Former Navy SEAL and member of Seal Team Six, Robert O'Neill recently gave an exclusive interview with Fox News, in which he told his story of the days and weeks leading up to the May 2011 raid on Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden's compound. 

One of the most interesting things to come out of that conversation is O'Neill's assertion that he and his fellow SEALs thought that they were essentially going on a suicide mission. 

Here's what O'Neill had to say:

"The more we trained on it, the more we realised this is going to be a one-way mission. We're going to go and we're not going to come back. We're going to die when the house blows up. We're going to die when he blows up or were going to be there too long and we'll get arrested by the Pakistanis and we're going to spend the rest of our short lives in Pakistan prison."

Fox News’ Peter Doocy asked O'Neill what it was like to train for a mission he didn't think he would come back from. O'Neill was unequivocal. 

"It was worth it because this is it. We would have moments where we would joke around and laugh and then it kind of hits you and you go, 'Alright, let's get serious again cause this is going to happen. Were not coming home ... No [it was not a sad feeling]. It was more of 'we're going to die eventually. This is a good way to go and it's worth it to kill him, because he's going to die with us.'" 

Check out the full video here. O'Neill talks about the mission being a suicide mission at the 5:00 mark:

Join the conversation about this story »

Japan, long one of America's most important allies in the Pacific, is a primary counterweight to the growing power of China in the region.

Japan is a cultural and economic powerhouse. But its ability to mount an effective military deterrence in the fact of a rising China may shrink in the coming decades as Japan faces a substantial problem: impending demographic collapse. 

Japan's overall population is set to contract by almost a third within the next 90 years. This sharp population cut would almost irreversibly limit the nation's military capabilities. 

Aki Peritz, a former CIA analyst, writes for Overt Action: 

Japan currently has some 127 million citizens, but according to Japan’s National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, this number will shrink by 2060 to 86 million, and then to 50 million by the year 2100.

Neither war nor famine is halving Japan’s population, but rather hard demographics. Japan’s birth rate is currently 1.4 children per woman, and the total population has already begun to decline as of 2010.

According to Peritz, demographic decline would lead to greater competition for Japanese youth in every facet of society. As the private sector, government, and the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) would jostle for youth recruitment, fewer and fewer young Japanese would enter the military leading, shrinking the armed forces at a time when China becomes more and more assertive.

Currently, the Japanese SDF is thought to be one of the top ten most effective fighting forces in the world even though it can only be used defensively or in international humanitarian missions. However, a slow-motion cratering of the Japanese population would hamstring the country's ability to defend itself, let along project power beyond its home island chain. 

To compensate for its small population, Japan has signaled it will purchase the latest in military equipment for national defense. Tokyo has plans to purchase the latest AEGIS destroyer as well as the F-35. 

Still, as Peritz notes, even with the latest equipment, Japanese national security capacity will become squeezed as there would be "fewer overall high-quality recruits in both enlisted and officer corps."

Demographics aside, the Japanese public is still largely against any military policy that extends beyond self-defense.

In a 2013 Pew research poll, 56% of the Japanese public said they were opposed to any sort of Japanese military effort other than defense, although there was a gradual trend towards military action becoming more acceptable within the Japanese public. 

This opposition to militarism has sometimes taken on an extreme tone. On Nov. 12, a Japanese man set himself on fire to protest Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's amending of the constitution to allow for the Japanese military to take part in collective self-defense with other countries. 

The debate over what role the military should play in Japanese life, coupled with demographic changes, is likely to become a more polarizing concern. Two prominent members of Abe's Liberal Democratic Party have floated the idea of amending the constitution in order to institute conscription within Japan in an effort to bolster the ranks of the Japanese SDF. 

Currently, over a third of Japan's population is at least 55 years old. 

SEE ALSO: These Chinese military advancements are shifting the balance of power in Asia

Join the conversation about this story »

Three US sailors from the USS Ross were attacked in Istanbul today by radical Turks belonging to the Youth Union of Turkey (TGB), an extreme leftist organization. 

The three sailors were confronted by a small gang of Turks belonging to the TGB in the tourist-frequented neighborhood of Eminonu, in Istanbul's historic Golden Horn. The mob began the confrontation with the sailors by saying "we define you as murderers, as killers," in English. 

The TGB members then threw red paint on the sailors and attempted to hood them with cloth bags. During the encounter, the gang chanted "Yankees go home," also in English. 

The confrontation was filmed and placed on YouTube and the TGB featured an article on their website proclaiming the incident as a successful effort against US imperialism. 

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, who is currently in Turkey, has released the following statement against the assault: 

Today's attack on three Sailors from the USS Ross in Istanbul is reprehensible. We are certain the vast majority of the Turkish people and the Government of Turkey do not condone this act against these representatives of a friend and ally.

We understand that local law enforcement have suspects in custody. We commend this swift action and are certain that those who did this will be held accountable.

We have long-enjoyed a strong relationship with Turkey for many years. As NATO allies, we share common interests, and this incident will have no impact on that strong relationship. Turkish ports have long been very popular destinations for U.S. Navy ships, and our Sailors have enjoyed the warm hospitality that has traditionally been extended.

The TGB is a self-described left-wing nationalist and revolutionary youth organization. They strongly identify with Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the secular nationalist founder of the modern Turkish republic, but support socialist economic policies and are strongly opposed to "imperialism."

The group was formed in 2006, and is strictly against any form of internationalism. The TGB opposes the US and are against Turkey' joining the European Union. They are also opposed to the ruling AKP party headed by President Recip Tayyip Erdogan. 

The video of the incident is below. 

SEE ALSO: Meet the Wisconsin army vet who's fighting with the Kurds against ISIS

Join the conversation about this story »

Intensified shelling and military activity by Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine have raised fears that the rebels may try to take a crucial port city, Europe Secretary General of the Organization for Security and Co-operation Lamberto Zannier told Interfax. 

