It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SEAL report on what realy happened!

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Originally posted by schrodingers dog

Indeed, the blatant stupidity of using violence as a last resort is overwhelming.


"Violence" had already occurred! This was a HIJACK and they'd fired on our sailors! Would you've preferred we took a few casualties first?


Worked out for the French didn't it?


Yes, two days later, as another American crew came under fire, the French military were tracking pirate movements. A day later, they took 11 pirates at GUNPOINT. Sounds like a winner to me.


Yet the captain is rescued, the bad guys are dead or captured, and life still sucks.
As well it should if you support BHO.


And now your pinning your misconceptions on a "I heard from a friend of a friend ..." thread.

Nope. Refuting BHO's deceptions with underlying facts. I've seen you gladly rely on lesser sources for favorable comments on the dem/lib/progressive agenda and its Enabler in Chief.


I guess the only way this could have turned out better for ya'll is if the captain died and Obama was one of the pirates.
Spoken like a true Obamite. The only alternative to decisive action MUST be loss of innocent lives. I will suggest to you that Obama already is the pirate. He's hijacked States' Rights and our collective future.

Deny ignorance!

jw

[edit on 20-4-2009 by jdub297]




posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by ZindoDoone
 

s&f4u

Even the Brits were reporting this immediately after the rescue.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Notwithstanding your proclivity to cite right wing Obama bashing blogs as "news" sources, no one here is contesting that Obama sought to exhaust all peaceful courses before resorting to a violent one. It's called hostage negotiations, look it up, they even have movies on the subject. The timeline put forth in "the guardian" and all others confirm nothing but this.

What you fail to realize or recognize is that just two days before the French went in all guns 'a blazin' and they lost one of their guys and others were injured.

Talk about Monday morning quarterbacking, you're doing it even though our team won and even though you didn't catch the game.


Please, next time you accuse anyone of not denying ignorance you might want to hang your hat on a failure, it sure does help with credibility.

Edit to add:


Spoken like a true Obamite.


Outstanding, all I did is say that the OP's story may be true pending an offer of evidence and that makes me one of "them."

Either with you or against you is to be my choice.


Very nice.


[edit on 20 Apr 2009 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Just another classic example of idiot pencil-pushers that have no clue what is going on in situations like that. If they do, and I highly doubt it, Im willing to bet that they were willing to leave the captain to die, why else would they have B.S. r.o.e's that prohibit the S.E.A.L's from performing an immediate rescue instead of waiting for 4 days.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Blade The Hunter
 


You guys are really something ...

You sound like traveling salesmen stereotypes, "Dem' boys up in corporate, siting in their ivory towers, with their fancy coffee, they don't know what we ground walkers have to put up with!"

Yeah except the president has those "pencil pushing" Joint Chiefs of Staff advising him 24/7.

Christ almighty, we've been bumbling two wars for the last eight years at the expense of so many lives, we finally get one right, and you're picking bones.


Your agenda is so transparent it's actually sad.

Edit to add:


... why else would they have B.S. r.o.e's that prohibit the S.E.A.L's from performing an immediate rescue instead of waiting for 4 days.


This is a basic lack of comprehension of what armed forces actually are. They are a tool, one of many at any president's disposal for conflict resolution. A hammer doesn't decide when it is used.

[edit on 20 Apr 2009 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Whether or not Obama made the final call to take out the pirates, the fact of the matter is that these pirates were known to be violent individuals and could have at any time during the "peace process" shot the hostage. Violent thugs who have the capability of killing innocents should not be negotiated with for any length of time; The quickest, most direct method of ending the encounter should be employed. Civilian peace officers have the use of tasers (although they use them a little too liberally); no such methods were available to the SEALS.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Originally posted by schrodingers dog

Notwithstanding your proclivity to cite right wing Obama bashing blogs as "news" sources, no one here is contesting that Obama sought to exhaust all peaceful courses before resorting to a violent one.


The Guardian is not a blog of any persuasion. It is an International newspaper, published by Guardian News and Media.
www.guardian.co.uk...


What you fail to realize or recognize is that just two days before the French went in all guns 'a blazin' and they lost one of their guys and others were injured.


Nope. In that incident the owner of the boat was murdered by pirates. The French killed 2 pirates on deck as they freed the remaining hostages. That, with 2 prior interventions, and the subsequent capture, make it French 4, Pirates 0. No French soldiers or sailors have been lost or injured.

Deny ignorance.

jw

[edit on 20-4-2009 by jdub297]



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


First of all I was referring to your primary source for the thread you linked which IS a right wing Obama bashing blog.

Second of all please try not to spread disinfo:


Two pirates and the skipper of the yacht Tanit were killed and four hostages freed in the operation.

It is not yet known if the Tanit's captain was killed by his captors or hit by a stray French shot.

