A U.S. rescue operation earlier this summer failed to free American journalist James Foley and others being held by ISIS in Syria, a U.S. official told CNN on Wednesday.
The Pentagon confirmed a rescue attempt, but did not say whether Foley was among those U.S. officials were hoping to free.
“Unfortunately, the mission was not successful because the hostages were not present at the targeted location,” Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby said.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told CNN the mission was to rescue Foley and other American hostages being held at an undisclosed location.
What exactly was the point of making this public today? It was secret for a while, there were no rumors of it, it wasn’t about to be disclosed due to a leak AFAIK - what is the point of publicising your failures?
That’s silly. I am sure there are at least a couple of dozen serious secret ops every year, and not all of them are successful. Yet they remain secret.
Ones in which the consequences of having failed had as much press coverage as this? I doubt it. But of course the fact we don’t know may just prove how secret they are!
Right. Sometimes you don’t want anyone to know you attempted something, and sometimes you do. This is a much more public issue, so a public response is more appropriate.
Well now we find out how Obama missed the opportunity to get Foley:
Pentagon sources said Foley and the others might well have been rescued but Obama, concerned about the ramifications of US troops being killed or captured in Syria, took too long to authorise the mission.
Anthony Shaffer, a former lieutenant-colonel in US military intelligence who worked on covert operations, said: “I’m told it was almost a 30-day delay from when they said they wanted to go to when he finally gave the green light. They were ready to go in June to grab the guy [Foley] and they weren’t permitted.”
Another US defence source said: “The White House constantly goes back and forth on these things. These people are a bunch of academics who endlessly analyse stuff and ordering up another deep-thinking paper but can’t decide what to order for lunch.”
And the author’s sources are two unnamed persons and a former officer who is claiming to have been told this by persons unknown. That’s got to be one of the most pathetic cites I’ve ever seen.
And some people don’t use Facebook.
Again - go complain to “The Sunday Times”. That’s one of the more reputable newspapers in the world, a paper with some standards. Including requiring credible sources from their reporters.
Also, I’m not sure to what extent it is editorializing because it only gives the vaguest of information.
The story clearly gives the impression that everyone but Obama was united in wanting to do this mission and having few reservations. I would be very surprised if that were the case.
Both that an operation this complex and risky would not have any military advisors suggesting caution, and that obama would just ignore their unanimous opinion.
These things can easily go wrong. Anyone remember President Carter’s rescue mission for the Iranian hostages:
"The operation encountered many obstacles and was eventually aborted. Eight helicopters were sent to the first staging area, Desert One, but only five arrived in operational condition. One encountered hydraulic problems, another got caught in a cloud of very fine sand, and the last one showed signs of a cracked rotor blade. During planning it was decided that the mission would be aborted if fewer than six helicopters remained, despite only four being absolutely necessary. In a move that is still discussed in military circles, the commanders asked President Carter for permission to abort and Carter granted the request.
As the U.S. force prepared to leave, one of the helicopters crashed into a transport aircraft which contained both servicemen and jet fuel. The resulting fire destroyed both aircraft and killed eight servicemen."