Clubbing SEALS, Why does Obama and the military engage in it?

[busybody]

NEW YORK POST: Clubbing SEALs.

“What is especially ironic, to say nothing of infuriating, about the SEALs’ inquisition is that it underscores the utter lack of curiosity exhibited by the Pentagon in the matter of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army shrink and Islamist.”

[firespin]

[busybody]

Clubbing SEALs

November 27, 2009

Posted: November 27, 2009

Punch a terrorist -- head for the brig

Welcome to America's thoroughly modern military.

The notion beggars the imagination, but three Navy SEALs who helped capture one of the most notorious terrorists in Iraq now face courts-martial -- because the terrorist acquired a bloody lip after the takedown.

Ahmed Hashim Abed organized the brutal 2004 attack on four US civilian contractors working as security guards in Fallujah. After murdering the guards, terrorists dragged their bodies through the city, burning and hanging two of them over the Euphrates Bridge.



Fast forward to this past summer: Navy Petty Officers Matthew McCabe, Jonathan Keefe and Julio Huertas were part of a SEAL team that captured Abed.

Abed complained that he was punched on Sept. 1 during his initial detention. A fat, bloody lip was offered up as proof.

Imagine that.

Now McCabe is charged with assault, dereliction of duty and making a false statement; Keefe is charged with dereliction of duty and making a false statement; Huertas has the same charges as Keefe, plus one of impeding an investigation.

It's not hard to figure out what happened here: One SEAL slugged Abed -- no doubt for good reason -- and the other two wouldn't rat out their buddy to investigators who would've been better employed slugging Abed themselves.

And so the SEALs will be arraigned on Dec. 7 -- another reason for the date to live in infamy.

Ironically, if the three had treated Abed like Al-Qaeda-in-Iraq has routinely treated American soldiers it captures, his bloody, mutilated corpse would've turned up floating in a river.

(For the record, the number of US combat troops captured in Iraq and Afghanistan who have been recovered alive is approximately zero.)

What is especially ironic, to say nothing of infuriating, about the SEALs' inquisition is that it underscores the utter lack of curiosity exhibited by the Pentagon in the matter of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army shrink and Islamist.

Hasan was allowed to remain in contact with troops despite a distressingly long record of incendiary public rhetoric -- and copious e-mail traffic with an associate of Osama bin Laden.

The FBI and Army were on to him, but lacked the courage to confront him.

The result: 13 Americans dead, and 29 wounded, at Fort Hood.

The truth, of course, is that falling afoul of the diversity police is a quick way to end an otherwise promising career -- and the Pentagon and FBI know it.

SEALs, on the other hand, are fair game. What a scandal.

Meanwhile, we wonder.

What happens the next time America needs SEALs -- and there aren't any?

Or, at least, there aren't any who meet traditional SEAL standards -- the warriors having been chased away by the pettifoggers.

Outlandish?

Don't bet money on it.

[busybody]

[Karen Kraft]

Originally Posted by firespin

Tell Bam-Bam that's not cricket.

[busybody]

Punishing the SEALs
November 30th, 2009 at 10:44 am by Sean Linnane | 14 Comments |Share
Earlier this week, news broke that three Navy SEALs were charged and may be court-martialed for allegedly punching a prisoner. The prisoner, a high-value target (HVT) was turned over to authorities with a bloody lip.

According to a source of mine — a retired SEAL who like myself still serves in other capacities — the feeling going around the Special Operations community at Fort Bragg is that this latest development is a kneejerk reaction to the situation a couple months ago when SEAL operators rescued Captain Phillips – Captain of the Maersk Alabama – off the coast of Somalia.

At the time of the capture, the media played up the angle that President Obama himself gave the order to the SEAL snipers to open fire. Having done extensive time in anti-terrorist units myself, I can tell you from personal experience this is ridiculous, a total fabrication. Nobody except those with “eyes on” the targeted individuals can make the judgment call to open fire.

The truth of the situation was that the SEALs were held off from infiltrating the AO (Area of Operations) for over 36 hours. There was a lot of resistance from the White House in letting them in theater in the first place; once they were in place they were given very restrictive ROE (Rules Of Engagement); so restrictive that they really couldn’t engage their targets. There were two previous opportunities to rescue Captain Phillips, and they were not allowed to engage their targets.

When they finally did execute, they did so by liberally interpreting the ROE; the onsite commander finally had enough with the situation and gave them a weapons-free command and they were able to engage and rescue Captain Phillips. The fallout from the National Command Authority was immediate and extremely unpleasant; the White House did not want the rescue to be conducted in the way that it was.

So the word on the street is that this latest development is payback for the SEALs violating the ROE in rescuing the captain of the Maersk Alabama. The Chain of Command is asserting itself, letting everybody know what’s going to happen to you if you don’t follow orders.

As this was expressed to me, this opinion is based on very good, solid inside information. In my personal experience with Navy brass I have found they are very political and very politically correct. The Naval Command’s reaction to the prisoner situation was so overblown and out of proportion that I somehow find this latest angle quite believable. Unfortunately.