31
Operation Red Operation Red Wings Wings Afghanistan Afghanistan 28 June 2005 28 June 2005

Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Operation Red WingsOperation Red WingsAfghanistan Afghanistan

28 June 200528 June 2005

Page 2: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Agenda

• Background– Geography– Command Structure– Goal / Plan / Mission– Background information

• Compromise Scenario– Options

• ROE Discussion

Page 3: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Background• Operation Red Wings was a 2/3 Marine operation,

that included SEALs during the opening phase.

• At the time, the SEALs were part of the CJSOTF-A (Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force – Afghanistan). – Naval Special Warfare Task Unit

• Seal Team

– Based at Bagram Airfield.

CJTF-76

CJSOTF-A

NSWTU 2/3 Marines

Page 4: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Geography

• Mountainous, arid country above tree line with no/little vegetation.

• Hindu Kush mountain range along Pakistan border.

Page 5: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

GeographyGeography

Page 6: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise
Page 7: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

GoalGoal

• Disrupt anti-Coalition militia (ACM) activity in the region– Focus on the “Mountain Tigers” led by Ahmad

Shah. – Estimated 8-200 ACM members.– “Capture or kill” mission– Ahmad Shah then considered a high-value

Taliban target in this area due to IED strikes.

Page 8: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

The PlanThe Plan (Slide 1 of 3) (Slide 1 of 3)

• 2/3 Marines original plan:• Six-man scout/sniper team occupy observation

posts under cover of darkness.• Main assault would occur at night.• Remain in area for weeks conducting various

missions (patrolling, HA, medical).

• No illumination, so required SOF helicopter assets.

• Plan changed…….

Page 9: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

The PlanThe Plan (Slide 2 of 3) (Slide 2 of 3)

• Helicopter assets available to the Marines could not operate in low illumination environments.

• To get SOF helicopters, SOF commanders wanted SOF ground force involvement .

• Surveillance team changed to 4 SEALs.

Page 10: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

The PlanThe Plan (Slide 3 of 3) (Slide 3 of 3)

• Insert SR team at night by helicopter.

• Insertion point within 1 mile of a populated area.

• SEALs would then conduct the direct action portion of the raid, and Marines would provide cordon security.

SEAL Pre-Mission Briefing Map

Page 11: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

The MissionThe Mission

• 27 June 27 2005 -- “Redwings is a go!”

• 4 SEALs inserted by helicopter at night on 27-28 June 2005. – Established initial observation post.– Settled in to begin their mission.

Page 12: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

SEAL Background

• Team members:– LT Michael Murphy– HM2 Marcus Luttrell– STG2 Matthew “Axe” Axelson– GM2 Danny Dietz

• Previous engagements with anti-coalition militia (ACM) members in Afghanistan.

• Previous combat experience in Iraq.

Page 13: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Compromise

• SEALs discovered by three unarmed civilians with around one hundred goats – One youth: approximately 14 years old.– “No Taliban.”

• Luttrell believes that they are goat herders from high country.

What do you do?

Page 14: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Options Discussed• Option 1: Kill the civilians

Problem: What to do with the goats & means of disposing of the bodies or others coming to look for them.

• Option 2: Turn them loose

Problem: Possibly disclosing position & jeopardizing mission.

Page 15: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

DiscussionDiscussion

Why vote?

Page 16: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Decision and Results

• The vote:

• Dietz abstains; Murphy discussed both sides;

• “Axe” says kill; Luttrell says free;

• Goat herders released –SEALs move to a better defensive position and prepared for possible compromise of their mission.

• Approx 40 minutes later…SEALs attacked by between 30 and 40 ACM fighters.

Page 17: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

QuestionsWhat training could have resolved this discussion?

ROE?

Law of Armed Conflict?

Other?

Who should have provided that training?Judge Advocate?

Commander?

Page 18: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

ROE

• 2005 OEF mission ROE– Required positive ID and “LIT”– Slightly different from OIF ROE

• Always retained the right of self defense

• According to Luttrell “Our rules of engagement in Afghanistan specified that we could not shoot, kill, or injure unarmed civilians.”

Page 19: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

OEF ROE Particulars

• PID: A reasonable certainty that the proposed target is a legitimate military target.

• “likely and identifiable threat” - certain enemy forces who pose a likely and identifiable threat to friendly forces could be considered hostile and engaged and destroyed.

Source: Legal Lessons Learned From Iraq and Afghanistan Vol 1 (p. 96 & 100)

Page 20: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Luttrell’s Thoughts on ROE

• Liberal politicians and media create ROE.

• “However, from the standpoint of the U.S. soldier, Ranger, SEAL, Green Beret, or whatever, those ROE represent a very serious conundrum. We understand we must obey them because they happen to come under the laws of the country we are sworn to serve. But they represent a danger to us; they undermine our confidence on the battlefield in the fight against world terror. Worse yet, they make us concerned, disheartened, and sometimes hesitant.”

Page 21: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Luttrell’s Thoughts on ROE

• “The truth is, any government that thinks war is somehow fair and subject to rules like a baseball game probably should not get into one”

• “Faced with the murderous cutthroats of the Taliban, we are not fighting under the rules of Geneva IV article 4. We are fighting under the rules of Article 223.556mm…”

Page 22: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Luttrell’s Thoughts on ROE

• Developed by politicians:

- “the ever-intrusive rules of engagement”

- “very long way from the battlefield “

“And those ROE are very specific: we may not open fire until we are fired upon or have positively identified our enemy and have proof of his intentions”

Page 23: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Blogs/Book Reviews

• A review of a wide variety of blogs demonstrated a widespread perception that ROE hinders mission accomplishment

• Many soldiers “added” that ROE often cost American lives

• A few soldiers took offense at placing the blame on ROE – and indicated that even “regular” soldiers practiced what to do if compromised – a common occurrence in that terrain.

Page 24: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Rest of the Story…• LT Murphy used cell phone to call for help

– Awarded Medal of Honor

• Murphy, Dietz & Axelson were killed– Dietz and Axelson each awarded the Navy Cross

• Rescue team killed by RPG fired by hostile forces. – Most SEALs killed in single incident.

• Luttrell escaped and was rescued by a local Afghan shepherd. – Evaded ACM forces for several days before returning to

US forces

Page 25: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise
Page 26: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise
Page 27: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise
Page 28: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

April 16, 2008April 16, 2008

• Ahmad Shah (AKA Mullah Ismail) killed in a shootout with Pakistani police.

Page 29: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

ConclusionConclusion• Outcome was not a result of the ROE.

• Under the circumstances, killing the civilians would have been a crime.

• Pre-mission legal training was conducted; commanders must train ROE.

• Results due more to lack of proper communications, planning, Command and Control, and “fog of war.”

Page 30: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise
Page 31: Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005. Agenda Background –Geography –Command Structure –Goal / Plan / Mission –Background information Compromise

Questions