Navy Veterans

A Social Network for Navy Veterans of the United States of America

This is another E-Mail from someone I know only as FW, read it it's very interesting.H. Polny

Original Message-----
From:
Subject: FW: Hostage Decision Making

FYI.... matches with my sources.

FYI only, can't vouch for validity/accuracy, but the Marine
that sent it often has good USMC/Navy inside details. Best,
-------------------------------
Subject: FW: Navy SEALs on Obama Hostage Decision Making
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:04:31 -0500
Many thanks for passing this along...From a very reliablesource
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. BO 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, BO 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 navyRIB 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. BO 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. BO 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 BO performance 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 onscenecommander 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.

Views: 83

Comment

You need to be a member of Navy Veterans to add comments!

Join Navy Veterans

Comment by Tracy L. McCoy on August 17, 2009 at 7:09pm
I agree. It's "unauthorized" when it does not go well and "decisive" when it makes the administration look good. Tell me again why we need soldiers on the ground in countries that hate America?
Comment by Harry D. Polny on July 29, 2009 at 5:01pm
I hear ya Tim! The doesn't even know to put his hand over his heart when the National Antheam is played. The bad thing is the media will not print this story.
Comment by Tim Gulliford on July 29, 2009 at 4:10pm
This is the 'leadership' in DC that gets our men and women killed. I will always stand behind my belief that in order to be The President of the United States, You should have served in the Military. How can bozo's like bo and clinton understand and be CIC if they never served?

© 2019   Navy Vets, Inc. Created by Douglas Karr in accordance with regulations covering all websites which are not government websites, neither the United States Navy or the Department of Defense has approved, endorsed, or authorized this web site.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service