PDA

View Full Version : Seals Rip Obama!!



Sev
05-01-2012, 05:55 AM
It would seem that the Putz is taking fire from all directions.
A tactically ill advised move perhaps.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>SEALs slam Obama for using them as 'ammunition' in bid to take credit for bin Laden killing during election campaign</span>
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...n-campaign.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2137636/SEALs-slam-Obama-using-ammunition-bid-credit-bin-Laden-killing-election-campaign.html)
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’.

In it President Bill Clinton is featured saying that Mr Obama took ‘the harder and the more honourable path’ in ordering that bin Laden be killed. The words ‘Which path would Mitt Romney have taken?’ are then displayed.

Besides the ad, the White House is marking the first anniversary of the SEAL Team Six raid that killed bin Laden inside his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan with a series of briefings and an NBC interview in the Situation Room designed to highlight the ‘gutsy call’ made by the President.

Mr Obama used a news conference today to trumpet his personal role and imply that his Republican opponent Mr Romney, who in 2008 expressed reservations about the wisdom of sending troops into Pakistan, would have let bin Laden live.

‘I said that I'd go after bin Laden if we had a clear shot at him, and I did,’ Mr Obama said. ‘If there are others who have said one thing and now suggest they'd do something else, then I'd go ahead and let them explain it.’

Ryan Zinke, a former Commander in the US Navy who spent 23 years as a SEAL and led a SEAL Team 6 assault unit, said: ‘The decision was a no brainer. I applaud him for making it but I would not overly pat myself on the back for making the right call.

‘I think every president would have done the same. He is justified in saying it was his decision but the preparation, the sacrifice - it was a broader team effort.’

Mr Zinke, who is now a Republican state senator in Montana, added that MR 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.’

Mr Obama has faced criticism even from allies about his decision to make a campaign ad about the bin Laden raid. Arianna Huffington, an outspoken liberal who runs the left-leaning Huffington Post website, roundly condemned it.

She told CBS: ‘We should celebrate the fact that they did such a great job. It's one thing to have an NBC special from the Situation Room... all that to me is perfectly legitimate, but to turn it into a campaign ad is one of the most despicable things you can do.’

Campaigning in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Mr Romney responded to a shouted question by a reporter by saying: ‘Even Jimmy Carter would have given that order.’

A serving SEAL Team member said: ‘Obama wasn’t in the field, at risk, carrying a gun. As president, at every turn he should be thanking the guys who put their lives on the line to do this. He does so in his official speeches because he speechwriters are smart.

‘But the more he tries to take the credit for it, the more the ground operators are saying, “Come on, man!” It really didn’t matter who was president. At the end of the day, they were going to go.’

Chris Kyle, a former SEAL sniper with 160 confirmed and another 95 unconfirmed kills to his credit, said: ‘The operation itself was great and the nation felt immense pride. It was great that we did it.

‘But bin Laden was just a figurehead. The war on terror continues. Taking him out didn’t really change anything as far as the war on terror is concerned and using it as a political attack is a cheap shot.

‘In years to come there is going to be information that will come out that Obama was not the man who made the call. He can say he did and the people who really know what happened are inside the Pentagon, are in the military and the military isn’t allowed to speak out against the commander- in-chief so his secret is safe.’

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.

Mr Kyle added: ‘He's trying to say that Romney wouldn't have made the same call? Anyone who is patriotic to this country would have made that exact call, Democrat or Republican. Obama is taking more credit than he is due but it's going to get him some pretty good mileage.’

A former intelligence official who was serving in the US government when bin Laden was killed said that the Obama administration knew about the al-Qaeda leader’s whereabouts in October 2010 but delayed taking action and risked letting him escape.

‘In the end, Obama was forced to make a decision and do it. He knew that if he didn’t do it the political risks in not taking action were huge. Mitt Romney would have made the call but he would have made it earlier – as would George W. Bush.’

Brandon Webb, a former SEAL who spent 13 years on active duty and served in Iraq and Afghanistan, said: ‘Bush should get partial credit for putting the system in place.

‘Obama inherited a very robust package with regards to special ops and the intelligence community. But Obama deserves credit because he got bin Laden – you can’t take that away from him.

‘My friends that work in Special Operations Command (SOCOM) that have been on video teleconferences with Obama on these kill or capture situations say that Obama has no issue whatsoever with making decisions and typically it's kill. He’s hitting the kill button every time. I have a lot of respect for him for that.’

But he said that many SEALs were dismayed about the amount of publicity the Obama administration had generated about SEAL Team Six, the very existence of which is highly classified.

‘The majority of the SEALs I know are really proud of the operation but it does become “OK, enough is enough – we’re ready to get back to work and step out of the limelight.” They don’t want to be continuously paraded around a global audience like a show dog.

‘Obama has a very good relationship with the Special Operations community at large, especially the SEALs, and it’s nice to see. We had the same relationship with George W. Bush when he was president.’

It was ‘stretching a little much’ for Mr Obama to suggest only he would have made the decision. ‘I personally I don't think Romney would have any problem making tough decisions. He got a very accomplished record of making decision as a business professional.

