Rules of Engagement for Conscience and Sense

[jcustis]

I think, most importantly, ROE must "make sense" at the grunt level, and changes must be "sold" to the troops.

During one of our daily ROE changes, I actually looked at one of the cards. The fact that they ROE was changing, and it was done casually, and through an e-mail, led to the Troops proclaiming that the ROE was "all ####ed up." and they therefore felt justified in ignoring it.

A checklist-style ROE is not the answer, imho. We had a guy waste some kids stealing trash, and he was completely ROE-compliant. We also had a female E-5 who sat there and endured a mortar barrage from some insurgents that she could see and could've engaged, but was prevented from doing so by the "ROE of the day" as well as direction from the TOC.

I would prefer a Horatio Hornblower "Strategic Corporal" to an ROE, but lacking that, a leadership chain that puts some serious effort into communicated the "why" aspect of ROE.

120mm, I have to ask what will probably a painful question. These ROE changes, did they occur in Iraq? On the Marine side of things, the ROE never changed, although there were "clarifications" that arose during Fallujah v.2.0. In fact, I think that besides a shift in verbage that there were no forces declared hostile (e.g. military or paramilitary), I remember the ROE to be the same in 2004 as what we used to cross the border in 2003.

Your absolutely right, that's total nonsense to let guidance that should be as clearly cut as possible, degrade to set of something at the level of confusing special orders.