Questions about the reckless U.S. rescue attempt in Yemen

[HomerRamone]

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/12/yemen-did-us-surveil-hostage-negotiators-to-hit-hostage-takers.html

In November a U.S. drone hit tribal mediators who were trying to get Korkie freed. How did the U.S. know about these mediators if not by listening to their communication? In early December the cars are ready to leave to finally free Korkie and the U.S. military hits again at the very same moment.

It is not plausible with all the national and international communication going on between the charity, the parents of the hostage, the mediators and the hostage takers that the U.S. was unaware of all this.

In November it hit the mediators with a drone when they were going to meet the hostage takers. This time it hit the hostages right when the mediators were taking off to meet them. At least ten innocent people were killed with this last raid.

The U.S. has some explaining to do. How did it detect the hostage takers if not by following the mediators communications? Why did it decide to do those two raids on November 25 and December 6 when there was, at least at the first date, no imminent threat to the civilian hostages lives? What was the real purpose and target of these military attacks?

[lamp_shade]

1. Reckless?

[HomerRamone]

4. How could they have known that the terrorists might have high-tech equipment like barking guard dogs

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/12/a-reckless-us-rescue-attempt-kills-nearly-free-hostage.html

The psychological and emotional devastation to Yolande and her family will be compounded by the knowledge that Pierre was to be released by Al Qaeda tomorrow. A team of Abyan leaders met in Aden this morning and were preparing the final security and logistical arrangements, related to hostage release mechanisms, to bring Pierre to safety and freedom. It is even more tragic that the words we used in a conversation with Yolande at 5.59 this morning was "the wait is almost over". Three days ago we told her "Pierre will be home for Christmas". We certainly did not mean it in the manner it has unfolded. All logistical arrangements were in place to safely fly Pierre out of Yemen under diplomatic cover, then to meet with family members in a "safe" country, fly to South Africa, and directly to hospital for total medical evaluation and appropriate intervention.

If the U.S. knew that Pierre Korkie was about to be released the hostage rescue attempt was utterly reckless. Why not wait a day for him to be freed without any additional risks?

If the U.S. did not know that Pierre Korkie was to be released tomorrow this can only be called a major failure in intelligence and coordination.

[msanthrope]

8. I find it amazing that anyone would believe AlQaeda's claims that they were going to release

anyone. I have real estate that spans Brooklyn and Manhattan. Perhaps you'd be interested?

[former9thward]

19. I don't agree with the OP but al Qaeda has released many hostages.

Mainly to the European countries. They pay.

In stark contrast to the US and UK, Continental nations, including Germany, France, Italy, and Spain, have directly paid ransoms to hostage-takers. The nations are in turn accused of funding terrorism, with al-Qa'ida alone making $125 million (£75 million) from global ransom transactions since 2008 - $66m (£40m) of which was made last year, the New York Times reported. It is believed that North African al-Qa'ida agents have benefited most from this indirect European funding.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/isis-hostage-threat-which-countries-pay-ransoms-to-release-their-citizens-9710129.html

[msanthrope]

20. True...they have released some hostages for money. But would you believe

AQAP was going to release a hostage because they said they would, or waited to see them step off the plane before believing them?

[former9thward]

21. I think the rescue attempt was proper.

Whether I believed them or not.

[msanthrope]

22. I think it was, too. And I cannot imagine the suffering the hostage's families

are feeling. Finally..I can't imagine what it must have been like for the SEALs and the medical personnel in those two Ospreys.

[okaawhatever]

13. They couldn't wait because they had reliable intel that the hostage would be killed Saturday morning

That is why they went in late Friday night/early Saturday morning (around midnight). It doesn't appear they knew anything about the deal for Pierre, had they known they probably would have had better intel about the whole situation.

