Conservative pundits … perhaps over-eager not to be like the deranged Bush-haters of days gone past … were quick to praise Chairman Zero’s resolution of the Somali Pirates Hostage Situation. “See, we’re not like those drooling Bush-haters,” they seemed to cry out. “We can be fair, and we prove it by praising his decisive leadership in this hostage situation.”
Perhaps, the praise was a bit premature.
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 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
If true, these accounts suggest BHO… contrary to what has been said… did not leave military commanders to deal with the crisis according to their best judgment, and, in fact, prolonged the hostage situation.
This sounds less like decisive leadership, and more like Les Aspin denying the Marines armor in Mogadishu, or Bill Clinton/Sandy Berger refusing to take out Osama bin Laden.