Navy SEALS slam Obama.

#1
gsvol

gsvol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
14,179
Likes
11
#1
Blog: SEALs slam Obama for giving himself credit for Bin Laden raid

Daily Mail:

Serving and former US Navy SEALs have slammed President Barack Obama for taking the credit for killing Osama bin Laden and accused him of using Special Forces operators as 'ammunition' for his re-election campaign.

The SEALs spoke out to MailOnline after the Obama campaign released an ad entitled 'One Chance'.
----------------------

Obama was exploiting bin Laden's death for his re-election bid. 'The President and his administration are positioning him as a war president using the SEALs as ammunition. It was predictable.'

Senior military figures have said that Admiral William McRaven, a former SEAL who was then head of Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) made the decision to take bin Laden out. Tactical decisions were delegated even further down the chain of command.
-------------------

No one likes a braggart - especially one who fails to give proper credit to the true heroes in this story while making it appear that one's opponent has less courage.

It is a shabby, ugly political ploy and blowing up in Obama's face would be a deserving outcome.
Click to expand...




Veterans Group Attacks Obama for Taking All the bin Laden Credit - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)


obama-general-patton-warmonger-afghanistan-war-commander-chief.jpg


Veterans for a Strong America, a group committed to strengthening the country's military power, blasted President Barack Obama in a new ad for stealing credit for Osama bin Laden's death from the Navy SEALs who carried out the raid.

Obama spent the days leading up to the bin Laden anniversary, touting his success in killing the al Qaeda leader and suggesting presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney wouldn't have made the same call.

The ad titled "Why Does President Obama Take So Much Credit For Killing bin Laden," suggests that despite the super hero persona Obama has adopted, the president wasn't the hero of the raid.

The ad highlights just how much credit the president has taken showing clips of a speech saying "I can report, I directed, I was briefed, I met repeatedly, I determined, at my direction."

"Heroes don't seek credit," the ad says over shadowy images of troops climbing into helicopters and scuba diving. "Heroes don't spike the football. Heroes put their life on the line."
Click to expand...
 
#5
#5
so what your saying then is Obama may be the reincarnation of Patton?
 
#9
#9
No disrespect to Admiral McRaven, but I seriously doubt it was his call to take out bin Laden. We're talking about invading an "allied" nation to carry out an assassination. That call comes from the President. Could he have recommended it? Yes, but it was still Obama's decision.

The SEALs are the true heroes. They put their lives on the line. The problem I have with these "arguements" is they do it out of loyalty and patriotism, not to be recognized. It's about "mission accomplished", not "look at us we're heroes".

I don't disagree with the assertion Romney wouldn't have made the same decision. The one thing Obama has done that I support is making this call. It took balls, IMO. I'm not sure anyone since Reagan would have made the same choice.

IMO, Obama deserves credit for making the decision, but the SEALs deserve credit(and much respect) for getting it done.

Back to Admiral McRaven, he's a soldier. Do you honestly believe he makes that decision without the approval of his CIC? No way. We've all seen the pictures of Obama and others watching the raid go down. As CIC, at any point he could have given the order to stand down. Did he? That is just a ludicrous assertion.
 
#10
#10
Weezer said:
No disrespect to Admiral McRaven, but I seriously doubt it was his call to take out bin Laden. We're talking about invading an "allied" nation to carry out an assassination. That call comes from the President. Could he have recommended it? Yes, but it was still Obama's decision.

The SEALs are the true heroes. They put their lives on the line. The problem I have with these "arguements" is they do it out of loyalty and patriotism, not to be recognized. It's about "mission accomplished", not "look at us we're heroes".

I don't disagree with the assertion Romney wouldn't have made the same decision. The one thing Obama has done that I support is making this call. It took balls, IMO. I'm not sure anyone since Reagan would have made the same choice.

IMO, Obama deserves credit for making the decision, but the SEALs deserve credit(and much respect) for getting it done.

Back to Admiral McRaven, he's a soldier. Do you honestly believe he makes that decision without the approval of his CIC? No way. We've all seen the pictures of Obama and others watching the raid go down. As CIC, at any point he could have given the order to stand down. Did he? That is just a ludicrous assertion.
Click to expand...

waaaay up the chain, Admiral McRaven is my boss, I've met the man, and he carries a lot of respect and wields an insane amount of power. I definitely believe it would be more in line with him saying "Mr President, we know it's him and my men are leaving in twenty minutes"

Oh, but he's not a soldier. He's a seaman.
 
