View Full Version : I know, send in Special Forces!!!
Team Sergeant
06-18-2014, 08:28
When you don't have a clue of what to do........ barry soetoro is making Jesse Jackson look intelligent.
Middle East
Obama eyes ‘special forces’ option in Iraq, meeting with Hill leaders
Published June 18, 2014
·FoxNews.com
President Obama plans to huddle with top congressional leaders on Wednesday to discuss ramping up U.S. involvement in the Iraq crisis, and is said to be leaning toward sending U.S. special forces into the country.
White House officials stress that several options remain on the table and no decision has been made. But the president reportedly has, for now, ruled out using airstrikes against the Al Qaeda-inspired Sunni Muslim insurgency that has seized vast swaths of territory in the north and west of Iraq.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the concern is that U.S. commanders lack sufficient intelligence to determine clear battlefield targets.
A senior official told Fox News that the president instead appears to be leaning toward sending roughly 100 special forces into the region. Such a contingent presumably would be sent to help train the Iraqi military and boost intelligence available to the Iraqis.
cont:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/18/obama-reportedly-rules-out-iraq-airstrikes-as-prepares-to-meet-with-hill/
If SF is there providing support, they will need air support! What's more important, Providing the support they need to accomplish their mission, or leaving them without this tactical asset because it's politically inconvenient?
I fear that without air, we'll suffer more losses...
Trapper John
06-18-2014, 09:30
If SF is there providing support, they will need air support! What's more important, Providing the support they need to accomplish their mission, or leaving them without this tactical asset because it's politically inconvenient?
I fear that without air, we'll suffer more losses...
More like catastrophic (approaching 100%) loss! I cannot imagine the Joint Chiefs advising this without the corresponding commitment of air assets. And if he does anyway, I would expect resignations en masse. It would establish this POTUS as the worst leader since Nero IMO. Nothing at this point would surprise me with what he does or does not do. :munchin
...shouldn't we be sending SEAL Team-6 and Delta Force to do this?
Why send plain old white-SOF ?
What a rookie.
...and as far as seeing "resignations en masse", I expect monkeys to fly out of my butt first.
The Reaper
06-18-2014, 12:41
How will these Iraqi troops we train be better than the ones we spent 2003-2011 training, and who cut and run at the sight of the enemy?
What will happen when the US forces are attacked or captured?
Who will provide MEDEVAC, lift, and fire support to the US troops in Iraq?
What will happen when there are (inevitably) civilian casualties, particularly if there is any way to blame us? No way to avoid this in an urban civil war, BTW.
Will a SOFA be signed before we go back in? Will there be one if/when we finish?
Who will these forces be OPCON to?
How does this address US strategic interests?
Finally, what is the desired end state that the force should try to achieve? Because to me, the underlying problems here are not going to be solved by American military intervention, and 100 guys are just a worm on a hook.
Maliki and the Iraqi leadershop are responsible for this mess, and for fixing it.
I say let them hold the sack of mierda they have created, and offer diplomatic, informational, and economic solutions.
TR
When you don't have a clue of what to do........
SF Men Always Know what to do! Thank God and Our Country for SF Men.:lifter
JMHO,
Holly
mark46th
06-18-2014, 14:08
Don't forget, when these morons say send in Special Forces, they mean SEALs, MARSOF or anyone else they think is special, they don't necessarily mean SF.
Javadrinker
06-18-2014, 17:00
Don't forget, when these morons say send in Special Forces, they mean SEALs, MARSOF or anyone else they think is special, they don't necessarily mean SF.
I'm for this solution; as "they" think of themselves as special "they" will send themselves over. :p :lifter
Hmmm, does anyone smell another Somalia??? Yeah, send them in...but with no support...
Frickin assclowns...all of'em...:mad:
How will these Iraqi troops we train be better than the ones we spent 2003-2011 training, and who cut and run at the sight of the enemy?
What will happen when the US forces are attacked or captured?
Who will provide MEDEVAC, lift, and fire support to the US troops in Iraq?
What will happen when there are (inevitably) civilian casualties, particularly if there is any way to blame us? No way to avoid this in an urban civil war, BTW.
