17 Apr

President Obama Restricted Navy SEALs From Rescuing Ship Captain With Force

                                       

Now this is interesting if true, and not surprising in the least. (h/t Ex-Liberal In Hollywood)

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. 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 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 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 the Indian 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 standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.

Shocking! Not…..

Yes, I know its secondhand information but I have a feeling we will be hearing more about this caper in the days and months to come and it won’t be flattering to the President, who can’t make a decision to save his life it seems.

About Curt

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 20 years.
This entry was posted in Barack Obama, War On Terror. Bookmark the permalink. Friday, April 17th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
| 547 views

82 Responses to President Obama Restricted Navy SEALs From Rescuing Ship Captain With Force

  1. Snake says: 51

    Striaght Scoop. Notice who the Authority who gave the debrief.

    How the rescue happened

    Posted By Uncle Jimbo
    I just finished listening to the press conference w/ ADM Gortney about the rescue of Captain Phillips. At the time it happened the USS Bainbridge was towing the lifeboat to calmer waters as the sea state was deteriorating. One of the pirates was on board the Bainbridge as the talks about obtaining Phillip’s release continued. The lifeboat was approx. 25 m behind the Bainbridge when snipers on the fantail observed one of the pirates in the pilot house of the lifeboat pointing an AK-47 at the back of a tied up Phillips and the other two pirates on board were visible (at least shoulders and heads). The standing authority gave them clearance to engage the pirates if the life of the captain was in imminent danger. The on scene commander deemed this to be true and gave the order to fire. All three bad guys were taken out and then a rigid inflatable boat went to the lifeboat to retrieve Phillips. Iti is unknown at this point whether the shooters were SEALs or Marine Scout Snipers as both would have been available. This was not a rescue attempt ordered by National Command Authority i.e. the President. It was a reaction by the on scene commander under standard authority to safeguard the life of a hostage.

    The AP is reporting that President Obama gave the order to use military force to rescue the hostage, that is misleading.

    WASHINGTON (AP)—Administration officials say President Barack Obama approved the military operation that rescued a U.S. captain held hostage by Somali pirates.

    The officials say Obama ordered the Defense Department to use military resources to rescue Richard Phillips from a lifeboat off the Somali coast.

    He did affirm the military’s authorization to use force if the captain’s life was in danger, but they already would have had that authorization as part of their standard rules of engagement. If there are innocents about to be slaughtered the same reasoning that authorizes self defense also covers an imminent execution unless the ROE specifically forbid it.The AP is making it sound like there was an active rescue ordered by the President. It was not, there was an imminent threat and the local commander gave the order to fire.

    Now you have word from the breifing with an Authority Cited. Nothing else has to be said. Check on it.

    The coward in chief is a coward. Please pass this on,

    ReplyReply
  2. RatDog says: 52

    This quote from Will Smith in “I, Robot” will be used time and time again over the next four years:
    You know, somehow, “I told you so” just doesn’t quite say it.

    ReplyReply
  3. SavageSun4X4 says: 53

    Time for armed conflict with canker sored liberals.

    ReplyReply
  4. Bobn10EC says: 54

    Is this any surprise to anyone? No expierence with anything except taxing & spending.
    We are in deep trouble.

    ReplyReply
  5. Satch says: 55

    Obummer,
    The Idealistic Fool. How could we expect a “community Organizer” to have the balls or make a decision to take the pirates or anyone else out?
    What a lame administration we have inherited, $800,000,000,000.00 A Billion is one thousand Millions! Are we up to our necks or what!

    ReplyReply
  6. GaffaUK says: 56

    @Satch
    yeah Obama really screwed up there with three pirates dead, one captured and with Capt Phillips rescued alive. Of course the Seals did their job and are the ones to congratulate – but they made the call based on the instructions they were given.

    ReplyReply
  7. Bill says: 57

    Gaffa, you’re missing the whole point. The Navy made the call IN SPITE OF the ‘instructions’ they were given. Obama dithered for five days and told the OSC, twice, that a “peaceful resolution” was “the only acceptable option.” He voted ‘present,’ once again.

    The credit goes to CDR Castellano, who made the call knowing the risk to his career. Obama is a lying glory-hound. Follow the link above to waronterrornews. Blackfive also has the straight poop.

    ReplyReply
  8. Too bad — this has been debunked pretty thoroughly (via HotAir): http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/22/obama-okd-2-seal-teams-for-pirates/

    Makes me wonder if the story might have been lefty ploy to get the righty-blogosphere into a frenzy which could then be slapped down. It sounded kinda over-the-top too me anyhow, as if someone with a little knowledge of how the chain of command works was play-acting how they thought it might go.