Why would it be considered an intelligence failure for the US not to know that Pierre was the other hostage? They didn't know who was there, just as they didn't know exactly who the 8 hostages they freed in November were. A lot of this info comes from people inside the organization, or locals, who are willing to risk their lives to pass the info on to the US. Those people passing on the info may only knows that bodies are there. Maybe they saw them going in the building. Maybe they heard from someone else hostages were there. To think that the US should know who was with the American hostage is ridiculous.

It is truly a shame that you are calling the attempt reckless. A lot of very good men were willing to risk their lives to free these hostages. These attempts are based on calculated risk. The calculations were in the favor of safely getting the hostages out. There were 8 hostages freed during the first operation, would you say to their families that we shouldn't try these rescue attempts?

[msanthrope]

16. They actually did know there was another hostage....just not who

it was...

U.S. officials said that threat prompted Obama to move quickly. Using information obtained during the first raid, U.S. officials believed Somers was being held Shabwa province, a stronghold of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, the terrorist group's Yemeni branch. Officials believed a second hostage was there, too, but did not know it was Korkie.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/06/hostages-killed-yemen_n_6280288.html

[okaawhatever]

17. Yes. Thanks for adding the link nt

[msanthrope]

2. Reckless? The US has nothing to be sorry about...these homicidal maniacs

in AQAP are not "tribal mediators." They are shakedown artists.

[Lolita46]

3. True.

Good point.

[Comrade Grumpy]

5. The South African hostage is dead. He probably would have been free by now.

I think the US should be sorry about that.

It's one thing to get our own citizens killed with our bad-ass policies.

[msanthrope]

6. Because you believe terrorists when they say they would have freed him?

Hell, if I was AQAP, I'd claim I was going to release the South African hostage, too....and blame his death on the US because it would be politically expedient for me to do so.

You actually trust anything that comes out of the mouths of terrorists?

[HomerRamone]

7. As I quoted above,

"If the U.S. knew that Pierre Korkie was about to be released the hostage rescue attempt was utterly reckless. Why not wait a day for him to be freed without any additional risks?

"If the U.S. did not know that Pierre Korkie was to be released tomorrow this can only be called a major failure in intelligence and coordination."

[msanthrope]

9. You are assuming a great deal here.....mainly that AQAP are truthtellers. That is an astonishing

leap to make.

[HomerRamone]

10. Even if they didn't "know" for sure why not wait a day rather than do something so chancy? nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

11. And if they had waited the day ...

and the hostage had been killed ... would you be here asking why they did not act? After all, they announced that they planned to kill him.

[HomerRamone]

12. No nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

23. That's the beauty of the internet ...

we get to speculate as to what should/shouldn't occur ... with no cost for being wrong.

[msanthrope]

28. Exactly...the armchair strategists don't have consequences. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

30. Sadly, this is a popular sport here ...

"Wait don't do that because ..."

"End all intelligence service activity because ..."

"Pull out all troops from everywhere tomorrow because ..."

"Stop being pansies! Let's go over the fiscal cliff. That'll show them we're tough!"

It never stops.

[HomerRamone]

31. so don't question authority nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

33. Posting a comment on an anonymous message board is not questioning authority. n/t

[HomerRamone]

34. So I'm not raising questions and trying to get people to think about

the actions of the government? *Even* if the administration is Democratic, or is THAT the whole problem everyone's having here?

[1StrongBlackMan]

36. LOL ... Okay. n/t

[msanthrope]

14. Again....why are accepting that AQAP's narrative of events is the truthful one?

You assume that waiting a day would have been significant. But you base that assumption on what a terrorist organization told other people. AQAP's shakedown artists had been holding him for 18 months....negotiating and renegotiating.

I think it's horrible both hostages were murdered by AQAP.

AQAP threatened to kill Luke Somers Saturday...and I'm glad we tried to rescue him.

On Thursday, al-Qaida militants released a video showing Somers and threatening to kill him in three days if the United States did not meet the group's unspecified demands or if another rescue was attempted.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/06/hostages-killed-yemen_n_6280288.html

[morningfog]

44. His family and his organization believed he was

soon to be released. I don't understand how the US did not know who was.