A post mortem examination has revealed that the captain, Florent Lemacon, 28, died of a gunshot wound to the head.

As no bullet fragment was found it has not yet been determined if the shot was from a French weapon or a hijacker's gun, officials said. bbc

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


So no one knows exactly when or by whom the French victim was shot.

[edit on 20 Apr 2009 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 01:31 AM
link   
Yeah, Im picking bones, If I was the President, I'd be sending the S.E.A.L's into action and giving them full authority to neutralize any and all tangos, when they have a shot, they will take it, not waiting for orders from some snivelling little weasel saying..... Oh we should negtiate first. As far as I'm concerned, thats what happened for those 4 days, and I dont give a rats ass what anyone thinks, thats the way I see it.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Blade The Hunter
 


Man, you sound like the badass SWAT commander in a bad cop movie.

You know, the one that always gets everyone killed.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 01:40 AM
link   
I may "sound like a S.W.A.T Commander". but I wouldn't sit on my ass waiting for the pirates to kill the hostage. I think thats what your suggesting, is the hostage being killed, then send in the troops.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Blade The Hunter
 


I was actually not suggesting any course of action. Quite frankly I'm not qualified to do any such thing.

What I am suggesting is the recognition that the mission was accomplished.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Yeah, the rescue was a success, but what would have happened if the pirates killed the hostage? How would you explain to the family that your family member could have been rescued, but were too busy waiting for orders from higher up, resulting in the hostage being killed.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 04:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blade The Hunter
Yeah, the rescue was a success, but what would have happened if the pirates killed the hostage? How would you explain to the family that your family member could have been rescued, but were too busy waiting for orders from higher up, resulting in the hostage being killed.



sigh.....look. Your wrong.

What if? jeez.

How about, what if an attempt was made within the first 2 hours? When adrenalin is running rampant, when the enemy is completely jacked up, erratic and irrational. GO...one man is taken out yet another takes cover. Blam there goes the captain.

They waited until the enemy was sleep deprived on purpose. They waited till there was hostage and humanity compassion which is a condition and the waiting for that condition is an actual technique.

The pirates sent over a sick pirate to our Navy. We also towed them because they were out of gas.

We really didn't want to "freak" them because they really could of killed the captain....remember ?

So if you will please direct your idiotic hostage saving strategic advice somewhere else or keep it to your self because this topic at hand involves the discussion about people who really are heroes and who have the intelligence to do such an operation. Its not a thread for crybabys who didn't get there man into office.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Reinforcements on their way here Schrodinger ! Ok, guys, for starters, I'm not even american, so the "Obamite" line won't work here. Obviously, judging from some of your posts, my not being american probably makes me a "socialist"/red/terrorist/pirate scumbag (*shudders*), but hey, I'll give my two cents anyhow.

One. The hostage IS fine. No "what if's" apply here.

Two. The people behind the operation are professionals, from the CIC down to the SEALS who took the shots. You are not. Your judgements are amateurish, and the end result tends to prove this, because the tactics you condemn DID work.

Three. As strange as it may seem, I value all human life. I think it is a good thing that every other possibility was studied before taking the lives of these pirates, who are poor people, from a starving third world country, trying to make ends meet for their families. I don't expect you to understand this, or even respond by anything other than " Oh, so we should feel sorry for the pirates ? But they started it ! " or maybe even "They should have gone out and got a job" and most definately "They tangled with AMERICA OH YEAH, big mistake pirates YEEHAR !".

Four. The message this sends to the world is that America has changed it's foreign policies. Gone are the times of "the axis of evil". While remaining firm, America will favour diplomacy to force. This sends out a peacefull message, and a breath of fresh air to your allies, who were getting REALLY pissed off with the bigotted, holy warmongering, and shallow views of your former president, and those of the people he represented.

Five. "Raggies" is a racist and offensive word. You know nothing of the somalian people and nothing of the hardship they endure. While you lay back in your comfortable sofa, these "raggies" are hacking their food out of a parched desert, which thanks to people who share your condescending views, is also a polluted wasteland. Their blood is the cement of your comfort. Dwell on that for a while. And show some respect.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ismail
Reinforcements on their way here Schrodinger ! Ok, guys, for starters, I'm not even american, so the "Obamite" line won't work here. Obviously, judging from some of your posts, my not being american probably makes me a "socialist"/red/terrorist/pirate scumbag (*shudders*), but hey, I'll give my two cents anyhow.

One. The hostage IS fine. No "what if's" apply here.

Two. The people behind the operation are professionals, from the CIC down to the SEALS who took the shots. You are not. Your judgements are amateurish, and the end result tends to prove this, because the tactics you condemn DID work.

