Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   Commander of Naval Special Warfare Command tells Navy SEALS to shut the hell up. "For an Elite Force that should be humble and disciplined for life, we are certainly not appearing to be so"   (usnews.nbcnews.com) divider line 317
    More: Followup, elite force, NSW, Navy SEALs, Dutton, military base, military officials, Jeh Johnson, commanders  
•       •       •

12600 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Sep 2012 at 6:43 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



317 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-04 11:59:09 PM  
The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.
 
2012-09-05 12:04:24 AM  
That swift boat sure ran aground, didn't it?
 
2012-09-05 12:21:35 AM  
Makes sense to me.
 
2012-09-05 12:22:07 AM  
Follow-Up?

Needs a damned HERO tag.
 
2012-09-05 12:48:43 AM  
If I were a Navy seal I would do a cute synchronized horn blowing thing and clap my flappers until I had my fill of herring.
 
2012-09-05 01:01:31 AM  

brap: If I were a Navy seal I would do a cute synchronized horn blowing thing and clap my flappers until I had my fill of herring.


Well played.
 
2012-09-05 01:30:23 AM  
Mark Owen is just a pseudonym for Barack Obama. Follow me here.

Look at it: MARK OWEN - BARACK OBAMA

Take out the BAC, garbage letters (or bank of america, which funded Obama in 2008) and you get ARK.

Take out BAA (Banro corporation, which is an outfit out of the Congo - Africa! Kenya! Obama!) and you have MO. MARK O.

Obama is not only trying to claim he personally killed Osama Bin Laden, but he's also letting out important national security matters. This must end!
 
2012-09-05 01:36:51 AM  

Mentat: That swift boat sure ran aground, didn't it?


I'm getting a whiff of an election season hit piece myself. Though of course it could simply be an attention whoring money grab.
 
2012-09-05 01:40:23 AM  
If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.
 
2012-09-05 01:49:19 AM  
What Science_Guy_3.14159 said. Most SF types tend to keep a low, low profile and not, well, brag and crap or write a book until at least 30 years after the fact of an op. UCMJ and all, and stuff 

go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop
 
2012-09-05 01:54:24 AM  

alienated: go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop


My Grandfather was enlisted Naval Intelligence in Vietnam, and served on the Camp David security staff. (I have his white house medals and service records to prove it. Along with some really interesting gifts from Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson's staff)

He taught me a really valuable lesson that I still hold onto today when dealing with people who claim to have been in the "Special Forces" of any branch: The ones that actually were don't brag about it for the most part. They either don't want you to know, or don't like to talk about it.
 
2012-09-05 02:07:49 AM  
There is a reason I have you faved Brony. Your Opa taught you well.
 
2012-09-05 02:08:58 AM  
The major reason for political butthurt over this book seems to be that this guy says the mission was a lot more about kill than about "kill or capture".

"No Easy Day," the new pseudonymous book revealed to be by Navy SEAL Mark Bissonnette, claims that Osama bin Laden was unarmed when shot at his Abbottabad compound last May. That's another key discrepancy in a story that's already changed several times since the initial days after Obama, to much acclaim, announced the killing of the Al Qaeda leader.

If you remember, the initial story was that when Bin Laden was shot, he was firing weapons while hiding behind one of his wives who he used as a human shield.
 
2012-09-05 02:10:59 AM  

alienated: What Science_Guy_3.14159 said. Most SF types tend to keep a low, low profile and not, well, brag and crap or write a book until at least 30 years after the fact of an op. UCMJ and all, and stuff 

go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop


I think this guy thought someone would be as greedy and a big a douchebag as he is and he needed to cash in before someone could beat him to it. I think the guy broke his oath and his word and the idea that you're not supposed to talk in detail about the things you do. I work in network security and have seen some wild sh*t, but I would never tell anyone details about a customer's network or give any info that could identify a customer, whether I have a contract telling me that or not.

There are things you just don't talk about because it's expected to be private.

This guy wants his millions, and the DoD will likely take his money, but I sense he was also angling for a Fox News job or a role on the Republican speaking circuit.
 
2012-09-05 02:24:27 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: This guy wants his millions, and the DoD will likely take his money, but I sense he was also angling for a Fox News job or a role on the Republican speaking circuit.


Ha. Indeed. I can see it now- Coming to you, live from Fort Leavenworth ....
 
2012-09-05 02:29:49 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.


The Coast Guard does an insane amount of dangerous shiat on a near daily basis.
 
2012-09-05 02:31:09 AM  

alienated: Cubansaltyballs: This guy wants his millions, and the DoD will likely take his money, but I sense he was also angling for a Fox News job or a role on the Republican speaking circuit.

Ha. Indeed. I can see it now- Coming to you, live from Fort Leavenworth ....


Pointing out that the people up top have been lying to the public about how things went down right before an election has a tendency to piss those at the top off.

However, they changed the official story of what happened so frequently and so fast that it was already pretty obvious that they were obfuscating the truth.

All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.
 
2012-09-05 02:36:41 AM  

BullBearMS: All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.


well, duh. What could we have done ? I mean, besides making a stain on the walls out of him. Could we, even as a nation ruled by law, had a trial ? I am not being facetious here.I see no other solution except his summary execution. armed or not is immaterial at this point. Laden was a cancer and needed to be excised . By any and all means at our disposal. Cold ? yep. I would have done the same to McViegh, given the chance.
 
2012-09-05 02:44:27 AM  

BullBearMS: All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.


And I'm perfectly ok with this. I doubt we'd have taken Hitler alive either.
 
2012-09-05 02:50:47 AM  

BullBearMS: alienated: Cubansaltyballs: This guy wants his millions, and the DoD will likely take his money, but I sense he was also angling for a Fox News job or a role on the Republican speaking circuit.

Ha. Indeed. I can see it now- Coming to you, live from Fort Leavenworth ....

Pointing out that the people up top have been lying to the public about how things went down right before an election has a tendency to piss those at the top off.

However, they changed the official story of what happened so frequently and so fast that it was already pretty obvious that they were obfuscating the truth.

All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.


WTF are you blubbering about? OK, so there were differences in the reports about exactly what happened. Have you ever in your life managed to read and understand a single word of a book about military history? In case they're beyond your comprehension, here's a little cheat sheet: "Early battlefield reports sometimes are inaccurate and subject to later revision. Rinse and repeat a million times throughout recorded history."
 
2012-09-05 02:51:04 AM  

alienated: BullBearMS: All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.

well, duh. What could we have done ? I mean, besides making a stain on the walls out of him. Could we, even as a nation ruled by law, had a trial ? I am not being facetious here.I see no other solution except his summary execution. armed or not is immaterial at this point. Laden was a cancer and needed to be excised . By any and all means at our disposal. Cold ? yep. I would have done the same to McViegh, given the chance.


I'm of two minds on this one.

Obviously, the most convenient outcome for us was that he be killed instead of captured.

However, England, Spain, and India somehow managed to give public trials in a court of law to the people behind their recent terrorist attacks. I'm pretty sure if they can manage it, we can too. We're supposed to be all about the rule of law here in America.
 
2012-09-05 02:51:42 AM  
by the way - i am against the death penalty , in a way . State sponsored murder is wrong, in 99% of the time. And this was an item that falls under special circumstances- it is the 1 percent.
So the republicans should be happier.
 
2012-09-05 02:53:04 AM  

BullBearMS: However, England, Spain, and India somehow managed to give public trials in a court of law to the people behind their recent terrorist attacks. I'm pretty sure if they can manage it, we can too. We're supposed to be all about the rule of law here in America.


They also didn't contaminate most of their evidence by torturing detainees and holding them for years without trial.

/as far as we know, anyway.
 
2012-09-05 02:55:44 AM  

BullBearMS: We're supposed to be all about the rule of law here in America.


Agreed, but, I am for prisoner rights and all, but- no. we saw him be guilty on tv, many times. many died.
the trial was televised by actions. i am not a lawyer, but- i would argue that your client committed many crimes and was armed and dangerous and an escaped war criminal.( if russia still has that warrant out for him )
I am conserving the american peoples money even tho we lost a helo.
 
2012-09-05 02:59:22 AM  
And thank the hate the country more than the party party folks or gitmo would be shut. that place is still a place of shame, even after all these years.
We could try all of them anywhere in the us. and we should. Are we that weak we cannot handle the trial of what, 500 people ? I think we have murder trials by that count a year in some cites here .at least in a state.
 
2012-09-05 03:01:23 AM  

themindiswatching: They also didn't contaminate most of their evidence by torturing detainees and holding them for years without trial.


Oh, yeesh. Don't get me started.

I saw just yesterday that Attorney General Holder had recently closed the investigations into the people who actually died while being "totally not tortured at all!" by us.

Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder announced the closing without charges of the only two cases under investigation relating to the US torture program: one that resulted in the 2002 death of an Afghan detainee at a secret CIA prison near Kabul, and the other the 2003 death of an Iraqi citizen while in CIA custody at Abu Ghraib. This decision, says the New York Times Friday, "eliminat[es] the last possibility that any criminal charges will be brought as a result of the brutal interrogations carried out by the CIA".

Surprise, surprise. Nobody will be charged with anything.
 
2012-09-05 03:21:59 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.


Way to shat on our servicemen, Republican scum.

www.uscg.mil
Link
 
2012-09-05 03:26:10 AM  

BronyMedic: alienated: go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop

My Grandfather was enlisted Naval Intelligence in Vietnam, and served on the Camp David security staff. (I have his white house medals and service records to prove it. Along with some really interesting gifts from Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson's staff)

He taught me a really valuable lesson that I still hold onto today when dealing with people who claim to have been in the "Special Forces" of any branch: The ones that actually were don't brag about it for the most part. They either don't want you to know, or don't like to talk about it.


Y'know, my grandfather was on a Presidential security detail, too.
Of course, the president was Batista, but still...
 
2012-09-05 03:43:21 AM  

alienated: We could try all of them anywhere in the us. and we should. Are we that weak we cannot handle the trial of what, 500 people ? I think we have murder trials by that count a year in some cites here .at least in a state.


The problem is that we, as a nation, no longer give a fark about the rule of law. Supposedly, this is the foundational concept behind our entire nation, but it has been shoved aside.

It's been obvious for some time that if you are sufficiently rich or sufficiently politically connected, you won't even be charged with your crimes much less convicted.

None of the fraudulent bankers who destroyed our economy have been prosecuted.

None of the people who ordered, carried out, or destroyed videotaped evidence of our torture have been prosecuted.

None of the people or companies who took part in illegally spying on Americans have been prosecuted.

People should take some time to read this:

dl.dropbox.com 

It's an excellent look at the problem.
 
2012-09-05 03:50:18 AM  

BullBearMS: People should take some time to read this:


thats the problem though- they dont really read anymore. twitter made the gen pop even more add. or adhd . and html somehow, along the way to making pr0n available faster and faster to our desktops, did not make it possible for bookchives read from anywhere, which was the goal of the thing in the first place.
 
2012-09-05 03:51:54 AM  
"We'll hunt down bin Laden wherever he's hiding."
"Well, we're not really that concerned about finding him."
"Of course killing bin Laden was what anyone would've done."
"Obama shouldn't have had bin Laden killed, he should've been brought to the U.S. for a proper trial."
"Oh no, we can't possibly bring suspected terrorists to the U.S. for trial."
"Obama is stupid to try to close Gitmo."
"Why didn't Obama close Gitmo like he promised?"
 
2012-09-05 04:01:50 AM  

alienated: BullBearMS: People should take some time to read this:

thats the problem though- they dont really read anymore. twitter made the gen pop even more add. or adhd . and html somehow, along the way to making pr0n available faster and faster to our desktops, did not make it possible for bookchives read from anywhere, which was the goal of the thing in the first place.


Then watch "Taxi to the Dark Side".

Here it is free of charge

The only cost is your further disillusionment.
 
2012-09-05 04:03:18 AM  

BronyMedic: BullBearMS: All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.

And I'm perfectly ok with this. I doubt we'd have taken Hitler alive either.


Yep. Bastard taunted us more than two times. Resistance or execution, I don't care.
 
2012-09-05 04:03:41 AM  

propasaurus: "Why didn't Obama close Gitmo like he promised?"


Obama never even tried to close Gitmo. He tried to move it onto US soil (where we would continue to hold people forever without even filing charges) as if the whole problem with Gitmo was that it was located in the Caribbean. Damned warm tropical breezes!

In ordering the federal government to acquire an Illinois prison to house terrorism suspects who are currently held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, President Obama on Tuesday took a major step toward shutting down the military detention facility that its detractors say had become a potent recruitment tool for Al Qaeda.

Administration officials acknowledged that the move would require Congressional approval, since Congress now bars Guantánamo detainees from being brought onto American soil unless they face prosecution, and some of the detainees may be indefinitely confined without being tried.


Holding people forever without even charging them with a crime is the problem. Not that it's happening in Cuba. Moving Gitmo onto US soil does not fix the problem.

Here's what the ACLU had to say:

The following can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU:

"The creation of a 'Gitmo North' in Illinois is hardly a meaningful step forward. Shutting down Guantánamo will be nothing more than a symbolic gesture if we continue its lawless policies onshore.

"Alarmingly, all indications are that the administration plans to continue its predecessor's policy of indefinite detention without charge or trial for some detainees, with only a change of location. Such a policy is completely at odds with our democratic commitment to due process and human rights whether it's occurring in Cuba or in Illinois. In fact, while the Obama administration inherited the Guantánamo debacle, this current move is its own affirmative adoption of those policies. It is unimaginable that the Obama administration is using the same justification as the Bush administration used to undercut centuries of legal jurisprudence and the principle of innocent until proven guilty and the right to confront one's accusers.


Despite the frequency with which the "Congress stopped Obama from closing Gitmo" lie is told, what Congress actually did was prevent Obama from moving Gitmo onto US soil.
 
