Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on May 4, 2011 9:18:29 GMT -5
Just my guess, but I'd say your wild guess is way on the low end. These guys can be ridiculously fast when they need to be, but as you say, this is not Call of Duty, nor is it Hollywood. I am fairly certain that they would, after securing all known exits so no one could get out, perform their room-to-room in an extremely methodical manner. I've also heard it reported that many upper floors of the compound were barricaded. An ex-SEAL was talking about that, and noted that they would have planned and trained for that, but it would still slow them down. And yeah, something tells me they knew, or at least had a pretty good level of confidence, that they weren't going to get any interference from the military academy, at least not immediately. Not sure what is at the bottom of that, but then again, just being an American doesn't give me the right to know every little thing. But I am willing to consider the possibility that Hillary Clinton wasn't completely full of BS the other day. (that one was just for strummer  ) |
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,869
|
Post by thebin on May 4, 2011 9:29:38 GMT -5
Totally an armchair guess here Boz, but my guess is that "extremely quickly, don't let them breath" is a much safer way to raid an armed compound than "extremely methodicaly and patiently." Which is to say they can't afford the risks incurred in being methodical, that there is lower risk to SeALs (as well as blowing mission by failing to prohibit escape through tunnels/backdoors that you have to assume are there) by storming through like like crazed madmen. Especially given an enemy that will gladly blow itself up and take you with them if you give them a couple of minutes to strap on/detonate. I think in a weird way the best way to be "methodical" in this situation is to storm in and overwhelm the place as fast as possible. Which is why I also remember being surprised about the 40 min number as well as how many survivors there were. I also agree that searching for intel after neutralizing the place is likely to have taken up by far the most amount of time.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on May 4, 2011 9:39:41 GMT -5
Totally an armchair guess here Boz, but my guess is that "extremely quickly, don't let them breath" is a much safer way to raid an armed compound than "extremely methodicaly and patiently." Which is to say they can't afford the risks incurred in being methodical, that there is lower risk to SeALs (as well as blowing mission by failing to prohibit escape through tunnels/backdoors that you have to assume are there) by storming through like lijke crazed madmen. Especially given an enemy that will gladly blow itself up and take you with them if you give them a couple of minutes to strap on/detonate. I think in a weird way the best way to be "methodical" in this situation is to storm in and overwhelm the place as fast as possible. Which is why I also remember being surprised about the 40 min numberas well as how many survivors there were. I also agree that searching for intel after neutralizing the place is likely to have taken up by far the most amount of time. That is certainly a possibility. Several minutes also may have been taken up sitting back in reflection and trying to count the number of times that Pervez Musharraf lied to the U.S. ;D |
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on May 4, 2011 9:48:54 GMT -5
Just my guess, but I'd say your wild guess is way on the low end. These guys can be ridiculously fast when they need to be, but as you say, this is not Call of Duty, nor is it Hollywood. I am fairly certain that they would, after securing all known exits so no one could get out, perform their room-to-room in an extremely methodical [And FAST] manner. Boz' comments above reflect my views, though I appreciate theexorcist's attempt to give us another perspective. I also read our guys used new, super-secret, stealth choppers for the mission. (OK, yes, I'm a little geeky about tracking down all this "inside baseball" info.) thebin's comments in his first post are also accurate -- unfortunately, but then, his second post also sounds right to me -- fortunately. And I still think there is a lot we don't know... and may never know. I don't think the Paks were warned ahead of time, but perhaps at some time during the mission -- after Seal Team Six was on site. Finally, I would bet $$ there were all kinds of contingencies in place, from armed drones flying cover, to back up forces available if necessary. Smart, tough, very aggressive mission. And while the Seals (and other special ops guys) deserve huge credit, the CIA deserves big time kudos for the detection and planning. One more thing, the recently announced leadership "Trade" -- Gen Patreus to CIA, and CIA Director Panetta to DOD -- is a very smart move (as should be even more apparent now) to cross-fertilize expertise in the new age of warfare we face going forward. A few days ago, I expressed doubt about the political motivation behind the moves and stand by that. Clearly, every high level management change in DC involves some level of political calculation -- especially with Senate approvals required. But it never seemed to me that anything beyond the minimum played into these choices in any significant way, and these changes were made in the best interest of National Security as far and away the primary determinant. Given the performance over recent days, Senate approvals should not be a problem. |
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,869
|
Post by thebin on May 4, 2011 10:18:41 GMT -5
"I don't think the Paks were warned ahead of time, but perhaps at some time during the mission -- after Seal Team Six was on site."