Three. As strange as it may seem, I value all human life. I think it is a good thing that every other possibility was studied before taking the lives of these pirates, who are poor people, from a starving third world country, trying to make ends meet for their families. I don't expect you to understand this, or even respond by anything other than " Oh, so we should feel sorry for the pirates ? But they started it ! " or maybe even "They should have gone out and got a job" and most definately "They tangled with AMERICA OH YEAH, big mistake pirates YEEHAR !".

Four. The message this sends to the world is that America has changed it's foreign policies. Gone are the times of "the axis of evil". While remaining firm, America will favour diplomacy to force. This sends out a peacefull message, and a breath of fresh air to your allies, who were getting REALLY pissed off with the bigotted, holy warmongering, and shallow views of your former president, and those of the people he represented.

Five. "Raggies" is a racist and offensive word. You know nothing of the somalian people and nothing of the hardship they endure. While you lay back in your comfortable sofa, these "raggies" are hacking their food out of a parched desert, which thanks to people who share your condescending views, is also a polluted wasteland. Their blood is the cement of your comfort. Dwell on that for a while. And show some respect.



Well said!
Couldn't of said it better my self. Although I would lean on the less rational side of things like as if it was one of my or your loved ones that was a hostage. You would probably not really give a crap about a pirates ego trip. I mean they are taking PEOPLE hostage. Thats wrong. I do however completely agree that knowing the realities of these people and the situation is just as important as the will power that fuels the pride of freedom as we are all one.

Again very well said. Agreed.
I'm American.

[edit on 20-4-2009 by Stella Lotus]



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Stella Lotus
 



Thank you. I have nothing against americans. Sometimes some of your fellow countymen/women give america very bad publicity. I respect those who have an open minded and humanist view of the world, regardless of their nationality.
If one of my loved ones was being held hostage, I would prefer a reasoned, calculated and calm response rather than gunhappy marines blasting everything to pieces as soon as they got the green light. So many things can go wrong in a hostage situation, I would always priveliege negotiation to violence. Although taking hostages ultimatly is wrong, I also acknowledge the fact that these people are acting out of desperation, and that my society is guilty for having placed these people in a situation where they are forced to use violence.

[edit on 20-4-2009 by Ismail]



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 05:53 AM
link   
when the pirates fired on the small navy boat taking supplies to them the seals should of had the go to return fire IF they could take down all the pirates at the same time and not harm the hostage. if they couldn't do that then they should of held fire like they did.

Now when the Hostage jumped into the water the seals should have been given the ok to take the shot to prevent the pirates from recapturing him.

there's a time to negotiate and there's a time to let your assets on the scene take the action they deem necessary. and the guys on the scene have the advantage of knowing when to take action, not someone half way around the globe from the scene.

whether it was Obama that put the very restrictive ROE on the Seals or someone along the chain of command I'd hope in the future they exercise better judgment and try to not micromanage operations whether they be rescue ops or Full blown war efforts! did the politicians and the Pentagon not learn a damn thing from trying to micromanage Vietnam?

Edit to add: The navy was towing the boat so the pirates could not reach the shore, not because it was out of gas! The seals and the bainbridge commander knew if the pirates reached shore with their hostage it was game over that is also why the 2nd navy destroyer stayed between the shore and the life boat so it couldn't reach shore and it would be able to stop other pirate boats from coming to help the pirates in the life boat.

[edit on 4/20/2009 by Mercenary2007]



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 06:32 AM
link   
I've read through the thread and didn't see anyone else post it. The OP's starting post reads almost identical to this article off of Jeff Rense .


My views on this, and this is just my opinion, but I believe this shouldn't have taken 4 days. Whatever happened to the U.S. doesn't negotiate? As for Somalia, I would give the good people that are living there and trying to live right a warning to leave the area and Somalia would cease to exist. When trade ships can't get to their ports and have to worry about being boarded and shot or taken hostage then it's time to put a stop to it. Somalia has been Hell on Earth for many many years, perhaps it's time to really send them to hell.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen
 


your comment about politicians in uniform: so true, simple but true. it's unfortunate that most of the time, the people making the decisions at the very top, don't really have a clue about what to do. A smart leader recognizes the superior intelligence of those around him to aid him in making critical decisions, but none the less, must stand by the saying"the buck stops here".
Also, in deferance to the Seals, there's no substitute for skill and experience, and good training. Thanks Navy Seals.



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 08:17 AM
link   
So many armchair Admirals and Presidents here it makes me smile.

Its so easy to second guess simply because we were not there. I've been involved in some tense situations (Line of Death ops with Libya) and I can tell you first hand, what the press gets is 20% (or less) of the entire picture. Honestly all we can know for certain was the outcome and this time it was in our favor. That being said though I'm afraid the crew of the next American ship captured will not be so lucky and when dead Americans are tossed into the sea, which of one of the armchair policymakers here will attend the funeral?



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join