2012-09-05 04:08:19 AM  

mediablitz: alienated: BullBearMS: People should take some time to read this:

thats the problem though- they dont really read anymore. twitter made the gen pop even more add. or adhd . and html somehow, along the way to making pr0n available faster and faster to our desktops, did not make it possible for bookchives read from anywhere, which was the goal of the thing in the first place.

Then watch "Taxi to the Dark Side".

Here it is free of charge

The only cost is your further disillusionment.


I've heard people talk about this, but have never seen it. Thanks.
 
2012-09-05 04:14:58 AM  

BullBearMS: propasaurus: "Why didn't Obama close Gitmo like he promised?"

Obama never even tried to close Gitmo. He tried to move it onto US soil (where we would continue to hold people forever without even filing charges) as if the whole problem with Gitmo was that it was located in the Caribbean. Damned warm tropical breezes!

In ordering the federal government to acquire an Illinois prison to house terrorism suspects who are currently held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, President Obama on Tuesday took a major step toward shutting down the military detention facility that its detractors say had become a potent recruitment tool for Al Qaeda.

Administration officials acknowledged that the move would require Congressional approval, since Congress now bars Guantánamo detainees from being brought onto American soil unless they face prosecution, and some of the detainees may be indefinitely confined without being tried.

Holding people forever without even charging them with a crime is the problem. Not that it's happening in Cuba. Moving Gitmo onto US soil does not fix the problem.

Here's what the ACLU had to say:

The following can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU:

"The creation of a 'Gitmo North' in Illinois is hardly a meaningful step forward. Shutting down Guantánamo will be nothing more than a symbolic gesture if we continue its lawless policies onshore.

"Alarmingly, all indications are that the administration plans to continue its predecessor's policy of indefinite detention without charge or trial for some detainees, with only a change of location. Such a policy is completely at odds with our democratic commitment to due process and human rights whether it's occurring in Cuba or in Illinois. In fact, while the Obama administration inherited the Guantánamo debacle, this current move is its own affirmative adoption of those policies. It is unimaginable that the Obama administration is using the same justification as the Bush administration ...


I think the problem is that any information from the prisoners is compromised by Bush's enhanced interrogation techniques. We're stuck with these prisoners.
 
2012-09-05 04:28:14 AM  

simplicimus: I think the problem is that any information from the prisoners is compromised by Bush's enhanced interrogation techniques. We're stuck with these prisoners.


yer overthinking it. space them .
 
2012-09-05 04:30:53 AM  

alienated: simplicimus: I think the problem is that any information from the prisoners is compromised by Bush's enhanced interrogation techniques. We're stuck with these prisoners.

yer overthinking it. space them .


Well, NASA needs something to do, so that might just work.
 
2012-09-05 04:36:10 AM  

alienated: simplicimus: I think the problem is that any information from the prisoners is compromised by Bush's enhanced interrogation techniques. We're stuck with these prisoners.

yer overthinking it. space them .


How about we do something radical, like follow the rule of law.

Prosecute those guilty of the enhanced interrogation techniques.

We are party to international treaties that make this a requirement that we cannot legally ignore. Obama's "Look forward, not back on torture" is purest illegal bullshiat.

Then we either charge the people in Gitmo (and our other political prisons in places like Bagram, Afghanistan) with crimes or we let them go. Just as the rule of law requires.
 
2012-09-05 04:42:31 AM  

BullBearMS: Then we either charge the people in Gitmo (and our other political prisons in places like Bagram, Afghanistan) with crimes or we let them go. Just as the rule of law requires.


Agreed. But, to be perfectly honest- i am really dfrunk and also i do not see how they can get a trial if nobody lets them have one.
 
2012-09-05 04:49:57 AM  

BullBearMS: alienated: simplicimus: I think the problem is that any information from the prisoners is compromised by Bush's enhanced interrogation techniques. We're stuck with these prisoners.

yer overthinking it. space them .

How about we do something radical, like follow the rule of law.

Prosecute those guilty of the enhanced interrogation techniques.

We are party to international treaties that make this a requirement that we cannot legally ignore. Obama's "Look forward, not back on torture" is purest illegal bullshiat.

Then we either charge the people in Gitmo (and our other political prisons in places like Bagram, Afghanistan) with crimes or we let them go. Just as the rule of law requires.


It would help if people don't freak the fark out when its announced terrorists like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed are going to be tried in New York.

Both sides are bad, so vote Ron Paul

/I'm not even sure if I'm serious
 
2012-09-05 04:51:28 AM  

alienated: BullBearMS: Then we either charge the people in Gitmo (and our other political prisons in places like Bagram, Afghanistan) with crimes or we let them go. Just as the rule of law requires.

Agreed. But, to be perfectly honest- i am really dfrunk and also i do not see how they can get a trial if nobody lets them have one.


Well, any public defender could get them freed, and Bush and Cheney would be at the Hague.
 
2012-09-05 04:54:53 AM  

alienated: BullBearMS: Then we either charge the people in Gitmo (and our other political prisons in places like Bagram, Afghanistan) with crimes or we let them go. Just as the rule of law requires.

Agreed. But, to be perfectly honest- i am really dfrunk and also i do not see how they can get a trial if nobody lets them have one.


Well, as we have seen going way back to Nixon's pardon and all the way up to Obama' refusal to prosecute those guilty of torture (even when the people we tortured freaking died of it), neither of the two parties is interested in the rule of law anymore.

We need another option.
 
2012-09-05 05:11:30 AM  

BullBearMS: alienated: BullBearMS: Then we either charge the people in Gitmo (and our other political prisons in places like Bagram, Afghanistan) with crimes or we let them go. Just as the rule of law requires.

Agreed. But, to be perfectly honest- i am really dfrunk and also i do not see how they can get a trial if nobody lets them have one.

Well, as we have seen going way back to Nixon's pardon and all the way up to Obama' refusal to prosecute those guilty of torture (even when the people we tortured freaking died of it), neither of the two parties is interested in the rule of law anymore.

We need another option.


Well, that's why I've been advocating the creation of a third party, from school boards up to congress, starting on the day after election day, because half the country will already be pissed off. Just need a name for it.
 
2012-09-05 05:12:26 AM  

BullBearMS: We need another option.


we do. I will think on this for a bit / while. hmmm. Breaking rocks is out, right ?
 
2012-09-05 06:23:10 AM  
The account by the writer differs from the administrations press release? Color me shocked! ( sarcasm off )
 
2012-09-05 06:48:06 AM  
Although i applaud those men and women who are SEAL members, as i know the training is tough and the missions dangerous, I would have to say i have no problem with this guy writing a book about his experiences. If he's not giving up state secrets, or tactical information that would interfere with upcoming operations, what is the harm? This is still America kinda, and he has a right to write a book about anything he wants.
 
2012-09-05 06:48:42 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake break the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.


/ftfy
 
2012-09-05 06:49:21 AM  
I learned something today. Gitmo being in Cuba is, apparently, not an issue anymore.

Phew, that's a load off of my mind.
 
2012-09-05 06:50:03 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Although i applaud those men and women who are SEAL members, as i know the training is tough and the missions dangerous, I would have to say i have no problem with this guy writing a book about his experiences. If he's not giving up state secrets, or tactical information that would interfere with upcoming operations, what is the harm? This is still America kinda, and he has a right to write a book about anything he wants.


America kinda? Doubleplus ungood!
 
2012-09-05 06:52:05 AM  
Maybe the guy just wanted to set the record straight. Maybe he just wanted his team to stop being used as a political football.
 
2012-09-05 06:54:06 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: This guy wants his millions, and the DoD will likely take his money, but I sense he was also angling for a Fox News job or a role on the Republican speaking circuit.


Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I read (embarrassed to say FauxNews; was curious of their spin on the matter) he's donating all proceeds to charities that benefit US Armed Forces.
 
2012-09-05 06:54:59 AM  

alienated: What Science_Guy_3.14159 said. Most SF types tend to keep a low, low profile and not, well, brag and crap or write a book until at least 30 years after the fact of an op. UCMJ and all, and stuff 

go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop


I can't, it's classified. Besides, I have to get to the Core gym in 26 minutes.
 
2012-09-05 06:55:24 AM  
I don't care if the guy was unarmed, and juggling cats while wearing a traffic cone on his head and getting his balls shaved while singing "Wont you be my neighbor". He was a scumbag terrorist, who killed thousands of people through his orders, and had no regard for human life beyond his derpfest of religious fanaticism. This was a asshole who was happy to send others to die while he lived on, getting pretty much whatever he wanted. We had zero intention of taking him prisoner, as all the islamic fundies would go even more retard than they already do. This was a kill mission, and everyone knows it, and not a shiat was given for this poor excuse for a human life. I'm buying the book as i would like to know more details about how they ganked his sorry ass, and fed him to the sharks. Photos would be nice, but whatever.
 
2012-09-05 06:55:42 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.


Just... stop talking.
 
2012-09-05 06:57:49 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.


When we were short on manpower in Iraq and using the Marines as middle-east mall cops (I guess the infantry was busy? who knows) the Corps lowered their recruiting standards to the level of... well, rent-a-cops. They may have been an elite force in the past, but nowadays they're not really spec anything, just generic security forces that can be, and regularly are, subbed for by merc organizations like Blackwater.

//Meanwhile, the navy can still blow a mite off a fly's wing with a 400mm cannon from eight miles off without harming the fly, and the air force dominates so hard that they don't even particularly need pilots to blow up your house.

//Not that there's anything wrong with generic security forces, I've met some TSA guys that are quite nice and respectable people.
 
2012-09-05 06:59:04 AM  

alienated: What Science_Guy_3.14159 said. Most SF types tend to keep a low, low profile and not, well, brag and crap or write a book until at least 30 years after the fact of an op. UCMJ and all, and stuff 

go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop


I had a ex-SEAL as a close personal friend and it was more than two years into that relationship before i knew what he'd been. I knew he was ex-military but that was it, and it was only a sidelong passing comment about something, combined with me knowing something via another friend that wasn't general public knowledge, that led me to figure it out. He didn't deny it when i asked him, it wasn't like he was trying to keep it secret, it's just not something he ever talked about
 
2012-09-05 06:59:12 AM  

BronyMedic: BullBearMS: All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.

And I'm perfectly ok with this. I doubt we'd have taken Hitler alive either.


Of the handful of Muslim friends I have, all have said the world is a better place w/o OBL. None have any problems with the US operation that resulted in his death (as far as they've discussed with me).
 
2012-09-05 07:03:50 AM  

Jim_Callahan: When we were short on manpower in Iraq and using the Marines as middle-east mall cops (I guess the infantry was busy? who knows) the Corps lowered their recruiting standards to the level of... well, rent-a-cops. They may have been an elite force in the past, but nowadays they're not really spec anything, just generic security forces that can be, and regularly are, subbed for by merc organizations like Blackwater.


Blackwater does PSD and logistics support. You're really defining down the term "mercenary" if you apply it to them. And no, "merc organizations" - I don't know what shiatty B-movie taught you to refer to them as that - do not carry out the Marine Corps' mission unless you're counting PSD for diplomats.
 
2012-09-05 07:06:14 AM  
The Democratic party should continue with the attacks on the SEALs. It shows real backbone and is surely a winning strategy.
 
2012-09-05 07:06:19 AM  
The official said that a recent movie starring actual Navy SEALs and even the growing number of "SEAL" workout videos have all added up to too much information about the community out in the public arena.

I'm pretty sure the Navy gave full cooperation for that movie, considering it started out as a recruitment video. Oh and I'm sure those special pull ups show exactly how to perform room clearing techniques.

pull-up-bar-reviews.com

Oh so THAT'S how you killed Bin Laden???
 
2012-09-05 07:06:39 AM  

digistil: Of the handful of Muslim friends I have, all have said the world is a better place w/o OBL. None have any problems with the US operation that resulted in his death (as far as they've discussed with me).


All my Muslim ex-SEAL friends who did time in Al Qaeda agree that Barack Hussein Obama is probably not Hitler.

/ Did I get everything?
 
2012-09-05 07:08:09 AM  

PunGent: I can't, it's classified. Besides, I have to get to the Core gym in 26 minutes.


Make sure to work out your Corp.
 
2012-09-05 07:09:51 AM  
Someday, we'll learn to be a greater species.

And send our human scum to the prison world in another dimension.
 
2012-09-05 07:10:09 AM  
Translation of TFA: "Oh no. If we talk too much, people will realise that we are not comic book superheroes after all."

/now waiting for all the hero-worshippers to spit their dummies out
 
2012-09-05 07:10:26 AM  

mycatisposter: The Democratic party should continue with the attacks on the SEALs. It shows real backbone and is surely a winning strategy.


Your cat needs to lay off the catnip.
 
2012-09-05 07:10:27 AM  

BullBearMS: The major reason for political butthurt over this book seems to be that this guy says the mission was a lot more about kill than about "kill or capture".

"No Easy Day," the new pseudonymous book revealed to be by Navy SEAL Mark Bissonnette, claims that Osama bin Laden was unarmed when shot at his Abbottabad compound last May. That's another key discrepancy in a story that's already changed several times since the initial days after Obama, to much acclaim, announced the killing of the Al Qaeda leader.

If you remember, the initial story was that when Bin Laden was shot, he was firing weapons while hiding behind one of his wives who he used as a human shield.


Sounds like you want to pal around with terrorists. Real Americans would have killed him with their bare hands if need be.
 
2012-09-05 07:13:39 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: The official said that a recent movie starring actual Navy SEALs and even the growing number of "SEAL" workout videos have all added up to too much information about the community out in the public arena.

I'm pretty sure the Navy gave full cooperation for that movie, considering it started out as a recruitment video. Oh and I'm sure those special pull ups show exactly how to perform room clearing techniques.

[pull-up-bar-reviews.com image 380x380]

Oh so THAT'S how you killed Bin Laden???


I was thinking of the other perfect pushup...
 
2012-09-05 07:14:02 AM  
The government is doing a whole lot of screaming and zero in the way of legal action. This tells me that the government is full of shiat and all about politics.
 
