ROE & Mission Command
An article in the military times (http://www.militarytimes.com/news/20...reers-042312w/) raises a consequential implication...
What is the purpose of ROE? and how does that purpose integrate into the concept of Mission Command?
I don't mean to be silly or superficial when asking this question. Beyond the apparent career-manuevering by this Marine officer's Battalion Commander, the issue of the place ROE's hold when put up against discretion is a critical one. Is it the case that we are designing ROE's with "Command and Control" circa 1990, or with "Mission Command - 2011" in mind?
I have always found the ROE's I was issued easy to interpret favorably or otherwise because they are so broad. The fact that ROE compliance can be checked by a SJA makes them a legal guideline or is this simply a misapplcation of a lawyer where a commander's judgement would be more appropriate? After all, laws of war are never amended by an ROE, so what's the lawyer's job?
This seems to be a rather dangerous element within our force's decision making evolution that needs to be resolved. Would love to see how many agree or disagree with the article's circumstance and the implication.
Bookmarks