Will a SOFA be signed before we go back in? Will there be one if/when we finish?
Who will these forces be OPCON to?
How does this address US strategic interests?
Finally, what is the desired end state that the force should try to achieve? Because to me, the underlying problems here are not going to be solved by American military intervention, and 100 guys are just a worm on a hook.
Maliki and the Iraqi leadershop are responsible for this mess, and for fixing it.
I say let them hold the sack of mierda they have created, and offer diplomatic, informational, and economic solutions.
TR
Spot on.
Snaquebite
06-19-2014, 12:41
28323
Team Sergeant
06-19-2014, 12:54
Exactly what I was thinking, but also going with "The 300" goes one moron........maybe he will write himself up for a 6th Purple Heart.......
Obama sending Kerry to Middle East, ready to dispatch military advisers to Iraq
How will these Iraqi troops we train be better than the ones we spent 2003-2011 training, and who cut and run at the sight of the enemy?
What will happen when the US forces are attacked or captured?
Who will provide MEDEVAC, lift, and fire support to the US troops in Iraq?
What will happen when there are (inevitably) civilian casualties, particularly if there is any way to blame us? No way to avoid this in an urban civil war, BTW.
Will a SOFA be signed before we go back in? Will there be one if/when we finish?
Who will these forces be OPCON to?
How does this address US strategic interests?
Finally, what is the desired end state that the force should try to achieve? Because to me, the underlying problems here are not going to be solved by American military intervention, and 100 guys are just a worm on a hook.
Maliki and the Iraqi leadershop are responsible for this mess, and for fixing it.
I say let them hold the sack of mierda they have created, and offer diplomatic, informational, and economic solutions.
TR
Wanna come over and spread some "vision" to my 3?
I've covered nearly all of those questions this week because at me level, nobody was. We had the wrong people this week trying to get into the fight. I think I hurt some feelings eclipsing the efforts of the 3 and his assistant planner by asking some of these same relevant questions. Nothing like your S2 NCOIC telling you that you have it wrong, and the BC agreeing.
What a fookin' week.
Exactly what I was thinking, but also going with "The 300" goes one moron........
So, 300 plus one?
...coincidence?
Trapper John
06-20-2014, 05:39
"......and 100 guys are just a worm on a hook." TR, you may have just hit the nail on the head with that one. If they're captured, they're trade material and voila - Gitmo's emptied and a campaign promise is fulfilled.
Trapper John
06-20-2014, 05:41
So, 300 plus one?
...coincidence?
Didn't we ban that guy?
Basenshukai
06-20-2014, 06:18
Just read an article on CNN where the writer uses a quote from a highly qualified source (some Marine sergeant) who asserts that the advisors will be composed of Navy SEALs and Army Rangers, as they are the best fighters the US has. Seriously. :rolleyes:
The Reaper
06-20-2014, 11:44
So, 300 plus one?
...coincidence?
Please don't put Ms. Pelosi's pic up again here.
TR
Team Sergeant
06-20-2014, 12:19
TR, you may have just hit the nail on the head with that one. If they're captured, they're trade material and voila - Gitmo's emptied and a campaign promise is fulfilled.
I'm surprised the White House has not called you for a strategy meeting.
Last hard class
06-20-2014, 14:05
If they're captured, they're trade material
That's the new E&E plan. Keeps support costs to a minimum.
LHC
Snaquebite
06-20-2014, 14:58
As Allen West said ..."Obama is a magician. Yesterday he stated he was deploying 300 advisors to Iraq. Today the White House announced they are already there -- presto chango hopeo and voila! Boy howdy, this guy is good."
Nonstop24/7
06-20-2014, 17:24
IMHO TR has summed it up very well. Knowing how big of lies that Obama and John Kerry tell, there is a very high probability of disaster of this type of deployment. The explosive politics of the Iraqi government is not going in the right direction. It is hard to ADVISE a military force on the run.
Paragrouper
06-21-2014, 15:15
I doubt that many outside of the military share my opinion, but I consider the members of our military to be one of our greatest national treasures and I do not believe they should be spent in such a reckless manner.