2012-09-05 07:15:39 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule-


devcentral.f5.com
 
2012-09-05 07:15:50 AM  
Hmmm. I wonder if President Oiho has got the memo? Lead by example I say!!! But when the only thing you have for four years of leading the country is killing Bin Laden, ruining the economy and adding trillions of dollars to the deficit....
 
2012-09-05 07:17:42 AM  
is it not weird that the DOD is complaining about this book at all?
the DOD and the administration have been leaking these details for propaganda purposes since just a few hours after the event.
how long was it before we saw the picture of the situation room full of all the apprehensive political officials?
files.abovetopsecret.com
this account from august is chocked full of administration and DOD personnel leaks.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/08/110808fa_fact_schmidle ?c urrentPage=all
just search for the word official in that article. there are dozens of references to various, administration, coutnerterrorism, and DOD officials who provided the details of the story to the author.
it doesn't seem to me that you should be able to break the rules you are supposed to be enforcing and observing about secrecy for political or organizational gain then claim the guy who actually put his life on the line in the mission is an asshole for talking about what happened.
make up your mind about whether talking about this is bad and then stick with whatever you decide.
 
2012-09-05 07:18:35 AM  

bdub77: Mark Owen is just a pseudonym for Barack Obama. Follow me here.

Look at it: MARK OWEN - BARACK OBAMA

Take out the BAC, garbage letters (or bank of america, which funded Obama in 2008) and you get ARK.

Take out BAA (Banro corporation, which is an outfit out of the Congo - Africa! Kenya! Obama!) and you have MO. MARK O.

Obama is not only trying to claim he personally killed Osama Bin Laden, but he's also letting out important national security matters. This must end!


I've read other scenarios online that are far, far more outlandish.

BTW less than three this rear admiral, though I think its time we changed the title of "rear admiral" to something else like maybe "lieutenant admiral" or something.
 
2012-09-05 07:18:51 AM  
But no prosecutions. Notice that.

One of these loudmouths needs to go to prison.
 
2012-09-05 07:19:11 AM  
I wonder how Bradley Manning feels about all this?
 
2012-09-05 07:20:36 AM  

Mean Daddy: Hmmm. I wonder if President Oiho has got the memo? Lead by example I say!!! But when the only thing you have for four years of leading the country is killing Bin Laden, ruining the economy and adding trillions of dollars to the deficit....


That said:

images.sodahead.com
 
2012-09-05 07:21:14 AM  

MurphyMurphy: I wonder how Bradley Manning feels about all this?


You got a Wikileak? Here's some SEALant for that...
 
2012-09-05 07:21:31 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.


That's actually a written rule for the Marine Corps and the Navy. And I've tried making sense of the "Order of the Day" and what uniform can be worn when and where and...I had to drink. Too much regulation for a uniform, I think.

/Almost joined the Navy
//Would have gone to OCS
///Probably would be an O-3 by now
////Oh well
 
2012-09-05 07:22:45 AM  
If he revealed any classified information in violation of the non-disclosure agreement, which he signed, he should be charged and tried. Simple as that.

If he wants to make money off of his service, he should take a screen writing class and write some jingoistic, rah, rah bullshiat for Hollywood and make a killing. Plenty of people in this country will eat that shiat up.
 
2012-09-05 07:23:25 AM  

maram500: That's actually a written rule for the Marine Corps and the Navy.


I think people use the adjective "unwritten" a lot like they use the adjective "literally".
 
2012-09-05 07:23:30 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.


Heh... I still wear socks with my sandals to this day. Dress code prohibited lots of things, one of which was bear feet in public, even at a beach. I have no idea if the regulations are the same now or not. This also, obviously, only mattered off-base and when not in the field. In the field I'll wear whatever I feel I need to so as to follow my orders as efficiently and effectively as possible. So, in answer, yes - the Marines required us to not wear our uniform (or any portion of it) when off duty except for certain exceptions and, even those, if you wore a single piece of the uniform you'd better have the rest of that same uniform on and it had better be squared away.

I don't really miss it. It has been years. Some habits remain (of course) and I still maintain my firearm skills but that's mostly because I like things that go boom. I have the rack squared away when I get out of it unless the missus is still in it. Sometimes I still eat "chow" or go to the "head" and the likes but, no... Mostly that's all gone though it took a long time. I only did eight years and a lot of years have passed since then, as I near 60 I tend to look back and be grateful that I got out early. I'm not sure what sort of mental mess I'd be if I'd done the full 20 or even 30.
 
2012-09-05 07:26:02 AM  

ZipSplat: Science_Guy_3.14159: The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.

Just... stop talking.


Yeah he makes jackasses like you look bad. Can't have that.
 
2012-09-05 07:26:41 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: The official said that a recent movie starring actual Navy SEALs and even the growing number of "SEAL" workout videos have all added up to too much information about the community out in the public arena.

I'm pretty sure the Navy gave full cooperation for that movie, considering it started out as a recruitment video. Oh and I'm sure those special pull ups show exactly how to perform room clearing techniques.

[pull-up-bar-reviews.com image 380x380]

Oh so THAT'S how you killed Bin Laden???


Well, you have to crawl before you walk, right?
 
2012-09-05 07:31:46 AM  

orbister: Translation of TFA: "Oh no. If we talk too much, people will realise that we are not comic book superheroes after all."

/now waiting for all the hero-worshippers to spit their dummies out


More like they don't want to contribute to the comic bookish mythology of SEALs/Special Forces/etc. being superhuman badasses and/or it really is mega-crass for someone to serve in such a capacity and then try to cash in on this after their service has ended.
 
2012-09-05 07:35:41 AM  

BullBearMS: alienated: BullBearMS: All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.

well, duh. What could we have done ? I mean, besides making a stain on the walls out of him. Could we, even as a nation ruled by law, had a trial ? I am not being facetious here.I see no other solution except his summary execution. armed or not is immaterial at this point. Laden was a cancer and needed to be excised . By any and all means at our disposal. Cold ? yep. I would have done the same to McViegh, given the chance.

I'm of two minds on this one.

Obviously, the most convenient outcome for us was that he be killed instead of captured.

However, England, Spain, and India somehow managed to give public trials in a court of law to the people behind their recent terrorist attacks. I'm pretty sure if they can manage it, we can too. We're supposed to be all about the rule of law here in America.


American Exceptionalism?
 
2012-09-05 07:37:49 AM  

david_gaithersburg: The government is doing a whole lot of screaming and zero in the way of legal action. This tells me that the government is full of shiat and all about politics.


There really is no legal action the government could take here, and even if there was wouldn't that be pretty creepy in and of itself?

You continue to be full of shiat and all about politics.
 
2012-09-05 07:39:40 AM  
This is hardcore corps.
 
2012-09-05 07:39:44 AM  
righttruth.typepad.com

I learned it from watching you.
 
2012-09-05 07:46:35 AM  

alienated: What Science_Guy_3.14159 said. Most SF types tend to keep a low, low profile and not, well, brag and crap or write a book until at least 30 years after the fact of an op. UCMJ and all, and stuff 

go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop


Not a special forces type, but you are correct. When the SAS Trooper "Pete/" "Soldier I" came forward and talked to the press about the Iranian Embassy Siege (and I don't think he forward with it as fast as this), he was blackballed from the S.A.S. He is persona non-grata to them to this day.
 
2012-09-05 07:47:46 AM  
Sorry, I meant "he came forward as soon as this..." I think it was after he left the Regiment, in fact.
 
2012-09-05 07:48:58 AM  
"Over the next few weeks, Pybus will speak to senior leaders about how to stop the trend of former SEALS profiting from their time in uniform."

Unlike talking head Generals opining on the news or Wesley Clark and his Stars earn Stripes. We don't want the NCOs thinking they can make a profit after their hitch.
 
2012-09-05 07:49:13 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: More like they don't want to contribute to the comic bookish mythology of SEALs/Special Forces/etc. being superhuman badasses and/or it really is mega-crass for someone to serve in such a capacity and then try to cash in on this after their service has ended.


More like they don't want to reveal classified information and tactics to the public and therefore to their enemies.
 
2012-09-05 07:51:24 AM  

BullBearMS: alienated: Cubansaltyballs: This guy wants his millions, and the DoD will likely take his money, but I sense he was also angling for a Fox News job or a role on the Republican speaking circuit.

Ha. Indeed. I can see it now- Coming to you, live from Fort Leavenworth ....

Pointing out that the people up top have been lying to the public about how things went down right before an election has a tendency to piss those at the top off.

However, they changed the official story of what happened so frequently and so fast that it was already pretty obvious that they were obfuscating the truth.

All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.


Assassination and using intelligence gathered by torture is OK when The One does it.
 
2012-09-05 07:51:25 AM  

KiplingKat872: Crotchrocket Slim: More like they don't want to contribute to the comic bookish mythology of SEALs/Special Forces/etc. being superhuman badasses and/or it really is mega-crass for someone to serve in such a capacity and then try to cash in on this after their service has ended.

More like they don't want to reveal classified information and tactics to the public and therefore to their enemies.


Definitely that too.
 
2012-09-05 07:51:35 AM  
Nothing in the book was terribly damning
and we have congress perpetually sharing secrets to the media

so I give this a meh
 
2012-09-05 07:52:46 AM  

SkunkWerks: maram500: That's actually a written rule for the Marine Corps and the Navy.

I think people use the adjective "unwritten" a lot like they use the adjective "literally".


I think those people are "retarded."
 
2012-09-05 07:53:34 AM  

Tuxedocat: "Over the next few weeks, Pybus will speak to senior leaders about how to stop the trend of former SEALS profiting from their time in uniform."

Unlike talking head Generals opining on the news or Wesley Clark and his Stars earn Stripes. We don't want the NCOs thinking they can make a profit after their hitch.


...but but but generals suck so it's okay if SEALs etc. suck.

What's the rank on the uniform you put your strawman in?
 
2012-09-05 07:54:48 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: Yeah he makes jackasses like you look bad. Can't have that.


In what way did that happen?
 
2012-09-05 07:55:22 AM  
More propaganda; book was probably written by the White House staff.
 
2012-09-05 07:55:34 AM  

maram500: Science_Guy_3.14159: The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.

That's actually a written rule for the Marine Corps and the Navy. And I've tried making sense of the "Order of the Day" and what uniform can be worn when and where and...I had to drink. Too much regulation for a uniform, I think.

/Almost joined the Navy
//Would have gone to OCS
///Probably would be an O-3 by now
////Oh well


In the Army we wore our duty uniform all over town. When I lived with my sister, who was a Marine, she was always very annoyed that she couldn't stop off at the grocery store near her house after work because she wasn't allowed to do things off base in her uniform. She babbled something about respecting the uniform and ensuring civilians didn't see them doing anything improper while wearing it. Seemed silly to me, especially in a military town.
 
2012-09-05 07:56:03 AM  

ZipSplat: Blackwater does PSD and logistics support. You're really defining down the term "mercenary" if you apply it to them. And no, "merc organizations" - I don't know what shiatty B-movie taught you to refer to them as that - do not carry out the Marine Corps' mission unless you're counting PSD for diplomats.


No, they are a mercenaries.

Blacwater snipers deployed into live combat

Blackwater contractors in rooftop firefight

Blackwater Shootings

They disgusting and it is disgusting that the U.S. government used them.
 
2012-09-05 07:57:20 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: alienated: What Science_Guy_3.14159 said. Most SF types tend to keep a low, low profile and not, well, brag and crap or write a book until at least 30 years after the fact of an op. UCMJ and all, and stuff 

go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop

I think this guy thought someone would be as greedy and a big a douchebag as he is and he needed to cash in before someone could beat him to it. I think the guy broke his oath and his word and the idea that you're not supposed to talk in detail about the things you do. I work in network security and have seen some wild sh*t, but I would never tell anyone details about a customer's network or give any info that could identify a customer, whether I have a contract telling me that or not.

There are things you just don't talk about because it's expected to be private.

This guy wants his millions, and the DoD will likely take his money, but I sense he was also angling for a Fox News job or a role on the Republican speaking circuit.


Wild network security shiat.

He's seen things that you wouldn't believe. The DNS for entire LANs poisoned just to get one guy's computer to load goatse. And he will never forget the carnage of the great MAC conflict of 98.
 
2012-09-05 07:57:54 AM  
Having this come out the day before the Democrat Convention reeks of Rudy Giuliani spouting "911" every where he goes. It is Obama's only accomplishment and a dubious one at that.
 
2012-09-05 07:59:20 AM  

ZipSplat: Crotchrocket Slim: Yeah he makes jackasses like you look bad. Can't have that.

In what way did that happen?


In telling him to shut up when he's spouting straight up gospel. It's pretty apparent you've never even met someone from the service in your whole life, or if you have they are the same straight up sell outs the rear admiral is calling out.
 
2012-09-05 08:02:09 AM  

KiplingKat872: ZipSplat: Blackwater does PSD and logistics support. You're really defining down the term "mercenary" if you apply it to them. And no, "merc organizations" - I don't know what shiatty B-movie taught you to refer to them as that - do not carry out the Marine Corps' mission unless you're counting PSD for diplomats.

No, they are a mercenaries.

Blacwater snipers deployed into live combat

Blackwater contractors in rooftop firefight

Blackwater Shootings

They disgusting and it is disgusting that the U.S. government used them.


Yeah, that in no way contradicts my statement, it just provides a blueprint of your ignorance. Yes, in PSD duties, people shoot people to protect their principle (usually a person, cargo, or a vulnerable area). That is not the same thing as the military engaging in offensive operations at the behest of the government to capture territory.
 
2012-09-05 08:02:56 AM  
Propaganda is a rough business.
 
2012-09-05 08:03:17 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: In telling him to shut up when he's spouting straight up gospel. It's pretty apparent you've never even met someone from the service in your whole life, or if you have they are the same straight up sell outs the rear admiral is calling out.


LOL, uh, I've spent five years in the Marine Corps and three in the National Guard, champ. So gurgle on them balls, wontcha?
 
2012-09-05 08:03:21 AM  

Cubansaltyballs: This guy wants his millions, and the DoD will likely take his money, but I sense he was also angling for a Fox News job or a role on the Republican speaking circuit.