That was my guess too, if they were notified it was prob done only after mission could not be stopped, only to prohibit an action on the choppers on the way back to afghanistan. If then.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on May 4, 2011 10:35:04 GMT -5
Not that Rummy has much credibility, but the original report may have been based on fog of war kinds of things that come out of these operations. In an ideal world, we could wait a few days to clear that up rather than rush with the news, but the WH could not be in that situation here.
My preference would have been to simply have a bare bones report - team of navy seals, stormed the compound, found some stuff, shot and killed Bin Laden, extracted OBL body from site, prepared body according to custom, dumped it in the ocean, the end.
In an ideal world, I think the WH would have wanted that too, but it is dealing with a global environment here - folks are clamoring for details, violence eroticists want the pictures, and the like, and the details are less for the American people (which will on balance believe Bin Laden is dead) than for those in the Arab world and others who have come to distrust our global leadership. In that sense, maybe anything said after the operation is neutral at best from a political point of view or the general test of what is good judgment.
All told, the story could have been enough with what was known and verifiable. Here was a guy who left the battlefield years ago, relied on others to do his dirty work, holed up in a multi-million dollar mansion, and slept on a luxurious water bed. Some freedom fighter that.
My $.02.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on May 4, 2011 11:29:39 GMT -5
Not that Rummy has much credibility, but the original report may have been based on fog of war kinds of things that come out of these operations. In an ideal world, we could wait a few days to clear that up rather than rush with the news, but the WH could not be in that situation here. My preference would have been to simply have a bare bones report - team of navy seals, stormed the compound, found some stuff, shot and killed Bin Laden, extracted OBL body from site, prepared body according to custom, dumped it in the ocean, the end. In an ideal world, I think the WH would have wanted that too, but it is dealing with a global environment here - folks are clamoring for details, violence eroticists want the pictures, and the like, and the details are less for the American people (which will on balance believe Bin Laden is dead) than for those in the Arab world and others who have come to distrust our global leadership. In that sense, maybe anything said after the operation is neutral at best from a political point of view or the general test of what is good judgment. All told, the story could have been enough with what was known and verifiable. Here was a guy who left the battlefield years ago, relied on others to do his dirty work, holed up in a multi-million dollar mansion, and slept on a luxurious water bed. Some freedom fighter that. My $.02. What still strikes me as odd though is that Obama, Brennan, Clinton, et al., allegedly watched the raid unfold in realtime thanks to a helmet mounted camera worn by one of the SEALs. How could there be such obvious discrepancies between what they watched and what was later reported? I don't think the White House made intentional mistakes; I think this glitch probably says a lot more about the unreliability of eyewitness testimony in general. |
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on May 4, 2011 12:28:47 GMT -5
What still strikes me as odd though is that Obama, Brennan, Clinton, et al., allegedly watched the raid unfold in realtime thanks to a helmet mounted camera worn by one of the SEALs. How could there be such obvious discrepancies between what they watched and what was later reported? I don't think the White House made intentional mistakes; I think this glitch probably says a lot more about the unreliability of eyewitness testimony in general. We still don't really know how the WH watched what happened, but let's say your report is correct. There were 25 (or so) SEALS on site. One had a helmet cam? The area of the site was at least one acre, several buildings, several floors. Who knows where the guy with the camera was? How good the image was? Chances are pretty slim the guy with the cam was also the guy who burst in the door and shot UBL. BTW, what's the over/under on how many months until the first cheesy made-for-TV movie comes out? |
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,869
|
Post by thebin on May 4, 2011 12:31:30 GMT -5
According to Panetta on PBS lastnight, there was no helmet cam video footage or anything like it on the day of the raid for them to watch live. Think that was just flat out assumed early then taken as fact- like the human shield thing. And again, as soon as I heard it I thought...someone has been watching too many movies. Who was producing this reality show? Would have been pretty worthless if it was just one guy's helmet. Was there a ABC Sports production truck with a producer feverishly switching cameras?
