Welcome to Gaia! ::

US military ROE

The US Department of Defense officially defines ROE as:

"Directives issued by competent military authority which delineate the circumstances and limitations under which United States forces will initiate and/or continue combat engagement with other forces encountered." [1]

The ROE deal with four issues [2]:

* When military force may be used,
* Where military force may be used,
* Against whom force should be used in the circumstances described above, and
* How military force should be used to achieve the desired ends.

The ROE take two forms: Actions a soldier may take without consulting a higher authority, unless explicitly forbidden (sometimes called 'command by negation') and second, actions that may only be taken if explicitly ordered by a higher authority (sometimes called 'positive command').

In addition to a typically large set of standing orders, military personnel will be given additional rules of engagement before performing any mission or military operation. These can cover circumstances such as how to retaliate after an attack, how to treat captured targets, which territories the soldier is bound to fight into, and how the force should be used during the operation.

The ROE are extremely important:

1. They provide a consistent, understandable and repeatable standard on how forces act. Typically they are carefully thought out in detail well in advance of an engagement and may cover a number of scenarios, with different rules for each.
2. They assist in the synchronization of political-diplomatic and military components of a strategy by allowing political commanders to better understand, forecast and tailor the actions of a force.

The first rule of engagement for United States military forces is always the right to use force in self-defense.
[edit]

ROE failures

In any engagement, the ROE need to balance two competing goals: The need to use force effectively to accomplish the mission objectives and the need to avoid unnecessary force. This creates room for two types of error:

* Excessively tight ROE can constrain a commander from performing his mission effectively, called a Type I error. It is typical for the political leadership to constrain the actions of military commanders. This is often a source of tension between the political leaders, who are trying to accomplish a different objective than the military commanders, who are trying make the most effective use of their forces. Sagan [2] provides an excellent discussion of this topic. The UN Peacekeeper's ROE (see UNAMIR) during the Rwandan Genocide is a tragic example of too restrictive ROE.
* Excessively loose ROE can facilitate the escalation of a conflict which, while being tactically effective, negates the political objectives that the use of force was meant to achieve. This is a Type II or 'escalatory' error and an example of it may be the killing of Jean de Menezes on July 22, 2005.

[edit]

Current Issues

(2004) There is an increase in the use of private military contractors in modern conflict. Typically these companies are not bound by the same ROE and well thought out standing orders that a national military force adheres to. Nor are also typically as accountable. This increases the likelihood of 'loose ROE' type errors.




Note: taken from Wikipedia

You should check out the interorgators, we get a weeks-worth of classes on ROE. Boring, yes, but nessisary...

When i join the Army and go into combat if i have to I will obey all ROE laws UNLESS 1 of my brothers in arms gets killed. then i say F**K ROE, then i shoot every mother F**ker i see, if hes hiding in a mosque or not.

I say shoot anyone holding an a.k., rpg, or any other weapon.

I'll look for you in the news.

Those going to/in Iraq please play close attenion:

IP and IA are allowed to take their weapons home.

Don't shoot a cop or army commander please.

Also every home is allowed 1 AK.

Not sure about how it goes in Afghanistan.