American hostage in Somalia rescued by US Navy SEALs in overnight raid
Good job yanks! Hope they shot and killed all the hostage takers.
I saw some speculation that something was up based on Obama’s comment to Panetta before the State of the Union. Guess this confirms it. Good deal.
Great work.
Couldn’t agree more.
Of all the bastard places on earth, Somalia must be in the finals.
Good work.
Obama seems to be having a good run in the “making bad people dead” stakes - Al Qaeda including Bin Laden, Somali pirates and kidnappers, etc.
Is it just luck or is he (or his team) picking the right missions to send the SEALs out on (and/or using drones for)?
Now, we should start sinking the pirates at sea. When enough don’t come back, the piracy will stop.
The cynic in me is amused that this happens the same night as the State of the Union speech; the realist doesn’t care and is glad it was successful.
An update:
Looks like no Americans were hurt (as far as anyone’s said).
New slogan for his 2012 campaign: Badassery We Can Believe In
Heh.
Read Panetta’s statement. Everybody involved, from the Oval Office to the guys who maintain the helicopters, deserves to look as good as they do.
Regards,
Shodan
Are we just going to sink any fishing boats we find or are we going to capture/confirm them as pirates, put them back on a boat, and execute them afterwards?
Snark aside, nice to see these good people safe and home.
America’s Navy SEALS are fucking badass.
SEALs vs Sarayet vs SAS vs Foreign Legion. Who wins?
Actually that should be another thread, and would just become nationalistic, so forget about it.
Nine dead skels. No harm to the hostages or American military personnel. That’s some good work right there.
When people are firing weapons at you, it is a safe bet that they are not fishing.
Glad to see the man taking action when he can, and taking no shit from assholes.
Badass credit where credit is due, of course. But I have a practical question. According to the article, the hostages were being held for ransom. But it doesn’t disclose the required amount. Was it cheaper to execute this operation, or would the ransom have been cheaper?
Not that I think we should have paid it, because of the precedent it sets. I know it would increase the likelihood of future kidnapping instead of discouraging it. But I’m just wondering, from a fiscal perspective of this ONE incident, would it have cost less money to pay the ransom?
“Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.” - Robert Goodloe Harper
Assuming the account is factual, good job. I only hope the kidnappers were shot in the balls and spent their last few moments screaming in agony while they bled out.
Not at all the SEALs style, but I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.