According to Zannier, the most intense shelling by rebel forces occurred in the region around Mariupol. Mariupol is the second largest city in Donetsk province. Although separatists have announced the creation of the Donetsk People's Republic, Mariupol has remained under Ukrainian government control.

The sharp uptick in hostilities around Mariupol comes as NATO announced that it has observed columns of military equipment moving into Ukraine from Russia over the past two days. The military columns have included tanks, artillery, and combat troops. However, NATO does not have a good idea of how many columns have moved into eastern Ukraine. 

The sudden renewed Russian military involvement in Ukraine has a strong possibility of being focused on taking Mariupol. The port city sits on the Sea of Azoz, and it blocks Russian access to Crimea. By seizing the city, Russia would effectively be well on their way to creating a land bridge connecting Crimea to the Russian state. 

Ivan Lozowy, a policy analyst based in Kiev, believes that the seizure of Mariupol and the creation of the land bridge is a top priority for Putin. However, any battle for Mariupol is likely to be drawn out and bloody. 

The city is "is pretty much dead set against letting the Russian troops through," Lozowy says. Locals within the city have been aiding Ukrainian troops build fortifications and defend against any separatist incursions. 

The Interpreter LiveBlog is following the situation.

SEE ALSO: Russian defense minister: Our long-range bomber patrols will reach the Gulf of Mexico

Join the conversation about this story »

Hackers from China broke into the US federal weather system in late September, according to a report in the Washington Post.

The hack targeted a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration web server and affected four NOAA web sites that process and coordinate data and images from satellites that track storms, temperature, and other weather systems.

In order to the respond to the breach, government officials told the Post that cybersecurity teams had to "seal off data vital to disaster planning, aviation, shipping and scores of other crucial uses."

This temporarily compromised the accuracy of some National Weather Service forecasts and may have slightly skewed long-range weather forecasts.

Officials also told the Post that NOAA didn't immediately follow procedures requiring any government agency to notify certain officials in the event of a security breach.

This caused NOAA to perform unscheduled maintenance in order to restore security.

In response to a request for information from Business Insider, NOAA spokesperson Scott Smullen provided this statement:

In recent weeks, four NOAA websites were compromised by an internet-sourced attack. NOAA staff detected the attacks and incident response began immediately. Unscheduled maintenance was performed by NOAA to mitigate the attacks. The unscheduled maintenance impacts were temporary and all services have been fully restored. These effects did not prevent us from delivering forecasts to the public. The investigation is continuing with the appropriate authorities and we cannot comment further.

WaPo notes that the purpose of the hack itself was most likely an attempt try to find an opening into US government agency computer systems by exploiting a not-very-secure entry point. Although NOAA's web sites are protected, one person who was familiar with those systems described their security to the Post as "just a screen door."

Through a Freedom of Information Act request, the Post uncovered a previously unreleased report from July that described NOAA's security as highly vulnerable.

The confirmation of this hack follows a report from Monday that China may have hacked the US Postal Service, which compromised the personal information of 800,000 employees.

SEE ALSO: China May Have Hacked The US Postal Service

Join the conversation about this story »

Yesterday's carbon emissions deal between the US and China might end up having a far greater impact on global geopolitics than on the environment. As Matt Schiavenza explains at The Atlantic, it signals China's ascension to superpower status. With its leader reversing years of Chinese intransigence on the issue. And now standing alongside the US in fighting a global problem with some notion of the greater good in mind.

This globally ambitious statesmanship stands in contrast to the probably paltry environmental impact of the deal, which doesn't even require any binding emissions cuts for the Chinese. But it also comes within the context of China's outsized economic and geopolitical plans — policies which can follow contradictory paths.

One example is President Xi Jinping's concept of the Chinese or "Asia-Pacific dream," which the Washington Post described today as Xi's "signature goal, a vision that combines economic prosperity with a strident new nationalism."

The Chinese president "aims to project that vision onto a broader stage" through a landmark policy of regional economic integration, mostly accomplished through the creation of two "Silk Roads," one maritime and one overland.

The "Roads" will be economic corridors built through $40-$50 billion in eventual infrastructure investment and development projects both within China and neighboring countries. As Samm Sacks, an Asia analyst at the Eurasia Group, explained to Business Insider, the "Dream" will elevate lower-tier cities in western and central China to newfound economic prominence. And it will deepen ties between China and its neighbors, as well as its influence over some of them.

"The idea, broadly, is that China's government wants to use trade and investment in Central Asia and in the region more broadly as a way to garner more political support from its neighbors," Sacks says. "The idea is to spread economic prosperity in the region in a way that's Chinese-led and enhances China's image as a great power."

On the face of it, the "Asian-Pacific Dream" is the opposite of an aggressive foreign policy: it's China assuming its natural position as Asia's economic leader and following its newfound superpower status to a logical and even constructive conclusion. China is on pace to become the second country in history, after the US, to have a single-year $10 trillion GDP, something that comes with opportunities and expectations that no responsible leadership can ignore.

But as Sacks explains, Chinese policy is following a divergent path thanks to the country's expansionist policies along its eastern periphery.

In the South and East China seas, China has provocatively moved an oil rig into Vietnam's exclusive economic zone (which it later removed), developed a deep-water navy with aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, and even carrier-capable stealth fighters; and staked territorial claims that overlap with those of the Philippines, Japan, and other countries.

"There's a lack of recognition on the part of the leadership for how it's own aggressive military posturing in the region is going to undermine support — regardless of the amount of trade and investment that they throw at their neighbors," says Sacks.

For whatever reason, Chinese strategy is working at potentially alarming cross-purposes, with an aggressive foreign policy possibly undermining attempts at economic integration.

This could be because China, like many autocratic states, operates under a compartmentalized system in which different wings of the state often fail to coordinate policy. Sacks believes Xi Jinping may also be adopting an assertive and nationalist regional stance to assuage Communist party elites smarting under Xi's anti-corruption drive, or worried that new environmental regulations will hamstring lucrative state-owned industries.

On the other hand, the "Asian-Pacific Dream" could also be totally consistent with China's pursuit of a more assertive foreign policy. Indeed, successful implementation of the "Dream" arguably requires a military buildup to undergird it.