"Next up on Fox News' election coverage, the man who actually *did* kill Osama bin Laden, Navy SEAL Mark Bissonnette, will give us his take on Obama's attempt to take credit for and politicize the military action that took down the Al-Qaeda leader... after this short break."

*uncrosses and crosses legs, adjusts miniskirt*
 
2012-09-05 08:08:46 AM  

ZipSplat: Crotchrocket Slim: In telling him to shut up when he's spouting straight up gospel. It's pretty apparent you've never even met someone from the service in your whole life, or if you have they are the same straight up sell outs the rear admiral is calling out.

LOL, uh, I've spent five years in the Marine Corps and three in the National Guard, champ. So gurgle on them balls, wontcha?


Yeah okay sure I believe you internet tough guy.

You're just words on a screen to me, and frankly you post nothing like the military personnel I grew up around would. If you're being honest here sorry for calling you out on being an utter putz who never "got it". I'm guessing you were one of those "mall guard" types mentioned up thread?
 
2012-09-05 08:08:54 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: brake --> break


Thank you.
 
2012-09-05 08:09:36 AM  

kim jong-un: He's seen things that you wouldn't believe.


C-beams glittering in the darkness near the Tannhauser Gate?
 
2012-09-05 08:10:08 AM  
What color is the boat house in Hereford?

I'm not surprised this guy wrote a book so soon. The SAS will approve former members writing stuff, generally under a fictional bent, that are considered recent.

My problem comes from the Right and how they are desperately trying to play down the narrative.

"Well, THESE SEALS don't like Obama and claim that he did nothing"
"Well, OBL was unarmed, and that's not American!"
"Well, Obama was golfing in Africa with a Iman while our brave SEALS were risking their lives".

I've seen stuff like this all over sites like Facebook and it's sickening that these shiatbags can twist a success into a partisan issue. What pisses me off the most is the use of "SEALS" who try to refute what happened and try to say Obama is taking all the credit. "SEALS" that haven't served in decades. "SEALS" who happen to be GOP shills.

Oh, and the loudest "very special forces" braggarts are also the least likely to be in. I'll reference the greatest troll of all time (you Fark trolls could learn from watching this guy)

Shrine of the Mall Ninja: The Greatest Troll of all Time
 
2012-09-05 08:11:11 AM  

Ivandrago: maram500: Science_Guy_3.14159: The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.

That's actually a written rule for the Marine Corps and the Navy. And I've tried making sense of the "Order of the Day" and what uniform can be worn when and where and...I had to drink. Too much regulation for a uniform, I think.

/Almost joined the Navy
//Would have gone to OCS
///Probably would be an O-3 by now
////Oh well

In the Army we wore our duty uniform all over town. When I lived with my sister, who was a Marine, she was always very annoyed that she couldn't stop off at the grocery store near her house after work because she wasn't allowed to do things off base in her uniform. She babbled something about respecting the uniform and ensuring civilians didn't see them doing anything improper while wearing it. Seemed silly to me, especially in a military town.


This is [another reason ]why Marines > Army. Marines go in first, kick more ass, and have far more respect for the uniform than to wear it off-base.

/One of my best friends is a Marine
//Lost his knee in Iraq
///A hero to me
////Not every person in uniform is automatically a hero, but thanks to you and your sister for serving
 
2012-09-05 08:12:21 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: ZipSplat: Crotchrocket Slim: In telling him to shut up when he's spouting straight up gospel. It's pretty apparent you've never even met someone from the service in your whole life, or if you have they are the same straight up sell outs the rear admiral is calling out.

LOL, uh, I've spent five years in the Marine Corps Cores and three in the National Guard, champ. So gurgle on them balls, wontcha?

Yeah okay sure I believe you internet tough guy.

You're just words on a screen to me, and frankly you post nothing like the military personnel I grew up around would. If you're being honest here sorry for calling you out on being an utter putz who never "got it". I'm guessing you were one of those "mall guard" types mentioned up thread?


Corrected for extra-Farkness.
 
2012-09-05 08:13:04 AM  

CMYK and PMS: It is Obama's only accomplishment


Sorry, what?

Putting slowly turning the economy around despite constant obstructionism from the GOP, in foriegn policy terms:

He assisted the revolution in Libya without getting us directly involved in a ground war there.

He removed most of the troops from Iraq so they could focus on the war in Afghanistan.

He has kept the tensions with Iran from exploding into war.

He has not kowtowed to Israel.

He has took an aggressive military posture toward North Korea when they sank South Korea Navy ship.

Love it or hate it, he has taken a strong position about eliminating Taliban camps on the Pakistan side.

He solidified relations with Japan after the Tsunami by sending the USS Ronald Regan for disaster relief.

He has at least partially repaired the U.S.'s reputation and standing on the Global Stage

To say he has accomplished nothing but the assassination of bin Laden is a lie, simple as that.
 
2012-09-05 08:14:05 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: Yeah okay sure I believe you internet tough guy.

You're just words on a screen to me, and frankly you post nothing like the military personnel I grew up around would. If you're being honest here sorry for calling you out on being an utter putz who never "got it". I'm guessing you were one of those "mall guard" types mentioned up thread?


No, I was definitely not a mall guard. What did you do? Hopefully you were at least a mall guard, because between you and the original poster I don't think either of you are in a position to inform me about the .mil

In any event, what he posted is inaccurate. The only service with regulations against wearing a utility uniform off base is the Marine Corps, they strongly request that you avoid wearing your uniform off base for anything more than putting gas in your tank to get home - but even for the Marine Corps all other uniforms are fine off base.
 
2012-09-05 08:15:39 AM  

trotsky: I've seen stuff like this all over sites like Facebook and it's sickening that these shiatbags can twist a success into a partisan issue. What pisses me off the most is the use of "SEALS" who try to refute what happened and try to say Obama is taking all the credit. "SEALS" that haven't served in decades. "SEALS" who happen to be GOP shills.


Isn't that what they talk about in the book? Wait are you more upset this guy is possibly giving away secrets or because you think he's turning into a partisan issue?
 
2012-09-05 08:16:22 AM  
Nobody else sees the irony that his e-mail to everyone to shut up was leaked to the press?
 
2012-09-05 08:16:23 AM  

ZipSplat: Yeah, that in no way contradicts my statement, it just provides a blueprint of your ignorance. Yes, in PSD duties, people shoot people to protect their principle (usually a person, cargo, or a vulnerable area). That is not the same thing as the military engaging in offensive operations at the behest of the government to capture territory.


You need to look at those links, they were deployed a combat zones.

I'm sure the British brought in the Hessians "just to protect their supply lines."

Mercenaries are mercenaries. Called them whatever fancy name you want, but in the end they are guns for hire. Get over it.
 
2012-09-05 08:18:32 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: trotsky: I've seen stuff like this all over sites like Facebook and it's sickening that these shiatbags can twist a success into a partisan issue. What pisses me off the most is the use of "SEALS" who try to refute what happened and try to say Obama is taking all the credit. "SEALS" that haven't served in decades. "SEALS" who happen to be GOP shills.

Isn't that what they talk about in the book? Wait are you more upset this guy is possibly giving away secrets or because you think he's turning into a partisan issue?


I wasn't talking about the book subby talks about. Have not read it. I was discussing the one book that was released months ago that was pretty much just bullshiat after bullshiat lie. I forget the title right now.
 
2012-09-05 08:21:41 AM  

impaler: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.

Way to shat on our servicemen, Republican scum.

[www.uscg.mil image 560x315]
Link



it's a quote from that terrible Navy Seals movie in the 90s. relax, Francis.
/Coastie
 
2012-09-05 08:23:26 AM  
"We do NOT advertise the nature of our work, NOR do we seek recognition for our actions,"

that's left for the politicians to do. though, i will say the WH wasn't shy about coming out and releasing all these supposed details of the raid. None of those details ended up being true, but they sure as hell weren't humble.

Obama is just mad he is about to be Swift Boated by these SEALS. Obama: this is your swift boat moment.
 
2012-09-05 08:23:32 AM  

trotsky: I wasn't talking about the book subby talks about. Have not read it. I was discussing the one book that was released months ago that was pretty much just bullshiat after bullshiat lie. I forget the title right now.


There are two books? I thought that's what this one was about, the guy talked about how they shot Bin Laden without question and the SEAL was upset that Obama is taking credit for it.

I mean I don't want to get into an argument and not everyone feels this way, but I get this feeling that people are more upset because he sort of let his political ideals out. I can't say I didn't see this coming, you're not supposed to take sides in the military because your Commander in Chief is your boss and you follow their orders but people have their own opinions.

Yes it's a great thing that Obama gave the order to go in and take Bin Laden out but the language a lot of people used was and is dangerous. When people say "Obama killed Bin Laden" that kind of takes away from what those guys did. I'm just saying, maybe people are more upset about what he said regarding that?
 
2012-09-05 08:23:51 AM  

KiplingKat872: You need to look at those links, they were deployed a combat zones.

I'm sure the British brought in the Hessians "just to protect their supply lines."

Mercenaries are mercenaries. Called them whatever fancy name you want, but in the end they are guns for hire. Get over it.


So are you going to acknowledge that they are bodyguards for diplomats and private principles? Or are you going to keep trying to pretend that their operations are synonymous with military operations just because they both have guns, and they both shoot people that shoot at them.
 
2012-09-05 08:27:03 AM  

ZipSplat: KiplingKat872: ZipSplat: Blackwater does PSD and logistics support. You're really defining down the term "mercenary" if you apply it to them. And no, "merc organizations" - I don't know what shiatty B-movie taught you to refer to them as that - do not carry out the Marine Corps' mission unless you're counting PSD for diplomats.

No, they are a mercenaries.

Blacwater snipers deployed into live combat

Blackwater contractors in rooftop firefight

Blackwater Shootings

They disgusting and it is disgusting that the U.S. government used them.

Yeah, that in no way contradicts my statement, it just provides a blueprint of your ignorance. Yes, in PSD duties, people shoot people to protect their principle (usually a person, cargo, or a vulnerable area). That is not the same thing as the military engaging in offensive operations at the behest of the government to capture territory.


I just finished listening to Rachel Maddow's book _Drift_, and she made the very good point that even using these contractors for non-combat services has some severe downsides. First, she talks a situation in Kosovo where contractors doing logistics, etc., got involved in some pretty serious crime (including having essentially underaged harems). People in the country being occupied aren't going to differentiate between US armed forces personnel and contractors or mercs, we're all just Americans to them. So, it's safe to say that using contractors increases the chances of pretty bad publicity / human rights / whatever problems. Also, the fact that we're just hiring people means that even less of the country is directly involved in the war, making it even easier and more probable that we'll end up using military power, probably unnecessarily.

That was pretty much the point of the book - that the gradual move of warmaking power from the legislature to the executive branch and the move to contracting (and, previously, away from the draft) have drastically lowered the bar for the use of force. She had a couple of good points, and some good recommendations in the afterword.
 
2012-09-05 08:27:38 AM  

trotsky: The SAS will approve former members writing stuff, generally under a fictional bent, that are considered recent.


Not really. If you read Chris Ryan's stuff it is pretty heavily on the fiction side, sometimes ridiculously so in terms of situations (like Hammas pulling crap in the 2000's that they were doing in the 1970's), and his heroes can be quite rambo-super-heroic. Not a lot of realistic tactics in there.

They are very guarded about past ops, I was reading "Who Dares Wins: The Special Air Service from 1950 to he Gulf War (1992 ed)" by Tony Geraghty, and I think he only has complete operational info up to the Falklands. Even the Selection process they still keep pretty tightly under wraps.
 
2012-09-05 08:29:05 AM  

ZipSplat: So are you going to acknowledge that they are bodyguards for diplomats and private principles? Or are you going to keep trying to pretend that their operations are synonymous with military operations just because they both have guns, and they both shoot people that shoot at them.


If you look at the links I provided you will see they are engaging in military operations, not just body guard work.

They are mercenaries. Deal with it.
 
2012-09-05 08:30:02 AM  

MurphyMurphy: I wonder how Bradley Manning feels about all this?


.
.
Is he still alive?
 
2012-09-05 08:30:10 AM  
If only the SEAL had used wikileaks to get the truth out there.......and if only the lying president had been a republican,then we would be praising the SEAL.

The SEAL doesnt have alot going for him....I mean hes not even a homosexual like Manning.
 
2012-09-05 08:30:34 AM  

dersk: I just finished listening to Rachel Maddow's book _Drift_, and she made the very good point that even using these contractors for non-combat services has some severe downsides. First, she talks a situation in Kosovo where contractors doing logistics, etc., got involved in some pretty serious crime (including having essentially underaged harems). People in the country being occupied aren't going to differentiate between US armed forces personnel and contractors or mercs, we're all just Americans to them. So, it's safe to say that using contractors increases the chances of pretty bad publicity / human rights / whatever problems. Also, the fact that we're just hiring people means that even less of the country is directly involved in the war, making it even easier and more probable that we'll end up using military power, probably unnecessarily.

That was pretty much the point of the book - that the gradual move of warmaking power from the legislature to the executive branch and the move to contracting (and, previously, away from the draft) have drastically lowered the bar for the use of force. She had a couple of good points, and some good recommendations in the afterword.


I watch Rachel a few times a week, and I listened to her Fresh Air interview about the book. I admire that she made the effort to educate herself and call them what they actually are instead of hastily grasping for what is most politically convenient (cough, Skahill, cough). I want to read her book as well. She and I usually aren't on par with regard to foreign policy, but she at least understands what she's talking about and has respect for truth over convenience.

Usually. Sometimes she gets hacky. But she is a cable TV personality as well.
 
2012-09-05 08:31:50 AM  

KiplingKat872: ZipSplat: Yeah, that in no way contradicts my statement, it just provides a blueprint of your ignorance. Yes, in PSD duties, people shoot people to protect their principle (usually a person, cargo, or a vulnerable area). That is not the same thing as the military engaging in offensive operations at the behest of the government to capture territory.

