President Obama faced his first international crisis when a band of Somali pirates boarded an American Cargo ship, took the Captain hostage and demanded 2 million dollars for his release. The President refused to comment publicly during the ordeal and was almost immediately criticized by the republicans, most notably Newt Gingrich for failing to "act decisively".
What we didn't know was that The President called together military strategists, law enforcement officials, and various experts to figure out a plan to thwart the criminals and rescue Captain Phillips. There were 17 such meetings during the 5 day ordeal. President Obama authorized precise military action with the safety of Captain Phillips as the primary objective.
As we know, the operation was a resounding success.
Even Newt Gingrich ate proverbial crow and admitted that The President and the military were correct in their actions. What is truly stunning is that many of those lovable right wing fanatics refuse to give our President the proper respect for dealing with this crisis in a decisive and successful way.
It is certain that if the mission failed, Obama would be the one to be blamed. Since it did not fail, even the republicans should be giving him the credit.
I can only imagine how George W. Bush would have handled it. After waking up from his nap, he probably would have made a public statement that the evil doers would pay. He then would have aroused Dick Cheney from his bunker who would have ordered the bombing of the life boat. Captain Phillips would have died of course and the pirates would have escaped. We then would have bombed the villages of Somalia without ever killing or capturing the pirates, just thousands of innocent Somalis.
We then would have invaded Madagascar!!!!!
DD
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Dave,
I do feel bad for you as the only positive thing Obama has accomplished in the past month was to "ok" the proposal given from top leaders of our armed services to take out the pirates. (Biden would have screwed it up.) I give Obama credit for not being dumb enough to reject the idea.
Can you say "No Brainer!!?"
In the meantime, you ignored all Obama's recent screwups:
1) The insult of conservative thinking servicemen by calling them extremists with like-mind thinking of Timothy McVeigh. Disgusting!!
2) In his trip to Saudi Arabia, he bows to the King of Saudia Arabia.
3) During same trip he claims that the U.S. is not a Christian country as he tries to kiss the asses of the Muslim countries.
4) He designates 21 million to help members of Hamass population to emigrate to other counties including the U.S. (Have you noticed that he hasn't selected a "Christian Church" yet?)
5) Obama accomplished nothing on his trip to Europe after kissing up to them. The lefties in the U.S. said that Bush lost our respect of most of the European countries. It actuality those same countries are cowards in the face of terrorism and prefer "business as usual" with Iran and Korea.
6) Obama has Russia and China laughing bhind his back as he mortgages the future of the U.S.
7) The big one is the wateful and overloaded pork stimulus plan to the tune of $$FOUR TRILLION+ DOLLARS!! We and the generations to follow us will have the next 100 years to have to pay back. Some of the spending in this plan does not kick in until years later. WHY??? Liberals!!!
8) Closing GITMO without a plan of where he will put the terrorists. Whoops...you're not allowed to call the terrorists, terrorists.
Dave, time to turn off MSNBC.
John
UPDATE: OBAMA NEVER GAVE INSTRUCTIONS TO TAKE OUT PIRATES HOLDING CAPTAINS. READ ON:
Paul Shultz, the West Point graduate with a lot of
> connections to the DOD sent this update. The screw-up in
> Washinton and tyhe BS spin is difficult to comprehend.:
>
> Subject: AH, now it comes out
>
> 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 (Barack Obama) 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 onscene 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 [1] 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.
Hey Dave,
Chances are that you are right and that President Obama made this call. Back in my days in military anti-terrorist operations, that sort of call absolutely went to the President. I expect that it is because of the sensitive nature of foreign operations like that, with American civilian lives at stake, and the fact that our founding fathers realized that giving too much power to the military was nearly as dangerous as mixing church and state (Obama taught Constitutional law, and that -- along with his reason/compassion-based upbringing -- makes it much more likely that he has thoroughly studied and understands such matters). I am glad to see that the president had the courage to make the call -- presidents who had an image of being much more hawkish have chickened out in such circumstances.
We are lucky to have a ridiculously well-trained and well-equipped special operations set-up in the US, and we need to use it more often. Doing so would decrease the need for ill-conceived large-scale military operations (Can you say "Iraq?") and save American military lives and taxpayers' money, as well as help repair our image on the world stage, which is important in this literally-smaller world in which we live.
What burns me about these things is that there is too often a perception that Muslims/pirates attacking American interests are something new. We have had problems with this since before the US was actually formed. The Treaty of Tripoli, negotiated under Washington and signed by Adams, was a direct result of Muslim pirate attacks on US shipping along the Barbary Coast. The more things change, the more they stay the same, huh?
Thanks for caring. :-)
Bob
Post a Comment