    ReplyReply
  9. Bill says: 59

    And you believe the Obama White House….why? Because of its unimpeachable rcord for telling the truth without spin?

    Of course Obama approved the SEALs- he would have to- but Jones’ account PROVES the stupid ROE- and confirms, indirectly, that the OSC acted on his own initiative. Even Jones confirms the “peaceful resolution” item- proof enough of Obama’s dithering gutlessness.

    ReplyReply
  10. reeko says: 60

    re: Bill at comment number 50:

    “An interesting not-quite-an-eyewitness report. Interesting that he claims four shots. If he’s correct, it would mean that there were four snipers sent out, for four pirates (one subtracted only later). I would expect that two would then have been tasked to the target holding the AK on the hostage, just to be sure.”

    actually, i believe there were probably five shooters – and they all might not have been SEALS. the Bainbridge’s normal crew compliment would include USMC Scout Snipers also. either way, they already had the fourth pirate onboard the Bainbridge, so they knew exactly how many shooters were needed. two were timed a split-second ahead to take out the plexiglass windows of the covered boat. (easy to do if trained to engage when hearing/feeling the “muzzle break” of the other shooter) in sniper parlance, these were “trick” shots – although some might say that ALL sniper shots are trick shots. ;)

    the last thing the pirates actually heard or saw was the windows shattering.

    PS: snipers usually use a spotter, and that spotter usually gives the final command “send it” instead of “fire” – which means the sniper can then engage on his own rhythm and timing. this was not one of those shoots. this was a “volley” shoot, on command. EXTREMELY DIFFICULT.

    (full disclosure: i helped rewrite the USMC Scout Sniper Instructor course. got to shoot it also. had a perfect score on the 600yd line iteration with the 7.62 M40 scoped sniper rifle and was awarded the coveted USMC Scout Sniper Instructor coin from the NCOIC of the school.)

    ReplyReply
  11. Bill says: 61

    Reeko:

    What you’re saying makes sense; another e-mail circulating which claims to be the “straight poop” indicates that there were four shooters, and the first one punched out the window with a wadcutter round.

    But USMC Scout Snipers as part of Bainbridge’ ship’s company? If so, that’s new since I was in the Canoe Club- and putting a pair on every surface combatant would mean well over 200 highly trained elite grads of the Scout Sniper course floating around the world’s oceans. Surely we don’t have enough of them for that, do we?

    (Still no reliable word on the rifles used: Mk 11, M40, M82?)

    ReplyReply
  12. reeko says: 62

    Bill,
    i don’t have any inside info on this. i was only assuming. are u saying that email only suspects that another shooter was used or is it from one of the players involved? it makes sense to me…

    i also misunderstood the Bainbridge ship’s company. i thought it was still the flagship of the task force there. apparently it isn’t now but it was, and they rotate flagship designations – and crew compliment. usually only a designated flagship would have the Scout Sniper team. my bad.

    ReplyReply
  13. Bill says: 63

    The email’s author names himself “Buddy Wellborn, USNA ’59″, who (if true) presumably would be Captain Raymond B. “Buddy” Wellborn USN-Ret (who scored three touchdowns against Notre Dame in ’58!). More to the point, CAPT Wellborn was a career submariner, which raises at least the strong likelihood of his having been concerned in SEAL ops. It claims to be based on info from a contact at DEVGRU, with a fairly complete timeline of the Team SIX det’s mission from departure Norfolk until the shoot. The claim of four rounds fired is corroborated independently by the young FN aboard Boxer who says he heard four reports (That email, at least, reads “clean;” in other words it’s exactly what one would expect to read from a junior sailor who only saw the peripherals)
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2235870/posts?page=1

    ReplyReply
  14. GaffaUK says: 64

    @Bill

    Gaffa, you’re missing the whole point. The Navy made the call IN SPITE OF the ‘instructions’ they were given

    So you are saying it was the Navy that spent 5 days dithering until they decided to go against instructions – when they could of taken out the kidnappers before then?

    ReplyReply
  15. MataHarley says: 65

    Gaffa, did you miss previous conversations/posts about this? Since this could escalate into a major int’l incident, the US military wanted confirmation from the top on every by-the-book procedure. The Navy did not “go against instructions” when it acted. It made sure that when it acted, it fit the absolute parameters of “the instructions”.