"When you deal with maritime there's going to have to be some kind of military component and it's not a coincidence that China's trying to build a blue-water navy," Damien Ma, a fellow at the Paulson Institute, told Business Insider. "That general structural trend is going to bump against a lot of other trends in the Asia-Pacific, including economic integration."

Either way, China is pushing its influence outward on multiple fronts — at the same time the US is plotting its own "pivot to Asia." China's asserting itself, but without it being entirely clear whether it's more interested in projecting hard power than in furthering its ever-growing economic footprint.

"You can see pretty clearly what China's capabilities are," says Ma. "They have yet to convince people what their intentions are."

SEE ALSO: These are the border disputes that could tear Asia apart

Join the conversation about this story »

Robert O'Neill, the former Navy SEAL who says he shot Osama Bin Laden believes his life could be threatened now that he has gone public with his story.

He discussed the potential danger during the second half of Fox News' two part documentary "The Man Who Killed Osama Bin Laden," which premiered Wednesday night.

"Are you worried about your personal security?" Fox News reporter Peter Doocy asked O'Neill, 

"Yes," O'Neill said.

O'Neill went on to say he was worried because of potential fallout from the documentary, in which he told the tale of the 2011 raid on Bin Laden's compound in Pakistan. 

"I don't know how people will react to this," said O'Neill. "I think all the guys ... all the guys on the mission, there could be a threat, yes."

O'Neill first shared his story in an Esquire interview published last year. In that article, his wife, from whom O'Neill is officially separated, discussed how she wanted to distance herself from him "for safety reasons."

"We're actually looking into changing my name," she said. "Changing the kids' names, taking my husband's name off the house, paying off our cars. Essentially deleting him from our lives, but for safety reasons. We still love each other."

O'Neill was first identified by the website SOFREP on Nov. 3, days after Fox News announced plans to air the documentary. SOFREP released his name after two leaders of US Naval Special Warfare Command sent a letter to their team members criticizing any SEAL who would go public about a mission. 

After Fox News issued a press release about the documentary, the Pentagon also gave a pair of statements to Business Insider wherein they suggested O'Neill could face criminal charges for discussing the details of the Bin Laden raid. 

In the Fox News interview, O'Neill also discussed the possibility the military could be "upset" by his decision to tell his story.

"There’s going to be people that are upset because you can’t do anything without upsetting some people," he said. "I don’t know why that is. I don’t believe that I’m saying anything that hasn’t been said, and confirmed, and acknowledged by high ranking officials."

O'Neill isn't the first SEAL who participated in the raid to discuss details of the mission. In 2012, Matt Bissonette released a book about his participation in the raid. Earlier this summer, the Justice Department launched a criminal investigation into whether Bissonette leaked classified material. 

"If classified information is accidentally released to the world, SEALs can get killed, innocent people can get killed, other American military people can get killed. That's what this is all about," co-author of Navy SEALs: Their Untold Story, William Doyle said in an interview with NBC News. 

Currently, both Bissonette and O'Neill face scorn from their Navy SEAL counterparts.

"I don’t feel like the Navy owes me anything. I don’t feel like I owe the Navy anything. My only regret is that, I miss my guys,” O’Neill said. 

After the Bin Laden raid, O'Neill went on his 12th and final deployment with the Navy SEALs and decided he wanted "a clean break" from the military community. O'Neill has been touring the nation as a motivational speaker.

SEE ALSO: Navy SEAL Who Says He Shot Bin Laden Says 'The Team Got Him'

Join the conversation about this story »

Fox News aired the second half of an exclusive two-part interview with Robert O'Neill, the former Navy SEAL who says he shot Osama Bin Laden on Wednesday evening. Business Insider published a story based on a conversation with Peter Doocy, the young reporter who got the scoop, on Tuesday.

In the late hours of May 1, 2011 news broke that US security forces killed Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and Fox News reporter Peter Doocy, ran out of his apartment in Washington D.C.  

"I got down to the White House and just celebrated on Pennsylvania Avenue late on a Sunday night with thousands of people and it was a night that I will never forget. Everyone just shared this great feeling of, we got him," Doocy told Business Insider in an interview.

Almost three and a half years later, Doocy, 27, uncovered the identity of the man who said he fired the fatal shot, former Navy SEAL Robert O'Neill. Doocy managed to land the first televised interview with O'Neill, which is being broadcast on Fox News Tuesday and Wednesday night this week in an exclusive two-part documentary called "The Man Who Killed Osama Bin Laden." 

Doocy was introduced to O'Neill through a third party source a few months after the raid on Bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The two first met at an Irish pub in Pentagon City in 2012. After Doocy gained O'Neill's trust, the ex-SEAL agreed to reveal his identity and speak on camera.

To ensure no one within Fox would learn of the huge scoop, Doocy's team created a code name for the project. 

"If we had to book travel or if we had to order a camera crew we gave it a code name and that code was Gatewood," Doocy said. 

The team chose this name to pay homage to the Army commander Charles Gatewood who helped capture Apache leader Geronimo in 1886. "Geronimo" was the code word the SEALs used on the night of the Bin Laden raid to confirm the country's most wanted man was dead.

When asked to describe O'Neill, Doocy used words like "patriot" and "warrior."

"He is one of the best this country has to offer. He is an all-American guy and I hope people will see that when they watch this two-night segment," Doocy said.

Two days after Fox News announced plans for the documentary, SOFREP, a military blog, revealed O'Neill's identity. 

However, Doocy told Business Insider he doesn't think the blog stole his thunder. 

"It really just confirms what we have known all along that there is a lot of interest in this story. In the Rob O'Neill story," Doocy said. "Obviously his name is out there and his picture is out there now and a lot of other stuff is too. Some of the stuff out there now is true, and some of it is not. We are the only ones that he sat down with on camera to explain his story and it's his own words and the way he tells it is so good."

