by Andy Bloxham
BLUF. British soldiers who spot Taliban fighters planting roadside bombs are told not to shoot them because they do not pose an immediate threat, the Ministry of Defence has admitted. They are instead being ordered to just observe insurgents and record their position to reduce the risk of civilian casualties.
A key part of the MoD's counter-insurgency theory holds that it is more important to win over civilians by not killing innocent people than it is to eliminate every potential insurgent.
Much more at The Telegraph
Comments
PC, the same could be said about the US/UK in Afghanistan, yes? The three Paddies were members of a PIRA ASU and were planning to bomb Brit troops in Gibraltar hence Operation Flavius. That they were killed when unarmed and before the bomb was planted is by the by. The Brits I'm sure would have preferred to lift them and get int out of them by fair means or foul (lets say by using IRA methods).
http://www.eliteukforces.info/special-air-service/sas-operations/sas-gi…
"The families of the Savage, McCann and Farrel took the case to the European Court of Human Rights. In 1995 the court found that the British Government had violated Article 2 of the Convention. It also ruled that the three had been engaged in an act of terrorism, and consequently dismissed unanimously the applicants claims for damages and costs."
Good stuff, "live by the sword, die by the sword".
Now apply all this to Afghanistan. The problem there is not the "foreign" fighters as they get taken out whenever they get cornered or try to stand and fight.
It is the local "gun for hire" Taliban (or a true believer) who seem to confuse ISAF. Only when he is armed is he a Taliban, otherwise he is "royal game" along with the civilian population. What are the consequences to him and his family if he takes part in an ambush that kills ISAF soldiers or lays and IED which does same? He just caches his weapon and mingles with the locals and marvels how stupid the yanks and the limeys are.
Oh yes and he is allowed to cultivate his poppies to make a nice little income where the result is money for him and more deaths down the road in the US and Europe. Yea the yanks and the Limeys are really stupid.
I ask again then, "What are the consequences to him (a local Taliban) and his family?"
Times Change!
A little over 20 years ago, British soldiers were shooting and killing unarmed Irish Republican Army Volunteers on a dry run in Gibraltar.
British army ROE were never shy about murdering unarmed Irish men, women, and children. Brit Army ROE may state: Catholic bog wogs get killed, actual Pathan muslim wogs planting IEDs get a pass.
"Digging a hole" does not necessarily mean a local national is planting an ied and therefore a hostile threat.
This is really about ROE and the author of the piece mixes some matters that are clearly tied to ROE with the idea that soldiers are told not to shoot IED layers.
Sorry, as critical as I have been toward pop centric coin, I cant believe the British or American Army has such a restrictive ROE that says a soldier cannot shoot to kill if he determines that an individual is digging a hole and actually placing an IED in it with clear and reasonable indicators that that is what is happening.
gian