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on May 4, 2011 12:32:01 GMT -5
1:30 WH says NO photos of UBL dead will be released.
also, a briefing update today at 2:00 from the WH
And, UBL had 500 Euros -- and two phone numbers -- sewn into is clothing.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,869
|
Post by thebin on May 4, 2011 12:36:10 GMT -5
1:30 WH says NO photos of UBL dead will be released. also, a briefing update today at 2:00 from the WH And, UBL had 500 Euros -- and two phone numbers -- sewn into is clothing. Big mistake after days of nearly official hinting to the contrary. They just threw gallons of gas on the conspiracy fire. I think we have a right to see them to boot. |
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on May 4, 2011 12:39:51 GMT -5
Who was producing this reality show? Would have been pretty worthless if it was just one guy's helmet. Was there a ABC Sports production truck with a producer feverishly switching cameras? LOL! Great image of a remote, TV control room "producing" this event! |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on May 4, 2011 12:48:26 GMT -5
1:30 WH says NO photos of UBL dead will be released. also, a briefing update today at 2:00 from the WH And, UBL had 500 Euros -- and two phone numbers -- sewn into is clothing. Big mistake after days of nearly official hinting to the contrary. They just threw gallons of gas on the conspiracy fire. I think we have a right to see them to boot. I saw the Panetta statements as classic bureaucratic gamesmanship. Beyond that, much of the fuel in the media came from Matt Drudge, unsurprisingly. I don't think the picture release was ever taken seriously among those who count. The newly released Obama statement is pitch perfect - OBL is not a trophy. |
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,869
|
Post by thebin on May 4, 2011 12:52:54 GMT -5
But it wasn't denied for 36 crucial hours. That is the point. Very highly placed sources said we would see photos very soon...then no immediate denial but one a couple of days later? That doesn't happen by accident in DC. They were floating it and checking the pulse. They were waiting I think to see if the American public would demand to see them and when they didn't see the demand they backed off. But in my opinion the public was not not demanding photos because they thought it was a foregone conclusion they would see them in a matter of hours. That's my guess anyway...also that there will be a substantial cry to see them after this announcement is official and people feel a bit ripped off.
Billions in our treasure was spent and countless lives, I think we deserve to see the body. I understand the reasons for not doing so are not without merit, but that's where I'm coming down on this one.
I could only agree that Obama's latest stance on this is "pitch perfect" for non-US ears, for people who don't really care about justice here as much as their reflexive disgust of American power, but I'm not too concerned with that POV at this point. This isn't about a trophy, it is about closure and moving on without having to deal with many more conspiracy nuts than is necessary.
I want to see the damn body. Not to parade it around NYC or to spit on it...but I want to see it nonetheless to process it visually as the bookend to the visions I constantly see in my head of people jumping out of the WTC whenever I'm in lower Manhattan for example. I'm not ashamed of admitting that. They don't have to put it on the internet. I'd be fine with being able to go see it at a post office or passport office or something. But let's face it, there isn't a chance in hell these photos don't get out. I'm not ok with the paternalism of senators and cabinet members telling me "its OK, we've seen it" and that I should just trust Mommy and Daddy so we don't offend a bunch of asholes that still want us dead one way or another.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on May 4, 2011 13:42:03 GMT -5
They don't have to put it on the internet. I'd be fine with being able to go see it at a post office or passport office or something. But let's face it, there isn't a chance in hell these photos don't get out. I'm not ok with the paternalism of senators and cabinet members telling me "its OK, we've seen it" and that I should just trust Mommy and Daddy so we don't offend a bunch of asholes that still want us dead one way or another. Yes, maybe they can put it in a booth, and you can put a quarter in and view it for a limited amount of time, and then after that you can add more quarters if you want to see it for longer. Good grief. Your view has about as much class and taste as that. I think you nailed it with the "pitch-perfect" comment, and then this post went kind of downhill. |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on May 4, 2011 13:47:07 GMT -5
This is America, isn't it?
Cable TV pay-per-view. Derr.
