| Monday,
May 9, 2011 We now know
the official story:
Months ago (in August, 2010) we discovered that Osama bin
Laden was hiding in Abbottabad, a military town in the foothill region
northeast of Islamabad. It took months to become certain of this, and all
during that time the secret that we were interested in the region was
meticulously kept from most of the White House Staff, the Congress, the CIA
except for those who needed to know and there were few of those, the
Director of National Intelligence (who seems to have been completely out of
the story, and whose job and staff seem increasingly less useful), most of
the US military, most of the State Department, and everyone in the Middle
East.
The government of Pakistan, meanwhile, is convinced that bin
Laden is hiding in the caves in the tribal areas, or has gone to earth
somewhere else, but it has no suspicion that he is in hiding in their
military retirement city. They have none of the clues that led the US to
Abbottabad. The CIA investigates -- it is certainly reasonable to assume
that at least a couple of CIA tourist teams will take their honeymoon
vacations in scenic Abbottabad -- but that draws no attention from Pakistani
authorities. Bounty hunters are looking for the biggest bounty ever, but
none are drawn to Abbottabad. No one drops any hints to bounty hunters. The
compound remains not only safe, but pretty well left alone by the Pakistani
security apparatus while the CIA seeks clues to resolve the ambiguities.
The President was decisive from the beginning. He ordered
mission plans to be made for the contingency that this was, in fact, Public
Enemy Number One. Although the ambiguity of just who was hiding in that
compound was never resolved to a certainty, eventually there was enough
resolution to warrant an armed expedition from a US base in Afghanistan
fairly deep into the sovereign territory of Pakistan. This was done without
either the knowledge or consent of the government of Pakistan.
Two stealth helicopters containing about 40 armed warriors
crossed from Afghanistan into Abbottabad. Cruising in the dead of night they
came into the city and settled in over a walled compound a couple of miles
from the Pakistani Military Academy in a city in which many of the Pakistani
flag officers live in retirement. One helicopter crashes, but without
casualties. The troops assault the compound. At some point shots are fired.
There were initial reports of a fire fight, but those turn out to be untrue,
probably a misinterpretation of the "shots fired" report. For forty minutes
more or less the assault continues. No one from outside interferes. There is
no intervention by the Pakistani police, who probably possess helicopters
and certainly possess squad cars. There is no intervention by the Pakistani
armed forces including whatever security forces protect the military
academy. There is no intervention from neighbors. The compound under attack
is said to be unusual in that it had neither telephone nor Internet
connections, from which we can infer that at least some and probably most of
the houses in the neighborhood had both.
After forty minutes on the ground the troops, carrying a
body and all the collectible information they could gather board the
remaining flightworthy helicopter. This flies unopposed and unmolested back
to a US base in Afghanistan, carrying some 40 men. At some point in this
operation the Pakistani government is informed that the US has invaded their
sovereign territory, and that this is an official US operation, please do
not interfere. The Pakistani government is astonished, but stands down; no
interceptors are sent, no inspections from air or ground are made. Pakistani
investigators arrive at the compound, to find that all US operatives have
left. There are some people in the compound. Some are alive. Some are dead.
Some have been, and perhaps remain, handcuffed. There is no one in charge,
no US operatives to explain the situation. The former compound inhabitants
are taken into custody and removed to a Pakistani military installation.
The next morning the situation in the neighborhood returns
to something like normal. New media are not allowed in the compound, at
least not at first, but they can approach its walls. Local inhabitants come
out in curiosity. Food vendors appear. There doesn't seem to be any great
excitement. It is not clear which Pakistani organizations have come to take
charge of the investigation. Certainly none of the operatives involved in
the assault are in Pakistani custody.
Meanwhile, the very heavily laden helicopter -- carrying
about 40 troops including the flight crew of the destroyed helicopter, plus
one dead body, plus an unknown amount of loot. From Wikipedia on the Black
Hawk:
Capacity: 2,640 lb of cargo internally, including 14
troops or 6 stretchers, or 8,000 lb (UH-60A) or 9,000 lb (UH-60L) of cargo
externally
We have reports of 40 assault troops. Call it 35 including
the flight crew of the downed copter. Add a dead body. That makes 36, at an
average of, say, 190 pounds is 3240 pounds without equipment and a very
crowded machine. The combat radius under normal load is said to be 368
miles, and the Afghani border is under 150 miles away so even fully loaded
that's not a problem. It's not going to be a comfortable trip, and there's
sure not a lot of room in there, but it's possible. By this time the
Pakistani authorities have been told this is happening and ordered not to
interfere, and for once everyone gets the word, and nothing happens.
This is the official story plus reasonable inferences. You
can believe as much of this as you want to.
=====
The biggest question is, how was something this big kept
secret? And just what secrets were kept? By whom, and from whom? Did Panetta
keep the operation secret from the President until it was launched? Did the
Pakistani government keep secrets from the Pakistani ISI? There are three
entities in Pakistan: the government, the military, and the ISI. They have
overlapping but not identical interests, and overlapping but very different
personnel. They keep secrets from each other. The ISI created the Taliban,
largely in reaction to the US abandonment of interest in the area following
the Russian withdrawal from Afghanistan. Once the Russians were out, the US
wasn't interested in Afghanistan. Pakistan lives next door.
More details emerge. There is ambiguity in the number of
troops engaged. There are many questions about just how many CIA assets were
already in place in the general neighborhood.
The one thing we may be sure of is that the official story
will leave Pakistan looking perhaps stupid but not in complicity with bin
Laden. We may, however, use logic to try to infer just what did happen.
I'm not feeling very good, and I'm going to go have
lunch while I contemplate all this.
===========
Subj: How many helicopters?
The version I read -- probably in the WSJ but
perhaps in _National Review Online_ -- said there were four helicopters in
the operation, of which two landed in the assault.
Presumably the people who arrived in the disabled
helicopter departed aboard the two helicopters that were present but had
not landed in the assault.
This is rather more plausible than stuffing forty
people into one BlackHawk.
Rod Montgomery==monty@starfief.com
That certainly sounds more plausible in one way, but it also
means a larger operation, with more assets. Four black helicopters from the
Afghan border to Abbottabad, and no one noticed. Four come into the
neighborhood and no one calls the cops. Well, that's more plausible in
Pakistani than California, I suppose.
There is also the possibility that some of the agents
already in place in Abbottabad took part in the raid; they may have gone out
with the raiders, or made their way some other way. I suspect that someone
was left behind to turn the mess over to the Pakistani authorities, who then
vanished. I note that Pakistan is now 'retaliating' by outing some CIA
officers who were perhaps due to be withdrawn anyway. Perhaps one of those
greeted the local Chief of Police when the Pakistani came to the compound
after all the excitement was done.
Since Pakistan is a very leaky outfit, but the US presumably
made it clear to all three elements of Pakistan control -- the military, the
government, and the ISI -- that bin Laden on their soil was a "bad", not a
good. It would not have taken much warning to give bin Laden a chance to get
away. Presumably he had some alternate safe house somewhere. Presumably the
US had a watch on the house. All presumption, of course. I could
easily write an adventure story about all this, and many will do that, but
there are a lot of screwy details.
And my brain isn't working very well this week.
My thanks to all who have recently subscribed or renewed.
This is KUSC pledge week, which means that it's the Spring Chaos Manor
Pledge Drive, but I sort of hate to do that since I haven't had a great deal
to contribute for the past week or so. I seem to be in the grip of something
awful. I like to think I'm worth the money for the pledges and subscriptions
and renewals, and I will be, presently; for the moment here we are.
There's a lot going on worth comment. I'm dancing as fast as
I can...
==========
California public school teachers are marching about
Sacramento to insist on raising taxes since they don't want any cut in their
pay. California teachers are the second highest paid in the country
according to the radio (New York is the highest) and indeed, if they had a
pay cut of 10% they would still be the second highest paid in the land.
Alas, while we once had one of the best public education systems in
the land, that is no more. There are some good schools, but the average
isn't so very good. The problem comes from failing to think about the
purpose of public education.
The current way of thinking is as a right, and about
equality, and about entitlements.
What isn't examined is why taxpayers ought to want to pay
for public education: is there any benefit to those who pay taxes to finance
this entitlement? If so, how do we assure that this beneficial goal will be
met?
========
There
was a bit of mail last night.
There is
mail today
=================
SUBJ: Pakis allowed UBL hit
Your conclusions confirmed, Jerry. Actually I
suspect Paki involvement goes well beyond this, behind the scenes.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/
2011/may/09/osama-bin-laden-us-pakistan-deal
The money quote: "Under its terms, Pakistan would
allow US forces to conduct a unilateral raid inside Pakistan in search of
Bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the al-Qaida No3.
Afterwards, both sides agreed, Pakistan would vociferously protest the
incursion."
Cordially, John
P.S. "Coming Soon To A Bahnhoff Near You" As you
have doubtless noticed, the MS press is now festooned with articles of the
Gomer Gestapo being poised to take over US train stations. Don't you just
feel safer already?
John
Well, it's hardly astonishing. Pakistani had to have
cooperated in some ways; the operation was impossible without at least some
leashing of the local cops. When people start assaulting houses in Beverly
Hills, you expect the Beverly Hills PD to respond even if the US government
is doing the assaulting. The story I have heard is that Pakistani police
were telling people in the neighborhood to turn off their lights and stay
indoors. There certainly was no fire fight with the local police.
===================
For platinum subscription:
Platinum subscribers enable me to work on what I think is important
without worrying about economics. My thanks to all of you.
Patron Subscription:
Did you subscribe and never hear from me?
Click here!.
Monday TOP
Current Mail |
