NYT: Obama was prepared to have SEALs fight off Pakistani troops

posted at 9:58 pm on May 9, 2011 by Allahpundit

I’d been looking forward to the inevitable movies about the Bin Laden raid, but now I’m thinking maybe the alternate-history version would be even more intense.

Coming soon: “Black Hawk Down 2: The Battle of Abbottabad”?

President Obama insisted that the assault force hunting down Osama bin Laden last week be large enough to fight its way out of Pakistan if confronted by hostile local police officers and troops, senior administration and military officials said Monday.

In revealing additional details about planning for the mission, senior officials also said that two teams of specialists were on standby: One to bury Bin Laden if he was killed, and a second composed of lawyers, interrogators and translators in case he was captured alive. That team was set to meet aboard a Navy ship, mostly likely the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson in the North Arabian Sea…

American forces were [initially] under strict orders to avoid engaging with any Pakistani forces that responded to the commotion at the Bin Laden compound, senior administration officials said.

If a confrontation appeared imminent, there were contingency plans for senior American officials, including Admiral Mullen, to call their Pakistani counterparts to avert an armed clash.

But when he reviewed the plans, Mr. Obama voiced concern that this was not enough to protect the troops on the mission, administration officials said.

So that’s why we ended up with two extra helicopters packed with SEALs following the main assault team towards Bin Laden’s compound. If the Pakistanis showed up and started shooting, our guys were going to liquidate them and then fly out. Which, really, is all you need to know about the state of relations between the two countries these days. Rather than phone the Pakistani leadership as the SEALs were taking off to tell them that an operation to seize Bin Laden was in progress, O was so worried that they’d either tip off Osama or force a confrontation with U.S. troops by sending Pakistani units to the scene that he decided to chance a firefight. Anyone need further proof of how high suspicions run about Pakistan’s double-dealing?

As for having lawyers aboard the aircraft carrier, see this post earlier. According to the Times, “the officials acknowledged that the mission always was weighted toward killing, given the possibility that Bin Laden would be armed or wearing an explosive vest.” For your viewing pleasure, via the Blaze, here’s the latest far-left objection to the operation. Why does Obama hate Native Americans?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The real cognitive dissonance is on the left right now, where they must pretend to love the military and partake of that trite chest-thumping patriotism which they usually disparage.

A Balrog of Morgoth on May 9, 2011 at 11:53 PM

hawkdriver on May 9, 2011 at 11:29 PM

I’m quite sure that I have criticized his handling of the war. but we have had this conversation before I think.

Bradky on May 9, 2011 at 11:49 PM

We may have. I guess there is little that ever changes in political debate.

hawkdriver on May 9, 2011 at 11:55 PM

hawkdriver on May 9, 2011 at 11:55 PM

The bottom line is that what “I” want is to see a GOP candidate win the wh in 2012 and secure the conservative tilt for the SCOTUS and put a realistic plan in place for the economy.

What doesn’t help that is is hysterics about every little thing Obama does. That is why I keep pointing out the Howard Dean comparisons.

Bradky on May 9, 2011 at 11:58 PM

hawkdriver on May 9, 2011 at 11:55 PM

one last thought before I turn in.
You more than most realize that there is a mix of every kind of political stripe in the service. Once the uniform is on it takes a far backseat to the mission — which is a great testament to the professionalism of our military folks.

Yet have a differing viewpoint at this site and I have my patriotism questioned, service questioned, and insults along those lines just because I have what might be perceived as a more moderate outlook. Ed suggested I revel in the deaths of military troops…

It irritates me but it is the internet and I don’t have to go to any site if I don’t want to. I do note that very rarely does someone point out to a commenter that we shouldn’t be questioning one another’s patriotism.

Bradky on May 10, 2011 at 12:09 AM

Bradky on May 9, 2011 at 11:58 PM

Nothing wrong with that. I just don’t honestly ever remember you engaging a troll on a topic. I don’t remember any harsh critique except for, as I said above, other commenters. I really just don’t recall any threads at all. It’s not like you don’t have passion in your debate, you just seem to save it for us.

Meh, just my opinion. And I’m an idiot.

I don’t like the name-calling either. I want the same things you want. I guess I might be a little more understanding what my fellow Conservatives went through over the past ten years; most specifically when Bush was president. And as far as the president and the constant crowing from the trolls about “them” getting him, that’s a little hard to swallow too after eight years of war and them bucking us every step of the way. Freaking peace marches with bandana wearing thugs. Throwing recruiters off campuses.

I’m rambling when I should be off to bed. Big day tomorrow. I officially become a part-time farmer.

G-nite.

hawkdriver on May 10, 2011 at 12:09 AM

p.