To those who get tapped for this one; I will be praying for your safe and speedy return. Stay Hard.
DOL
I doubt that many outside of the military share my opinion, but I consider the members of our military to be one of our greatest national treasures and I do not believe they should be spent in such a reckless manner.
To those who get tapped for this one; I will be praying for your safe and speedy return. Stay Hard.
DOL
Amen, and well said, sir. I hope the mission and exit strategy are both crystal clear, but there's something tells me neither are. Being the incurable optimist, I continue to hope that this isn't just a political move to give the impression that this administration gives a rats-ass about anything outside the beltway.
Anyway, God bless the 300, and may He see them all safely home.
I doubt that many outside of the military share my opinion, but I consider the members of our military to be one of our greatest national treasures and I do not believe they should be spent in such a reckless manner.
To those who get tapped for this one; I will be praying for your safe and speedy return. Stay Hard.
DOL
Couldn't agree more. As TR said this is Iraq's mess, let them clean it up.
I doubt that many outside of the military share my opinion, but I consider the members of our military to be one of our greatest national treasures and I do not believe they should be spent in such a reckless manner.
A great many of us outside the military share your opinion, even in places you might not think. We just don't chirp as much as the ungrateful ones.
Couldn't agree more. As TR said this is Iraq's mess, let them clean it up.
Yes let them clean it up. Better yet the Arab League of Nations should be doing it with our diplomatic pushing of them. We have so many military training missions in different Arab countries. Along with civilian corporations also doing military training in many different Arab nations that could come in do what we're going to be doing there. I say support the League, but not this Iraqi POS Goverment. They have been non supportive of our plans, wants and request. So why send in a hand few to show we are in support of one side. Once we align any of our troops, drop one bomb we have aligned ourselves to one ethic group and regionally align ourselves to a point.
You think it's a soup sandwich now, wait in two to four weeks. Some thick chicken soup and rye bread is going to be served very soon by this administration.
TR - I think you point of what is the desired end state is the biggest question. Got to love when asking that and the choir say " Who cares let's just get in." I've been there before, sounds great and all Spartan. But when your a thinker and not just thinking about shooting people in the face. You obtain a different preseptuve. This is more of Strength through War. Is that a good Foriegn Policy?
Javadrinker
06-22-2014, 11:57
God bless and God hold close and protect the 300 sent in.
This is a mess the Arab league and the Iraqis need to resolve and clean up.
:D
WASHINGTON, D.C. - After much legal wrangling between the U.S. and the Iraqi government, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has confirmed the U.S. military will be sending 10,000 green berets to Iraq later this week, Duffel Blog has learned.
At a news conference at the Pentagon, Hagel said he received the directive in a brief phone call from the White House last week, when President Obama told him "to send as many green berets to Iraq as we could." Hagel added, "We were a little puzzled why he didn't want us to send something more useful, like special forces or military advisers, but orders are orders."
"Whatever, they don't pay me to think," he said.
In response to Hagel's statement, the White House spokesman Josh Earnest initially said that there had been some "linguistic confusion." He later added that after careful deliberation President Obama has decided he likes this new plan much better, as it keeps American boots off the ground, and has halted the military's current deployment of 300 barefoot American advisers to Iraq.
Javadrinker
06-28-2014, 21:08
entire post
priceless! Thank you, that was great.
helicom6
08-08-2014, 01:29
TR, you may have just hit the nail on the head with that one. If they're captured, they're trade material and voila - Gitmo's emptied and a campaign promise is fulfilled.
This is not going to be popular...I'm sorry, but sometimes we all need a reality check...and conspiracy theories are not a useful source of information or conversation.
I am in total agreement about the responsible use of resources, and this type of abuse of assets has been historical in many conflicts. I would be just as outraged as any man here, if they were ordered into a situation without the proper means for success.
But to think a president is just sending his men into an area to be killed or captured to be used as pawns for the closure of a prison, is a bit of a stretch. Unless, you have concrete, written, tape recorded, and or, any other tangible intelligence.....
If this was a moment of venting frustration, I get that too...
