Posted on 04/16/2009 7:09:51 PM PDT by mrmargaritaville
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.
WOW! Very interesting that they belong to the Luo Tribe. Wonder if some of the ransom money already paid ended up in ZERO’s campaign war chest he used during the election?
Let's talk economics.
How much did those extra days cost us or whoever pays for Bainbridge and the SEALs?
Amen shipmate. I can’t add a word to your post. You said it all.
Of course this is hearsay at this time but it does fit to answer the question as to WHY when the captain jumped out of the boat the first time... we did not act
RHIB
What's the URL of this "source"?
0bama lies again ping
He'll probably be promoted... to KP... permanently...
And has anybody thought as to why the captain was held on the Bainbridge for so long when at any point he could have been flown out?
Wait for things to blow over? Convince the Captain to “be quiet”?
FBI threatens National Security?
My only thought about this is that the SEALS didn't arrive on station until sometime Saturday (the exact time Saturday is still unclear in press accounts). The skipper jumped in the water on Friday. So, we can use some deductive reasoning to understand that there wasn't anyone on board the Baingridge to actually shoot the pirates.
I know that US Navy ships don't as a matter of course carry scoped rifles in the ship's armory. The SEALS had to bring their weapons with them when they jumped on station. Also, you would be foolish to order sailors to open up on a target like a lifeboat with crew-served weapons while the skipper was so close, especially from 100 to 150 meters away.
I don't think so. I'm guessing it was just a matter of logistics and skill. The SEALS weren't yet on station when the skipper jumped into the water on Friday.
With all apologies to our Navy veterans, US sailors are not very good shots. In fact, I don't believe anyone on board a guided missile destroyer is even trained on a rifle, like the M-16A2 or the M14. The only weapons that were probably even pointed at the lifeboat at the time were crew-served M60s or M2s - not weapons you want to fire at a small object at 300 yards, especially when something you don't want to hit is floating right next to it.
I'm guessing that the Bainbridge skipper was instructed not to do anything provocative and to keep the lifeboat close with an open line of communication until the SEALS arrived. In my experience, that's very good advice.
Now, what happened after the SEALS set up shop is anyone's guess. I'm sure the real story has yet to come out, but eventually it certainly will - it always does.
You may be right. I haven’t been in the service for decades, and then I was in the Army, not the Navy. I do have quite a lot of experience with boats and the sea, but not connected with the Navy.
But it strikes me as remiss that the commander in that region would send out the Bainbridge without Seals already on board. Since the mission was supposed to be protecting ships against pirates, how on earth could they do that unless they were properly prepared to deal with pirates? Small boats, irregulars, hostages, the whole scenario was well known, the only difference being that this time the hostage was American. And they weren’t ready for it? Why were they there, then?
I don’t KNOW anything about current SOP, of course. It just seems odd to me that they wouldn’t be ready to deal with the kind of situation they encountered.
Although I understand that SNAFU can be an ancient problem in the military. Courage, heroism, and screwups.
Obama certainly didn’t gain anything by going after Joe the Plumber. In fact, given McCain’s stupidity, it was almost the only negative publicity he got during the last stages of the campaign.
So the question is, is he going to be smart, or vindictive? Given the fact that he’s well trained in the Chicago Way, I wouldn’t be entirely hopeful, but even mobsters and narcissists can learn sometimes that it’s best just to let it go.
now the captured pirate will get a day in US courts (should be military court, where death is outcome)
the pirates youth will be used as a defense (of course some of the saliors in the navy are 18 years old, are they youths also, incapable of making adult choices??)
even if this pirate gets life in a us prison (something tells me he will get a lot less, and will be lawyered up with liberal help) we end up paying for his trial,a nd inprisonment.
he should have been dumped into the ocean.
guess now we can look forward to a pirate hostage taking for exchange.
kill them where we find them, take no prisoners
And so BHO’s legacy begins, with his 4 day failure. Let him take the credit, because when the pirates retaliate THE ONE will also have to take the blame.
Don't get me going. It's probably not logistically feasible to have SEALS on every ship in the Indian ocean. They are an extremely limited and valuable commodity. But, there was once a time when US Marines were stationed aboard virtually every Navy ship. In a effort to scale back the cost of our national defense (the only thing in the Constitution that the government is to provide), the Marines were removed. Now, we have no one on board that has any worthwhile training in close combat tactics, small arms implementation or ship boarding.
If this were to happen again, the Navy would probably once again have to wait for someone else, either Marine, Delta or SEAL to arrive on station. Welcome to the post-Cold War military.
I find it interesting that despite all of the tough talk following the incident, (and in light of the additional attacks ou US flagged ships)-he’s taken NO action on attacking or stopping the pirates.
The person that you refer to is named Raila Amollo Odinga. The Obama family in Kenya claims that, although Odinga claims to be a first cousin to BO, he is not. I can't find anything that cites Odinga as the head of the Luo tribe.
He knows more about our Tea Parties than he does about the pirates. We are a threat, the pirates are not.
My belief is that the AK47 being pointed at Phillips is not true. The life boat was being towed to steady it and make the kill shots easier. The commander said waste the Somalis and lets get out of here. So the shots were taken at the best time irregardless of an AK47 being pointed at Phillips.
We are left with our chickenshit lame brain President taking the credit
Wake up!!! 0bama is all rhetoric in such situations. He’s talking the way he’s seen presidents talk on The West Wing or some stupid movie. This talk has little relation to what he will do or won’t do
The mark of a conman is someone who has never done anything but sure has talked a lot. 0bammy is a professional talker.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.