Posted on 11/03/2001 6:04:22 AM PST by Diogenesis
MAG: 12 U.S. DELTA MEMBERS WOUNDED ON RAID OF OMAR'S COMPLEX, THREE SERIOUSLY; PENTAGON RETHINKS 'SPECIAL FORCES OPERATIONS'
Seymour Hersh has filed yet another controversial report for coming editons of the NEW YORKER, publishing sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
In ESCAPE AND EVASION, Hersh claims: In the wake of a near-disaster during the assault on Mullah Omar's complex during the early morning of October 20th, the Pentagon has been rethinking future Special Forces operations inside Afghanistan.
Delta Force, which prides itself on stealth, had been counterattacked by the Taliban, and some of the Americans had had to fight their way to safety. Hersh has filed his report for the November 12, 2001 issue of the NEW YORKER, on sale Monday.
Twelve Delta members were wounded, three of them seriously.
The intensity and ferocity of the Taliban response "scared the crap out of everyone," a senior military officer tells Hersh.
The Delta team stormed Mullah Omar's complex, but found little of value, Hersh reports, and then, "as they came out of the house, the shit hit the fan," one senior officer says. "It was like an ambush. The Taliban were fighting with light arms and either [rocket-propelled grenades] or mortars." The team immediately began taking casualties and evacuated.
"The Delta team was forced to abandon one of its objectives: the insertion of an undercover team into the area and the stay-behind soldiers fled to a previously determined rendezvous point, using a contingency plan known as an E. & E., for escape and evasion," Hersh writes.
Bears repeating. My thoughts exactly!
Let me tell you about this new invention called the Department of Defense website. In which a transcript of every briefing and interview by Rumsfeld is documented. You can't find evidence for your assertion because there isn't any. As I said, you are full of crap.
Actually, the real question is whether FReepers have even considered whether it might be true. There is NOTHING anti-American about what was reported. It might be untrue, but it was not anti-American, like the relentless propaganda about civilian deaths in Afghanistan, which are anti-American.
Why are Freepers so afraid of confronting stuff we might not like, which might be true? Instead, the usual response is juvenile humor, invective and self-congratualtion.
About half went to the Taliban and half to the North.
Yes, of course, alliances are constantly shifting in Afghanistan.
Nonetheless, there was no such thing as the Taliban while the Russians were there.
It was largely a Pakistani creation which took over from the chaos and infighting that followed the Russian withdrawal.
Many Mujahadin and other groups joined the Taliban, or more precisesly, were bought by the Taliban.
The problem of our top leadership not knowing how to use special or irregular forces has a long history. If this article is true, Franks is far from the first.
Furthermore, I don't know how it aids and abets the enemy to let him know that we know that operation x was a f'up - which, were it, he knows already - and therefore we are likely not to do it a second time - unless we are, in which case I hope everyone knows so that maybe we can put an end to the stupidity.
Finally, I am amazed at the arm-chair bravado of those here who think that they wouldn't be scared under fire - or that SF's are superhero's who do not feel fear when under fire. Fear is part of the wiring of the primitive wiring of the human (or animal) brain to help self preservation. The only one's who don't feel fear are destined to win the Darwin Award.
Furthremore it is dangerous. Great tactics are not thought up in a vacuum... they are learned through application on the battle-field. Not to learn from one's mistakes is not bravery - it is stupidity of the worst sort. Our job isn't to get American's killed. It is to acheive and objective with the least possible cost in blood, treasure, and the lives of cjountry.
I can only speak for myself....to me it is not a matter of confronting information I might prefer to not face....in the case of this article it is a matter of the press printing articles that are inappropriate for wartime. I know some active duty military and some vets would take exception about how the Delta Force (if such a unit there is) is portrayed. However, knowing many military officers in different branches of the services, I just ignored that part as ignorant disinformation. What did concern me about the article is the supposing....the special ops plans might change, etc. Any military information discussion is dangerous to the troops on the ground now, and the ones who will follow in the future. I resent "journalists" putting the lives of patriots at risk. I hope that answers your question.
No doubt he is on the left - but what matters is the information he provides. I read an interview with him once were he made the point that he is able to report as he does because there are many mid-level to lower-senior level military and CIA who are extraordinarily competent and who care that America does what is right - and does it well. He is simply reporting what he hears from them.
They thought they had Aidid and his generals in one place - went in - nothing there - when they came out, s**t hit the fan for many hours.
I gotta say your concerns are misplaced. Making it public that the country employed bad tactics and procedures on a mission that the enemy already knows was a disaster is a good thing. It will provide public pressure to change tactics that some bullheaded ops officer or commander somewhere - with greater concern for being right than accomplishing the objectives or protecting the lives of our forces - might not otherwise change. The misuse of special forces has a long and checkered history. They ain't Rambo taking on a regiment personally. They have special skills and training for special missions and they ought to be correctly employed. Period.
Just think, if it had not been regarded as unpatriotic in World War I to publicly challenge military tactics and strategy the British or French or German's might actually have replaced enough senior officers that we did something else besides engage in wholesale slaughter of human beings for no defensible military purpose. But that would have been unpatriotic.
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.