(off topic) Hostage Rescue-the truth
Dudester
I can't divulge my sources, but I still have some connections within the Spec Op community. Read this after action report.
Acronyms might be difficult.
ROE= Rules of engagagement
CPN = Captain
BHO = Obama
CDR = Commander
OSC = Operational Scene Commander
Having spoken to some SEAL pals here in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for 4 days, I got the following:
1. BHO wouldn't authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.
2. Once they arrived, BHO imposed restrictions on their ROE that they couldn't do anything unless the hostage's life was in "imminent" danger
3. The first time the hostage jumped, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction
4. When the navy RIB came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.
5. BHO specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge CPN and SEAL teams
6. Bainbridge CPN and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies
7. BHO immediately claims credit for his "daring and decisive" behaviour. As usual with him, it's BS.
So per our last email thread, I'm downgrading Oohbaby's performace to D-. Only reason it's not an F is that the hostage survived.
Read the following accurate account.
Philips' first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn't worked out as well. With the Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country's Navy possible, Philips threw himself off of his lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters onboard the destroyer a clear shot at his captors — and none was taken.
The guidance from National Command Authority — the president of the United States, Barack Obama — had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage's life was in clear, extreme danger.
The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates — and again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief's staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a “peaceful solution†would be acceptable.
After taking fire from the Somali kidnappers again Saturday night, the on scene commander decided he'd had enough.
Keeping his authority to act in the case of a clear and present danger to the hostage's
life and having heard nothing from Washington since yet another request to mount a rescue operation had been denied the day before, the Navy officer — unnamed in all media reports to date — decided the AK47 one captor had leveled at Philips' back was a threat to the hostage's life and ordered the NSWC team to take their shots.
Three rounds downrange later, all three brigands became enemy KIA and Philips was safe.
There is upside, downside, and spinside to the series of events over the last week that culminated in yesterday's dramatic rescue of an American hostage.
Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and [1] declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put paid to questions of the inexperienced president's toughness and decisiveness.
Despite the Obama administration's (and its sycophants') attempt to spin yesterday's success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the inexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort.
What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four day and counting standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.
Acronyms might be difficult.
ROE= Rules of engagagement
CPN = Captain
BHO = Obama
CDR = Commander
OSC = Operational Scene Commander
Having spoken to some SEAL pals here in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for 4 days, I got the following:
1. BHO wouldn't authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.
2. Once they arrived, BHO imposed restrictions on their ROE that they couldn't do anything unless the hostage's life was in "imminent" danger
3. The first time the hostage jumped, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction
4. When the navy RIB came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.
5. BHO specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge CPN and SEAL teams
6. Bainbridge CPN and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies
7. BHO immediately claims credit for his "daring and decisive" behaviour. As usual with him, it's BS.
So per our last email thread, I'm downgrading Oohbaby's performace to D-. Only reason it's not an F is that the hostage survived.
Read the following accurate account.
Philips' first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn't worked out as well. With the Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country's Navy possible, Philips threw himself off of his lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters onboard the destroyer a clear shot at his captors — and none was taken.
The guidance from National Command Authority — the president of the United States, Barack Obama — had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage's life was in clear, extreme danger.
The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates — and again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief's staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a “peaceful solution†would be acceptable.
After taking fire from the Somali kidnappers again Saturday night, the on scene commander decided he'd had enough.
Keeping his authority to act in the case of a clear and present danger to the hostage's
life and having heard nothing from Washington since yet another request to mount a rescue operation had been denied the day before, the Navy officer — unnamed in all media reports to date — decided the AK47 one captor had leveled at Philips' back was a threat to the hostage's life and ordered the NSWC team to take their shots.
Three rounds downrange later, all three brigands became enemy KIA and Philips was safe.
There is upside, downside, and spinside to the series of events over the last week that culminated in yesterday's dramatic rescue of an American hostage.
Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and [1] declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put paid to questions of the inexperienced president's toughness and decisiveness.
Despite the Obama administration's (and its sycophants') attempt to spin yesterday's success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the inexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort.