A Defense Department spokeswoman, gave a statement to Business Insider,  in which she said former SEALs were bound by military non-disclosure agreements and could face criminal charges for revealing information about the stealth raid. The spokeswoman specifically said SEALs were prohibited from revealing the names of any participants, which remain classified. 

Fox News subsequently provided a statement to Business Insider indicating the government had not attempted to block the documentary.

"FOX News has not been contacted by the Department of Defense or any other government agency expressing concern about 'The Man Who Killed Osama Bin Laden' special and we have every intention of airing it as planned on November 11th and 12th," the Fox News spokesperson said. 

Join the conversation about this story »

Robert O'Neill, the former Navy SEAL who says he shot Osama Bin Laden, has an answer for his critics.

In the second half of his exclusive interview with Fox News, which was broadcast Wednesday, O'Neill discussed the possibility people might question his story.

Since the Fox News special was filmed, sources with knowledge of the 2011 raid on Bin Laden's compound in Pakistan have reportedly questioned O'Neill's claim he fired the fatal shot at the Al Qaeda leader. O'Neill told Fox News he was aware people might be skeptical of his story and pre-emptively offered a rebuttal.

"It's one of those things where, you know, I heard from a guy, that heard from a guy, that heard from a guy, and then, it's all of a sudden, it turns into a different story," said O'Neill. "Again, it doesn't bother me, because, you know, there were two people that were there. Unless you were in the room at the time, you only know what you were told,"

He told Fox News he confronted Bin Laden directly and shot him three times. O'Neill's story is slightly different from the one presented in a 2012 book about the raid by another former SEAL, Matt Bissonette.

In his book, Bissonette wrote that he was the number two person in line as the U.S. soldiers entered the room where Bin Laden was. Bissonette also said he fired shots at Bin Laden when the Al Qaeda leader was on the ground. 

However, O'Neill said he was the second SEAL into the room after another one of his colleagues cleared people out of the way. He also said he killed Bin Laden after shooting him in the head multiple times. 

O'Neill addressed the discrepancy between his story and Bissonette's book in his interview with Fox News.

"I think that war is foggy and I think that the author is telling the story as he saw it and also based on the debrief the he heard," said O'Neill.

O'Neill told Fox News the military debriefing Bisonette and other SEAL team members heard was "fairly accurate."

O'Neill also insisted the bullets from his gun unquestionably killed Bin Laden whether or not other SEALs fired their own shots before or after he hit the Al Qaeda leader.  

"When I went in the room, I cant say for 100% that he was hit when I went in the room, he could have been," said O'Neill of Bin Laden. "He was definitely on two feet and he was definitely moving. So, you know, he was there and I'll take ten lie detectors on that one." 

Currently, both Bissonette and O'Neill face scorn from their Navy SEAL counterparts for not only violating non-disclosure agreements but for pursuing public attention on the backs of what was a team effort.

"I don’t feel like the Navy owes me anything. I don’t feel like I owe the Navy anything. My only regret is that, I miss my guys,” O’Neill said. 

After the Bin Laden raid, O'Neill went on his 12th and final deployment with the Navy SEALs and decided he wanted "a clean break" from the military community. O'Neill has been touring the nation as a motivational speaker.

SEE ALSO: How A 27-Year-Old Reporter Landed An Interview With The Alleged Bin Laden Shooter

Join the conversation about this story »

Fox News aired the second half of their exclusive two-part documentary "The Man Who Killed Osama Bin Laden" on Wednesday evening. It concluded with footage showing former Navy SEAL Robert O'Neill meeting with families of people who were killed in the September 11th attacks earlier this year. O'Neill has said that is the moment he decided to go public and Business Insider published the story behind that day last Thursday. 

Former Navy SEAL Robert O'Neill has said he decided to reveal himself as the man who shot and killed Al Qaeda founder Osama Bin Laden after sharing his story of the 2011 raid on the terrorist leader's compound with a group of people at the 9/11 Memorial Museum earlier this year. 

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-New York) was in the room with O'Neill that day.

The congresswoman, who describes O'Neill as "a friend," told Business Insider on Thursday that the ex-SEAL was there for a ceremony marking the donation of a shirt he wore during the raid to the museum. Maloney, who said she helped arrange for O'Neill's shirt to be exhibited at the museum, said the people in attendance included families of people who died in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and "leaders" from police and fire departments.

"People were in tears, and the room was not that big," Maloney recounted. "I'd say it was 30 people … maybe 30 people. It was a selective group, and I asked to have a ceremony for the donation of the shirt. And we came in and had the quiet ceremony, and it meant a lot."

O'Neill first publicly said he was the person who fired the shot that killed Bin Laden in an interview with The Washington Post that was published Thursday. However, in the wake of that story, Reuters released a report about an anonymous source "close to another SEAL team member" who disputed the claim O'Neill killed Bin Laden. 

The Washington Post article was not supposed to be O'Neill's public debut. He had been planning to reveal himself in a Fox News documentary and a story in the newspaper later this month. However, on Monday, the website SOFREP identified him. O'Neill told The Post he "spontaneously" decided to share his story at the 9/11 Memorial Museum.

"The families told me it helped bring them some closure," O'Neill said. 

O'Neill's shirt is adorned with an American flag patch. Rather than the traditional red, white, and blue, it is black to aid in camouflage for nighttime missions. 

According to Maloney, the shirt ceremony took place in a family room at the museum where the family members had "pictures of their lost loved ones." 

"I was very active on the 9/11 response; I authored a great number of bills working in a bipartisan way to make America safer after 9/11, did a lot of work with the 9/11 families that lost their loved ones, and I arranged for him to come and speak to some of them," Maloney said. "I'd like for him to do more of that now that he came out in public. I think that he would help bring closure to many of them and, you know, that's the reason we were over there, the reason he went on the mission was for the 9/11 families."

Maloney told Business Insider that, in her many years working with the relatives of people who were killed in the Sept. 11 attacks, she had never seen them react as they did after hearing O'Neill's story.

