Why the Somali Pirate Ordeal took Four Days Instead of a Few Hours

April 21, 2009 at 11:01 am 2 comments

This was forwarded to me from a friend of my family’s–a retired. USAF Col., who knows Col. Holliday. ~MCL
 
Dr. Sam Holliday,  Col. USAF (retired) wrote:
 
I just received this from what I consider a reliable source. Again it  illustrates the problems of having centralized control and laws (which  results in Rules of Engagement for reasons other than effectiveness) imposed 
on combat operations. We need to get back to letting the on scene commander 
(OSC) command. ~> v/r, Sam
 
Having spoken to some SEAL pals 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 had not  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 fromWashington 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 theIndian Ocean and  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 stand-off between a ragtag 
handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.

Advertisements

Entry filed under: Barack Obama, Conservatism, Current Events, Education, Obama, Politics, Uncategorized. Tags: , , , , , , .

USS Bainbridge Named After Captain William Bainbridge of the Barbary Wars Swine-Flu Bio Terror?

2 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Erik  |  April 22, 2009 at 6:47 am

    “SEAL email criticizing Obama is bogus”:
    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/04/21/1902281.aspx

    Might want to check your sources before you post.

    Reply
    • 2. mary christina love  |  April 23, 2009 at 9:15 pm

      I read your link…and , like the email says: “Again it illustrates the problems of having centralized control and laws (which results in Rules of Engagement for reasons other than effectiveness) imposed on combat operations. We need to get back to letting the on scene commander (OSC) command.”

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed