Here's what Seymour Hersh's new book asserts:

1) OBL was being held by the ISI (intelligence agency in Pakistan) and paid for by Saudi families the years he lived in Abbotabad. Pakistan held him as an asset under constant survelience to keep the taliban and al qaeda under their control/influence.
2) A high level military official walked into the CIA's offices and revealed that he knew where OBL was and wanted the $25 mil reward.
3) US intelligence guarded the info at first but eventually told Pakistan they knew where he was and wanted him. A doctor got OBL's DNA from a faux polio vaccine visit.
4) An arrangement was made between the two countries that he would be handed over and that in return the US would keep the source secret and would immediately open up the financial spigot that hand been recently closed (money for arms).
5) On the night of the raid, the ISI was on board with McRaven's troops. The military and intelligence agencies had been ordered to stand down and allow the US helicopters to enter Paki air space with zero risk. City lights were ordered off the team had an extraordinary amount of time to pull off the raid. A backup helicopter was brought in when the first of two was damaged at the compound. Troops sat around waiting for 40 minutes for the second helo to arrive...again because there was no urgency.
6) The two countries agreed that OBL was be killed on site. There were no gun fights because there was absolutely no security on site. OBL did not have a gun in his hand when he was shot.
7) Original agreement was that US would wait a week and claim that they got OBL on the Afghan side of the mountains in a firefight. But that changed with the helicopter downing and the grenades etc that went off. Also Obama wanted to take as much political credit as possible and so he immediately made a speech that night. Sec Gates was livid with the details released in the speech that were untrue and then had to be covered up with more lies and that also released details about seal team protocol (used every night all over the region).

Here's the book excerpt:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden

It has been met with lots of skepticism but one reporter believes it has the ring of truth:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/magazine/the-detail-in-seymour-hershs-bin-laden-story-that-rings-true.html?_r=0

Fascinating stuff, not sure how I feel about it. I mean, the SEALs did a great job but essentially they were never under any threat or resistance. Also, it gives you a sense of understanding that there's A LOT of stuff that happens behind the scenes that the general public doesn't know.

This is conspiracy theory BS. One of the stupidest things I have read on here.

quote:

---

This is conspiracy theory BS. One of the stupidest things I have read on here.

---

That you, Barack?

I'm a Republican and am definitely not a fan of Obama. This book is ridiculous.

STUPID AND RIDICULOUS hardly useful ! What was written that you disagree with ?

I rather take the word of the seal who popped OBL.

Just like I take the word of the guys who were boots on the ground in Benghazi.

One supports BO and the other harpoons him and Hilliary. I detest BO but I am not going to make things up in my head so I can hate BO.

That is what democrats do.....

quote:

---

STUPID AND RIDICULOUS hardly useful ! What was written that you disagree with ?

---

quote:

---

5) On the night of the raid, the ISI was on board with McRaven's troops. The military and intelligence agencies had been ordered to stand down and allow the US helicopters to enter Paki air space with zero risk.

---

Don't you find it interesting that Rob O'Neill never mentioned ISI being on the helos in any of his interviews? Why was it never mentioned in Matt Bissonnette's book? Why was it never mentioned in Bob Gates book? Rob and Matt got out of the Navy so they could spill the beans and make money off of books, Fox News, interviews, etc... They have already disclosed operational and tactical information they were not supposed to, but yet never mention any of this. Bob Gates was also very candid in his book, yet never mentions it.

quote:

---

City lights were ordered off the team had an extraordinary amount of time to pull off the raid.

---

No, they didn't have an extraordinary amount of time. They did a lot in 40 minutes. If they would have had an extraordinary amount of time then they would have been there for hours.

quote:

---

Troops sat around waiting for 40 minutes for the second helo to arrive...again because there was no
urgency.

---

It's called contingency planning. They already had a plan for if a helo went down. As soon as the helo went down I guarantee the Ground Force Commander was calling in the other one and giving a time for extract. It took 40 minutes not because of the helo, but because they had to breach, clear and secure the structure, kill UBL, make sure it was him, put his body in a body bag, carry it outside, coral the women and children, gather computers, CD's, DVD's, paperwork, and all other important documents for intelligence exploitation, and detonate the downed helo. The 40 minutes was for getting all this done...not because they had to wait on a helo. Also, to do all that in 40 minutes is fast...there was urgency.

quote:

---

6) The two countries agreed that OBL was be killed on site. There were no gun fights because there was absolutely no security on site. OBL did not have a gun in his hand when he was shot.

