Posted on | October 7, 2013 | 25 Comments
A commando unit from the US Navy’s Seal Team Six launched an amphibious raid on a Somali town, but failed to confirm a capture or kill of their Al Shabab target, suspected to be linked to Nairobi’s Westgate mall terror attack.
The operation could have opposite its intended result of discouraging further attacks. Analysts warn that even earlier successful targeted strikes against Al Shabab, a Somalia-based Islamist militant group, failed to curb the group’s capacity to carry out international terror attacks, and that failed missions could in fact bolster its support and recruitment.
You can read the whole thing, but I’m not buying this argument. Unsuccessful operations are just part of the calculus of anti-terror strategy and, while commanders never plan for a mission to fail, no military force in history has ever been 100% successful. Even an unsuccessful mission can have strategic benefits, e.g., keeping the enemy off-balance, forcing them to take defensive measures for their own security.
If this failed Somalia raid should have the short-term result of aiding Al Shabab recruitment (which is merely possible, not certain), that just means more targets for our guys to kill. Go grab an AK-47, idiots, and see how that works out when we get the crosshairs on you.
Even while the SEALs were attacking in Somalia, meaning, in Tripoli “members of the elite U.S. Army Delta Force captured Abu Anas al Libi, an al Qaeda operative wanted for his role in the deadly 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.”
Delta Force? Best of the best. Fort Bragg, N.C.