#12
#12
Weezer said:
No disrespect to Admiral McRaven, but I seriously doubt it was his call to take out bin Laden. We're talking about invading an "allied" nation to carry out an assassination. That call comes from the President. Could he have recommended it? Yes, but it was still Obama's decision.

The SEALs are the true heroes. They put their lives on the line. The problem I have with these "arguements" is they do it out of loyalty and patriotism, not to be recognized. It's about "mission accomplished", not "look at us we're heroes".

I don't disagree with the assertion Romney wouldn't have made the same decision. The one thing Obama has done that I support is making this call. It took balls, IMO. I'm not sure anyone since Reagan would have made the same choice.

IMO, Obama deserves credit for making the decision, but the SEALs deserve credit(and much respect) for getting it done.

Back to Admiral McRaven, he's a soldier. Do you honestly believe he makes that decision without the approval of his CIC? No way. We've all seen the pictures of Obama and others watching the raid go down. As CIC, at any point he could have given the order to stand down. Did he? That is just a ludicrous assertion.
Click to expand...

The question is, would BHO have taken the blame if the mission had gone bad or would he have blamed the Admiral? All indications are that the blame was set to be placed on the Admiral for a bad outcome as he was the one that actually said that we had BHO and killing him was attainable.
 
#13
#13
Weezer said:
No disrespect to Admiral McRaven, but I seriously doubt it was his call to take out bin Laden. We're talking about invading an "allied" nation to carry out an assassination. That call comes from the President. Could he have recommended it? Yes, but it was still Obama's decision.

The SEALs are the true heroes. They put their lives on the line. The problem I have with these "arguements" is they do it out of loyalty and patriotism, not to be recognized. It's about "mission accomplished", not "look at us we're heroes".

I don't disagree with the assertion Romney wouldn't have made the same decision. The one thing Obama has done that I support is making this call. It took balls, IMO. I'm not sure anyone since Reagan would have made the same choice.

IMO, Obama deserves credit for making the decision, but the SEALs deserve credit(and much respect) for getting it done.

Back to Admiral McRaven, he's a soldier. Do you honestly believe he makes that decision without the approval of his CIC? No way. We've all seen the pictures of Obama and others watching the raid go down. As CIC, at any point he could have given the order to stand down. Did he? That is just a ludicrous assertion.
Click to expand...

Both Bushes were cowboys, never backing down from a fight...or a chance to be a "hero"...they personified the way foreign people viewed us. Its silly to suggest they wouldn't have gone after that terrorist coward. Silly I tell you. They made mistakes, but either one of them old boys has a bigger set than Obama. Figuratively.
 
#14
#14
T-TownVol said:
The question is, would BHO have taken the blame if the mission had gone bad or would he have blamed the Admiral? All indications are that the blame was set to be placed on the Admiral for a bad outcome as he was the one that actually said that we had BHO and killing him was attainable.
Click to expand...

If this mission had failed, it would have squarely been on Obama same as the failed hostage resue mission is considered a Carter failure.
Obama gets credit for giving the order.
 
#15
#15
Gramps said:
If this mission had failed, it would have squarely been on Obama same as the failed hostage resue mission is considered a Carter failure.
Obama gets credit for giving the order.
Click to expand...

My question is would HE have stepped up to take the blame? You and I and every one else would have placed the blame on him but would HE have taken it?

He does get credit for making the call but should not now be patting himself on the back for it.
 
#16
#16
marcusluvsvols said:
Both Bushes were cowboys, never backing down from a fight...or a chance to be a "hero"...they personified the way foreign people viewed us. Its silly to suggest they wouldn't have gone after that terrorist coward. Silly I tell you. They made mistakes, but either one of them old boys has a bigger set than Obama. Figuratively.
Click to expand...

Old man Bush was a cowboy, he called off the biggest massacre in modern warfare.

Might want to check your history
 
#17
#17
T-TownVol said:
My question is would HE have stepped up to take the blame? You and I and every one else would have placed the blame on him but would HE have taken it?

He does get credit for making the call but should not now be patting himself on the back for it.
Click to expand...

He has to tour on something, his voice is all he has.
 
#18
#18
T-TownVol said:
My question is would HE have stepped up to take the blame? You and I and every one else would have placed the blame on him but would HE have taken it?

He does get credit for making the call but should not now be patting himself on the back for it.
Click to expand...

