Consider the following scenarios for a hot second:
1. You’re a platoon leader patrolling somewhere in Iraq, say Ramadi or Sadr City. Your troops are engaged by sniper fire from atop a three story building. No one is directly hit however one Sargent is winged by shrapnel.
2. On Humvee patrol just outside Baghdad your gunner sights a man by the side of the road ahead. He is carrying an object that fits the profile of an IED. He looks up to see your unit approaching and as he does drops the device, swings an AK-47 and fires a burst in the Humvees direction as he scurries into a nearby residential area.
What is missing from both scenarios above? Isn’t it obvious?
As both units came under fire they didn’t engage the threat.
Why you ask? Because that’s what the [Dim]ocrats want. They want the units in both scenarios to first scream “Hey are You an al-Qaida affiliated Jihadist Cut Throat?
WASHINGTON (AP) — Determined to challenge President Bush, Senate Democrats are drafting legislation to limit the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq, effectively revoking the broad authority Congress granted in 2002, officials said Thursday.
While these officials said the precise wording of the measure remains unsettled, one draft would restrict American troops in Iraq to combating al-Qaida, training Iraqi army and police forces, maintaining Iraq’s territorial integrity and otherwise proceeding with the withdrawal of combat forces.
Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senator Reid, declined to discuss the deliberations, saying only, “No final decisions have been made on how to proceed.”
That’s called a trial balloon floated by these idiots to see how high it flies. With luck (note I said luck not any form of common sense) it will die before it gains enough hot air to float.
Captain Ed has it about right.
This is a textbook case of micromanaging a war. Instead of taking the one option open to Congress — defunding the war effort — they have decided to override the Constitution by setting themselves above the President in the chain of command. They understand that a defunding effort would unmask them as defeatists and retreatists while American troops face the terrorists, especially in Anbar. Even Joe Biden understands that much.
To which I’ll add, they needed “unmasking?”
Since when?
I usually defend GOPers when people call them unusually empty-headed. It’s becoming harder and harder to do that, though.
At any rate, the new AUMF won’t take away self-defense capabilities.
Your first mistake is assuming your speaking to a “GOPer.” But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and consider you’re spelling challenged and meant to write “GOFers.” However, I’m not a “GOFer” either.
Your second mistake is obvious. Any revision of the AUMF that would require the U.S. Military to ensure they only engage al-Qaida, while under fire, is not only misguided but suicidal.
Or perhaps YOU have a better plan for U.S. Forces to distinguish between a jihadist-cut-throat and your “normal everyday” Iraqi “insurgent.”
Better than, “Hey You, Are You a Jihadist Cut Throat,” I mean.