What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four day and counting standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.
17 comments
I'm a President Obama groupie---that is there ain't nothing better on the platter.
Anyway, my 2 cents is that the post should stay even though it doesn't seem at all related to stripclubbing.
Also not surprising is the reaction by Slothrop. Liberals absolutely cannot STAND dissent. Ironically, your post does not even amount to "dissent," but merely some information about the actual rescue.
Those that support BHO will not believe, censor, trash, etc. etc., the truth if it shines unfavorably, in any way, on their chosen one.
Those that do not support BHO will understand that the above is highly likely if one understands that it is in line with how he seems to think.
Therefore, let it go, and thank God for the Seals, and the rest involved, in the safe return of an American!
BTW, I agree with the OP. A navy destroyer full of SEALs and trained servicemen taking 4 days (and probably costing US taxpayers a billion dollars) to eradicate a lifeboat of three teenage pirates and rifles. They should have blown them out of the water when the Captain jumped off the lifeboat.
Here's another off-topic post: I saw a shirt the other day, it said "Welcome Back, Carter" with a picture of BHO on it. Funny, but oh so true. Perhaps the only good thing that will come of it is we will get a second coming of Regan in 3 years, 9 months (but who's counting?)
Oh, and have a lap dance for me. (There, now this post is about strip clubs)
The truth is if this incident improves President Obama's appeal, then it was well worth printing an extra billion dollars or so. The loss of life is tragic, but sometimes the greater good e.g. love of President Obama or money creation is actually served.
Next bold decisive step? Drug decriminalization and saving stripclubs. Unfortunately, I'm concerned the government's interest in banning private ownership of guns will derail the freedom agenda as far as drugs and the spill over will be less freedom including stripclubs.
For those who are hyped up about saving an American, think how many Americans could be saved if guns were banned. America could be the next Canada or United Kingdom. :) Even banning stripclubs might save an American life. LOL!
Assuming the above statement is correct, then it should give pause to those who believe they have a common sense point of view. President Obama may have been 100% correct to try and protect the lives of so called "criminals." According to the American propaganda that I've seen these buccaneers are viewed overwhelmingly as HEROES in their own communities. Anyway, the bloodlust of a few may drive these buccaneers into alliances that may truly cost American lives and treasure.
I wonder if forced stripclubbing at the expense of government could help curb bloodlust? I have a feeling that some males are so aggressive merely because they ain't getting enough pussy. Hmmm . . . maybe pussy could cure patriotism as well. :)
"This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief’s staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a 'peaceful solution' would be acceptable."
This type of wording would NEVER be in any *real* after-action report from our military. The whole original post is really bogus unless you're willing to believe what some "anonymous source" has to say...it smacks of a complete lack of respect for the miltary's Commander-in-Chief, which doesn't happen officially very often in the military.
I also was never able to figure out how they would be able to affect a decent rescue operation in the first place, since the lifecraft was completely enclosed & locked up. There really were only a few ways that this recent incident was going to come to a close...they were going to kill the American & be killed themselves OR they were going to release the American & be treated as prirates under international law OR they were going to try to kill the American hostage & end up being killed themselves. They weren't going to be allowed to get any help from their fellow pirates, and they had no way to get back to shore, since they had no fuel.
"Liberals absolutely cannot STAND dissent."
LOL...really...what about all the blather from the Right-wing about ending the Iraq War while our troops were engaged in battle?? That was a BIG "no-no" in their book, period.
"A navy destroyer full of SEALs and trained servicemen taking 4 days (and probably costing US taxpayers a billion dollars)"
LOL...really?? Please...since when do you guys care about the excess of money that we spend on "defense"...your number is waaaay off too...
"since when do you guys care about the excess of money that we spend on "defense""
Please don't classify me as "you guys". I think excess govt. spending in any way shape or form is terrible.
Fine, but don't try & say that this little, recent exercise cost "a billion dollars". We spend well over a billion dollars a day on "defense" in this country (and that includes ALL "defense" operations), and that destroyer wouldn't have been just home in port if it wasn't engaged with the pirates, period.