‘He may not have charisma but he clearly has leadership skills. I don’t think he'd have any problem taking that decision.’

Clint Bruce, who gave up the chance of an NFL career to serve as a SEAL officer before retiring as a lieutenant after nine years, said: ‘We were extremely surprised and discouraged by the publicity because it compromises the ability of those guys to operate.

‘It’s a waste of time to speculate about who would and wouldn’t have made that decision. It was a symphony of opportunity and intelligence that allowed this administration to give the green light. We want to acknowledge that they made that decision.

‘Politicians should let the public know where they stand on national security but not in the play-by-play, detailed way that has been done recently. The intricacies of national security should not become part of stump speeches.’

LWW
05-01-2012, 06:25 AM
They are obviously enemies of the state.

Sev
05-01-2012, 08:38 AM
They are in the best position to rip The Putz.

Soflasnapper
05-01-2012, 09:59 AM
Sure, because when US Navy Seals want to speak out, they turn to the UK Daily Mail?

This is ridiculous on its face, and relates to the nature of that tabloid. Look back on their global warming coverage for other examples of their style.

A propaganda rag of the right over there. And a former part of the gray washing of propaganda overseas to appear over here, first noticeable in the Clinton years. They and other tabloids there, others owned by Murdock, were a conveyor belt of propaganda. With their low bar to print so many lies that they've been the subject of multiple large libel awards through the 21st century, they run planted stories, so that they will be picked up here, as credible. They are not credible.

Sev
05-01-2012, 10:40 AM
As if the MSM in America is credible.

Soflasnapper
05-01-2012, 11:22 AM
The MSM here is not credible, but the UK tabloids are less credible, still.

Find me a news outlet anywhere with this record of libel suit losses:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Libel lawsuits

The Daily Mail has been involved in a number of notable libel suits. Among them are:

2001, February: Businessman Alan Sugar was awarded £100,000 in damages following a story commenting on his stewardship of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club.[44]
2003, October: Actress Diana Rigg awarded £30,000 in damages over a story commenting on aspects of her personality.[45]
2006, May: £100,000 damages for Elton John, following false accusations concerning his manners and behaviour.[46]
2009, January: £30,000 award to Dr Austen Ivereigh, who had worked for Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, following false accusations made by the newspaper concerning abortion.[47]
2010, July: £47,500 award to Parameswaran Subramanyam for falsely claiming that he secretly sustained himself with hamburgers during a 23-day hunger strike in Parliament Square to draw attention to the plight of Tamils in Sri Lanka.[48]
2011, November: the former lifestyle adviser to Cherie Blair and Tony Blair, Carole Caplin received "substantial" libel damages over claims in the Mail that she was about to reveal intimate details about her former clients.[49]
</div></div>

Quite a proven history of lying in current times, there.

LWW
05-01-2012, 11:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sure, because when US Navy Seals want to speak out, they turn to the UK Daily Mail?

This is ridiculous on its face, and relates to the nature of that tabloid. Look back on their global warming coverage for other examples of their style.

A propaganda rag of the right over there. And a former part of the gray washing of propaganda overseas to appear over here, first noticeable in the Clinton years. They and other tabloids there, others owned by Murdock, were a conveyor belt of propaganda. With their low bar to print so many lies that they've been the subject of multiple large libel awards through the 21st century, they run planted stories, so that they will be picked up here, as credible. They are not credible. </div></div>

And again you exhibit how little you know.

The regime has a history of going after soldiers who speak out against dear leader.

The foreign press would be much harder to subpoena and or harass.

Soflasnapper
05-01-2012, 04:49 PM
LOL!

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>The FOUR NAMED PARTIES</span> are somehow protected from official harassment, because they told their stories to out of the country sources?

How that supposed to work? They use the British spellings of their names to make them unrecognizable?

ROFL!

Qtec
05-02-2012, 01:59 AM
We all know what this is about. Obama had the audacity to point out that he was true to his word and that what Mitt is now claiming is not what he said back then.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mitt Romney, asked if he would have given the order to go after Osama bin Laden, as President Obama's new video and his campaign aides have suggested he wouldn't have done, per POLITICO's Ginger Gibson: "Of course, even Jimmy Carter would have given that order." </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> [Romney] said the country would be safer by only “a small percentage” and would see “a very insignificant increase in safety” if al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden was caught because another terrorist would rise to power. “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person,” Romney said.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>"I do not concur in the words of Barack Obama in a plan to enter an ally of ours...</span> [ <span style="color: #990000">to go into another country to kill OBL! ...Q ]</span> I don't think those kinds of comments help in this effort to draw more friends to our effort," Romney told reporters on the campaign trail. [...] Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who is one of the Republican front-runners, said U.S. troops <span style='font-size: 17pt'>"shouldn't be sent all over the world." He called Obama's comments "ill-timed" and "ill-considered."</span></div></div>

Which is exactly what Obama did!

Imagine OBL was still alive today...

"Mr Pres, your critics are saying you are not doing enough to track down OBL, what is your response?



Q