You need to look at those links, they were deployed a combat zones.

I'm sure the British brought in the Hessians "just to protect their supply lines."

Mercenaries are mercenaries. Called them whatever fancy name you want, but in the end they are guns for hire. Get over it.


Their single largest contractor was the State Department, specifically because they wanted their security teams seperate from the military. They didn't want their missions controlled by military brass (historically protecting the State Department fell under the duties of the USMC). They also believed, and still do, that having civillian security teams would be helpful to seperate their image from the more militaristic-looking military (less gear, armor, small trucks instead of humvees, etc).

Unlike most i've worked with PMCs during the height of the "omfg mercenaries!" scare. It's humerous to see these mostly left leaning civil servants, government aid agencies, international NGOs, UN and Nato officials, and hell, even the same journalists printing these mercenary stories, they might disparage blackwater but when they need to drive through a dangerous area they are the first ones to hire them.
 
2012-09-05 08:34:10 AM  

SlothB77: "We do NOT advertise the nature of our work, NOR do we seek recognition for our actions,"

that's left for the politicians to do. though, i will say the WH wasn't shy about coming out and releasing all these supposed details of the raid. None of those details ended up being true, but they sure as hell weren't humble.

Obama is just mad he is about to be Swift Boated by these SEALS. Obama: this is your swift boat moment.


Oh, I'd say he's had plenty of moments already when he's been bombarded by lies about his background. I mean, that's what the swiftboating was all about.

I figure he would have gotten all the crap if things had gone bad; he had to make the call to go into Pakistani terrority; he gets to say he killed bin Laden.
 
2012-09-05 08:34:17 AM  

maram500: This is [another reason ]why Marines > Army. Marines go in first, kick more ass, and have far more respect for the uniform than to wear it off-base.


I have to say I agree with this. We have an ROTC here on campus, and some of these kids swanning around in their fatigues everywhere when they have no freaking clue what it means to be in the real military unit gets on my nerves. I had one in one Global Understanding class (video conferencing with students from universities aroudn the world) and when the instructor asked her for her perspective on Iraq (who were were conferencing with), the student replied, "Oh, I don't pay attention to that stuff. It's too depressing."

I come from a very long line of Army officers, my dad was Navy, my brother Corp, I was *this* close to turning around and boxing her ears.
 
2012-09-05 08:34:19 AM  

KiplingKat872: If you look at the links I provided you will see they are engaging in military operations, not just body guard work.


The FOB on which they are located is under attack. That video is from 2003/2004 timeframe, I remember when it came out.

You don't even have the context in which to understand what you are seeing. You just see people with guns running around shooting alongside the military, so you're assuming that must mean that they're performing the same duty across the spectrum. The contractors either live at or are protecting a principle visiting that FOB, and being that it is under attack they are working alongside the military there to repel the attack.
 
2012-09-05 08:35:10 AM  

ChuDogg: (historically protecting the State Department fell under the duties of the USMC)


Say what? DSS mean anything to you?
 
2012-09-05 08:36:41 AM  
CMYK and PMS: It is Obama's only accomplishment

Sorry, what?

Putting slowly turning the economy around despite constant obstructionism from the GOP,
This is a talking point that just isn't true.

in foriegn policy terms:

He assisted the revolution in Libya without getting us directly involved in a ground war there.
We got involved in a civil war where we don't even know who we were backing. Replacing a government in another country is not our job especially with one that may be worse

He removed most of the troops from Iraq so they could focus on the war in Afghanistan. Pretty much according to the withdrawal plan laid out by Bush

He has kept the tensions with Iran from exploding into war. This is just absurd

He has not kowtowed to Israel. I don't know how this could be viewed as an accomplishment even if it were true

He has took an aggressive military posture toward North Korea when they sank South Korea Navy ship. which has accomplished fark-all

Love it or hate it, he has taken a strong position about eliminating Taliban camps on the Pakistan side. the US has no business going into other countries and blowing things up. If he were a Republican you would view this as a negative

He solidified relations with Japan after the Tsunami by sending the USS Ronald Regan for disaster relief. And no other president ever sent relief to a country in distress. Were our relations with Japan bad? I didn't get that meno

He has at least partially repaired the U.S.'s reputation and standing on the Global Stage Hardly, we are now seen as a country that will murder our own citizens around the world with no trial

To say he has accomplished nothing but the assassination of bin Laden is a lie, simple as that.
 
2012-09-05 08:37:02 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: ChuDogg: (historically protecting the State Department fell under the duties of the USMC)

Say what? DSS mean anything to you?


He might be referring to MSG
 
2012-09-05 08:38:57 AM  

BronyMedic: He taught me a really valuable lesson that I still hold onto today when dealing with people who claim to have been in the "Special Forces" of any branch: The ones that actually were don't brag about it for the most part. They either don't want you to know, or don't like to talk about it.


This. I met/worked with a few SEALs/ex-SEALs during my time in the Navy. If you weren't a member of their team, they wouldn't even tell you what they had for lunch, much less what they'd been doing on ops.
 
2012-09-05 08:39:07 AM  

ZipSplat: You don't even have the context in which to understand what you are seeing. You just see people with guns running around shooting alongside the military, so you're assuming that must mean that they're performing the same duty across the spectrum. The contractors either live at or are protecting a principle visiting that FOB, and being that it is under attack they are working alongside the military there to repel the attack.


Are you going to acknowledge that this was not PSD?

I know full well what I'm looking at: A bunch of guys who are not professional soldiers, who are not working directly for the U.S. government, engaged in military operations. A FOB is NOT a private operation, it is military base.

I'm just not rationalizing the hell out of it.
 
2012-09-05 08:39:46 AM  

Giltric: If only the SEAL had used wikileaks to get the truth out there.......and if only the lying president had been a republican,then we would be praising the SEAL.

The SEAL doesnt have alot going for him....I mean hes not even a homosexual like Manning.


Manning is in prison. Maybe we should stick this traitor in the same cell with him - since their acts are equivalent.
 
2012-09-05 08:40:23 AM  

KiplingKat872: Are you going to acknowledge that this was not PSD?

I know full well what I'm looking at: A bunch of guys who are not professional soldiers, who are not working directly for the U.S. government, engaged in military operations. A FOB is NOT a private operation, it is military base.

I'm just not rationalizing the hell out of it.


No, you have no idea what you're looking at nor how to interpret it. Stay safe.
 
2012-09-05 08:40:39 AM  

ZipSplat: Crotchrocket Slim: Yeah okay sure I believe you internet tough guy.

You're just words on a screen to me, and frankly you post nothing like the military personnel I grew up around would. If you're being honest here sorry for calling you out on being an utter putz who never "got it". I'm guessing you were one of those "mall guard" types mentioned up thread?

No, I was definitely not a mall guard. What did you do? Hopefully you were at least a mall guard, because between you and the original poster I don't think either of you are in a position to inform me about the .mil

In any event, what he posted is inaccurate. The only service with regulations against wearing a utility uniform off base is the Marine Corps, they strongly request that you avoid wearing your uniform off base for anything more than putting gas in your tank to get home - but even for the Marine Corps all other uniforms are fine off base.


I only make grandiose claims about my life experience in jest, whether they are true or not. Your attitude doesn't impress me and in fact flies in the face of every IRL experience I've ever had with a serving or retired service member, Marines included. I never served and I don't make utterly unverifiable claims just to further "sell" my credibility and thus any argument I make. I'd rather just make the argument.

BTW if you bothered to read his post, he wasn't talking about mil regulations, he was talking about military culture. You know, that thing you learn about while actually serving? That thing my uncles who spent the early part of the second Iraq war dodging IEDs while running supplies to front line bases made sure I understood? Even if you served I'm farking glad you aren't now apparently, as you would have been a huge embarrassment to everyone else in that uniform.

You never responded to trotsky about hat color is the boat house in Hereford either. (BTW trots if I weren't opposed to TF on principle I'd sponsor you just for that Ronin reference; one of the most underrated films ever.)
 
2012-09-05 08:40:40 AM  

CMYK and PMS: CMYK and PMS: It is Obama's only accomplishment

Sorry, what?

Putting slowly turning the economy around despite constant obstructionism from the GOP, This is a talking point that just isn't true.

in foriegn policy terms:

He assisted the revolution in Libya without getting us directly involved in a ground war there. We got involved in a civil war where we don't even know who we were backing. Replacing a government in another country is not our job especially with one that may be worse

He removed most of the troops from Iraq so they could focus on the war in Afghanistan. Pretty much according to the withdrawal plan laid out by Bush

He has kept the tensions with Iran from exploding into war. This is just absurd

He has not kowtowed to Israel. I don't know how this could be viewed as an accomplishment even if it were true

He has took an aggressive military posture toward North Korea when they sank South Korea Navy ship. which has accomplished fark-all

Love it or hate it, he has taken a strong position about eliminating Taliban camps on the Pakistan side. the US has no business going into other countries and blowing things up. If he were a Republican you would view this as a negative

He solidified relations with Japan after the Tsunami by sending the USS Ronald Regan for disaster relief. And no other president ever sent relief to a country in distress. Were our relations with Japan bad? I didn't get that meno

He has at least partially repaired the U.S.'s reputation and standing on the Global Stage Hardly, we are now seen as a country that will murder our own citizens around the world with no trial


This is so full of right wing derp spin, I'm not even going to bother.
 
2012-09-05 08:41:40 AM  

ZipSplat: No, you have no idea what you're looking at nor how to interpret it. Stay safe.


Really? According to your own words in the previous post, that is exactly what is happening.
 
2012-09-05 08:43:40 AM  

CMYK and PMS:
He has at least partially repaired the U.S.'s reputation and standing on the Global Stage Hardly, we are now seen as a country that will murder our own citizens around the world with no trial


From where I'm sitting (Western Europe), the US reputation is MUCH better under Obama than it was under Bush.
They don't know all that much about Romney other than 'rich businessman', and at least here the only stuff I've seen about Ryan was about how full of lies his speech was. Just what I've observed here in Holland.
 
2012-09-05 08:43:48 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: BTW if you bothered to read his post, he wasn't talking about mil regulations, he was talking about military culture. You know, that thing you learn about while actually serving? That thing my uncles who spent the early part of the second Iraq war dodging IEDs while running supplies to front line bases made sure I understood? Even if you served I'm farking glad you aren't now apparently, as you would have been a huge embarrassment to everyone else in that uniform.


LOL, kid, go play in traffic. You and KiplingKat are both way outside of your respective elements.
 
2012-09-05 08:44:32 AM  
Well duh, you have a gang of 14 year old FPS addicts in adult bodies. These aren't James Bond style assassins.
 
2012-09-05 08:46:10 AM  

shotglasss: Maybe the guy just wanted to set the record straight. Maybe he just wanted his team to stop being used as a political football.


A "political football" LOL right. We've barely heard of these guys since the raid. Until this guy needed to write a book to restores his "honor" or some damn thing.

More likely that that a member of the precious snowflake generation wasn't able to do his life-changing mission without getting praise and a trophy for it. HE never agreed to keep secrets! How will people ever know what a great guy he is that way??
 
2012-09-05 08:48:01 AM  

EnviroDude: The account by the writer differs from the administrations press release? Color me shocked! ( sarcasm off )


Because a republic*nt administration would have done it better? I don't think so. If I recall right, it was a republic*nt that gave up looking for OBL. Take your whiny ass over to freeperland where it can get some love.
 
2012-09-05 08:48:31 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.


At my very first Drill in the National Guard, before I even reported for Basic, that was given to us verbally as a direct order.

Never wear the uniform unless you are in a paid status (i.e. active duty or drill/annual training), or at a patriotic, ceremonial or military function where it is appropriate. Don't wear the uniform to just be out and about walking around in it, don't wear it to go out deer hunting or mudding in your four-wheeler, don't wear it anywhere you wouldn't want your Commander or First Sergeant to see you wearing it, don't wear it anywhere you wouldn't want it to show up on the front page of the local paper or on the TV news wearing it.

Reviewing AR-670-1 Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia, it states in Section 1-10 (2) j. that "Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian employment.
(2) When participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or public demonstrations, except as authorized by competent authority.
(3) When attending any meeting or event that is a function of, or is sponsored by, an extremist organization.
(4) When wearing the uniform would bring discredit upon the Army.
(5) When specifically prohibited by Army regulations."

The last one is a little funny, since it IS the Army regulation on when not to wear the uniform, but I guess they mean that if it happens to be mentioned to not do it in another regulation, that counts too.
 
2012-09-05 08:51:01 AM  

SlothB77: "We do NOT advertise the nature of our work, NOR do we seek recognition for our actions,"

that's left for the politicians to do. though, i will say the WH wasn't shy about coming out and releasing all these supposed details of the raid. None of those details ended up being true, but they sure as hell weren't humble.

Obama is just mad he is about to be Swift Boated by these SEALS. Obama: this is your swift boat moment.


Really, NONE of the details were true?

So the raid did not take place in Pakistan?
OBL was not really hiding next to the Pakistan Westpoint?
There was no helicopter that had to be left behind?
SEALs didn't actually do it?
They didn't use guns?
There were no animals harmed in the making of the raid?

Since NONE of the details are true, why even allow that OBL was killed. Maybe it is all a big lie to make Obama look better. May as well say that OBL was killed years ago in some bombing raids under Bush, but he was just too cool to be worried over it.
 
2012-09-05 08:51:17 AM  

cryinoutloud: More likely that that a member of the precious snowflake generation wasn't able to do his life-changing mission without getting praise and a trophy for it. HE never agreed to keep secrets! How will people ever know what a great guy he is that way??


Seeing as how this guy was at DEVGRU, he's probably in his late 30's.
 
2012-09-05 08:52:29 AM  
No kidding.

When heroes kill a terrorist, it's supposed to be used a cheesy PR piece for the President, even though he had nothing to do with it, and he was on the 12th hole when it happened.

We don't want to hear from the heroes themselves. Just let Barry take a bow, DAMMIT.

