It seemed a little disengenous to hit him with a 500 lb bomb. I think GW and Rummy short changed the special forces who should have had a shot at him? From what I read there were only 7 associates with him; certainly a Seal Team could have handled them? What a reward that would have been for those men who have been searching and hunting for him to have them capture him. He was in the middle of no where for crying out loud.
What do you think? Smart bomb was right or should have sent in a special forces team?
2006-06-08 15:19:28 · 18 answers · asked by netjr 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
You don't know a bomb is on the way, troops need to be transported. The Special Forces are quite pleased with the outcome, mission accomplished.
2006-06-08 16:19:23 · answer #1 · answered by Mr.Wise 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It seems that you are not well informed as to the complexities involved; as well as the players!
Targeting an individual or individuals is a complex and delicate mission. An F-16 does not arbitrarily use precision guided missiles either. So..., your question should be, 'how did the military leadership come to their decision to use a surgical airstrike?' Also, how did they know where to target? Hmmm.?
Task Force 145 is an elite strike force made up of members from the SEALS, Green Berets, Army Rangers, and Marine Recon, and Delta Force. They operate under what's called the Joint Special Operations Command, a.k.a. 'JSOC'. Their primary mission is to track/hunt/eliminate key targets, i.e. Al Qaeda leaders, former Ba'ath party/Taliban members, etc. Basically, they focus on the leadership of the troublemakers. They operate in Afghanistan as well as Iraq. They were the ones who captured Saddam, tracked his sons to their 'safehouse'.
Task Force 145, from the intelligence gathered with the cooperation of local informants, was able to track and identify, with virtually complete certainty, the precise location of al-Zarqawi. After days of relentless surveillance, they were able to accurately notify their commanders as to his precise location, and recommend the airstrike.
This is the function of these Spec Op units. To see without being seen! An aerial strike eliminated a 'high value target' while at the same time, protected operational security and allowed these secret warriors to exfiltrate and resume pursuit of their next target(s).
Spec Ops forces were intimately involved in this operation!
2006-06-09 03:34:28 · answer #2 · answered by colhadley 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Does it matter? He's dead.
He couldn't be captured OR killed by other means so the bomb was the last resort.
I'm not short changing the soldiers that have been hunting him down but again, that method was tried and not successful. It's probably better that he was killed the way he was, less firefight for the soldiers. News reports state there was quite an arsenal at Zarqawi's location.
2006-06-09 20:42:12 · answer #3 · answered by Pretty_Trini_Rican 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we sent in troops, we could have lost some, and he could have escaped. Bombing the house was a sure way to kill him and ensure our troops safety. Plus, no troops were close enough, and also during this air raid, we also bombed 19 other terror cells in Iraq. This was done at the same exact time.
Also, if we did send in troops, and one got killed, you would be saying "Why didn't we use an air raid?"
2006-06-08 22:24:19 · answer #4 · answered by Chopper 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As long as the job gets done. Special Forces aren't glory hounds. You can believe that there were Special Operators of some type very near by when Z got what he deserved.
2006-06-08 22:31:58 · answer #5 · answered by Captain Obvious 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We had been looking for the guy for what seems like forever. Sending in troops takes a lot more time than an air strike. Plus, in any ground attack, there's a greater chance of casualties.
2006-06-08 23:03:23 · answer #6 · answered by DOOM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why capture him, so he can complain about his treatment and have a platform from which to spout more garbage?
Frying the guy was the best move. F Him.
2006-06-08 23:07:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They didn't want to take the chance of him slipping out, or getting through some passage. Better to do the sure thing.
2006-06-08 22:22:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it was better that they used a bomb. Not only did they get him, but now we don't have to listen to him spouting off in a courtroom someplace.
2006-06-08 22:26:21 · answer #9 · answered by Strike2? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Didn't wanna take a chance and NOT get him, perhaps. I'm sure not a lot of people are complaining about the results.
2006-06-08 22:24:57 · answer #10 · answered by trucker3977 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