The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day

  Can't kill your way out of war
--General David Petraeus 

Acting is all about honesty.
If you can fake that, you've got it made
--George Burns

 I think I'll move to Australia 
--Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible,
No Good, Very Bad Day, Judith Viorst
________________________

Retired SEAL Matt Bissonnette's No Easy Day (published under the pseudonym, "Mark Owen") is a kiss-and-tell about the assassination of Osama bin Laden by Seal Team 6 (ST6), of which he was a member.  Many things surrounding this book reveal the questionable nature of the War on Terror.

First, if the Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©) were real, would it not be an act of sheer insanity to identify oneself in the media?  Would one not then be a sitting duck for al Qaeda retribution?

Second: All members of ST6 were awarded the Silver Star Medal (SSM) for this operation in which there was, by Bissonnette's account, less-than negligible hostile action.  This award should be bestowed for conspicuous valor in the face of an armed enemy -- how does this equate with assassinating an unarmed man in his nightshirt, in his house?

The Silver Star is appropriate for the Bedford Boys in World War II Normandy and later, the Battle of the Bulge. Appropriate for the Battle of Lang Vei or the Son Tay raid in Vietnam, in which large enemy forces were engaged and neutralized in a genuine military raid conducted for a military reason.  More recently, think Waygul and Wanat.

The SSM is NOT awarded for service or achievement; the Bronze Star without "V" device (valor) device takes care of that need. As with the Pat Tillman scenario, the statutory requirements for the award were not met.  There were more SSM's awarded for the OBL action than were awarded to entire Ranger and Airborne Battalions on D-Day.  Moreover, assassination is not a military term.

Third: The Law of Land Warfare and the Geneva Conventions, which are the law of our land and all civilized nations, does not recognize the actions of Bissonnette's "No Easy Day".

Bissonnette admits that OBL was shot in the entry phase with two to the head, and he said he himself then fired a handful into the body of a grievously-wounded adversary, whom he "could not identify".  If the target was no longer capable of hostile action (any man  is neutralized when he takes two to the head from a 5.56 carbine, and Bissonette describes OBL's brains spilling onto the floor), then his action is a violation of the GC's.  

He justified his trunk shots on the program 60 Minutes by saying he wasn't sure if OBL held a grenade under his clothing which he might throw, but that would be a scenario only seen in Marvel comics. Of course, after a cascade of dissimulation from the highest levels, what matter a final fib from a triggerman?

Fourth, but perhaps most significantly: Why was there no credible effort made to capture the most valuable source of intelligence concerning al Qaeda?  A live prisoner is an invaluable asset for neutralizing terror networks.  A kill mission in this case lacks military (though perhaps not political) logic.

The author has been criticized for jeopardizing national security, but what SEAL or SOCOM technique, training or operational imperative was exposed that had not already been revealed in the recent Navy propaganda film, "Act of Valor"?

If Act of Valor is a righteous film, then too is this book.  If this is a false conclusion, then Bradley Manning may be getting a new bunk mate.

Washington's objection to this book is that this soldier compromised the White House's carefully-scripted theater, revealing that the rapt faces in the NSC viewing room the day of the assassination were actually conducting the finest performance of the day.

[cross-posted @ milpub]

Act of Valor -- Tactics

--Italian National Fascist Party flag

Miniver loved the days of old
When swords were bright
and steeds were prancing;
The vision of a warrior bold
Would set him dancing
--Minivar Cheevy,
Edward Arlington Robinson

You couldn't force people,
you could only kill people,
that was the only thing
you could force on them.
--Adam and the Train,
Heinrich Boll

Well, the Lone Ranger and Tonto
They are ridin' down the line
Fixin' ev'rybody's troubles
Ev'rybody's 'cept mine
--Bob Dylan's Blues, Bob Dylan
__________________

Act of Valor II: Tactics

This is not your Variety review --

Ranger would simply say the film is "trite", but will explain why that is so.

The operation to save the CIA agent is phased, which is extremely difficult both to plan and execute because it requires disparate units to congregate at the appointed place and time.