Leadership would be bucking all you liberal wack-jobs and returning the ROE to Bush Administration rules.

hawkdriver on May 9, 2011 at 11:10 PM

The restrictive ROE are part of COIN warfare rather than some nod to liberal activism. Obama certainly hasn’t hesitated to employ the kenetics and the sharp uptick in drone attacks reflects that. You can look at various papers on the subject if you think I am making it up.

lexhamfox on May 10, 2011 at 12:19 AM

It irritates me but it is the internet and I don’t have to go to any site if I don’t want to. I do note that very rarely does someone point out to a commenter that we shouldn’t be questioning one another’s patriotism.

Bradky on May 10, 2011 at 12:09 AM

We both know what we did for the service. It doesn’t matter what anyone thinks. Easy to say I guess and harder sometimes to let it roll off your back.

I’m not sure how long ago you were in, but for me, I lived through the changing of the ROE. One “R U Kidding” rule change after the next. To a point where the Special Ops guys I worked with were required to write hand receipts for illegal munitions they confiscated. No exaggeration. The Obama Administration is no great friend to the troops in the field. They required our AH64s to be able to verify that every phase of planting an IED was conducted by the guys on the IED site before they could squeeze on them. They aren’t emplaced like that. Use of IEDs escalated under his Administration. So, I can tell you that I have carried an Afghani Commando into battle and taken the same young man out dead early the next morning from a IED site an Apache was not able to attack. His rules mean something personal to me.

Rambling again. No one should question your patriotism.

G-nite for real.

hawkdriver on May 10, 2011 at 12:20 AM

lexhamfox on May 10, 2011 at 12:19 AM

Like I said, I’ve carried around the results of his spiffy new ROE.

hawkdriver on May 10, 2011 at 12:21 AM

I think the timing had more to do with Panetta wanting to go out on a high – and giving the finger to Obama in the process.

OldEnglish on May 10, 2011 at 12:25 AM

I have two words for Obama’s comments: Bravo Sierra!

PhiKapMom on May 10, 2011 at 12:48 AM

Why does Obama hate Native Americans?

LOLOLOL

Wow, that’s so delicious on so many different levels.

Midas on May 10, 2011 at 1:07 AM

NYT: In big gamble, Obama bets against Detroit Lions.

amerpundit on May 9, 2011 at 10:20 PM

I was thoroughly enjoying the mockery of Peebo until this, but now you’re just gettin’ nasty.

Jaibones on May 10, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Barry now said there was a plan to tele-ported him, ala Star-Trek, to Abbottsford and joined the SEALs in the firefight against the Pakistani troops should such an engagement occurred. No girly man was he.

bayview on May 10, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Why is it offensive to name your warriors equipment after historically important warriors or battles? Is it offensive to talk of New Centurions? Or Knights? Or Legions of lawyers at the ready? Or Sharp Shooters? Or hoping the cavalry rides to the rescue? Or Champions or Longbows or Last Stands? Or Marathons? Americans only name things after people or situatiions they respect.

Fred 2 on May 10, 2011 at 1:59 AM

Man, has Captain Kickass received his battlefield promotion yet? Sending in extra SEALs to take on Pakistani troops sounds a whole lot better than sending them in to take on Osama’s jihadi neighborhood watch program. Wouldn’t look too good if our guys started “liquidating” a bunch of folks in their jammies. So, we are treated to yet another verse of The Ballad of the Green Barry. The spin is beyond getting beyond ridiculous.

Christien on May 10, 2011 at 2:50 AM

Anyone who’s been in the military is familiar with war stories, where every time the story is told the danger is greater, the heroes more heroic, the injuries more debilitating.

I find it comical that we keep hearing more dramatic details about how Obama intervened, sent more people, and authorized them to fight their way out if need be.

Much like the guy who kills a poisonous snake in his yard, but every time he tells the story the snake gets bigger and more aggressive, and his role in killing it more daring. Next think you know, the snake that was a foot and a half long and sluggish and that he killed from arms-length with a hoe becomes an aggressive 6-foot monster that he caught and crushed with his bare hands.

There Goes The Neighborhood on May 10, 2011 at 2:59 AM

Am I the ONLY one who remembers that back during the 2007-2008 campaign 0bama said (for those able to read between the lines, anyway) that he WANTED to start a war with Pakistan????

Don’t ask me why though.
My only guess is that he backs the Shia rather than the Sunni, and Pakistan is primarily Sunni. Maybe he wants to help his pal Mahmoud bring in the 12th Imam.

LegendHasIt on May 10, 2011 at 4:02 AM

Honda V65 and I discussed this yesterday. He was pretty convinced that the Paki’s had to know, but held out that the Paki’s would have to be kept at bay. I figured that the assault plan would have to have a “what if Paki’s fight back?” contigency plan. There always has been one previously.

ted c on May 10, 2011 at 5:31 AM

Well duh! Of course the Seals can return fire. I mean come on, they are not going to let someone kill them or take them. I would think that goes without saying.

We have been using drones in Pakistan for years now..and I am sure this is not the first time some of our people have crossed over into that country.

