3 ms·

You are forgetting Eagle Claw, and the fiasco at Desert One. Look, neither of us can prove our claims, since we weren't there. But I have read several news rep

by ajays 15y ago

You are forgetting Eagle Claw, and the fiasco at Desert One. Look, neither of us can prove our claims, since we weren't there. But I have read several news reports along these lines, that Obama pushed for more redundancy. One might ask: why didn't the SEALs think of it? The answer can be (and here again, this is pure speculation just like yours) that the SEALs wanted the smallest possible contingent, to avoid being detected (2 helis are less likely to be detected as 4) and risking the Pakistanis' ire. But at some level, diplomatic considerations creep in; and Obama could have said (or thought) "I'll take care of the fallout; but I want you guys to be double-extra safe". While it is easy to dismiss this news report as you did, I don't think that is the case here. For example: in the photograph released by the WH (where everyone is huddled, watching the monitor), Obama is in a corner, and the military guy is centre stage. Don't you think if Obama was so self-promoting as you claim he is, that he would have maneuvered into a better shot? Maybe placed himself front-and-center, to show he's "in command" ?? In comparison: do you remember how Bush flew a jet onto the carrier, "Mission Accomplished" ? That is self-promotion.

bugmenot 15y ago
There's heavy precedent set for pure-SEAL ops to be devised by SEALS, not their higher-ups. Fun stories of SEALs telling people of much higher rank, "No, we're going to it our way, or we just aren't going to do it." Hasn't always gone over well, but they're SEALs for a reason, and tend to understand what they can and can't do better than anyone. Now, the UBL op was under the auspices of JSOC and I'd be surprised if that were the case in this instance, but I'd be shocked if a man whose prior training consisted mostly of community organizing, had much--if any--operational input, his current rank notwithstanding. He may have had concerns about helo redundancy, as would anyone familiar with the disaster on the way to and at Desert One, but I just can't imagine that he had anything substantive to add to the operational planning aspects of it, in terms of execution. And: before I get anyone's undies in a bunch, it's not to say that he wasn't responsible for getting the right people for the job, and deserves ample credit -- but there's this unrealistic view circulating in the press that the person most of them voted into office to end the wars most of them didn't like didn't like suddenly became the new Clausewitz and that's why this operation played out as it did. Hardly.

by ajays 15y ago

bugmenot 15y ago

There's heavy precedent set for pure-SEAL ops to be devised by SEALS, not their higher-ups. Fun stories of SEALs telling people of much higher rank, "No, we're going to it our way, or we just aren't going to do it." Hasn't always gone over well, but they're SEALs for a reason, and tend to understand what they can and can't do better than anyone. Now, the UBL op was under the auspices of JSOC and I'd be surprised if that were the case in this instance, but I'd be shocked if a man whose prior training consisted mostly of community organizing, had much--if any--operational input, his current rank notwithstanding. He may have had concerns about helo redundancy, as would anyone familiar with the disaster on the way to and at Desert One, but I just can't imagine that he had anything substantive to add to the operational planning aspects of it, in terms of execution. And: before I get anyone's undies in a bunch, it's not to say that he wasn't responsible for getting the right people for the job, and deserves ample credit -- but there's this unrealistic view circulating in the press that the person most of them voted into office to end the wars most of them didn't like didn't like suddenly became the new Clausewitz and that's why this operation played out as it did. Hardly.