One of our high-tech drone aircraft crash-landed in Iran unscathed, giving to our enemy one of our highest-tech pieces of military hardware.
Could a ring of traitors in our military be making sure that Iran has a drone to tear apart and reverse-engineer for their own production?
Of course. And the US Congress should stop passing legislation to turn down the volume on TV commercials and start to investigate the corruption of our military security.
The Republican-controlled US House of Representatives should begin an immediate investigation into who in our military is sabotaging our drones and handing them over to our enemies.
And we can get to the bottom of it if our elected representative and so-called Republican presidential candidates will stop bickering among themselves and start focusing on the Enemy Within our military.
This investigation should parallel a probe into the deaths of our Navy SEALs last Summer in a Chinook helicopter crash in Afghanistan, the very same SEALs who captured and killed bin Laden
Nikitas3.com asked these questions about that incident in an editorial right after the Chinook incident:
*Who precisely authorized the mission in which our elite Navy SEALs lost 22 special forces troops in the Afghanistan Chinook helicopter crash incident?
*Who loaded all these elite troops, from the same SEAL Team Six group that took out bin Laden, onto one slow-moving CH-47D chopper, notorious for its lack of maneuverability, and sent it into a combat zone?
*Was this sabotage of our SEALs an inside job among the Afghans traveling with the SEALs? Or is this just an example of our newly incompetent and ‘diversified’ military, with homosexuals now being ushered in and women taking over command in places they’ve never earned it? Or was it outright sabotage by a US military official from the political left?
*Are not elite forces usually broken up into smaller units and do not they use faster choppers like the Black Hawk so that they don’t get bogged down, sometimes without backup, or shot down in one big juicy target like the 16.5 ton Boeing-made Chinook which was introduced to the US military in…. 1962? The Chinook is a two-rotor, multi-mission transport unit that is generally used to move troops, ammo, fuel and other supplies. It is not a combat chopper.
*Were there any verbal protests beforehand from the SEALs over the dangerous arrangement that ferried them in one group into a hot landing zone (LZ)?
*Were any Afghan army higher-ups involved in the decision to send the troops in, the higher-ups who are supposed to be “helping” our effort?
*Did traitor translators pass on the “information” that important Taliban leaders were meeting in the target zone when in fact it was all a trap?
Nikitas3.com will be watching this story. There must be a congressional investigation. There is something very, very troubling about all this. The facts must come out about this and about our drones. And expect a major Obama administration cover-up.
A senior Afghan official said that a Taliban commander Qari Tahir lured US forces to the scene with information that a Taliban meeting was taking place and that the Taliban knew precisely where the chopper was going to come in.
There are questions buzzing around the internet about the mission, including that the plain-vanilla Chinook belonged to a National Guard unit, while dedicated Chinooks for special ops were sitting idle.
One commenter on veteranstoday.com who had seen action in Vietnam said: ‘Chinooks… were only for back up operations after an LZ was secured, and never used for a combat assault/insertion into a hot LZ.’
Here are two exchanges from longwarjournal.org that appear to exonerate the military, with nikitas3.com comments after each:
Question: Why was such a slow and fat chopper used for this important mission? "If one were transporting a very valuable object of art or a critically important one-of-a-kind document or an irreplaceable statue, would one do it in a Chinook Helicopter?" one blogger asks. "These machines are loud, create swirls of dust, have wide freeboard, are cumbersome and ungainly with little in the way of countermeasure capability."
LWJ Reply: Fair point. But because the SEALs were part of a Quick Reaction Force -- they were coming to the aid of pinned-down Rangers -- there had to be enough on hand to deal with the mission. UH-60 Black Hawks can only carry about 10, a third the passenger load of a Chinook. Two or three Black Hawks would have generated more, albeit smaller, targets, but would have complicated coordination and communication. Plus, the Chinook's tandem-rotor design gives it more lift in and around Afghanistan's mountains than the UH-60.
Nikitas3.com comment: Three quick, smaller Black Hawks would be better than one big, slow target. Common sense says so. Coordination and communication? Anyone heard of radios? This reply does not make sense. It does not answer the question about concentrating the troops in one chopper.
Question: Why were there so many of the nation's best-trained special operators on a single mission to rescue Rangers -- no slouches, them -- who themselves had been dispatched to kill or capture a mid-level Taliban commander? "First of all why was an entire DEVGRU [U.S. Naval Special Warfare Development Group, aka as Seal Team 6] platoon conducting a generic nightraid against Taliban/Haqqani foot soldiers???" another blogger wonders. "The risk vs. reward just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. These guys are our BEST trained assets in the military so why would they be exposed to such a "low-yield" operation where there was no HVT [High Value Target] present?...it's mind boggling that a special missions unit such as DEVGRU would be doing run-of-the-mill raids that are normally carried out [by] `green' Special Operations forces. i.e. Rangers, Green Berets, and `standard' SEALs."
LWJ Reply: Also a fair point, but misleading. SEAL Team 6 can't be placed on a shelf, awaiting another once-in-a-decade mission to take out the next Osama bin Laden. These guys are the nation's best because they practice their skills relentlessly, including regular assignments as a Quick Reaction Force. To be primed to get OBL, they need to train at a high level -- ideally by repeatedly performing real-world assignments in the theater where they may be called on to carry out such missions.
Nikitas3.com comment: It still does not answer the question: Why were the SEALs concentrated in a slow-moving helicopter. We need to find out precisely who authorized that mission as configured. That person should be court-martialed and jailed and executed if he is found culpable in these deaths.
Of course Obama rushed to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to greet the returning remains of the fallen SEALs as his polls plummet. Perhaps now he knows what “fallen heroes” really means. Remember when he said on Memorial Day 2010, “On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today…”
Oh, there’s your answer why the Chinook incident happened...
Please visit my blog at www.nikitas3.com for more conservative insights.