"We were in numerous meetings, numerous press conferences — I've never seen an emotional response as I saw in that room," Maloney said. "I saw men and women just break down crying. It was closure to them. It was important to them to see him, to really hear in his own words why it was important for him to go on that mission."

Joseph Zadroga was one of the people Maloney said was in attendance at the ceremony. His son, James Zadroga, was a New York City police officer. James died of respiratory disease in 2006 and became the first officer whose death was attributed to exposure to chemicals while working at the site of the Sept. 11 attacks in Manhattan.

Maloney cosponsored legislation designed to provide healthcare and monitoring for 9/11 responders in 2006. It was named the James Zadroga Act. She said that of the family members in attendance at the ceremony, Joseph Zadroga's reaction to O'Neill stood out for her.  

"It meant the world to them. It meant the world to hear what it was like. Many people were crying," Maloney said. "I mean, I can't tell you what a tough guy James Zadroga's father is. He's a police officer, great big strong man, and he was in absolute tears."

Maloney also stressed that other residents of New York were intensely interested in the circumstances of Bin Laden's death.

"You could hear a collective sigh of relief from all of New York when Bin Laden was killed," Maloney said. "We are grateful to the Navy SEALs, and to the CIA, and to all the military that are part of training these incredible people. The people that I am privileged to represent, they wanted to know what happened to Bin Laden."

Though O'Neill identified himself as the person who fired the shot that killed the Al Qaeda leader, Maloney felt he never attempted to take individual credit for the operation.

"He never talks about this incident except with we — we on the team," Maloney said. "When he gave the shirt, he gave it in the name of the entire team. He's really into giving credit to his distinguished allies."

Still, Maloney said the raid ended in a direct confrontation between two men: O'Neill and Bin Laden. 

"I think that the last person Bin Laden saw was looking into Robert O'Neill's eyes, and he saw that flag on his shirt — he saw the American flag," Maloney said. "He looked into his eyes. He's the last person he saw. He's an American hero." 

Join the conversation about this story »

The Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) says a newly released audio recording contains a message from Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the jihadist group.

The recording comes just days after Baghdadi was reportedly injured in a US airstrike. It appears to be genuine, according to the security firm Flashpoint Intelligence. The SITE Group also confirmed that the Islamic State released the message.

The audio is the highly secretive leader's second such message, and his first since a July 5 video showed him delivering a sermon at a mosque in Mosul.

The audio recording could be ISIS' attempt at proving that Baghdadi survived the US strike on Sunday. But the fact the message has been released only in audio form raises doubts as to how injured the airstrike may have left him, and it makes it difficult to immediately confirm whether Baghdadi is in fact the speaker on the tape.

An unconfirmed translation released at the same time as the recording and bearing the flag of the Islamic State includes a few references to events that can be dated. Baghdadi mentioned the Obama administration's Nov. 7 announcement that it was dispatching an additional 1,500 troops to Iraq. He also made what might be an oblique mention of jihadist groups in the Sinai that have "burnt their ships," a potential reference to a Thursday attack on an Egyptian naval vessel in the Mediterranean.

Crucially, there is no mention of Sunday's airstrike in the recording. The recording could in fact predate the airstrike and be purposed with distracting from Baghdadi's actual state of health. 

Elsewhere in the recording, Baghdadi emphasizes his view that there is a religious obligation to join the fight in Iraq and Syria. At times he seems to openly bait the US into launching a ground war against him, and he argues that the US-led coalition campaign against ISIS is in a state of disarray.

"We see America and its allies stumbling between fear, weakness, inability, and failure. America, Europe, Australia, Canada, and their apostate tails and slaves from amongst the rulers of the Muslims' lands were terrified by the Islamic State," Baghdadi says according to the early translation.

He also lashes out against "the effeminate pilots from the soldiers of the Gulf rulers" and closes on an illustrative plea to his followers to "erupt volcanoes of jihad everywhere."

SEE ALSO: Hagel: The Air War Against ISIS Will Intensify

Join the conversation about this story »

Pakistan successfully tested an intermediate-range ballistic missile today with an impact point in the Persian Gulf. The newly tested version of the Shaheen-II ballistic missile, which is roughly equivalent to the US's Pershing II missiles, can carry either conventional or nuclear warheads according to ISPR, the Pakistani army's public relations arm.

The announcement seems to confirm expert analysis that the country is aiming to build long-range delivery systems for tactical nuclear weapons — smaller warheads built for use in a battlefield or active combat scenario, rather than for strikes on cities or infrastructure.

Addressing scientists, engineers, and military officers viewing the test site, lieutenant general Zubair Mahmood Hayat still reiterated Pakistan's stance that the goal of its strides in ballistic capability is deterrence — presumably against any rash military action by India, with which Pakistan has a number of outstanding territorial and security-related disputes.

Pakistani news media put the range of the Shaheen-II at 1,500 kilometers, though the Federation of American Scientists estimates it may be able to travel 2,000 kilometers or more depending on its payload. One Indian television news program included a map showing the several India's cities that fall within the missile's now-proven range.

The test is the latest development in a long-running arms race between Pakistan and its neighbor.

In 1999 Pakistan tested a shorter-ranged Shaheen missile that was also capable of carrying nuclear weapons. After that test, Pakistan's officials cited a concern for preserving "strategic balance in south Asia"— an objective that has India, Pakistan's larger, more populous, more powerful, and also nuclear-armed rival, squarely in mind.

The missile program has established that strategic balance with India, Arif Rafiq, a researcher at the Middle East Institute, told Business Insider in September.

"Since India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in 1998, there has been a greater level of restraint in terms of the behavior of both countries when it comes to war," Rafiq said. "But at the same time they also taken great measures to build up their nuclear arsenal and further develop or strengthen or diversify their launch capability."

While nuclear development continues, India and Pakistan have become the world's first and third largest arms importers, respectively.

SEE ALSO: China is finally acting like a superpower — and nobody knows what's going to happen next.

Join the conversation about this story »

China is upgrading its anti-submarine fleet, introducing a new ship with capabilities that would further hamper any US pivot to the Pacific.