[msanthrope]

46. Yes....they believed what AQAP told them. After 18 months of captivity, he was being released.

I don't fault them for hoping.....just wondering why anyone looking at this dispassionately would believe terrorists.

The US did know a second hostage was being held...just not who it was.

[morningfog]

47. Well his wife had been released. And I've not read

that he had been promised release any time prior. I'm not saying I trusted them, but it does seem it was a strong possibility.

Again, I wonder why US did not know. It seems someone could have figured that out.

[msanthrope]

49. They'd been negotiating for 18 months. AQAP took the ransom money, and shot him anyway.nt

[okaawhatever]

15. Clearly your source of information on this subject is promoting an agenda. Most reliable media

outlets have repeated that the reason they went in when they did was because they had reliable intel that the hostage would be killed Saturday morning. They also report that they didn't know exactly who was with the American but that Obama gave orders to allow the SEALS to rescue any hostage they found there. (Just as they did when they rescued the 8 hostages from other countries during the last raid).

[Comrade Grumpy]

25. AQAP had already negotiated the release of his wife.

There is a track record of releasing hostages for ransom.

We don't know if they really would have released him. The only thing we know for certain is that he is now dead because of our rescue attempt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/world/middleeast/hostage-nearly-free-on-ransom-killed-during-seal-raid.html

ISTANBUL — For 18 months, a group of civilians in South Africa worked to accomplish what their government had been unable to do: negotiate the release of a South African couple held by Al Qaeda in the lawless desert of southern Yemen.

In January, the civilian negotiators succeeded in securing the release of the woman, Yolande Korkie. And in recent weeks, they received confirmation that the terrorist group had agreed to free her husband, Pierre Korkie, in return for a $200,000 ransom. On Saturday morning, a convoy of cars was set to leave the southern Yemeni city of Aden to pick up the 54-year-old hostage from the remote outpost where he was being held.

At 6 a.m. in Johannesburg, Imtiaz Sooliman, the director of the aid group that had led the long effort, sent a text message to Mrs. Korkie: “The waiting is almost over.”

At 8:03 a.m. his phone rang with incomprehensible news: Mr. Korkie was dead.

[msanthrope]

26. He's not dead because of the rescue attempt, he's dead because AQAP shot him.

He's dead because terrorists captured him for 18 months and then shot him.

I don't excuse kidnappers and murderers, or pretend that their actions have any reasonable basis to deny their culpability.

[HomerRamone]

32. Nobody is "excusing" the terrorists

But when people threaten to kill, you have to be careful about unnecessary risk...

[msanthrope]

35. Actually, I find that your source does excuse terrorists. Your source seems to accept the

narrative that all would have been well, had the US simply let the deadline for Luke Somers pass, while refusing to hold AQAP accountable for the kidnappings in the first place.

You seem to think that when AQAP threatened to kill, that meant we should have danced to their tune. Wrong.

[Comrade Grumpy]

38. Yet they didn't shoot him for 18 months. He died because of the rescue attempt.

That wasn't even aimed at securing his release.

Yes, the AQAP guy murdered him. There is no excuse for that. I don't deny their culpability.

But the US and its gung-ho, never negotiate strategy is also culpable in Korkie's death.

[msanthrope]

39. No....he died because AQAP kidnapped him and then killed him. If you served on

a grand jury for the shooter, would you mitigate his guilt using the excuses that AQAP had 'held' him for 18 months and shot him only when a rescue seemed imminent?

You think that makes the shooter less culpable?

[Comrade Grumpy]

43. I think AQAP is directly culpable. I think the US is indirectly culpable. That's not so hard, is it?

You think AQAP just woke up on Saturday and said "Hey, let's kill this guy we're about to get a big ransom for and who we haven't gotten around to killing for the last 18 months?"

He died because AQAP killed him when the US special forces arrived.

