Yemen Raid: US Loses 1 SEAL & 1 MV-22 Osprey; 4 Injured

A JSOC raid in the Al-Qaeda stronghold of al-Baydah Province in Yemen this weekend ended in mission success — the targeted HVTs were killed — but at a heavy price, with one frogman from the unit commonly known as SEAL Team SIX being killed and three more suffering unspecified wounds.

In addition, a damaged USMC MV-22 Osprey was abandoned and destroyed in place. One man was injured in the Osprey “hard landing.”

The enemy lost fourteen AQAP fighters, and three named AQAP leaders:

Yemeni security and tribal officials said the assault in central Bayda province killed three senior Al Qaeda leaders.

The surprise dawn attack killed Abdul-Raouf al-Dhahab, Sultan al-Dhahab, and Seif al-Nims, Yemeni officials told the Associated Press. The al-Dhahab family is considered an ally of Al Qaeda, which security forces say is concentrated in Bayda province. A third family member, Tarek al-Dhahab, was killed in a previous U.S. drone strike years ago. It was not immediately clear whether the family members were actual members of Al Qaeda.

“Actual members of al-Qaeda”? The reporter that wrote that is a blockhead. What does he expect them to have, membership cards? Secret decoder rings?

In addition to the enemy casualties, sensitive site exploitation gathered significant intelligence on site.

Drone strikes on 20, 21, and 22 January in the same vicinity killed five targeted AQAP operatives.

Statement by GEN Joe Votel, Commanding General of the US Central Command (CENTCOM):

“We are deeply saddened by the loss of one of our elite servicemembers. The sacrifices are very profound in our fight against terrorists who threaten innocent peoples across the globe.

Statement by Donald J. Trump, President:

“Americans are saddened this morning with news that a life of a heroic service member has been taken in our fight against the evil of radical Islamic terrorism. The sacrifices made by the men and women of our armed forces, and the families they leave behind, are the backbone of the liberty we hold so dear as Americans, united in our pursuit of a safer nation and a freer world.

via US Navy SEAL killed, 3 injured in raid on Al Qaeda in Yemen | Fox News.

Meanwhile, the loss of the SEAL and the other mens’ injuries have been overshadowed by the Islamic-terror immigration freeze. While the usual paid protestors and let’s-trash-its have swarmed the airports, and one Senator was on TV crying for the poor Yemeni terrorists who killed and wounded these guys, nobody in public life seems distressed about the loss of the GIs.

UPDATE

According to David Cincotti at The Aviationist, two crewmembers were injured in the MV-22 crash, and this photo is the destroyed aircraft:

Two points to whoever set the charges… not much of intel value to recover there.

27 thoughts on “Yemen Raid: US Loses 1 SEAL & 1 MV-22 Osprey; 4 Injured

    1. Hognose Post author

      Hey, M. Trudeau wants ’em, we want to be rid of ’em, sounds like a job for a guy who likes making deals. Win-win!

      1. John M.

        It does increase the miles of wall that we need, though. Maybe it’s for the best.

        -John M.

    2. Sommerbiwak

      Now looks like it has been a lone attacker. A quebecois of the islam hating nationalist persuasion. The other guy has been arrested by accident.

  1. John M.

    “Drone strikes on 20, 21, and 22 January in the same vicinity killed five targeted AQAP operatives.”

    20 January, huh? It seems like something happened on 20 January that’s looking pretty important in hindsight. Must be a coincidence.

    -John M.

  2. Sommerbiwak

    Sad to hear, but the loss of an aerial vehicle and a sailor are to be expected, when actually engaging and fifhting the enemy instead of firing at cell phones from above the clouds.

    My condolescences to friends and family for their loss.

  3. John M.

    It’s a shame to lose a good man. I wonder if the new administration is approving higher-risk ops than the prior administration, or if this was just a SNAFU. I know there were a few manned ops like this publicized under the Obama administration, but my memory of them was that they’d only send people in after bin Laden or after hostages. Of course, I don’t know how many manned ops there were like this that either weren’t publicized or that I just forgot about.

    -John M.

    1. Haxo Angmark

      there was no “SNAFU”. It was, compared with most of Obama’s drone and other ops, i.e., general massacres of all and sundry, quite well done. Trump should also cease all military aid to the Sunni terror regime in Saudi Arabia, and re-direct same to the Yemeni Shi’a. Who also fight the Sunni terrorists.

  4. S

    “Two points to whoever set the charges… not much of intel value to recover there.”

    Ten points if they had and used the opportunity to set further surprises; to catch the types that rummage through stuff like that searching for valuables, recoverable, foreign.

    1. Hognose Post author

      That has been verboten to us since around New Year 2003. They actually collected up our claymores and toe poppers at that time. I heard the claymores came back but with all kinds of warnings about using them in command detonated mode only. But if so that was after I retired.

