posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 01:44 PM
Originally posted by ADVISOR
Unless one is actually there on the ground, it is really hard to say for sure.
Unless they had information indicating that the hostages were or would be killed there is no reason to rush into a situation like that
I suspect, having been a member of US Special Forces that this event, much like the recent French Secret Service catastrophe are classic examples of
pride and ego getting in the way of a deliberate decision making process. There is huge ego involved in these type units.
Developing a situation slowly is hard on the hostages of course but it allows for proper intelligence gathering and since the terrorists tend to be
outnumbered greatly by the hostages they lose sleep, make mistakes etc.
A better intelligence picture always results in more live hostages rescued.
The decision point is always - Which is the greater risk taking action or taking no action?
While I think since Americans were involved we certainly most likely offered to handle it in some way. I wonder why they didn't accept. I am
certain pride and ego were a big part of it.
However, there is also the possibility that the death of the hostages was imminent and taking action - even a poorly executed one resulted in saving
some lives. We don't (probably won't know if the terrorists were ready to kill all the hostages anyway so the cost to benefit ratio was actually
favorable to action.
There are several countries out there with premier hostage rescue organizations, Germany, UK, US etc. Algeria is not one of them - obviously.
Neither is France.