---

Ummm...there was a gun fight. Three males and one female were killed in addition to UBL. It was a kill/kill mission. Rob O'Neill even said it was briefed as a kill/kill mission. No one had to agree because the SEALs were going to do it anyway.

quote:

---

7) Original agreement was that US would wait a week and claim that they got OBL on the Afghan side of the mountains in a firefight. But that changed with the helicopter downing and the grenades etc that went off. Also Obama wanted to take as much political credit as possible and so he
immediately made a speech that night. Sec Gates was livid with the details released in the speech that were untrue and then had to be covered up with more lies and that also released details about seal teamprotocol (used every night all over the region).

---

So there wasn't a firefight in bullet #6, but in bullet #7 grenades went off? Regardless of that, you really believe the plan was to hold onto the information for a week? You can't fart these days without it being all over Youtube, twitter, news, etc...within five minutes. Again, if Gates was so livid then why did he not mention any of this in his book? He was certainly candid about a lot of other stuff.

Grenades would've been to destroy as much of the stealthy high tech helicopters as possible.

But I agree, it's just like when people claim 9/11 was an inside job. Of course 9/11 being an inside job is even more ludicrious, but the shear volume of people needed to cover up this between two sets of government leadership, multiple government/intelligence agencies, multiple military units, etc. Of course, it's not improssible, but just highly improbable.

quote:

---

Grenades would've been to destroy as much of the stealthy high tech helicopters as possible.

---

Got it. If that's what was meant then that's wrong. Grenades are used to kill people not destroy sensitive items.

quote:

---

If you haven't noticed yet, when the U.S. uses Special Forces on a High Value Target, 90% of the time they kill the bad guy and usually more.

---

If you are as incorrect with the rest of your opinions as you are with this one you should probably stop internetting.

quote:

---

If you are as incorrect with the rest of your opinions as you are with this one you should probably stop internetting.

---

Please tell me how many times Special Forces have not killed when directed by POTUS? I'll be waiting for your answer.

Let's name the ones they have and tell me which ones I'm missing: Captain Phillips, Laura Norcroff, Jessica Buchanan, Dilip Joseph, Abu Sayyaf, and UBL. This doesn't even include the drone strikes.

A quote from the news on the most recent operation...."Normally, when we go in, we kill a lot of people." a U.S. official said.

From the Washington Post..."JSOC's lethality was evident in its body counts: In 2008, in Afghanistan alone, JSOC commandos struck 550 targets and killed roughly a thousand people, officials said. In 2009, they executed 464 operations and killed 400 to 500 enemy forces."

Although difficult, I'll refrain from making any comments towards Gator 2/Air Force.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If you haven't noticed yet, when the U.S. uses Special Forces on a High Value Target, 90% of the time they kill the bad guy and usually more.

---

If you are as incorrect with the rest of your opinions as you are with this one you should probably stop internetting.

---

^ This.

He's dead. How it happened is not important. Bomb, SF, missle... He's dead!!!

Not sure what any narrative hopes to achieve.

Keep quoting news clippings.

You can disagree with "Gator 2/ air force" all you want. If you don't understand why someone with 1/75 in their username agrees with me then you're simply too far out of your league to continue having this conversation.

quote:

---

Keep quoting news clippings.

You can disagree with "Gator 2/ air force" all you want. If you don't understand why someone with 1/75 in their username agrees with me then you're simply too far out of your league to continue having this conversation.

---

1/75 didn't agree with you. He gave you the annoyed face icon.

You're right I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about.

Let me guess. You served as a JOC monkey somewhere in Iraq or Afghanistan. Now you are an expert on SOF. We are not talking about Theater SOF or Theater SOF operations.

You have yet to answer my question. I'm still waiting.

2004 - to be clear, my annoyed face was in reaction to your "90%" statistic. If you want to summarize parts of the book, and agree or disagree, that's fine. But don't make comments about CONOPS and TTPs when you have no idea what you're talking about.

And don't throw terms around like "Theater SOF" to give credibility to your statements. There are more than a couple of things that indicate you don't have intimate knowledge on any of the units referenced above.

And that's ok. Not a knock on anyone's service, etc.