This is just the NYT trying to make Obama look all big and bad. I also saw a report that said Bush had made a deal with the Pak government that would allow us to go into that country and get Obama and that a lot of the stuff we hear now is just posturing for domestic purposes.

Terrye on May 10, 2011 at 7:23 AM

ted c on May 10, 2011 at 5:31 AM

Yep, a young lady I know got her first Air Medal (with V) bringing back the survivors and dead from a firefight an American unit got into with the Pakistani police. Americans Soldiers always have the right to defend themselves with deadly force.

Nothing new or gutsy.

hawkdriver on May 10, 2011 at 8:00 AM

It should be obvious that Obama and all the immigration mongers don’t care the least about Native Americans. Natives don’t get the coveted victim status. In other words, natives aren’t cool.

thuja on May 10, 2011 at 8:06 AM

Yep, a young lady I know got her first Air Medal (with V) bringing back the survivors and dead from a firefight an American unit got into with the Pakistani police. Americans Soldiers always have the right to defend themselves with deadly force.

Nothing new or gutsy.

hawkdriver on May 10, 2011 at 8:00 AM

I agree. Border area Pakis are always giving us trouble, that’s no new news. This raid included CAS on-station with specific ROEs in the event that anything on any airfield started turning. A QRF was ready and waiting, as were hospital facilities and CASEVAC platforms.

ted c on May 10, 2011 at 8:08 AM

By announcing that our dear leader’s plan included a boat load of lawyers just in case OBL was captured alive, he’s trying to placate the lefty loons who believe in rights for terrorists. I seriously doubt that there was a plan in place to bring OBL back alive and that the Won was part of formulating any plans involving this mission. It’s not part of his M.O. as he always leaves that to others. Have the Blackfeet called to cancel the adoption into the tribe yet?

Kissmygrits on May 10, 2011 at 8:22 AM

there is very little I do like about Obama. In this particular case he did the right thing and the hyperpartisans cannot even acknowledge that.

Bradky on May 9, 2011 at 11:23 PM

There are people arguing that he didn’t do the right thing here? Or are people arguing that his gutsy call was actually the logical thing to do?

strictnein on May 10, 2011 at 8:45 AM

But when he reviewed the plans, Mr. Obama voiced concern that this was not enough to protect the troops on the mission, administration officials said.

So that’s why we ended up with two extra helicopters packed with SEALs following the main assault team towards Bin Laden’s compound. If the Pakistanis showed up and started shooting, our guys were going to liquidate them and then fly out.

….Unlike Clinton in Somali….Obama appears to have sent in enough fire power to complete the mission.
Credit where credit is due.

Baxter Greene on May 10, 2011 at 9:01 AM

Am I the ONLY one who remembers that back during the 2007-2008 campaign 0bama said (for those able to read between the lines, anyway) that he WANTED to start a war with Pakistan????

Don’t ask me why though.
My only guess is that he backs the Shia rather than the Sunni, and Pakistan is primarily Sunni. Maybe he wants to help his pal Mahmoud bring in the 12th Imam.

LegendHasIt on May 10, 2011 at 4:02 AM

Is that really what he said, even reading between the, invisible, not there, I made them up…lines. I seem to remember seeing multiple videos, debates, interviews where he said. If we have actionable intelligence as to the location of OSL and Pakistan is unwilling or unable to act, we will launch and attack on OBL, even inside Pakistan. McCain said he wanted to bomb Pakistan and he said very clearly, no I will attack OBL (exactly what he did by the way) If you are going to argue a point, at least have the intellectual integrity to state facts. The only reason your comment stands out so much is it was an area of real difference between Clinton, McCain and Obama. Not necessarily in policy but in Obama’s saying he would take the action.

NextGen on May 10, 2011 at 9:22 AM

Bradky on May 9, 2011 at 11:17 PM

Rent free? You really are delusional. Nothing TOTUS does to us is free, or haven’t you filled a gas tank lately?

Freelancer on May 10, 2011 at 10:47 AM

Oh, and Bradky…

Thank you for your service. However, the other commenters are correct, pretty much every word you bring here comes from well left-of-center. I am neither a partisan nor a Republican, I dumped the party after Bush’s first mid-term when the GOP blew the chance to take better control of things. I’m a constitutional originalist. From my viewpoint, you very often advocate for things only a liberal could love, and that leaves you open to being labelled as one. Words matter.

Freelancer on May 10, 2011 at 10:52 AM

Obama will play himself, of course.

SlaveDog on May 9, 2011 at 10:33 PM

The Won is too busy playing golf, but he will allow Dennis Haysbert to portray him.

pedestrian on May 9, 2011 at 10:37 PM

I’m thinking Chris Rock would be more appropriate.

slickwillie2001 on May 10, 2011 at 12:00 PM

From my viewpoint, you very often advocate for things only a liberal could love, and that leaves you open to being labelled as one. Words matterFreelancer on May 10, 2011 at 10:52 AM

Name examples – don’t generalize.

Bradky on May 10, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Comment pages: 1 2