/sorry Spanky, it's #1 on Amazon
 
2012-09-05 08:52:31 AM  

wingnut396: Since NONE of the details are true, why even allow that OBL was killed. Maybe it is all a big lie to make Obama look better. May as well say that OBL was killed years ago in some bombing raids under Bush, but he was just too cool to be worried over it.


This is now fact.
 
2012-09-05 08:53:52 AM  

Silverstaff: At my very first Drill in the National Guard, before I even reported for Basic, that was given to us verbally as a direct order.


By some fat guy who also told you all his war stories? Everyone in the Army wears their ACUs out in public, especially in the National Guard.
 
2012-09-05 08:55:22 AM  
I think there is a real problem with the military right now.

Between General McChrystal's interview in Rolling Stone and the SEALs I think thee is a real sense of betrayal between the Commander in Chief and the military. From their point of view they take all the risk while politicians use them like a centerpiece at thanksgiving and then packed away until the next time they're useful.

It's not good.
 
2012-09-05 09:00:49 AM  

ZipSplat: Crotchrocket Slim: BTW if you bothered to read his post, he wasn't talking about mil regulations, he was talking about military culture. You know, that thing you learn about while actually serving? That thing my uncles who spent the early part of the second Iraq war dodging IEDs while running supplies to front line bases made sure I understood? Even if you served I'm farking glad you aren't now apparently, as you would have been a huge embarrassment to everyone else in that uniform.

LOL, kid, go play in traffic. You and KiplingKat are both way outside of your respective elements.


You are excellent on Farking now get to convincing me you actually aren't just another internet tough guy trying to sound cool.
 
2012-09-05 09:03:35 AM  

Cauchy_Riemann_equations: Between General McChrystal's interview in Rolling Stone and the SEALs I think thee is a real sense of betrayal between the Commander in Chief and the military. From their point of view they take all the risk while politicians use them like a centerpiece at thanksgiving and then packed away until the next time they're useful.


I've been in during both the Bush administration and the Obama administration. I don't think they feel "used", I think that the military is just overwhelmingly Republican, and Republicans for some reason are particularly prone to falling for stupid conspiracy theories and inane political rhetoric.

Seriously. Fox News is on every television in the chow hall. SNCOs listen to Michael Savage in the office. I think it has more to do with the sense that liberals are pussies and conservatives are strongmen than it has to do with any particularly organic sense of disenfranchisement. It's astounding how many people fall for it.

I did a stint in the Guard after I left the Marine Corps and people would gather 'round the TV at the end of the day during drill and watch Glenn Beck wax on about communist conspiracies and presidential racism. If I had turned on a TV during the Bush administration in the Marine Corps and watched Keith Olbermann, I don't think it would have been similarly welcomed.
 
2012-09-05 09:03:43 AM  

ZipSplat: Silverstaff: At my very first Drill in the National Guard, before I even reported for Basic, that was given to us verbally as a direct order.

By some fat guy who also told you all his war stories? Everyone in the Army wears their ACUs out in public, especially in the National Guard.


This has been noted the last few years and is extremely unapreciated as a lack of discipline. Sometimes a young private walking around the mall outside a base risks being approached by a retired Sergeant Major and being cussed out right their in the mall, and might report them to their Chain of Command.

Airforce seems less disciplined about this attitude, and a lot of people see airmen walking around and confuse them for soldiers. National Guard is obviously less enforced since chances are they won't run into anyone that has even served before. It's still problematic. If you see someone check out their name and rank and report them to your State's TAG office, they would like to know.
 
2012-09-05 09:04:36 AM  

Silverstaff: Science_Guy_3.14159: You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

At my very first Drill in the National Guard, before I even reported for Basic, that was given to us verbally as a direct order.

Never wear the uniform unless you are in a paid status (i.e. active duty or drill/annual training), or at a patriotic, ceremonial or military function where it is appropriate. Don't wear the uniform to just be out and about walking around in it, don't wear it to go out deer hunting or mudding in your four-wheeler, don't wear it anywhere you wouldn't want your Commander or First Sergeant to see you wearing it, don't wear it anywhere you wouldn't want it to show up on the front page of the local paper or on the TV news wearing it.

Reviewing AR-670-1 Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia, it states in Section 1-10 (2) j. that "Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian employment.
(2) When participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or public demonstrations, except as authorized by competent authority.
(3) When attending any meeting or event that is a function of, or is sponsored by, an extremist organization.
(4) When wearing the uniform would bring discredit upon the Army.
(5) When specifically prohibited by Army regulations."

The last one is a little funny, since it IS the Army regulation on when not to wear the uniform, but I guess they mean that if it happens to be mentioned to not do it in another regulation, that counts too.


I'm guessing you served in a utterly different Armed Force than Zippy lolz

Watch out an ITG might tell you to stop posting
 
2012-09-05 09:06:13 AM  

dersk: CMYK and PMS:
He has at least partially repaired the U.S.'s reputation and standing on the Global Stage Hardly, we are now seen as a country that will murder our own citizens around the world with no trial


From where I'm sitting (Western Europe), the US reputation is MUCH better under Obama than it was under Bush.
They don't know all that much about Romney other than 'rich businessman', and at least here the only stuff I've seen about Ryan was about how full of lies his speech was. Just what I've observed here in Holland.



Funny how four years ago, the GOP hyper focused on terrorism and warned everyone that it was the #1 threat to America but somehow it was barely even worth a mention from Romney last week. George W. Bush correctly coined the term Global War On Terrorism and then went out of his way to piss off the other nations on this globe that would have otherwise gladly helped us, not to mention the colossal mistake of squandering our international goodwill on Iraq. By the end not only did forgotten Poland tell us to forget about it, but even the Brits abandoned us to that trillion+ dollar folly.
 
2012-09-05 09:09:29 AM  

ChuDogg: Airforce seems less disciplined about this attitude, and a lot of people see airmen walking around and confuse them for soldiers. National Guard is obviously less enforced since chances are they won't run into anyone that has even served before. It's still problematic. If you see someone check out their name and rank and report them to your State's TAG office, they would like to know.


The National Guard was shiat. Worst decision I ever made. Those lazy, fat pieces of shiat - I couldn't believe the stuff that went on there. Contrasted with the Marine Corps I don't even consider them to be part of the military.

Our capital newspaper has an entire page devoted to the scandals spilling out of our National Guard. My favorite: Our last CG, who joined the Guard during Vietnam to dodge the draft, got caught double-dipping on federal and state pay. He was cashing two checks for his pay grade. And the two CGs before him were doing it too.

Unlike Texas when they had the same issue arise with two of their generals, we didn't send ours to prison. They just recouped a small portion of what he had stolen and let him retire.
 
2012-09-05 09:13:21 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: I'm guessing you served in a utterly different Armed Force than Zippy lolz


Or he's a boot, lolz.
 
2012-09-05 09:14:02 AM  
my cousin (RIP) was on Team 6
he shared a few wild stories about 'training techniques' when he'd been drinking

/good kid
//and a bit scary
 
2012-09-05 09:14:06 AM  

trotsky: I've seen stuff like this all over sites like Facebook and it's sickening that these shiatbags can twist a success into a partisan issue. What pisses me off the most is the use of "SEALS" who try to refute what happened and try to say Obama is taking all the credit. "SEALS" that haven't served in decades. "SEALS" who happen to be GOP shills.


Swift boating. Popular Republican tactic. See also John Kerry, 2004.

Take the military accomplishments of a Democrat. Either in uniform, or as Commander In Chief, have retired/former servicemembers who were in a related unit to the accomplishment insult the accomplishment and cast doubts on the heroism, leadership or achievement involved.

Doesn't matter if the allegations are true or can be substantiated at all, FOX News will trumpet them constantly and create enough of a media stink that the allegations will be reprinted in other media, even if to just cover the controversy. The fact allegations exist alone will make some people think they are true. It creates doubt.

That's what they are looking for, doubt and the specter of impropriety.
 
2012-09-05 09:18:13 AM  

BronyMedic: He taught me a really valuable lesson that I still hold onto today when dealing with people who claim to have been in the "Special Forces" of any branch: The ones that actually were don't brag about it for the most part. They either don't want you to know, or don't like to talk about it.


Frankly, I haven't really observed that to be the case. I've known a good number of current and ex special forces guys of various kinds (mostly Army, as I am myself ex Army). They pretty much all mention it regularly, and I don't think I've ever met one that doesn't have his medals and beret or other sign of office prominently displayed somewhere in there home. They might not be spouting off classified stuff right left and center, but they aren't that shy about it and will give you stories that are kind of hazy on details. Which is cool, as I'm not one to let details like dates, times, locations and that kind of thing get in the way of a good story.
 
2012-09-05 09:19:20 AM  

KiplingKat872: CMYK and PMS: It is Obama's only accomplishment

Sorry, what?

Putting slowly turning the economy around despite constant obstructionism from the GOP, in foriegn policy terms:

He assisted the revolution in Libya without getting us directly involved in a ground war there.

He removed most of the troops from Iraq so they could focus on the war in Afghanistan.

He has kept the tensions with Iran from exploding into war.

He has not kowtowed to Israel.

He has took an aggressive military posture toward North Korea when they sank South Korea Navy ship.

Love it or hate it, he has taken a strong position about eliminating Taliban camps on the Pakistan side.

He solidified relations with Japan after the Tsunami by sending the USS Ronald Regan for disaster relief.

He has at least partially repaired the U.S.'s reputation and standing on the Global Stage

To say he has accomplished nothing but the assassination of bin Laden is a lie, simple as that.




Only. Accomplishment.
 
2012-09-05 09:21:59 AM  

maram500: Ivandrago: maram500: Science_Guy_3.14159: The Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Department tells the NAVY SEALS to show more discretion and be more humble... also not to brake the law and leak classified information. I don't see the problem with this. You do know every branch of the military has an unwritten rule that you can't wear your uniform if you aren't on base or on active duty, except at special events like parades, weddings and funerals. I think for the Marines this is an actual law they have to follow.

Believe it or not most military people, enlisted men and officers, are quite humble and disciplined and get quite upset when they see another soldier that isn't.

That's actually a written rule for the Marine Corps and the Navy. And I've tried making sense of the "Order of the Day" and what uniform can be worn when and where and...I had to drink. Too much regulation for a uniform, I think.

/Almost joined the Navy
//Would have gone to OCS
///Probably would be an O-3 by now
////Oh well

In the Army we wore our duty uniform all over town. When I lived with my sister, who was a Marine, she was always very annoyed that she couldn't stop off at the grocery store near her house after work because she wasn't allowed to do things off base in her uniform. She babbled something about respecting the uniform and ensuring civilians didn't see them doing anything improper while wearing it. Seemed silly to me, especially in a military town.

This is [another reason ]why Marines > Army. Marines go in first, kick more ass, and have far more respect for the uniform than to wear it off-base.

/One of my best friends is a Marine
//Lost his knee in Iraq
///A hero to me
////Not every person in uniform is automatically a hero, but thanks to you and your sister for serving


Your thanks are appreciated.
But as someone who is related to Marines, and has worked with Marines, and will admit to a certain amount of inter service rivalry, this business about the Marines kicking more ass gets old.
I'm sorry, but they don't go in first and they are not America's shock troops (damn you Generation Kill). They go in at the same time as all other conventional forces. Marine Infantry are no better at stacking and clearing and movement to contact than Army Infantry. Marines are better marksmen, true, as long as it's a known distance range, and they are in the prone shooting at stationary targets. In my experience (2 deployments to Iraq) I never fired a single shot at 500 yards from the prone at a stationary target. With respect for the uniform, making your Marines' lives harder by not allowing them to perform simple functions does not engender more respect for the uniform, it's annoying. Let's say I go to the commissary to buy food for dinner. I'm having sandwiches. I buy everything but the bread. I realize this on the way home but I can't stop at the grocery store across the street from my house because I'm in uniform. MRE's for dinner! That's a slight exaggeration. My sister mentioned that if you wear your uniform around, people ask you about it, and maybe people will be interested in what you do and maybe they'll join because they see how awesome you look in your uniform. If you want to know what most Marines think about the silly rules they have to abide by read terminallance.com (it's the best military webcomic), some of it might go over your head because you didn't serve in the Infantry (no dig, just a fact) but you'll see all the BS they have to put up with and how it doesn't make their lives any better, nor make them a more elite fighting force.

/end (slight) rant
 
2012-09-05 09:22:20 AM  
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-09-05 09:28:01 AM  

vartian: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard does an insane amount of dangerous shiat on a near daily basis.


No doubt. The Coasties have been at war with the drug cartels for decades. And to put that in perspective: The drug cartels cut off WAY more heads than Al Qaida.
 
2012-09-05 09:31:23 AM  

ZipSplat: Crotchrocket Slim: I'm guessing you served in a utterly different Armed Force than Zippy lolz

Or he's a boot, lolz.


*sigh*

Back in my uncles' days serving the uniform meant something. Thanks to twatwaffles like you it's now a tool to get laid in bars. Real awesome.
 
2012-09-05 09:33:57 AM  

KiplingKat872: He solidified relations with Japan after the Tsunami by sending the USS Ronald Regan for disaster relief.


Isn't there just a little bit of irony in sending the USS Ronald Reagan to make the statement "I'm from the US government, and I'm here to help"?
 
2012-09-05 09:36:26 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: I'm guessing you served in a utterly different Armed Force than Zippy lolz


Honestly, I've seen his type in the Guard over the years. The "Angry Marine" type, who when finished with their active-duty time went to the National Guard and spent that entire time constantly whining and biatching about how "we wouldn't put up with this bullshiat in the Corps" or "the Marines weren't like this".

I remember asking one of these types why he didn't just go to the USMC Reserve instead of the Guard when his active time was up, his answer was "they pissed me off." Marines are trained to think they are inherently better, their way is inherently better, and they are a superior and elite force. They have good publicity and good esprit de corps.

However, outside that USMC bubble, the rest of the DOD just treats them as another service, not superior, just equals. They hate that, hate it with a passion.

