President Trump deserves significant credit for recent U.S. successes against top terrorist leaders. In just three months, three of the top global terrorists have been killed by U.S. action. At least to some degree, these successes reflect Trump's more aggressive posture compared to that of the Obama administration.

First on the chopping block was Abu Bakr al Baghdadi. The Islamic State leader was hunted down in western Syria in October 2019, in an A-Squadron, Delta Force-led operation in which no Americans lost their lives. That Baghdadi died a coward also serves broader counterterrorism narratives well.

Then, in early January, Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani met his maker while traveling in Baghdad, Iraq. The leader of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps external action wing, the Quds Force (Jerusalem Force), was eliminated by a drone strike. While Iran remains likely to engage in broader retaliation, Trump's decision to kill Soleimani has disrupted Tehran's strategic calculus. The regime had long assumed that the United States would not target Soleimani in fear of inviting significant Iranian retaliation. But Ayatollah Ali Khamenei must now wonder what else Trump might do if Iran pushes him too far.

Finally, in late January, we saw the demise of Qasim al Raymi. The leader of al Qaeda's most capable syndicate, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Raymi's death hasn't generated nearly as much attention as the other two. But it is important. Keeping up the pressure on AQAP mitigates the risk of new attacks on the West in the vein of the 2015 Charlie Hebdo massacre. AQAP has also shown a sustained ability to affect explosive airliner attacks. Fortunately, all of these have been prevented by proactive searches or crew interdiction.

So why does Trump deserve special credit?

Well, while the U.S. Intelligence Community and the Pentagon are responsible for carrying out these successful operations, what's as important is Trump's penchant for authorizing immediate action in the face of intelligence reports. This sets him apart from his predecessor.

Although President Barack Obama deserves credit for authorizing the operation to kill Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, he adopted a far more contemplative and less time-sensitive approach to authorizing major counterterrorism operations. Obama's decision to order the bin Laden raid, for example, came eight months after the CIA first reached a high-confidence assessment that bin Laden was hiding at the Abbottabad target compound.

I am also led to believe that an August 2014 operation designed to save James Foley and other ISIS hostages could have been conducted sooner. In the event, no hostages were found at the target site when it was finally authorized. In contrast, Trump has unleashed the U.S. Intelligence Community and Joint Special Operations Command with a far greater degree of operational latitude.

Yes, some say that Trump's reflexive approach to authorizing operations is negative in that it risks lives in the absence of sufficient justifying intelligence. I disagree. Intelligence reports are rarely conclusive. In the end, like the commanders below him and those proven most effective through history, a president must lean in, aggressively seizing the initiative.

Trump is doing just that, and the results are showing.