The SEAL team helos in, sans oxygen until seconds before exit. They jumped with no gear, but had LAWs, commo and plenty of weapons and ammunition when they hit the ground.

The approach march formations were bunched up, and they approached from the opposite side of the river, leaving the sniper team on the far bank isolated from the assault element by a body of water with no rear security. Imagine attacking a camp on a river from the river side; this a backwards since you want to push/block the enemy with the water obstacle.

Also, there was no far security sealing the high speed avenues of approach. The team lacked 40 mm grenade launchers and used only hand grenades.

Miraculously, the sniper team resurfaces in Ghillie suits, which does not make sense since these are used to help isolated snipers avoid detection. This team was instead covering an assault team and were anything but isolated or secret.

The snipers only took head shots, except one shoots a guard through the chest; the director probably tired of seeing heads exploding like pumpkins.

There were no machine guns to cover the withdrawal phase of the raid/assault. No claymores or explosives for the blocking of motorized reaction forces responding to the event. The team did no long-term surveillance of the target area.

The team's time on target gave the opposition forces enough time to kill the hostage, but this did not happen, again defying logic. Next is movement to the Objective Rally Point (ORP), of which this team had designated three! This is unheard of.

In the execution phase, the ORP was not properly secured. During the execution assault phase there were no friendlies for security, nor did the team employ explosives to destroy the target after the assault.

But continuing with the unreality, the SEAL's stolen vehicle was impervious to AK rounds. No explanation on how the sniper team crossed the river in their Ghillie suits. There were no weapon malfunctions, despite the fact the friendlies submerged all their weapons and ammo.

Miraculously the team links up with the boats sent to extract them in precision time -- still, no 40 mm launchers to hit the defilade targets. On one gun turret there was a death's head, and one air crew member had "In God We Trust" on his helmet.

Why did the SEAL team take no prisoners? A live hostage is an intelligence boon, far better than a found cell phone.

Where was the corpsman during the action? He may have been present but his medical kit was never shown. Maybe he was busy killing people.


The Bad Guys: They had no inner or outer security to speak of -- no roving patrols, no tanglefoot or pressure-detonated mines. Strange that violent men would take such a casual defensive posture, especially with such a high-value hostage. We are to believe they are good enough to snatch her, but not professional enough to protect their prize.


Summation: The team leaders likens the team to twigs tied in a bundle in order to make each stick stronger. This, of course, is a fascicle, from which the word "fascist" comes.

This film was "300", with modern doo-dads. A of V is also like a modern Don Quixote. The SEALs didn't ride broken down horses or wear old armor, but their warrior philosophy was not in tune with modern standards. The SEALs are Quixote riding $4 Billion nuclear subs and $62 Million special operations helos.

But it doesn't matter what you ride, when you are tilting at windmills.

Act of Valor -- Stereotypes

--Happy International Women's Day

[T]he order of knight-errantry was instituted
to defend maidens, to protect widows,
and to rescue orphans and distressed persons
--Don Quixote, Cervantes

I have known many adventures in my time
. . . but war is not really an adventure at all,
it is only a substitute for adventure . . .
War is a disease
--Pilot de Guerre,
Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Ma'am I am taking you home
--SEAL to Agent Morales
_________________

Act of Valor Part I -- Gender Relations


"What do you fight for?"

That's the challenge delivered but not answered by the Department of Defense-funded technicolor shoot-em-up, cotton-candy-for-the-mind film, Act of Valor (A of V). It is a recruiting tool par excellence, every bit as much as George Lucas's recent film on the Tuskeegee Airmen, Red Wings, a film he described as “Patriotic,” and “inspirational for teenage boys.” A of V is a piece of bombastic propaganda that might have embarrassed even Goebbels.

Even by measure of romantic notions of honor, courage, valor and warriorhood, the film did not pass muster. What were the brave SEALs fighting for? We presume for what all soldiers fight -- the completion of a military mission conducted in a military manner delineated by a clearly-defined objective that does not always move out to the next woodline.