By the way, ZipSplat, I'm no boot. I've been in a few years, got a few ribbons on my chest and a hash mark on my sleeve. No, I haven't deployed overseas yet. I've spent more than half my time in the Guard on various homeland security related active-duty assignments stateside. I'm scheduled to go to Afghanistan next year, as part of the final rotations before combat operations end. My unit was supposed to go to Iraq, but that deployment got cancelled when the war ended.

Yeah, I've seen shiatbag Guardsmen who did their one enlistment and left, but the system corrects itself, and they don't re-enlist (or can't because they can't pass a PT test) and don't get promoted. However, for every shiatbag out there I've seen just waiting until his ETS date, I've seen at least two Guardsmen who would fit in fine on any active duty post (and lately we've been getting a lot of active duty soldiers coming to the Guard after being released from Active duty due to the drawdown).
 
2012-09-05 09:37:24 AM  

BullBearMS: alienated: BullBearMS: All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.

well, duh. What could we have done ? I mean, besides making a stain on the walls out of him. Could we, even as a nation ruled by law, had a trial ? I am not being facetious here.I see no other solution except his summary execution. armed or not is immaterial at this point. Laden was a cancer and needed to be excised . By any and all means at our disposal. Cold ? yep. I would have done the same to McViegh, given the chance.

I'm of two minds on this one.

Obviously, the most convenient outcome for us was that he be killed instead of captured.

However, England, Spain, and India somehow managed to give public trials in a court of law to the people behind their recent terrorist attacks. I'm pretty sure if they can manage it, we can too. We're supposed to be all about the rule of law here in America.


The Difference is, the attackers in Britian and India were citizens of those countries who actually carried out the attacks. Osama was a foriegn national who effectively declared war on the US and was the active head of a military organization planning further attacks. That makes him a military target, not a civilian lawbreaker
 
2012-09-05 09:38:40 AM  

CMYK and PMS: KiplingKat872: Love it or hate it, he has taken a strong position about eliminating Taliban camps on the Pakistan side.

the US has no business going into other countries and blowing things up.


CMYK and PMS wishes OBL was still alive. We had no business going into Pakistan, after all...
 
2012-09-05 09:42:16 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Yes it's a great thing that Obama gave the order to go in and take Bin Laden out but the language a lot of people used was and is dangerous. When people say "Obama killed Bin Laden" that kind of takes away from what those guys did. I'm just saying, maybe people are more upset about what he said regarding that?


It sounds like you're trying to make an argument that some people actually might think that Obama went in there personally and killed Osama. I don't know what kind of stupid people you hang out with, but no one I know would make that mistake, no matter how it was worded.


ZipSplat: cryinoutloud: More likely that that a member of the precious snowflake generation wasn't able to do his life-changing mission without getting praise and a trophy for it. HE never agreed to keep secrets! How will people ever know what a great guy he is that way??
Seeing as how this guy was at DEVGRU, he's probably in his late 30's.


well I take it all back then. After all, a full-grown MAN would never want to be praised for their accomplishments. He did this purely for "honor." Why, not even HIS honor. He's just worried about, you know, honor in general. We need more honor. And how lucky are we that this brave man is right here to set us straight about what true honor is? It's all explained in that book he wrote, and you too can read it and find out about true honor. Just pay him.
 
2012-09-05 09:44:21 AM  
I just told the Commander to STFU.
Who's the bad ass now.
 
2012-09-05 09:44:50 AM  

vartian: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard does an insane amount of dangerous shiat on a near daily basis.


Could you be a little more vague, please?

/Fark details... amirite?
 
2012-09-05 09:45:23 AM  

Ivandrago: Marine Infantry are no better at stacking and clearing and movement to contact than Army Infantry.


I'm with you completely except for this line. I've seen some terrible National Guard* units, and I'd have to give the Marines the advantage there. I doubt that the shiattiest Marine grunts are half as bad as the shiattiest grunts in the Army. As a whole, though, I agree that there doesn't seem to be a significant difference between Marines and "real" Army infantry. The Marines just keep their POGs in much better shape than the Army does.

*Reserve units, too, but those are never combat arms
 
2012-09-05 09:46:57 AM  

cryinoutloud: It sounds like you're trying to make an argument that some people actually might think that Obama went in there personally and killed Osama. I don't know what kind of stupid people you hang out with, but no one I know would make that mistake, no matter how it was worded.


cosplay.paheal.net
Nope. I have proof.
 
2012-09-05 09:47:18 AM  

Magorn: The Difference is, the attackers in Britian and India were citizens of those countries who actually carried out the attacks. Osama was a foriegn national who effectively declared war on the US and was the active head of a military organization planning further attacks. That makes him a military target, not a civilian lawbreaker


I'm pretty sure that several of the Mumbai attackers were Pakistani; at the very least they received a *lot* of support from the ISI. And one of the London bombers was Jamaican.

I think we Americans are just kind of cowardly. I much rather would've seen bin Laden and all the rest on trial than killed or indefinitely detained. I mean, we're trying to show that our system is superior, right?
 
2012-09-05 09:47:19 AM  

ZipSplat: Silverstaff: At my very first Drill in the National Guard, before I even reported for Basic, that was given to us verbally as a direct order.

By some fat guy who also told you all his war stories? Everyone in the Army wears their ACUs out in public, especially in the National Guard.


I believe depending on the military branch this is also at the discretion of the base commander, along with many other things. There might be some officers that are a lot less strict then others however overall I am quite sure it is not accepted.
 
2012-09-05 09:49:35 AM  

cryinoutloud: It sounds like you're trying to make an argument that some people actually might think that Obama went in there personally and killed Osama. I don't know what kind of stupid people you hang out with, but no one I know would make that mistake, no matter how it was worded.


Marylanders. He hangs out with Marylanders, and Frednecks, specifically. So it isn't his fault.
 
2012-09-05 09:53:34 AM  

Silverstaff: Crotchrocket Slim: I'm guessing you served in a utterly different Armed Force than Zippy lolz

Honestly, I've seen his type in the Guard over the years. The "Angry Marine" type, who when finished with their active-duty time went to the National Guard and spent that entire time constantly whining and biatching about how "we wouldn't put up with this bullshiat in the Corps" or "the Marines weren't like this".

I remember asking one of these types why he didn't just go to the USMC Reserve instead of the Guard when his active time was up, his answer was "they pissed me off."


Do you find "they pissed me off" to really mean "I couldn't rise up through the ranks as I'm not at all a team player and a bit of a whiner"? Generally speaking that what I usually read that as.
 
2012-09-05 09:53:43 AM  
damn right I agree with this.
 
2012-09-05 09:54:44 AM  

ZipSplat: The National Guard was shiat. Worst decision I ever made. Those lazy, fat pieces of shiat - I couldn't believe the stuff that went on there. Contrasted with the Marine Corps I don't even consider them to be part of the military.


They aren't supposed to be the military.
 
2012-09-05 10:00:44 AM  
The Bush administration is responsible for post-9/11 leadership that sent a message that following rule of law would be seen as weakness and that strong leaders break supposedly obsolete rules to get results. Unfortunately this is what lot of the American people believe too. Obama possibly could have insisted on closing Gitmo and having normal trials but it would have cost him all his political capital and he'd have got nothing else done. Now we're stuck with this precedent. If there is another incident of the magnitude of 9/11 the exact same shiat will happen again. It's policy. We WILL break our own laws when we respond. We WILL retroactively make whatever we do legal and punish no one.
 
2012-09-05 10:03:21 AM  

Crotchrocket Slim: Do you find "they pissed me off" to really mean "I couldn't rise up through the ranks as I'm not at all a team player and a bit of a whiner"? Generally speaking that what I usually read that as.


**DING!**
 
2012-09-05 10:13:16 AM  

dersk: I think we Americans are just kind of cowardly. I much rather would've seen bin Laden and all the rest on trial than killed or indefinitely detained. I mean, we're trying to show that our system is superior, right


That is pretty ballsy.

I am guessing you have plenty of experience in taking people alive who would rather go down fighting, and in ordering peopel to do so, right?
 
2012-09-05 10:13:44 AM  

BullBearMS: Well, as we have seen going way back to Nixon's pardon and all the way up to Obama' refusal to prosecute those guilty of torture (even when the people we tortured freaking died of it), neither of the two parties is interested in the rule of law anymore.

We need another option.


Another option would split the vote of one of the existing options leading to an hegemony for the other.
 
2012-09-05 10:15:07 AM  

BullBearMS: The major reason for political butthurt over this book seems to be that this guy says the mission was a lot more about kill than about "kill or capture".

"No Easy Day," the new pseudonymous book revealed to be by Navy SEAL Mark Bissonnette, claims that Osama bin Laden was unarmed when shot at his Abbottabad compound last May. That's another key discrepancy in a story that's already changed several times since the initial days after Obama, to much acclaim, announced the killing of the Al Qaeda leader.

If you remember, the initial story was that when Bin Laden was shot, he was firing weapons while hiding behind one of his wives who he used as a human shield.


I read the book last night, and I think in context they went in with kill or capture, but a few things made them switch to just kill mode.

1. Chalk 1(the blackhawk the author rode on to UBL compound) crashed
2. The courier in the guest house opened fire.

After that, everyone in the compound knew that there was armed forces there. So I have no issue with them talk little to no chances. If UBL(SEALs used the CIA spelling Usama) wanted to surrender, he could have. But he didn't, and I don't fault the SEALs for not giving him more than one chance to surrender.

However, I did pick up some things that I need not know. Like how they mark rooms they have cleared with infrared chem lights. Or about how reliant they are on NVGs. They use IR lasers because they assume the other side isn't using NVG at all. If I was an insurgent, I would pick up a cheap sony handy cam, and if you see a bunch of ir beans moving around, you know where the SEALs are.
 
2012-09-05 10:15:28 AM  
Maybe the SEALS are a little pissed that Obama has been using the killing as a political tool and trying to take all the credit.
 
2012-09-05 10:17:58 AM  

dersk: Magorn: The Difference is, the attackers in Britian and India were citizens of those countries who actually carried out the attacks. Osama was a foriegn national who effectively declared war on the US and was the active head of a military organization planning further attacks. That makes him a military target, not a civilian lawbreaker

I'm pretty sure that several of the Mumbai attackers were Pakistani; at the very least they received a *lot* of support from the ISI. And one of the London bombers was Jamaican.

I think we Americans are just kind of cowardly. I much rather would've seen bin Laden and all the rest on trial than killed or indefinitely detained. I mean, we're trying to show that our system is superior, right?


I dunno. I think trying to put UBL on trial would have lead to more terrorism. Look at Munich, when terrorists took hostages to get the members of black September released. I bet Al Qaeda would have done something similar.
 
2012-09-05 10:18:06 AM  

Publikwerks: However, I did pick up some things that I need not know. Like how they mark rooms they have cleared with infrared chem lights. Or about how reliant they are on NVGs. They use IR lasers because they assume the other side isn't using NVG at all. If I was an insurgent, I would pick up a cheap sony handy cam, and if you see a bunch of ir beans moving around, you know where the SEALs are.


got me through Arkham city.
 
2012-09-05 10:19:49 AM  

liam76: dersk: I think we Americans are just kind of cowardly. I much rather would've seen bin Laden and all the rest on trial than killed or indefinitely detained. I mean, we're trying to show that our system is superior, right

That is pretty ballsy.

I am guessing you have plenty of experience in taking people alive who would rather go down fighting, and in ordering peopel to do so, right?


What's that got to do with whether or not we try people? With bin Laden, sure - we didn't know exactly what to expect inside the compound, so it's understandable to shoot first . I was thinking more of the Gitmo detainees.
 
2012-09-05 10:20:06 AM  
Flynavy steps in - rearranges his medals and steps out......
 
2012-09-05 10:20:54 AM  

BGates: Maybe the SEALS are a little pissed that Obama has been using the killing as a political tool and trying to take all the credit.


Really, how has Obama done that?

Please, link to a source where Obama said "I did it"

Ever time I have heard Obama talk about it, he ALLWAYS mentions the heorics of the SEALs and the tireless work of the intellegence agents who tracked him down.

Even the author of the book says Obama didn't take all the credit
 
2012-09-05 10:24:10 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: Follow-Up?

Needs a damned HERO tag.


How about an 'Act of Valor" tag?

upload.wikimedia.org

Be sure to stay quiet SEALs.
 
2012-09-05 10:25:17 AM  

Publikwerks: Really, how has Obama done that?

Please, link to a source where Obama said "I did it"

Ever time I have heard Obama talk about it, he ALLWAYS mentions the heorics of the SEALs and the tireless work of the intellegence agents who tracked him down.

Even the author of the book says Obama didn't take all the credit



I concur. The death of Bin Laden probably didn't do a whole lot operationally, but it was a huge symbolic coup. It makes the point that we will hunt you down and kill you, no matter how ridiculous it gets if you piss us off enough. A president would have to be nuts not to crow a little about it.
 
2012-09-05 10:26:54 AM  

Publikwerks:
I dunno. I think trying to put UBL on trial would have lead to more terrorism. Look at Munich, when terrorists took hostages to get the members of black September released. I bet Al Qaeda would have done something similar.


I imagine so - but I think al Qaeda's pretty much droned out at this point. It'd probably be one offs, but still - so what? We shouldn't act like America because there might be a terrorist attack? Personally, I'd be happy to triple the chances that I die as a civilian in a terrorist attack in order to maintain America.
 
2012-09-05 10:29:33 AM  

dersk: liam76: dersk: I think we Americans are just kind of cowardly. I much rather would've seen bin Laden and all the rest on trial than killed or indefinitely detained. I mean, we're trying to show that our system is superior, right

That is pretty ballsy.

I am guessing you have plenty of experience in taking people alive who would rather go down fighting, and in ordering peopel to do so, right?

What's that got to do with whether or not we try people? With bin Laden, sure - we didn't know exactly what to expect inside the compound, so it's understandable to shoot first . I was thinking more of the Gitmo detainees.