Gotcha .

My guess is if the mission had failed he would have put the blame on the helicopter crashing.
I agree he should not be patting himself on the back. He made a call, which is part of the job description he was hired to do. It turned out the way he wanted it to. It is over and done with and he needs to move on.
 
#19
#19
Weezer said:
No disrespect to Admiral McRaven, but I seriously doubt it was his call to take out bin Laden. We're talking about invading an "allied" nation to carry out an assassination. That call comes from the President. Could he have recommended it? Yes, but it was still Obama's decision.

The SEALs are the true heroes. They put their lives on the line. The problem I have with these "arguements" is they do it out of loyalty and patriotism, not to be recognized. It's about "mission accomplished", not "look at us we're heroes".

I don't disagree with the assertion Romney wouldn't have made the same decision. The one thing Obama has done that I support is making this call. It took balls, IMO. I'm not sure anyone since Reagan would have made the same choice.

IMO, Obama deserves credit for making the decision, but the SEALs deserve credit(and much respect) for getting it done.

Back to Admiral McRaven, he's a soldier. Do you honestly believe he makes that decision without the approval of his CIC? No way. We've all seen the pictures of Obama and others watching the raid go down. As CIC, at any point he could have given the order to stand down. Did he? That is just a ludicrous assertion.
Click to expand...

This was a no-brainer for any president. The harder decision would have been to take UBL alive and exploit him for intel.
 
#20
#20
#21
#21
Bans Pakistan raids | Obama Karzai deal | Special forces | The Daily Caller


....... Obama has promised not to attack Pakistan-based al-Qaida leaders or fighters from bases inside Afghanistan.

The surprising commitment effectively bars Obama and his successors from launching another nighttime helicopter raid like the one that that killed Osama bin Laden. That raid has proven to be Obama’s primary foreign-policy success because it killed bin Laden, scooped up much intelligence data and shocked Pakistan.

Obama’s commitment will also end the use of secretive drone-attacks from Afghanistan. Those attacks have killed hundreds of al-Qaida leaders since the mid-2000s. They’ve also been very popular with U.S voters, and usually have had tacit Pakistan approval.

The unadvertised provision is buried in the deal that Afghan president Hamid Karzai and Obama signed with much campaign-style fanfare May 1 in Kabul. It could provide a legal shield for Pakistani-based al-Qaida’s leaders, front-line fighters, terrorism-planners, allied terror-leaders, funders, terror bases and terror training-grounds.
Click to expand...

fz6vfb.jpg
 
#22
#22
YorkVol said:
This was a no-brainer for any president. The harder decision would have been to take UBL alive and exploit him for intel.
Click to expand...

I disagree. There's more to this decision than most want to admit. We invaded an allied nation. We didn't ask permission to cross their border, we invaded. We did so to commit an assassination. I'm glad he's dead, don't get me wrong, but I highly doubt taking him alive was a true consideration. We went there to kill him. If we had failed, the rest of the world would not have overlooked the fact we invaded Pakistan. Pakistan most likely would have cut ties making it harder to track him down again. Saying it's a no-brainer now is easy because the mission was accomplished, but the same wouldn't be said if we had failed. It wasn't a choice made lightly. Would other Presidents have acted on the intel? Of course they would have. Would they have done so without seeking Pakistan's permission? I highly doubt it. As I said, IMO, Reagan was the last President who would have made the same gamble. Agree to disagree if you want, but this was far from being a "no brainer".
 
#24
#24
volfanbill said:
waaaay up the chain, Admiral McRaven is my boss, I've met the man, and he carries a lot of respect and wields an insane amount of power. I definitely believe it would be more in line with him saying "Mr President, we know it's him and my men are leaving in twenty minutes"

Oh, but he's not a soldier. He's a seaman.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt the Admiral knows his strategy and trusts in his men's capabilities, but if the POTUS says "stand down", the Admiral stands down.
 
#25
#25
Weezer said:
I have no doubt the Admiral knows his strategy and trusts in his men's capabilities, but if the POTUS says "stand down", the Admiral stands down.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. The potus makes his decision based on what his expert(s) tell him. McRaven knew he had UBL dead to rights and told the Pres to let his men go get him. the potus is my commander in chief, but he's basically authorizing whatever the 4 stars tell him. Also, if you are really going to call this invading Pakistan, we've invaded every country in central and south America, and at least most in Africa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top