One of the major defensive gaps within the Chinese navy has been in anti-submarine warfare (ASW). This gap has left China's growing fleet vulnerable to attacks from its neighbors' quickly expanding submarine capabilities, as well as the US's highly advanced submarine fleet.

Beijing has taken stock of this strategic weakness. China recently commissioned the Zhuzhou, the first corvette to enter the Chinese navy that's specifically designed for ASW. 

"ASW has long been considered one of the gaps for the Chinese and this is an attempt to fill one of those gaps,” Eric Wertheim, author of Combat Fleets, told USNI News.

The Zhuzhou is the 18th Jiangdao-class missile corvette within the Chinese fleet, although it is the first one dedicated to ASW. Beyond the Zhuzhou, an additional four Jiangdao corvettes are being outfitted with equipment that aids in submarine detection, like variable-depth sonar arrays.

These advancements come during an upsurge in China's own submarine development. China now has one of the largest attack submarine fleets in the world, composed of six nuclear-powered attack vessels alongside 53 diesel-powered submarines. Additionally, China has three nuclear ballistic "boomer" submarines that grant China second-strike nuclear capability. 

Second-strike capability is the to launch a nuclear attack on a target after having been the target of a nuclear exchange. Currently, these submarines are able to target the continental US from the mid-Pacific. 

These naval upgrades come as China's neighbors are also attempting to upgrade their navies. China is locked in territorial disputes with nearly all of these countries.

Russia has so far delivered six Russian Kilo-class diesel electric attack submarines to Vietnam. This delivery could have played a role in China's decision to upgrade its ASW capabilities. Vietnam and China are locked in a maritime conflict over the Paracel and Spratly Island chains that has threatened to turn violent at times, as when China moved an oil rig to waters inside Vietnam's exclusive economic zone this past summer.

China's ASW capabilities are likely also aimed at the US shift to the Pacific. Currently, the US bases nuclear attack submarines on the Pacific island of Guam. However, a defense deal between the Philippines and the US could lead to American submarines moving right on China's doorstep. 

Beijing's sudden introduction of ASW-capable craft shows that China is working to close any security gaps that the US or other regional rivals may be able to exploit. 

SEE ALSO: These Chinese military advancements are shifting the balance of power in Asia

Join the conversation about this story »

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the House Armed Services Committee on Thursday that he would be open to sending a small number of US ground troops into Iraq to help retake the country's second-largest city, which is held by the Islamic State militant group (also known as ISIS or ISIL).

General Martin E. Dempsey, President Barack Obama's top military adviser, told the House committee that, despite recent Iraqi military successes against ISIS, the door remained open for the use of US ground troops in the country to retake Mosul.

“I’m not predicting at this point that I would recommend that those forces in Mosul and along the border would need to be accompanied by US forces, but we’re certainly considering it,” Dempsey told the committee.

Although Dempsey left the door open to a wider military role for the US in Iraq, he said an American ground presence would not go beyond a "modest" force. However, Dempsey told the committee that Iraq would need tens of thousands of effective military troops to retake all the terrain lost to ISIS.

"We're going to need about 80,000 competent Iraqi security forces to recapture territory lost, and eventually the city of Mosul, to restore the border," Dempsey said. 

The US has been launching airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq since August. The use of US air power helped the Kurdish peshmerga retake the critical Mosul Dam from ISIS control. But more recently, the effectiveness of the strikes has been called into question. 

ISIS has continued its offensive in Anbar, effectively bringing about 80% of the province under jihadist control. The province abuts Baghdad and can provide the militant group with a vital launching pad for staging offensives against the capital.

Dempsey previously told the House Armed Services Committee in September that there could be a need for greater military action against the militants once they moved into densely populated cities. 

Obama is planning on boosting the number of American military advisers in Iraq to 3,100. About 1,400 US troops are already in the country. 

SEE ALSO: ISIS Leader Just Released Another Audio Tape Amid Death Rumors

Join the conversation about this story »

The Russian Pravda has published an article titled "Russia Prepares Nuclear Surprise For NATO," citing a Sept. 1 US State Department report that signaled US and Russia had reached parity in terms of deployed strategic nuclear weapons. 

Although the article does not explicitly contain threats against NATO or the US, the message of the article is clear: The readily deployable Russian nuclear arsenal is growing and now matches that of the US.  

From Pravda: 

It just so happens that today, Russia's strategic nuclear forces (SNF) are even more advanced in comparison with those of the US, as they ensure parity on warheads with a significantly smaller number of carriers of strategic nuclear weapons. This gap between Russia and the United States may only grow in the future, given the fact that Russian defense officials promised to rearm Russia's SNF with new generation missiles.

In a September report, followed by an October fact sheet, the US Bureau of Arms Control echoes Pravda's claims.

Although the US vastly leads Russia in the deployment of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and enjoys an advantage in deployed heavy bombers of 794 to 528, the US and Russia are roughly equal on the actual number of nuclear warheads deployed aboard ICBMs and heavy bombers. The numbers are almost identical: 1,642 to 1,643.

Since February 2011, both the US and Russia have increased their number of deployed strategic nuclear weapons. However, Russia has increased its deployment significantly more than the US has. As of October, Russia had deployed an additional 131 warheads since 2011.

This increase in deployed nuclear weapons is despite the signing of New START, which Russia and the US agreed to in February 2011. According to the treaty, both sides were to be limited to 700 deployed ICBMS, submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and heavy bombers along with 1,550 total deployed nuclear warheads on those platforms.

Both the US and Russia have more deployed nuclear weapons than the end-state of the treaty envisions. However, there is concern regarding both the number of new warheads Russia is deploying along with various threats from Moscow relating to its nuclear capabilities. 

In March, for instance, a prominent Russian broadcaster warned that Russia could turn the US into "radioactive dust." 

Russia has also taken an increasingly bellicose stance toward the West since March. Since then, Russia has had 40 alarmingly close military encounters with NATO or neighboring militaries, including the simulated attack of a heavily populated Danish island by an armed fighter jet. 

