You have commented 338 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Africa Horn
SEAL Strike on Shaboob Big Turban Fails in Somalia
2013-10-07
Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday that a pair of raids conducted in Africa by American special forces signaled the ongoing determination of the United States to bring terrorists to justice and sent the message that "members of Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations literally can run but they can't hide."

In the Somalia raid, the strike on Al Shabaab was carried out in the early hours before morning prayers in the seaside town of Barawe.

A resident said by telephone that heavy gunfire woke up residents before dawn prayers. The raid was carried out by US Navy SEALs, who came ashore and killed at least one individual at a villa.

The target of the operation was Abdikadir 'Ikrima' Mohammed, a Kenyan of Somali origin that is a foreign fighter commander for al-Shabaab in Somalia, Fox News confirms.

According to Fox News sources, a shootout ensued when SEALs entered the Somali villa, with the SEALs subsequently unable to bring the body of one of the militants killed back with them. A senior U.S. official told Fox News that no U.S. personnel were injured in the operation, but one militant was killed. The team ran into fiercer resistance than expected and the unit's leader decided to abort the mission and the Americans swam away, U.S officials told The Associated Press.

Little confirmed the raid earlier Saturday, saying: "I can confirm that yesterday, October 4, U.S. military personnel were involved in a counter terrorism operation against a known Al Shabaab terrorist. We are not prepared to provide additional detail at this time."
Posted by:Steve White

#12  More than just "Ikrima" ...

* TOPIX > [The Star] US COMMANDOS CONFRONTED THREE HIGH-LEVEL TARGETS IN SOMALIA RAID.

and

* RELATED SAME > [CTV] TARGET OF US NAVY SEALS RAID IN SOMALIA PLANNED TO ATTACK UN, OTHER SITES IN KENYA.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2013-10-07 23:30  

#11  Glemore, it boils down to the objective. That's for the leadership to decide.
Posted by: Pappy   2013-10-07 21:49  

#10  Pappy, your points are all valid given the assumption that collateral damage is unacceptable: For operations in a country we are not at war with (Somalia may fit that description, at least technically), collateral damage probably should be unacceptable.
Posted by: Glenmore   2013-10-07 16:05  

#9  That said, kill the bastards. The likely replacements will know. That's the important thing.

1. You have to have the assets in place and a target.

2. In order to get to point 1 you have to have targeting data

3. In order to get point 2 you need accurate intel.

4. In order get point 3, you need to remember that this is Somalia. Somalia ain't Pakistan. Somalis don't stay bought and I can pretty much guarantee there's little or no US HUMINT assets on station.

5. A final reminder: This ain't no Tom Clancy novel. And Tom Clancy is dead.
Posted by: Pappy   2013-10-07 15:53  

#8  I suppose if you've got a guy, you can stretch out the number of times you remind people you got him. OBL's old news, now. If we had weekly updates on the intel or trial, it would be different.
That said, kill the bastards. The likely replacements will know. That's the important thing.
Cruise missiles make too big a splash? Reaper drone or stealth a/c with a 500lb bomb. Or a chopper or drone with half a dozen Hellfires. You can really do a number if you keep unloading Hellfires, without spreading the fun around. Eventually you get the guy.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey   2013-10-07 14:41  

#7  Pre-mission drone, SAT, HUMINT surveillance?

Likely done, except maybe lacking a bit on the HUMINT. As with anything else, things change. Like a Shaboob unit stopping in for the night, or terrs embedded in the community, or a HUMINT double-cross, or inadequate foreign-source intel.

At least destroy the compound using air assets...how about an arclight?

You have to have air assets in place. It was a snatch mission. There were helos, but I doubt they were armed for taking out structures.
Posted by: Pappy   2013-10-07 12:10  

#6  Risk averse? Well then how about an arclight?
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2013-10-07 11:39  

#5  The team ran into fiercer resistance than expected and the unit's leader decided to abort the mission and the Americans swam away

Very interesting. Arm chairing here but, plan 'B' was to un-ass and swim back to the insertion platform? Pre-mission drone, SAT, HUMINT surveillance? I seem to recall a similar assault 'gone bad' at Patia Airport in Panama. Problem in Panama, going it Rambo, failing to cross-walk intelligence.
Posted by: Besoeker   2013-10-07 09:59  

#4  Sounds like a botched mission. At least destroy the compound using air assets.
Posted by: OCCD   2013-10-07 09:22  

#3  The Somalis handed our hats to us, again?

When you're told to have zero casualties it sort of implies its a meaningless mission. Risk aversion overrides objectives. Like the last time, I doubt there was adequate fire support provided the ground elements.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2013-10-07 08:50  

#2  No doubt, they were worried about the Rivers of Blood.
Posted by: Bobby   2013-10-07 06:22  

#1  The team ran into fiercer resistance than expected...and the Americans swam ran away

The Somalis handed our hats to us, again?
Posted by: Ebbusose Dribble7247   2013-10-07 05:25  

00:00