(Proceeds not consumed by Don King to the charity of your choice. )
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506 
|
Post by theexorcist on May 4, 2011 14:01:58 GMT -5
They don't have to put it on the internet. I'd be fine with being able to go see it at a post office or passport office or something. But let's face it, there isn't a chance in hell these photos don't get out. I'm not ok with the paternalism of senators and cabinet members telling me "its OK, we've seen it" and that I should just trust Mommy and Daddy so we don't offend a bunch of asholes that still want us dead one way or another. Yes, maybe they can put it in a booth, and you can put a quarter in and view it for a limited amount of time, and then after that you can add more quarters if you want to see it for longer. Good grief. Your view has about as much class and taste as that. I think you nailed it with the "pitch-perfect" comment, and then this post went kind of downhill. Up front. I really don't care one way or the other. With that said, the photos are getting out at some time. You know it, I know it, the press secretary and POTUS know it. Second, there's an insatiable demand with new media for original sources. I love how, on the internet, you can go to proposed legislation or original statements from Congressional committees. Not wanting to show the photos seems quaint. And there are two possible explanations that I can see. #1 is the most troubling - that it will aggravate radical Muslims (which seems odd). Curtailing American freedom based on fear of retaliation (the Mohammed cartoon controversy) really leaves me cold. #2 is that it's triumphalism and vulgar. In that case ... I'm sorry, but the ship's sailed. We had the Starr report that talked about the blue dress. We've seen photos of Uday and Qusay (the hanging of Saddam was bootleg and so doesn't really count). It seems really weird to draw the line in the sand here. |
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,869
|
Post by thebin on May 4, 2011 14:07:04 GMT -5
They don't have to put it on the internet. I'd be fine with being able to go see it at a post office or passport office or something. But let's face it, there isn't a chance in hell these photos don't get out. I'm not ok with the paternalism of senators and cabinet members telling me "its OK, we've seen it" and that I should just trust Mommy and Daddy so we don't offend a bunch of asholes that still want us dead one way or another. Yes, maybe they can put it in a booth, and you can put a quarter in and view it for a limited amount of time, and then after that you can add more quarters if you want to see it for longer. Good grief. Your view has about as much class and taste as that. I think you nailed it with the "pitch-perfect" comment, and then this post went kind of downhill. lol! Oh TC you're too much. This honestly gave me a good laugh. I had literally forgot you existed, never mind the fact that every 6 months or so you try to insult me as much as possible no matter what the topic for something I said that got your panties in a twist probably about a decade ago. Come on....tell me what it was I said that made you so bitter that you can't see my posts without puking out an ad hominem insult as fast as possible? Honestly, I'd love to know. Whatever it is, don't ever stop. Its nice to know somethings never change. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyawatcher on May 4, 2011 14:08:16 GMT -5
I understand the rational for not wanting a shot of half of Osama's skull plastered all over the Arab "street". Doesn't help guys looking for friends in Afghanistan or even Iraq. But damn the folks in charge have got to be better than a Keystone Cops episode or the lead in to a Don King pay per view event (BTW King is charging the charities  ) This routine over the last 36 hours or so unfortunately takes a lot of the impact away what should be a great event and puts the focus on the Keystone Cops part of this. And promising then reneging on the photo just plays straight into the hands of the doubters in the Middle East. As for knowing everything about the raid itself, I have a friend who was the XO of a sub back in the bad old cold war days. He is mentioned in the book Blind Man's Bluff. He will tell me parts of what they did and how they did it but when I ask a question that goes over the line he just smiles this knowing and frustrating smile at me. I'll never know everything about what he did either  |
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,665
|
Post by guru on May 4, 2011 14:08:18 GMT -5
Yes, maybe they can put it in a booth, and you can put a quarter in and view it for a limited amount of time, and then after that you can add more quarters if you want to see it for longer. Good grief. Your view has about as much class and taste as that. I think you nailed it with the "pitch-perfect" comment, and then this post went kind of downhill. lol! Oh TC you're too much. This honestly gave me a good laugh. I had literally forgot you existed, never mind the fact that every 6 months or so you try to insult me as much as possible no matter what the topic for something I said that got your panties in a twist probably about a decade ago. Come on....tell me what it was I said that made you so bitter that you can't see my posts without puking out an ad hominem insult as fast as possible? Honestly, I'd love to know. Whatever it is, don't ever stop. Its nice to know somethings never change. settle down children |
|
)
) This routine over the last 36 hours or so unfortunately takes a lot of the impact away what should be a great event and puts the focus on the Keystone Cops part of this. And promising then reneging on the photo just plays straight into the hands of the doubters in the Middle East.