Helicom6 out
Remington Raidr
08-08-2014, 04:39
This is not going to be popular...I'm sorry, but sometimes we all need a reality check...and conspiracy theories are not a useful source of information or conversation.
But to think a president is just sending his men into an area to be killed or captured to be used as pawns for the closure of a prison, is a bit of a stretch. Unless, you have concrete, written, tape recorded, and or, any other tangible intelligence.....
Helicom6 out
all the hard drives with concrete written tape recorded tangible intelligence have been erased and destroyed, see? It happens all the time . . .:rolleyes:
helicom6
08-11-2014, 02:39
all the hard drives with concrete written tape recorded tangible intelligence have been erased and destroyed, see? It happens all the time . . .:rolleyes:
I wish I had the answers to the world's issues....Diplomatic lines are crossed, treaties are ignored, governments fail, governments kill their own people, we supply weapons to friendlies that become our enemy. Men go to war, fight and die, and yet here we are...searching for a president to blame, searching for a government to blame, what policy failed, and we are still standing here in another shit storm of killing, murdering, and under the threat of terrorism by oppositional factions of democracy and freedom to live freely as human beings on planet Earth.
I know, that sounds like a bit of hippy bullshit, but I don't always make friends every where I go....I will say this, the more we sit around blaming who did this and who did that, or who didn't do this or that, the more time the factions of destruction to humanity have to carry out their mission!
I look at Iraq, and I see a country that was willing to adopt our views of democracy and to allow the freedoms of people to live as they chose, religiously or otherwise. This ideal in the middle east was in the infant stages of change.
There were agreements put in place before Obama to give control back to the Iraqi government and its people. This was done according to those agreements.
I do think we, as a country that made its investment, has some kind of duty to protect its investment. After all, we convinced it people to believe in the ideals of democracy and freedom. We would all give our lives here if our freedoms were impeached upon by a foreign regime. We cannot leave a country we gave hope to, and then turn our backs.
It is most certain, if men are required to enter battle, and with all of the assets we have available for support, that support must be given! No half-ass insertion of SF, etc is going to help anyone!!
I just want to look at the realistic operational details of the situation, rather than back talk about scheming presidents or policies. I mean if we really wanted to go there, we could spend all of our time talking history for days and weeks on end, and still never get anywhere!!
My opinion is this, and I have spent a lot of time with assets in the middle east discussing this view...We have spent trillions of dollars, the lives of thousands of men and women, but we have not stopped the rise of IS or squelched out Al Quaeda entirely, even with the demise of Osama Bin Laden. Syrian refugees flood into Tripoli, Lebanon and the young teen men and women then fall prey to IS operator recruiters for suicide bombings and IED placement and testing.
The sacrifice of these young people is now the knowledge the IS gains, and is then transferred to their forward operating personnel in the regions and areas they wish to inflict the most pain and suffering. As if they haven't already done enough.
Operationally, we must go after the major financial backers of this faction, as well as, disrupt the ideals of such factions, or just give up hope for humanity in the middle east, and turn a deaf ear and blind eye to that part of the world. We spend a lot of time, resources, and money trying to develop Africa, and other parts of the world, what do we do with the areas we have supposedly liberated?
Again, I want to focus on results that will matter for the future, not on supposed fantastical agendas of a president to liberate a prison through the blood of Americans. I still insist, show me any kind of intelligence, anything at all that would persuade me to think otherwise!
RomanCandle
08-11-2014, 03:49
Please take my comment and questions as it is, but it seems from observations that the intention of the SF members of this board are very much in line with your units motto. There sometimes appears to be a disconnect though in terms of how the administration wishes to achieve their goals and it doesn't always seem that the oppressed are at the top of the agenda.
One of the observations from helicom6 regarding 'supplying weapons to friendlies that become enemies' and later on about 'going after the financial backers' and also regarding blaming the president and the incumbent administration etc. As an outsider looking at these situations that develop I cant help wondering how the following points possibly influence these happenings:
1. Government convincing itself that enemies are in fact friendlies, for example supporting the "moderate" opposition in Syria, Libya etc as a matter of expediency (the enemy of my enemy is my friend?) Only to have these factions run amok and destabilise entire regions after being empowered.
