Interested in what the military folks think of this
http://in.reuters.com/article/usa-trump-commando-idINKBN15G5RV
"U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence, ground support or adequate backup preparations.
As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself dropping onto a reinforced al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers, and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists."
JMO-
-Because/when a President, SoS, SecDef, or JCOS approves a plan or mission, does not mean they give the order to conduct it. That is usually left to the commanders on the ground and the Command the location is in-this case Central Command. Usually means the ok was given to operate in a country or conduct a mission in a country we are not technically at war with.
That would be up to the Command on the ground to make sure elements were correct for the operation(Right unit, the operation order, right variables(this case weather), intel, support, etc)
-One of the main factors for success in these types of missions is using the right team or force for the job. JMO, this sounds like it would have been a job for a Ranger Battalion, or at least a few Ranger Companies(FYI-4 rifle companies and 1 support company in a Battalion). The main reason being the reported fortification/size of the area. Just a much larger unit typically would be needed. Much of the time who gets the mission has to do with politics within JSOC and the Pentagon.
-For a while, just due to differences in culture between the services, SEAL Teams had been operating with an Army infantry company, Ranger company, Marine Infantry either close by or along side them. Reason being the latter units are much more adept and responding to ambush. Not sure when this changed or when/why there did not seem to be closer cohesion this time around. Article is vague but sounds like ground support was fairly far off.
I will say I was interested in hearing more about this as well. Some questions thoughts I had were-
Do the words 'he approved' get changed to 'he ordered' in future reporting?
-Did command on the ground give order to go due to intel that someone may be there that they wanted?
-Could have just been a recon that was spotted and not meant as a mission, etc.
-Or as what happens fairly often with these types of operations, they are high risk, and with that unfortunately comes casualties and much second guessing when they go wrong.