      1. S

        Cynical persons may wonder if winning is desired or permitted; but then, the same thoughtcrime has probably been committed since 1950 or so. So, bangstoff/polonium-salted goodies to make life interesting and short for opfor’s techies and scavengers is something in someone else’s playbook.

  5. Keith

    Father be with the family of this brave person who maid the ultimate sacrifice. Amen. The tree of liberty was watered once again.

    Keep your powder dry and your faith in God.

  6. Jacobs

    I was going to say, I didn’t think you were allowed to leave explosives at sites like that because you couldn’t guarantee it was an enemy taking the hit. Same thing came up with the sniper getting charged for shooting hadjis coming to retrieve the bodies/equipment of guys laying i.e.d.s

  7. gavin

    Not a good day for anyone.

    As an aside (since Hognose is an aviation geek), the aircraft was a CV-22 (USAF), not an MV-22 (USMC). The USMC threw off the standard naming convention when they got the V-22 before the USAF, and named it the MV-22 (reportedly for Marine Variant).
    gavin

    1. SPEMack

      Damn Jarheads. I thought the Tri Service Designation (the only good thing from MacNamara) fixed cheap like that. M denotes special ops birds. (Pop was AFSOC; I was born at Hurlburt)

      It sucks. But at least he died taking the fight to Haji.

      1. Sommerbiwak

        In theory yes, but the various shenanigans of the services screwed the simple system up. F-117 is anything but a fighter. F/A-18? And then with the same number the Super Bug, that apart from a rough outer similarity has not much in common with the earlier Hornets. Etc. etc. etc.

        So the MV-22 is not really that much off. Everyone seems to pick what they fancy in the moment.

    2. Hognose Post author

      Thanks, brother. For the readers, the CV-22 is an SOF variant that replaced the capable but aged-out MH-53 Pave Low in AFSOF service. It is optimized for covert and clandestine insertions and extractions.

      1. Boat Guy

        Well, I might take exception to “replaced” – it’s what AFSOC got in place of the Pave. As with everything it’s a trade-off. Count me among the sceptical – shoulda stuck with “Plenty Good” instead of faster and newer.

        1. DSM

          I had some friends down at Hurby, they weren’t happy with the CV-22 decision. The Pave Lows were old and needed replaced but there were other medium and large lift helos that should’ve been given the nod.

  8. Docduracoat

    I’m with Haxo on this one
    Striking at anyone near a cellphone from the sky is counterproductive
    Then shooting at the first responders just helps terrorist recruiters
    Actually going in there and killing our enemies and gathering intelligence is far more effective
    Even if it means taking casualties
    Stop supporting the Saudis is also a great idea
    At least until they accept thousands of Syrian refugees

    1. Kirk

      I look at it as the Western equivalent of the suicide bomber attacking us. You want to use indiscriminate combat techniques, don’t come whining to me when you get indiscriminate responses.

      If the assholes behind the suicide bombers and so forth actually targeted legit targets like security forces, I’d say you and Haxo are morally correct. As it is, with the range of crap that they do on the other side…?

      Yeah. Color me “uncaring”, ‘cos I really, really don’t.

      The only thing virtue brings to the fight when going up against the unvirtuous is a set of distinct disadvantages to your side. Hell, I’d go so far as to say that the correct way to deal with these people is not only to “stoop to their level”, but to go so far past it that they scream. They want to target innocent civilians? So be it; we target theirs, and kill a hundred thousand for every one they kill.

      In the final analysis, that’s what we did to the Germans and Japanese. And, I might point out, both parties have been a hell of a lot less trouble of late, than they were before. As an exercise for the reader, I would suggest thinking on and then trying to express in clear terms why I’m wrong, in practical terms.

      Mercy and restraint in war are two things that are actually more destructive than outright savagery. Why? Because they result in more war down the line, and more suffering and dying going on. Had we delivered up unto Saddam’s regime the same level of destruction that we visited upon the Nazis, odds are pretty fucking good that there would have been many fewer problems. You will note that the Nazis counted on there being sufficient angst amongst the German people that there would be support for the Werewolf post-war strategy, and that after the 8th Air Force and Bomber Command got done with their programs, the German people pretty much decided that they’d had more than enough of the whole “Let’s make Germany great again…” idea. You can talk trash about how Dresden wasn’t strictly necessary, but I honestly think it was–How else were you going to beat some fucking sense into those people?

      Old German dude I knew told me some stories out of the post-WWII era in Germany, from after he got out of the Siberian camps and before he emigrated to the US. His wife and kids were somewhere in the countryside of Bavaria, out where the irredentist types thought they’d find fertile ground. Per his description of what happened when some of the Werewolf types came visiting the family farm circa ’46, his father-in-law and brothers-in-law wound up burying them out in the barn right next to the weapons caches that they had forced on the family. That’s how you do pacification, and enforce long-term social change. Mercy is contra-indicated, at least until you have utterly crushed the enemy.

Comments are closed.