2. Allies of expediency and profit, such as Pakistan who were never a friend and have played both sides of the field. Saudi, Qatar and other small regional states that appear to provide the lions share of funding unchecked and safe havens to retreat and regroup to these extreme groups yet are regarded as valuable allies.
3. In Iraq setting up a government dominated by one sect or another knowing full well the sectarian nature of that society and having experienced first hand its propensity to erupt into chaos due to those divisions. (This notwithstanding the virtual impossibility of achieving a system in Iraq and elsewhere in a few short years that took western countries centuries to develop)
Could it be a mistake to soften the blow of war (or maybe compound the initial mistake) by sticking around to rebuild the country in ones own image in every instance? Sort of a middle eastern repeat of the Marshal Plan. It worked in Europe and Japan after WWII but is it necessarily repeatable everywhere in regions where there are so many different factions that are not necessarily friendly and will state as allies on the one hand whilst always aiding and abetting the enemy on the other. It seems that there is a sort of schizophrenia associated with this type of external policy that may make success here a bridge to far and not solvable by any level of boots on the ground.
Who really takes responsibility at the end to make sure the policy works and not just for those who need it to work (or at least drag on) for a term of office?
I do think we, as a country that made its investment, has some kind of duty to protect its investment. After all, we convinced it people to believe in the ideals of democracy and freedom. We would all give our lives here if our freedoms were impeached upon by a foreign regime. We cannot leave a country we gave hope to, and then turn our backs.
You do recall our investment in Vietnam, history seems to have a way of repeating itself, how about the killing fields of Cambodia? What is happening in Iraq sickens me beyond words in much the same fashion as world events four decades ago.
Funny how the Daily Mirror would have this before the American press.
SAS and US special forces forming hunter killer unit to 'smash Islamic State'
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/sas-special-forces-forming-hunter-4097083
WarriorDiplomat
08-25-2014, 14:23
I wish I had the answers to the world's issues....Diplomatic lines are crossed, treaties are ignored, governments fail, governments kill their own people, we supply weapons to friendlies that become our enemy. Men go to war, fight and die, and yet here we are...searching for a president to blame, searching for a government to blame, what policy failed, and we are still standing here in another shit storm of killing, murdering, and under the threat of terrorism by oppositional factions of democracy and freedom to live freely as human beings on planet Earth.
People are doing what they are supposed to do hold our leaders accountable for their leadership or lack thereof.
I know, that sounds like a bit of hippy bullshit, but I don't always make friends every where I go....I will say this, the more we sit around blaming who did this and who did that, or who didn't do this or that, the more time the factions of destruction to humanity have to carry out their mission!
Having a strategy that considers the long term effects, will of the American people, will of allies and the impact of again not allowing the region to find its own equilibrium is what must be sold to the public before we make it worse. This is an ideology they are fighting we cannot just send in fast movers to break the will of an intense hatred towards westerners this generally strengthens the resolve and increases recruiting through martyrdom.
I look at Iraq, and I see a country that was willing to adopt our views of democracy and to allow the freedoms of people to live as they chose, religiously or otherwise. This ideal in the middle east was in the infant stages of change.
Iraq had more freedom than we do believe it or not, free market competition etc.... the only expression they did not have was the right to elect it's leadership. This is a dangerous ideology to impose on a region that IS NOT a country of immigrants who's way of life is ancient. Americans have little to no connection with it's tribal laws that governed our very own people hundreds/thousands of years ago. An ancient culture with no separation of church and state. These people are ruled by Imams, Ayatollahs and Sheiks. We cannot impose our way of life and values on them.
There were agreements put in place before Obama to give control back to the Iraqi government and its people. This was done according to those agreements.
Agreed, but.......... I remember during OND when Gen Rogers gave the order to pull out we all knew with the re-election coming up the Prez would make a decision to jockey for re-election by fullfilling a campaign promise but iironically he couldn't do it until he was running for re-election.
