Relaxed rules of engagement are attributed to the U.S. military basically defeating ISIS on the ground in Iraq.
Under President Trump, U.S. forces are no longer required to be in contact with enemy forces before opening fire. Additionally, fighters on the ground have more authority to make decisions.
Basically: Soldiers are left free to fight and win the war we sent them there to win.
It’s called “war” for a reason. Under Bush and Obama (particularly Obama), soldiers were trained to be politically correct and sensitive with any enemies they encounter. Now this doesn’t make any sense. If someone is ruthless and evil enough to justify going to war with them, then why in the world would “rules of engagement” consist of refusing to hurt their feelings or harm them?
It’s an absurdity bordering on the humorous.
When we send actual troops into the world’s most dangerous territory and expect them to act this way, it’s a sick travesty.
No wonder we lost and lost and lost for all those years. And only now are we starting to win some of the battles, thanks to President Trump’s willingness to eschew political correctness in favor of winning.
Islam and other enemies of Western values and freedom will never, ever give up. The war is by no means won. But at least we’re starting to turn the tide against ISIS, the latest manifestation of that warped ideological hatred against all things American. Iran and other enemies, including non-Muslim adversaries such as North Korea, remain more dangerous than ever. But at least now they know we have some spine.
America is still a democracy, and the sad truth is that most of us voted for Obama’s insane and sick rules of engagement, not once but twice. We all have to take a look at our feelings of unearned guilt. If we actually believe that the United States is in the wrong and has no moral right to defend itself against Islamic terrorists and other violent forces, then we simply should not send troops anywhere in the first place.
Of course, if we adopted that policy consistently, the United States would be overrun in no time. Not to mention the majority of our energy supplies coming from the Middle East would be shut off, putting an end to civilization as we know it.
I have a sneaking suspicion that most of the armchair pacifists who love Obama and his rules of engagement would greet such a development with howls and shrieks of anxiety and despair. But it’s easy to be politically correct when the consequences of doing so only have to affect soldiers in harm’s way, and not your own self-righteous, pitifully pious beliefs.
Rational people can and should always debate the best way to use the military and diplomacy to sustain liberty and defend the rights of man. But there never should have been a question about our moral right to do so.
Under Obama, we instilled moral self-doubt in our soldiers. We actually told our troops, “Defend us, but never at the expense of killing or offending anyone.” That’s what the absurd rules of engagement accomplished.
Under President Trump it’s a completely different story. And that’s how we win.
Follow Dr. Hurd on Facebook. Search under “Michael Hurd” (Rehoboth Beach DE). Get up-to-the-minute postings, recommended articles and links, and engage in back-and-forth discussion with Dr. Hurd on topics of interest. Also follow Dr. Hurd on Twitter at @MichaelJHurd1