    They could have acted sooner were those “instructions” not so binding, and the CIC given them the blessing to follow traditional ROE already in place. That’s all they were asking in the beginning. However when the CIC and his underlings started micromanaging with additional caveats, they had to wait until everything fit the Obama bill.

    ReplyReply
  16. GaffaUK says: 66

    @MataHarley

    Not according to Bill – he claims the Navy made the call ‘in spite’ of the instructions were given. Therefore that brings up the question why didn’t they make that call earlier. I’m not blaming the Navy myself – as I believe they did the right thing within instructions. It was the right call with the right result.

    ReplyReply
  17. Colorado Bob says: 67

    First of all before jumping on this bandwagon, don’t you think a SOURCE should be identified other than the opening line, “Talking to some SEALS….”

    For all we know this was some schizophrenic on St. Paul Alaska island, talking to real frikkin seals!

    ReplyReply
  18. Pingback: President Obama vs. Somali Pirates – Point to the Pirates « Designated Conservative

  19. Pingback: Somewhere in the Chicago suburbs a wealthy family is missing it’s - mbecker908’s blog - RedState web01.prod.theplanet.eaglepub.com 174.120.27.221

  20. Pingback: Obama Didn’t Know Nuthin’ Of The Tea Parties – But The Rest Of The World Did! « Truth11

  21. teresa says: 68

    Oh what we forget, and SO much more we don’t know!

    ReplyReply
  22. WHAT A COMMANDER IN CHIEF
    HE IS FULL OF CRAP, MANY SOLDIERS DIED BECAUSE OF HIS ROE, HE WON’T GET AWAY WITH IT,
    JUST YOU WAIT, HIS TIME WILL COME TO PAY FOR THE DEAD SOLDIERS AND THE WOUNDED.

    ReplyReply
  23. teresa says: 70

    Isnt he great at telling Military NOT to do something, like Stand Down on Benghazi?? The Sheeple who elected him are deaf and blind, my friends and family included. They do not want to hear anything about him, no truth, all they watch is TV news, some live in Rural areas and that’s all they get. No wonder everyone is confused, lies lies and so called truth.

    ReplyReply
  24. teresa
    there is so many smart CONSERVATIVES thinking the same as you and those family,
    this time the fool rushed in to put him there, they came from the same haters which the soldiers try to eliminate with the same stupid roe,

    ReplyReply
  25. teresa says: 72

    In the Bible the Lord says in end times it will be Brother against Brother. We are ea others Brothers and we are fighting against ea other now like never before. Until all repent, nothing will change. I am 64 and really see life in the end playing out until my death. It won’t be tomorrow, but connect the dots, the Environment, Gay Marriage, Demoralizing the Military, Abortions, Rights taken away, Laws and Regulations, etc. The RFID Chip implemented next March, working towards a One World Religion. Those are going on now, what is next don’t know but we need to filled w the Armor of God. Have a great wknd!

    ReplyReply
  26. teresa
    I believe you, but I THINK THAT SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN TO DESTROY THE BEAST,
    i’m not sure that the GENERALS are with the people,THE GOVERNMENT IS SPLIT,
    THE REPUBLICAN ARE PARALYZE , THE GOP ARE PUSHING BUT LACK THE SUPPORT OF THE PEOPLE’
    AND THE OTHER MEMBER OF THE GOVERNMENT,
    THE TEA-PARTY HAVE EXPOSE THE CORRUPTION BRAVELY, IN ALL THE SCANDALS
    AND FOX IS SUPER GOOD, WE CAN DEPEND ON THEM ONLY,
    THE POWER WHICH TO DESTROY IS VERY STRONG AND PREPARED,
    WHO WILL STAND UP IN FRONT AND CALL ON AMERICA TO DO THEIR DUTY FOR AMERICA.

    ReplyReply
  27. teresa says: 74

    Hi,I know you do. I will stand for Christ when they come but don’t know if I am willing to stand for Govt. There is nothing Godly about it at any level so how can they help the Sheeple? Have a good one

    ReplyReply
  28. teresa
    don’t go to sleep on the sad thought,
    best to you.

    ReplyReply
  29. teresa says: 76

    see that’s where you guys lose me, I am old and don’t talk the lingo. sad thought? Should I stay up? lol

    ReplyReply
  30. teresa
    sorry for the lingo, I’m trying hard to not say a bad word,
    I go to bed with some nice thoughts, because the negative thought bring a bad dream,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  31. teresa says: 78

    laughing!

    ReplyReply
  32. teresa
    that’s the way to bed’
    bye

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>