1/75 and Gator,

I absolutely do have intimate knowledge of what I'm talking about. That's the funny thing about handles. You don't have to advertise your service/profession through it.

I'm still waiting for the answer to my question. I'll ask again.

How many POTUS authorized operations have resulted in zero EKIA? Bergdahl does not count.

quote:

---

There are more than a couple of things that indicate you don't have intimate knowledge on any of the units referenced above.

---

So, I guess you guys use grenades to blow up sensitive items? Have fun with that.

quote:

---

1/75 and Gator,

I served 10 years in NSW. I absolutely do have intimate knowledge of what I'm talking about. That's the funny thing about handles. You don't have to advertise your service/profession through it.

I'm still waiting for the answer to my question. I'll ask again.

How many POTUS authorized operations have resulted in zero kills? Bergdahl does not count.

---

I don't have to advertise my service/profession through my "handle." Those that know what it indicates likely have more than book knowledge of the mil. Those that have only seen movies or read books don't know what it indicates. Ironic an NSW guy would call me out for over-representation.

I had to go back and re-read the thread since I never saw your original question. Here's the thing - POTUS doesn't authorize the vast majority of JSOC missions. So the question is irrelevant.

You said "90% of Special Forces missions result in multiple EKIAs" (I paraphrased there). Special Forces are a unit, a theater SOF unit, not a catch all for SOF, and certainly not a national asset. That comment struck a nerve because it paints the picture of "hunter-killers and assassins" to the majority of non-vets on this board.

If we were in a closed venue those type of comments wouldn't bother me as much. Since you're a NSW vet you should know those kinds of claims shouldn't be made on a public forum. It does more harm than good to the perception of anyone wanting to classify us as murderers and assassins.

Yes, some people need to be killed. And we have some folks in the U.S. mil who are very proficient at doing just that. If you want to go in to much more detail we can take it to PMs...

quote:

---

So, I guess you guys use grenades to blow up sensitive items? Have fun with that.

---

Like I said, not going to comment on TTPs, but there is more than one type of grenade.

quote:

---

Ironic an NSW guy would call me out for over-representation.

---

Yep, saw that one a mile away.

quote:

---

POTUS doesn't authorize the vast majority of JSOC missions. So the question is irrelevant.

---

The thread is about the UBL raid, which was a POTUS authorized mission and was what was being discussed. This is why I posed the question to Gator, "How many POTUS authorized operations have resulted in zero EKIA?" in reference to my comment..."If you haven't noticed yet, when the U.S. uses Special Forces on a High Value Target, 90% of the time they kill the bad guy and usually more."

I'll admit the comment should have been more specific.

We both know the facts. Enjoy your Memorial Day weekend.

quote:

---

Enjoy your Memorial Day weekend.

---

Best post in this thread so far.

You do the same. Lest we forget...

RLTW!

I'm disappointed you won't count our arrest of that traitor Bergdahl. Other recent ones would be al-Libi and Khattala.

That being said, I had issues with your 90% statement. I'm only answering this question out of courtesy.

Happy Memorial Day to you to Gator.

Same to you.

quote:

---

Don't you find it interesting that Rob O'Neill never mentioned ISI being on the helos in any of his interviews? Why was it never mentioned in Matt Bissonnette's book? Why was it never mentioned in Bob Gates book? Rob and Matt got out of the Navy so they could spill the beans and make money off of books, Fox News, interviews, etc... They have already disclosed operational and tactical information they were not supposed to, but yet never mention any of this. Bob Gates was also very candid in his book, yet never mentions it.

---

Because the government of both the U.S. and Pakistan don't want anyone to know ISI was on board?I mean a president that wants to take credit for his gallant and fearless actions and the Pakistan intelligence service that wants the rest of the Muslim world to believe that they had no idea where OBL was.


I wouldn't be at all surprised if our Seals were led to believe that this was a dangerous mission when it wasn't. That serves several purposes as well.

Last thing - this kind of alternative back story has really zero relationship to the crack pots that think 911 was an inside job. That's outrageously wrong. One can easily believe that a president and its intelligence community want to obfuscate the exact amount of Intel support it received in the ONE VICTORY Obama had in his first term before he ran for his second term without believing that our government purposely took the lives of 3,000 Americans so it could raise the price of oil or start several small scale wars across the Middle East.