I read that more as a dig at administration policy and those who write the Rules of Engagement, not those who follow the ROE. I can't speak for Bowser, though, Its possible he means different.

To be honest, I'm more curious what your views on this are than Bowser's. Do you think the ROE as written by the administration are too lax? Should more care be taken even at the risk of extending this conflict for many more months and many more US/British deaths?

I believe a balance must be struck, but achieving that balance is going to take time, as the soldiers read new threats down the road. It is clear to me that the Iraqi army is exploiting the ROE to their advantage and to hell with the cost to civilians. Take note, that does not make it ok for the US to say the hell with civilians too. My point is that the US are the antecedent to the way the Iraqis are prosecuting this war. Atrocities on the US side are the exception not the rule. In Iraq, I think we know what the rule is.

Those exceptions are unfortunate. I don't like seeing or hearing about kids getting blown away in vans either. In such cases, I hope the US military conducts full investigations and judges accordingly. I, however, refuse to judge the soldiers. Let somebody more qualified do that job.

-Steve G.