SEE ALSO: The Most Isolated US Military Base Could Get A Lot More Important

Join the conversation about this story »

The Russian economy is prepared for the worst-case scenario, Russian President Vladimir Putin told TASS in an interview on Friday before flying out to the G20 summit.

"Yes, it's ready. We are considering all scenarios, including the so-called catastrophic decline in energy prices, which is quite possible, and we admit it," Putin said. "The Ministry of Economics and the Ministry of Finance, and the government consider the development of the economy in each of these scenarios."

The Russian economy heavily relies on its oil and gas industries. In fact, a $20 per barrel decline in oil prices leads to a drop of 1.75 percentage points for Russia's GDP after the first year of the shock, according to a research note from Societe Generale's Michala Marcussen.

The price of Brent crude oil recently fell below $80 per barrel, down from about $115 this summer.

"A country like ours," he said, has an easier time coping with "the situation."

"Why? Because we are producers of oil and gas and we handle our gold and currency reserves and government reserves sparingly. Our reserves are large enough, and this allows us to be sure that we will meet our social commitments and keep all the budgetary processes and the entire economy within a certain framework," Putin said.

Those without reserves would struggle in a situation like this, he added.

However, Putin said it was not the right time to use these reserves to "warm up and speed up" the Russian economy.

"I don't think so," Putin said. "We were ready to use them, anyway, even before all the negative events ... We talked about the possibility of using the funds from the National Welfare Fund. We didn't just say this yesterday; we talked about this two years ago."

If it came to it, Putin said the reserves would be used for areas like infrastructure development.

"But this doesn’t mean that we should just use these reserves thoughtlessly without waiting for an adequate economic returns. [Using the reserves] only to resolve the current issue — this we will not do."

You can watch the whole interview at "Vesti" here.

Join the conversation about this story »

"Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima"— the black and white photo depicting five Marines and a Navy corpsman planting a US flag after a bloody battle for the island — may be the Second World War's most iconic photo.

Fifty years after its capture, the Associated Press wrote that it may be the world's most widely reproduced.

A Twitter account dedicated to sharing historical photos recently shared the photograph along with the names and status of its subjects.

The men who raised the flag on Iwo Jima in Joe Rosenthal's iconic photo from 1945. pic.twitter.com/Dk0DPI6VIf

— ClassicPics (@History_Pics) November 14, 2014

Though the image is one of triumph, it was taken just days into a battle that would last more than a month.

Half of the six soldiers depicted died — among 6,821 Americans — on the very same island they claimed as part of the US' island-hopping strategy of claiming the Pacific theater; Franklin Sousley, Michael Strank, and Harlon Block all left their lives in Iwo Jima.

The longest-lived was John Bradley, the only non-Marine, who died in 1994. The AP photographer behind the image, Joe Rosenthal, died in 2006. He'd been too nearsighted for military service, but had an eye for a photograph that would earn him a Pulitzer Prize the year it was taken.

It's worth noting that the tweeted photo contains an error. For a time it was thought that the soldier on the far right was Henry Hanson (he, too, would die on Iwo Jima). The sixth man was in fact Harlon Block.

SEE ALSO: We spoke to 2 veterans who served in World War II as teenagers — and here's what they remember most

Join the conversation about this story »

After last week's Fox News interview with Robert O'Neill, two of the members of SEAL Team 6 involved in the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden have gone public with their stories of what's already one of the most legendary US military operations in history.

This public profile goes against decades of SEAL culture. Before O'Neill's interview and Matt Bissonnette's best-selling book partly about the raid, the SEALs — and Team 6 in particular — were known for being highly secretive.

Officially, the team's name is classified and not available to the public. Technically, there is no Team 6.

A Tier-One counter-terrorism force similar to the Army's elusive Delta group, Team 6's missions rarely become public. The Fox interview with O'Neill, who claims to have killed Bin Laden, is a major break with decades of SEAL protocol.

But so is the government's entire handling of the Bin Laden raid, the details of which have been widely disseminated in the three years since. It shows how important the publicity about Bin Laden's killing is to the US that Team 6 was front-page news, or that a movie like "Zero Dark Thirty" was ever made — the latter thanks to a series of leaks by top defense and intelligence officials.

The members of Team 6 are all "black" operatives. They exist outside military protocol, engaging in operations that are at the highest level of classification — and often outside the boundaries of international law. To maintain plausible deniability in case they are caught, records of black operations are rarely, if ever, kept.

The development of SEAL Team 6 was in direct response to the botched 1980 attempt to rescue the American hostages held in Iran. The failure of a US mission to extract the hostages illustrated the need for a dedicated counter-terrorist team capable of operating with the utmost secrecy.

The Team was labeled 6 at the time to confuse Soviet intelligence about the number of SEAL teams in operation when the team was formed. There were only two others.

Team 6 poached the top operatives from other SEAL units and trained them even more intensely from there.

Even among proven SEALs the attrition rate for Team 6 is reported to be nearly half. The CIA also recruits heavily from their numbers for their Special Operations Group.

Team 6 is normally devoted to missions with maritime authority: ship rescues, or raids on oil rigs, naval bases or land bases accessible by water. O'Neill was also involved in the Mearsk Alabama raid in 2009, the daring hostage rescue at sea that was turned into the film "Captain Philips."

When a former Navy SEAL was called for a comment about this article all he could say was: "You know I'd love to help you man, but I can't say a word about Team 6. There is no Team 6."

This report is originally by Robert Johnson.

SEE ALSO: The SEAL who says he shot Bin Laden responds to critics who say he's lying

Join the conversation about this story »

Military officers spend their time in service leading men and women in high-stress, high-stakes situations, and they earn their titles after rigorous, specialized training. It would be a waste not to transfer these skills to the business world upon returning home.

The University of Southern California noticed several years that many veteran officers were enrolling in its Marshall School of Business Executive MBA program, and found that there was a demand for help with transitioning into civilian life.