A of V presents rough and tumble pretend military actions that were simply unfocused violence, as senseless as anything thrown our way by al Qaida. In addition, the objects of the SEAL's wrath were laughable as viable opponents and cut of the same Marlboro Man cardboard.

A Town and Country reviewer (3.12.12) gushed, "Historians will prize this recording of operations so close to the truth of actual combat." We wonder if the Townies are really qualified to make this assessment: Have they actually known anyone who has served in Iraq or Afghanistan?

We had "The Green Berets" back in the 1960's, but we in Special Forces used to laugh at the film, understanding that it was a poor representation of the reality. Ranger thinks this world of gaming-addicted, virtual reality-living youth is not laughing in the same way.

A of V is not John Wayne in the Green Berets but in The Searchers -- a darker film in which Wayne embarks on an endless search fueled by hatred and violence against the Indian kidnappers of a white woman.

A of V grossed $24.5 million its premiere week. Where did that money go? Since my tax dollars funded the film, shouldn't the profits return to the U.S. Treasury? The General Accounting Office should examine this little feat of slicky-boyness. First, the military recruiters brought war game simulators into the malls; now, they've put their spiel in the cinemaplex. Getting future cannon fodder to pay for the privilege is brilliant.

The rest of this review will be in two parts: The Characters and the Action. Characters today; Action tomorrow.

This is a recruitment film, so it does the military well to target their audience of potential enlistees. Therefore, the Jessica Lynch of the film is a Latina Central Intelligence Officer, Agent Morales. In order to curry favor with largest demographic, we have the central action focusing around her rescue by the helmeted and often obscure SEALs.

The military already has a choke hold on the land of Jessica Lynch. If a poor resident desires to leave West Virginia et. al., the military is the still the best choice. However, the new rising pool of potential applicants comes from across the border.

Women in general are weak in the film, in keeping with Faludi's thesis in "The Terror Dream" that the events of 9-11-01 would usher in a neuvo-machismo which patronizes women so as to re-establish the power inequity. In this way, the film is -- as Lucas described his softball "Red Tails" -- “old-fashioned” and “corny”.

The little ladies are treated in fundamental Islamic style, sans burkhas. They are props to their oh-so-manly spouses and baby-making machines, suspended in animation until their heroes return dragging their dirty laundry and tumescent members. The women served up the sentimentality via tears at the final funeral scene.

One wonders why these guys even marry considering their flatline portrayal: Would guys with such low affect even desire a woman? If you are going to put women in your film, their dynamic with the lead should be developed somewhat, especially in 2012, and when the suggested subtext of your wars has been to develop gender parity. One imagines these men as Spartans, coming home only to procreate with their wives, who perhaps are shorn of their hair and dressed in manly clothing for the event. (The screenwriter also wrote the Spartan film, "300".)

Our Jessica Lynch-cum-Jennifer Lopez is captured by terror-supporting drug kingpins, associated with Russian Jewish gun dealers, associated with Chechen terrorists -- What else? She is tortured, and the team launches and rescues her after three days of captivity -- unbelievable in any format other than a Navy-funded action game.

That it is unlikely a Russian Jew would support radical Islamic Chechens is beside the point; this is Hollywood. The Jewish gun dealers are taken right from the canard the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. They are hook-nosed villains to parallel the generic Middle Eastern threat, which is never mentioned, by the way. So much for the truthiness of the film.

Why would the Chechens want to attack the U.S. Homeland? Why would Central and South American druglords need weapons from a Russian? Why would they do anything for extremists? Irrelevant, when there is shooting to be done.

If you believe this movie, the lack of reason does not trouble. Like the team leaders says, "There are threats everywhere," and isn't that the nature of bogeymen to be rather imaginary and unreal?

A of V plucked every American macho stereotype from James Fenimore Cooper's Leatherstocking Tales to Jeremiah Johnson and Lawrence of Arabia, from Louis L'Amour and Zane Grey to every Western ever made.

This derivative aspect of pop culture has been the norm for several generations now, and make no mistake, A of V is a representation of pop culture. It is time for something new -- a new hero, a new idea.

Act of Valor provides neither.


NEXT: Act of Valor Action