That the hostage-takers might try to kill their hostages when rescues are attempted is not a surprise to anyone who has been watching.

[msanthrope]

48. Um...AQAP already had the ransom money. They shot him, anyway. So, tell me again

how the Navy SEALs are responsible?

[okaawhatever]

18. This blog is nothing but propaganda and conspiracy theory. You should be ashamed you posted it here

on DU. We're better than this.

[HomerRamone]

24. Are you better than the Guardian?

"The UK-based family of a British-born hostage killed by Islamic militants has said he might still be alive had it not been for an attempted US rescue mission."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/08/luke-somers-family-angered-by-us-rescue-mission

[msanthrope]

27. He might have been alive but for the fact that AQAP shot him.

If you were on a grand jury indicting the shooter, would you mitigate his guilt?

[okaawhatever]

41. +100 nt

[okaawhatever]

45. And yet you didn't use the Guardian article for your post did you? No, you used a no-source CT

blog. Yes, like his family said, "he MIGHT still be alive had it not been for an attempted US rescue mission." MIGHT. Even they know it wasn't a done deal. What they are also saying is that the American should have been killed so their family member could go free. (remember the raid only happened when it did because they had intel the American hostage would be killed Saturday morning). For all we know the intel could have said that the hostages, plural, would be killed Saturday morning.

Stop your USA bashing and stop apologizing for terrorists. The fact is, when people pay ransom to the terrorists it encourages them to go out and kidnap more people. Maybe neither of them would have been kidnapped if people didn't pay ransom, and by ransom I mean funding for the next kidnapping. Did you ever think of that?

Another sickening point in the CT blog is that 7 Yemeni "civilians" were killed. Give me a friggin' break. They were Al Qaeda terrorists who had kidnapped at least 2 people and were guarding them. It is pathetic they are trying to elicit sympathy for those craven murderers. Even worse still that you would post it here on DU.

[Blue_Tires]

29. Reckless?

I guess it's all about the final result, then...because if it had succeeded, it would have been "bold" and "daring"

[spanone]

37. i find it pretty ballsy....reckless?...ummmm NO.

[Comrade Grumpy]

40. But then, you're not the hostage who was about to be freed who got killed instead.

Here's what the people he worked for said:

tofthegivers.org/disaster-relief/yemen/2014-02-13-11-32-42

Pierre Korkie Killed in Attempted Hostage Release

In response to queries from the media and public requesting verification on reports emanating from social media that Pierre Korkie has passed on in Yemen, the answer is YES. Those wanting to know if this is a rumour or speculation, it is not.

We received with sadness the news that Pierre was killed in an attempt by American Special Forces, in the early hours of this morning, to free hostages in Yemen. It was not appropriate for us to make the announcement but now respond to the queries through this statement.

Our heartfelt condolences to Yolande and her family in this hour of great difficulty.

Pierre and Yolande were taken hostage in Taiz, Yemen, in May 2013. It's eleven months since Yolande has had no contact with Pierre since being freed by Anas Al Hamati from Gift of the Givers on 10 January 2014. The Korkie children have not heard from their father in 18 months.

The psychological and emotional devastation to Yolande and her family will be compounded by the knowledge that Pierre was to be released by Al Qaeda tomorrow. A team of Abyan leaders met in Aden this morning and were preparing the final security and logistical arrangements, related to hostage release mechanisms, to bring Pierre to safety and freedom. It is even more tragic that the words we used in a conversation with Yolande at 5.59 this morning was "the wait is almost over". Three days ago we told her "Pierre will be home for Christmas". We certainly did not mean it in the manner it has unfolded. All logistical arrangements were in place to safely fly Pierre out of Yemen under diplomatic cover, then to meet with family members in a "safe" country, fly to South Africa, and directly to hospital for total medical evaluation and appropriate intervention.

[spanone]

42. no i'm not, i'm still alive. but i don't find it reckless.