So last year, after three years of development, USC launched a Master of Business for Veterans (MBV) program. It's a one-year course with biweekly weekend sessions, and there are 50 students enrolled this year.

Its program director, James Bogle, has served in the Army and the office of the US secretary of defense. He says that the MBV program is a traditional business education with an emphasis on assisting vets with the transition from the structure and rigor of military life into civilian life, which includes building upon the skills they already learned. USC has been developing relationships with companies that have embraced MBV graduates, including the Walt Disney Company.

We asked three MBV students what leadership lessons they learned serving in the military that have prepared them for the corporate world. Here's what they said.

Confidence

You can only become a military officer if you are incredibly sure of yourself, says Jennifer Baker, who served as staff sergeant in the US Army's 82nd Airborne Division. "Remaining calm under pressure will ensure your coworkers follow your lead and remain calm as well, which will keep morale and motivation high," she says.

Dedication

"When faced with problems, you must be persistent until a solution is created; you cannot quit when the answer isn't obvious," Baker says. Her time in the Army taught her that a team is as dedicated as its leader, and this requires "getting your hands dirty every once in awhile."

The Ability to Follow

The military is, of course, regimented, and Baker finds that this dedication to following orders develops better leaders. It's a skill that translates well to the corporate world, keeping managers humble and adverse to micromanaging.

"Strong leaders can understand that people have different experiences and backgrounds, which enables them to bring valuable ideas to the overall mission. The worst thing a leader can do is to let their position or power prevent them from reaching their goal or meeting the bottom line," she says.

Ownership

"When I assume a new position, the leadership skill I focus on most is taking ownership of the responsibilities and mission set before me," says R. Alex Urankar, an active-duty captain in the US Marine Corp. "I approach everything with the mindset that my reputation is attached to the end result."

Bias for Action

Urankar tells us that being a Marine has taught him to use a stressful situation as an opportunity to run toward obstacles and overcome them rather than lingering in indecisiveness.

"When the mission becomes difficult or overwhelming, a leader must take action and calmly guide their team through the challenges. Effective leaders do not get overwhelmed by a challenge, they develop solutions and take action," he says.

Compassion

"Upon entering the Marine Corps Wounded Warrior Battalion Head Quarters aboard Camp Pendleton, the words, 'Have compassion, for everyone is facing their own internal struggle' are featured on the wall," Urankar says.

"A great leader recognizes that the needs of their people are just as important to mission success as accomplishing tasks," he says. "This means having genuine compassion for your team."

Authority

Mark Fetterman served as lieutenant commander in the US Navy. He says it taught him that a position of power is not sufficient for holding authority over a team, but rather it is the "willingness to accept responsibility" and commit to it that makes a leader.

Consistency

Fetterman says that the only way to maintain the respect of your superiors and reports in the military is to remain consistent.

"There are many ways to lead, but whichever path is chosen the true value lies in consistency," he says.

Solitude

Fetterman learned that being a leader sometimes means "bearing the burden of solitude."

In a speech to an incoming West Point class in 2010, the essayist and critic William Deresiewicz said, "The position of the leader is ultimately an intensely solitary, even intensely lonely one. However many people you may consult, you are the one who has to make the hard decisions. And at such moments, all you really have is yourself."

Imperfection

True leaders know that they cannot handle every challenge on their own and that they can employ others to make up for their deficiencies. "Knowing we are imperfect gives rise to empathy, a key to true leadership," Fetterman says.

SEE ALSO: How Veteran Unemployment Compares To Overall Unemployment In Every State

Join the conversation about this story »

Since March, Russia has launched approximately 40 provocative military demonstrations against the West and NATO. These actions include a Russian fighter jet making 12 close passes at an American warship in the black sea.

Left unchecked, this unprecedented level of intimidation could lead to war, according to Tom Nichols, a professor at the US Naval War College and a senior associate at the Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs.

"Putin believes NATO is a weak alliance led by a weak America that will shatter at the first real military confrontation and he is trying to send that message with increasingly daring and increasingly stupid stunts," Nichols told Business Insider by email. "My greatest fear is that he does not really understand how wrong he is about how the US or NATO really works, and that he is eventually going to run out of luck." 

According to Nichols, Russia's current actions are not militarily significant as they do not pose a direct threat towards the West. Instead, he says, the actions are political statements intended to show that NATO is incapable of defending Europe against aggression. 

The provocations are "not normal, it is not typical even of Soviet actions during the Cold War," Nichols said. "[I]t clearly comes from the very top as an expression of Putin's foreign policy." 

Even though the provocations are not currently a direct military threat, these actions could still lead to war. Nichols envisions two such scenarios in which a military response to Russian provocation might occur. 

"First, an accident resulting from Russian recklessness. Second, that Putin misjudges NATO and engages in a provocation so extreme that the West is forced to react." 

According to a report from the European Leadership Network (ELN), Russia and the West were involved in three high-risk incidents that easily could have led to a military confrontation since March.

In March, a Swedish commercial airline almost collided with a Russian reconnaissance plane — which wasn't transmitting its location — over Denmark. This event was followed by the kidnapping of an Estonian intelligence officer along the Russian border and the hunt for a purported Russian submarine in Swedish waters. 

The following map, created by ELN, shows the nearly global scope of confrontations between Russia and Western-aligned nations. A red pin denotes a high risk encounter, a yellow pin is a serious incident, a blue pin is a routine incident, and green is miscellaneous. 

Russia has also increased its rhetoric against the West in the past month. 

The Russian defense minister has warned that long-range bomber patrols will reach the Gulf of Mexico. This would be the first time Russian bombers routinely flew that course, even during the course of the Cold War.

Pro-Kremlin Russian media has also published an article warning that Moscow has a "nuclear surprise" for NATO in the form of Russia and the US reaching nuclear parity. 

Tom Nichols' comments reflect his views only and do not represent the US Government. 

SEE ALSO: Here are the 'complex' Russian air incursions that NATO is so concerned about

Join the conversation about this story »