on this very important matter.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-54058386248629051692010-07-01T11:12:31.924+02:002010-07-01T11:12:31.924+02:00Eeben,
As usual, great subject and commentary. It...Eeben,<br /><br />As usual, great subject and commentary. It seems the initial rule set needs to be defined first with the RoE to be determined by those affected most in contact. I'll have more thoughts soon but the comments here have really got me thinking.<br /><br />Regards, <br />JohnJohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14052355800345172823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-41627333558353388692010-06-26T13:03:55.494+02:002010-06-26T13:03:55.494+02:00Very true, Choco. The idea of RoE may be noble but...Very true, Choco. The idea of RoE may be noble but it is muddying the waters and causing casualties. Yet, stupidly, it prevails in its current form – but I still believe it is to play the politically correct card for the politicians, their legal advisors and the media at the expense of the armed forces. As for “peace operations”...another attempt at political correctness I suspect as such operations, like “peacekeeping” are a fallacy. <br /><br />The RoE are being exploited by the enemy – and we are allowing it to happen. As you rightfully point out, we give the enemy the opportunity and the timing to decide when to act. When we are reactive, we have lost the initiative and the momentum. Couple that to centralised command and control, and we have a disaster in the making. <br /><br />I suspect that you are right wrt some countries turning their militaries into NGOs. Whereas I am not in-the-loop as you are, I base my support to your comment on the happenings I see with many foreign armies. Many of them are so laden with technology that in many instances is worthless, they are not allowed to engage on initiative. Why are they there then, one may ask. So to killed? I get really mad at this sad state of affairs. <br /><br />My meagre experience with multinational operations was seeing the UN’s pathetic attempt at peacekeeping. Not only was language a problem, but to were agendas, equipment compatibility, marrying-up drills, radio procedures...you name it, it was a problem. I believe you re the points you make with these ops but as you point out, no one wants to learn and I am sure that those who want to rectify it are not allowed to do so. <br /><br />Yes, there have been many excellent contributions to the posts on the blog. IN fact, I really enjoy getting the response of others to what I write. <br /><br />Thank you for the compliment.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-24377766078650499652010-06-26T01:15:02.787+02:002010-06-26T01:15:02.787+02:00The RoE concept might be one of the most bastardiz...The RoE concept might be one of the most bastardized nowadays. From a serious attempt at balancing the use of force it has degenerated too many times into a political (lowercase "p" politics) tool for either making more palatable for the public the use of military force or to disguise the nature of the operations altogether. I.e: as "Peace operations". By the way, what the hell is that?.<br /><br />Other issue arises when RoE are, (As very often happens) ambiguous or ill-defined as they, as any other rule or regulation, can be "interpreted". The brass can (will) be tempted to stay out of trouble interpreting then in the most stringent way, getting the troops under their command very deep into way worse, real trouble, and sometimes rendering the mission ineffective. "Being there, doing next to nothing". (The most blatant examples of this might be found in the context of UN operations). What does mean, and what does include, "defensive action"?. Debatable, isn't it. What does even mean “Don’t shoot until you are shot at”?. I mean, by doing so, we let the enemy pick when they engage, but depending on the interpretation, we let they decide WHEN TO DISENGAGE. That makes a huge difference.<br /><br />If you think I wrote the last paragraphs from the perspective of modern day European armies, you are dead right. I'm a Spaniard. To be blunt, the Government of my country is adamantly turning our Army (With the enthusiastic support of the brass) into an NGO, a laical version of the Salvation Army. The RoE has been a great tool for this aim and that does color my opinion about the matter. In other cases just the opposite may apply. I´ve read and heard many about over-eager officers bending the RoE in the other way in lots of conflicts, but never experience it.<br /><br />In the context of multinational operations, it's often overlooked in the planning phase that two forces from different countries working side by side might have completely opposite RoE, or that they might interpret then in an opposite way. That causes poor coordination, mutual distrust, bitterness, ineffectiveness, and some huge f**k ups. And the funny (Well, it's no fun at all being in the middle of that, I tell you) thing is that this happens again and again, and no one seems to want to learn.<br /><br />I been reading this blog for a while, but didn't post until now. I´ve read all the older post and always found them interesting, and many times enlightening. The effort that Eeben makes keeping up with the readers causes that many times the very interesting debates in the Comments are as informational and worth to read as the posts, and that's a rarity in today's blogosphere. Kudos to him for that.<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />ChocoBurrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04764732930008067877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-81569233183886614262010-06-25T11:16:43.439+02:002010-06-25T11:16:43.439+02:00I thought he gave a good interview, Matt. Thanks f...I thought he gave a good interview, Matt. Thanks for posting it. I can certainly appreciate how he feels about things. <br /><br />I am very pleased that others are talking about the RoE and the negative effect they can have on offensive operations. After all, to fight and WIN a COIN conflict, one needs to retain the offensive. <br /><br />I believe that political and legal meddling has altered the landscape of warfare to such an extent that soldiers are unable to perform the missions the politicians and legal experts send them on. <br /><br />A friend of mine said to me in jest one day “Maybe we can fix the bad strategy with firepower”. Now even that is not possible.<br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-60076219067752530432010-06-25T05:24:09.811+02:002010-06-25T05:24:09.811+02:00Interesting stuff. I just posted an interview that...Interesting stuff. I just posted an interview that Erik Prince did on CNBC. I looked at as a way for him to advertise the sale of the company, but he also delved into some interesting subjects.<br /><br />One of which was the ROE in Afghanistan, and the complaints from the troops about restrictive ROEs. He compared today's use of lawyers to decide the use of munitions, to the political officers of the soviet union. Interesting discussion, and wouldn't it be cool if started a blog and started talking things up? Check it out here.<br /><br />http://feraljundi.com/2010/06/24/industry-talk-erik-prince-on-cnbc/matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04645537637248773668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-955273524757178757.post-46305927743447081282010-06-24T19:19:50.249+02:002010-06-24T19:19:50.249+02:00You are spot on William. They are usually crafted ...You are spot on William. They are usually crafted by people who are not there, hope to make their political careers shine and who once crafted, never assess the validity of the RoE. <br /><br />Again I agree with you. The RoE are decided not only by the phase we are entering but also on the operating environment. If we don’t do that, we stagnate and again give the enemy the initiative whilst denying it to ourselves. <br /><br />Training, training and more training. It is training and belief in training that allows us to make snap decisions on when to fire and at what and who, gives us fire discipline, makes us take responsibility for our actions and ultimately carries the day. Trainie3d soldiers don’t shoot civilians unless the civilians pose a threat and are armed. <br /><br />As I said to Matt, EO’s commanders determined the RoE required for any scenario. It certainly worked well. <br /><br />Rgds,<br /><br />EebenEeben Barlow's Milsec Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08942119485068301545noreply@blogger.com