I do think we, as a country that made its investment, has some kind of duty to protect its investment. After all, we convinced it people to believe in the ideals of democracy and freedom. We would all give our lives here if our freedoms were impeached upon by a foreign regime. We cannot leave a country we gave hope to, and then turn our backs.
True we took their country by force, killed the rulers imposed our government structure on them and em placed it's military leadership as WE saw fit, they had very little say in it. We promised them a democracy?? yet Americans don't have a democracy we are a constitutional republic a country ruled by law. By the time we pulled out many were lamenting how much safer they felt with Saddam. They want a leader who is strong enough to keep all the sectarian violence in check period and most understand this, it would take a brutal ruler with the fear and respect of all the surrounding entities.
It is most certain, if men are required to enter battle, and with all of the assets we have available for support, that support must be given! No half-ass insertion of SF, etc is going to help anyone!!
Taking the country by force with no plan after the fall is why they are in shambles today and we did this with little planning beyond the invasion. The question to you is what is the American peoples will, do you really believe the U>S populace has the desire to send their sons and daughters into harms way again for another undetermined amount of time?
I just want to look at the realistic operational details of the situation, rather than back talk about scheming presidents or policies. I mean if we really wanted to go there, we could spend all of our time talking history for days and weeks on end, and still never get anywhere!!
What realistic operational details are you referring to?
Scheming Presidents and policies are inherent in politics we do not have to accept the fallacy of it.
My opinion is this, and I have spent a lot of time with assets in the middle east discussing this view...We have spent trillions of dollars, the lives of thousands of men and women, but we have not stopped the rise of IS or squelched out Al Quaeda entirely, even with the demise of Osama Bin Laden. Syrian refugees flood into Tripoli, Lebanon and the young teen men and women then fall prey to IS operator recruiters for suicide bombings and IED placement and testing.
So how would you solve this dilemma by diplomacy or military force?? The will of the people and their desire to support actions are what wins these kinds of conflicts and terrorism type activities are no different. If there was incentive I mean something they valued and stood to gain as a result of stopping terrorism from leaving their borders they would. If the people of the region had a reason to police their own they would and I don't think the heavy handed military approach will work we have BTDT. The people have pushed back and are lost without a dictator, their is no commonality amongst these tribes no one Grand Ayatollah to bind them in unity.
The sacrifice of these young people is now the knowledge the IS gains, and is then transferred to their forward operating personnel in the regions and areas they wish to inflict the most pain and suffering. As if they haven't already done enough.
Operationally, we must go after the major financial backers of this faction, as well as, disrupt the ideals of such factions, or just give up hope for humanity in the middle east, and turn a deaf ear and blind eye to that part of the world. We spend a lot of time, resources, and money trying to develop Africa, and other parts of the world, what do we do with the areas we have supposedly liberated?
OK who are the financial backers of ISIS and do you really think that a lack of money is going to stop a fanatical group who can and does resupply by force?. I know full well the connections between money launderers, cartels the gold coast etc... so how do we shut it down. A Leaderless organization driven by an ideology isn't exactly a pliable structure that can be simply shutting with a decapitation their tactics change every time something works well and no one tells them to change or not to do something they are driven by a hatred and fanaticism we have yet to understand.
Again, I want to focus on results that will matter for the future, not on supposed fantastical agendas of a president to liberate a prison through the blood of Americans. I still insist, show me any kind of intelligence, anything at all that would persuade me to think otherwise!
Since you seem out of the loop we are alluding to the exchange of the high ranking Al Qaeda operatives that become a symbol of a victory for them over us for 1 Bowe Bergdahl. You really do not understand this?
Funny how the Daily Mirror would have this before the American press.
SAS and US special forces forming hunter killer unit to 'smash Islamic State'
Yes. That news bothered the hell out of me as well. Let me clarify. It didn't bother me that the Daily Mirror would have it before the American press; but that if any operation was planned, that the press of either the U.S. or the U.K. would have it to inform our enemies. :confused: :mad:
On the other hand: The U.S. had no idea Egypt and the U.A.E. were going to bomb Libya. (Couldn't imagine why.)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/08/the-u-s-had-no-idea-egypt-and-the-u-a-e-were-going-to-bomb-libya