Well now you are saying, "With bin Laden, sure" but that wasn't what you intitially said.

I agree once we have them we should try them, but I have no problem with drone strkies or the like to take out "the rest".
 
2012-09-05 10:29:34 AM  

Speaker2Animals: WTF are you blubbering about? OK, so there were differences in the reports about exactly what happened. Have you ever in your life managed to read and understand a single word of a book about military history? In case they're beyond your comprehension, here's a little cheat sheet: "Early battlefield reports sometimes are inaccurate and subject to later revision. Rinse and repeat a million times throughout recorded history."


Uh, they were watching it live. You don't think things might have improved a bit in that regard.
 
2012-09-05 10:29:46 AM  

ChuDogg: Unlike most i've worked with PMCs during the height of the "omfg mercenaries!" scare. It's humerous to see these mostly left leaning civil servants, government aid agencies, international NGOs, UN and Nato officials, and hell, even the same journalists printing these mercenary stories, they might disparage blackwater but when they need to drive through a dangerous area they are the first ones to hire them.


That's the nut of it, isn't it?
The fact that policy has brought us to the place where in order to execute it we have to do the wrong thing should be enough to change that policy. If it's so dangerous to drive around that you need a cordon of mercenaries to protect you, you're doing it wrong.
 
2012-09-05 10:34:58 AM  

fusillade762: Mentat: That swift boat sure ran aground, didn't it?

I'm getting a whiff of an election season hit piece myself. Though of course it could simply be an attention whoring money grab.


Why can't be both. Two birds and all...,
 
2012-09-05 10:35:47 AM  

liam76: dersk: liam76: dersk: I think we Americans are just kind of cowardly. I much rather would've seen bin Laden and all the rest on trial than killed or indefinitely detained. I mean, we're trying to show that our system is superior, right

That is pretty ballsy.

I am guessing you have plenty of experience in taking people alive who would rather go down fighting, and in ordering peopel to do so, right?

What's that got to do with whether or not we try people? With bin Laden, sure - we didn't know exactly what to expect inside the compound, so it's understandable to shoot first . I was thinking more of the Gitmo detainees.

Well now you are saying, "With bin Laden, sure" but that wasn't what you intitially said.

I agree once we have them we should try them, but I have no problem with drone strkies or the like to take out "the rest".


I thought I said with bin Laden that 'I would have preferred' - and he is a special case. I sure hope - but don't really expect - that we've been more carefully vetting people we kill than the people we toss into Gitmo. There sure seem to be a lot of false positives there.
 
2012-09-05 10:36:04 AM  
I'd like to make a point that has been obvious to me for many years but seems to be missed by many fine American citizens. Any and all information released by military sources has been adjusted to meet the needs of the military. It's called propaganda. In this Bin Laden case, it was mostly doctored to make OSB look like an ahole to his constituancy. This was an attempt to prevent OSB from becoming a cause for more terrorism against the United States.

The Pat Tillman friendly fire case was an episode of military propaganda coverup designed to hide a very tragic friendly fire death and, at the same time, produce an American war hero to shore up support from American citizens. Both were useful goals for the military.

If we are going to roast Obama for the misinformation campaign surrounding the death of OSB, perhaps we should retroactively roast W for the Tillman affair. Personally, I'm very happy OSB is no longer with us. Pat Tillman's death was a terrible tragedy but it has led to efforts to reduce friendly fire episodes.
 
2012-09-05 10:36:04 AM  

dersk: From where I'm sitting (Western Europe), the US reputation is MUCH better under Obama than it was under Bush.
They don't know all that much about Romney other than 'rich businessman', and at least here the only stuff I've seen about Ryan was about how full of lies his speech was. Just what I've observed here in Holland.


Obiwan duped the pants off Europe.
 
2012-09-05 10:37:26 AM  

trappedspirit: Uh, they were watching it live. You don't think things might have improved a bit in that regard.


as insane as that it is, it is still worthwhile to take a few hours to sort through what happened. Early assessments are inevitably flawed.
 
2012-09-05 10:42:23 AM  

dersk: Publikwerks:
I dunno. I think trying to put UBL on trial would have lead to more terrorism. Look at Munich, when terrorists took hostages to get the members of black September released. I bet Al Qaeda would have done something similar.

I imagine so - but I think al Qaeda's pretty much droned out at this point. It'd probably be one offs, but still - so what? We shouldn't act like America because there might be a terrorist attack? Personally, I'd be happy to triple the chances that I die as a civilian in a terrorist attack in order to maintain America.


Well, first off - I think it was a good kill. I think, as I said above, at that part of the raid, their cover was blown and they had taken fire. At that point, I have no issue with taking no chances.

Secondly, this was in another country with someone we were at war with. He was an enemy combatant, and made no effort to surrender. So a different set of rules apply. Had this been in the United States or if he surrendered, and still got shot, that would be one thing. But war has different rules, and just like a German poking his head out of a trench and get shot in WWI, Bin Ladin stuck his head out of a doorway, and the SEALs reacted.
 
2012-09-05 10:44:40 AM  

fireclown: trappedspirit: Uh, they were watching it live. You don't think things might have improved a bit in that regard.

as insane as that it is, it is still worthwhile to take a few hours to sort through what happened. Early assessments are inevitably flawed.


According to the book, they were watching footage from a drone, and it wasn't very good(The Chalk 1 blackhawk crashed, but apparently, they thought it landed in DC because the footage was grainy)
 
2012-09-05 10:50:08 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: dersk: From where I'm sitting (Western Europe), the US reputation is MUCH better under Obama than it was under Bush.
They don't know all that much about Romney other than 'rich businessman', and at least here the only stuff I've seen about Ryan was about how full of lies his speech was. Just what I've observed here in Holland.

Obiwan duped the pants off Europe.


Maybe people are just smarter and more perceptive here.
 
2012-09-05 10:50:21 AM  

dersk: We shouldn't act like America because there might be a terrorist attack?


Hrm, "act like America".

I rather imagine people might be led to think that could mean a lot of different things- depending on who you were and what you think "America" is exactly.

That said, I was pretty disappointed with the lot that was suggesting we not rebuild the WTC because of potential future terrorism. I was totally supportive of not just rebuilding it, but building it taller, and erecting four other bouldings in the immediate vicinity that would have produced what I like to call the "Bird of Freedom" salute to anyone coming in from off the coast.
 
2012-09-05 10:54:27 AM  

SkunkWerks: dersk: We shouldn't act like America because there might be a terrorist attack?

Hrm, "act like America".

I rather imagine people might be led to think that could mean a lot of different things- depending on who you were and what you think "America" is exactly.


True, but you know what I mean. The America we pretend to be about - rule of law, due process, freedoms, ad nauseum.
 
2012-09-05 10:56:13 AM  

dersk: Maybe people are just smarter and more perceptive here.


Nah. I've spent enough time in Europe to know better.
 
2012-09-05 11:03:02 AM  

SkunkWerks: That said, I was pretty disappointed with the lot that was suggesting we not rebuild the WTC because of potential future terrorism. I was totally supportive of not just rebuilding it, but building it taller, and erecting four other bouldings in the immediate vicinity that would have produced what I like to call the "Bird of Freedom" salute to anyone coming in from off the coast.


I wanted them to rebuild it EXACTLY as it was. Ok, make improvements and apply leasons learned. But at the end of the day, when people looked at the NY skyline, I wanted them to see the twin towers, standing defiantly.
 
2012-09-05 11:03:22 AM  

impaler: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.

Way to shat on our servicemen, Republican scum.

[www.uscg.mil image 560x315]
Link


THIS. My grandfather, a WWII combat verteran, could never figure out how the GOP managed to snag the position of party-of-the-troops/military given how often their actual opinion of the troops is exposed. The Purple Heart bandaids at the 2004 convention were so offensive to me that I can fully imagine never voting Republican again in my life because of it.
 
2012-09-05 11:09:08 AM  

fireclown: dersk: Maybe people are just smarter and more perceptive here.

Nah. I've spent enough time in Europe to know better.


Well, there is a lot less nationalistic derp here, but I think specifically:
- They prefer Obama to Bush because Obama seems like someone you can work with to solve a problem
- They perceive Obama to be more financially responsible than the Republicans
- They wonder why the hell it took us so long to put in place health care, even in its crippled state, and think the conservative response to it is insane
- They don't think Obama is as likely to drag the rest of the Western world into a war as Bush was, and as Romney's perceived to be in the case of Iran
- They're fairly horrified by the Republican attitude towards gays

So I don't think it has to do very much with being duped; did you have anything particular in mind?
 
2012-09-05 11:10:31 AM  

dersk: HotIgneous Intruder: dersk: From where I'm sitting (Western Europe), the US reputation is MUCH better under Obama than it was under Bush.
They don't know all that much about Romney other than 'rich businessman', and at least here the only stuff I've seen about Ryan was about how full of lies his speech was. Just what I've observed here in Holland.

Obiwan duped the pants off Europe.

Maybe people are just smarter and more perceptive here.


Yeah. I voted for him once. Never again.
I lived in Germany for eight years, so no, it's not that.
 
2012-09-05 11:16:18 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: dersk: HotIgneous Intruder: dersk: From where I'm sitting (Western Europe), the US reputation is MUCH better under Obama than it was under Bush.
They don't know all that much about Romney other than 'rich businessman', and at least here the only stuff I've seen about Ryan was about how full of lies his speech was. Just what I've observed here in Holland.

Obiwan duped the pants off Europe.

Maybe people are just smarter and more perceptive here.

Yeah. I voted for him once. Never again.
I lived in Germany for eight years, so no, it's not that.


The density of Deutsche rednecks is pretty shocking.
 
2012-09-05 11:26:20 AM  

dersk: So I don't think it has to do very much with being duped; did you have anything particular in mind?


Obama has governed measurably to the right of Richard Nixon.
His geopolitik is effectively no different from Bush II, as the fun continues in southwest Asia, Gitmo parties on, eavesdropping and domestic intelligence collection continues unabated (link here), Homeland security parties on, the war on drugs continues to feed the prison-industrial complex humans.
His social rhetoric is hopeful and sounds very liberal, but he has done nothing differently with respect to the banking system or Wall Street's systematic robbery of American wealth. Hey, it's not illegal, right?
His attorney general has supplied weapons to Mexican drug cartels and clamped down on whistle blowers (see link above) much more aggressively than Bush II ever did.
He walks like a liberal and quacks like a liberal, but he acts like a neoliberal of the Chicago School; therefore nothing has changed here in the states for anyone from the upper middle class on down. Wages are still eroding, inflation has been adjusted so as not to be apparent, and unemployment is down because so many people have just quit looking for work.
The United States is a labor camp of debt service built on a service economy.
And the lame Obamacare health insurance thing? Heh. Don't get sick or stung by a scorpion, is all I can say about that.

People don't think Rmoney can win, but I think he can, simply because Obama has been such a weak president, probably the weakest in my lifetime, and Citizen's United effectively put a knife in the neck of what credibility the electoral system ever had. You would not believe the density of the negative anti-Obama ads on the airwaves here. And that shiat works and it will work and this is only September.
 
2012-09-05 11:28:01 AM  

dersk: HotIgneous Intruder: dersk: HotIgneous Intruder: dersk: From where I'm sitting (Western Europe), the US reputation is MUCH better under Obama than it was under Bush.
They don't know all that much about Romney other than 'rich businessman', and at least here the only stuff I've seen about Ryan was about how full of lies his speech was. Just what I've observed here in Holland.

Obiwan duped the pants off Europe.

Maybe people are just smarter and more perceptive here.

Yeah. I voted for him once. Never again.
I lived in Germany for eight years, so no, it's not that.

The density of Deutsche rednecks is pretty shocking.


True enough.
 
2012-09-05 11:29:04 AM  

Cauchy_Riemann_equations: I think there is a real problem with the military right now.

Between General McChrystal's interview in Rolling Stone and the SEALs I think thee is a real sense of betrayal between the Commander in Chief and the military. From their point of view they take all the risk while politicians use them like a centerpiece at thanksgiving and then packed away until the next time they're useful.

It's not good.


No, it's exactly how it should be. That's why roles and payscales have been very exactly defined. People are free in that as well.
 
2012-09-05 11:34:55 AM  
HotIgneous Intruder
Obama has governed measurably to the right of Richard Nixon.
His geopolitik is effectively no different from Bush II, as the fun continues in southwest Asia, Gitmo parties on, eavesdropping and domestic intelligence collection continues unabated (link here), Homeland security parties on, the war on drugs continues to feed the prison-industrial complex humans.
His social rhetoric is hopeful and sounds very liberal, but he has done nothing differently with respect to the banking system or Wall Street's systematic robbery of American wealth. Hey, it's not illegal, right?
His attorney general has supplied weapons to Mexican drug cartels and clamped down on whistle blowers (see link above) much more aggressively than Bush II ever did.
He walks like a liberal and quacks like a liberal, but he acts like a neoliberal of the Chicago School; therefore nothing has changed here in the states for anyone from the upper middle class on down. Wages are still eroding, inflation has been adjusted so as not to be apparent, and unemployment is down because so many people have just quit looking for work.
The United States is a labor camp of debt service built on a service economy.
And the lame Obamacare health insurance thing? Heh. Don't get sick or stung by a scorpion, is all I can say about that.


It sure will be awesome when Romney gets into office and fixes all those things that Obama screwed up, won't it. I've been reading all Romney's policy plans about how he's going to do this. What? Romney doesn't have any plans about anything..........we're supposed to just trust him? Trust Mitt Romney? Are you shiatting me?
 
2012-09-05 11:37:46 AM  

pissnmoan: It sure will be awesome when Romney gets into office and fixes all those things that Obama screwed up, won't it. I've been reading all Romney's policy plans about how he's going to do this. What? Romney doesn't have any plans about anything..........we're supposed to just trust him? Trust Mitt Romney? Are you shiatting me?


Well no.
That's my point.
They're ALL clowns. Comparing Rmoney to Obama is as bad a comparing Obama to Eisenhower.
But back on topic or something, Obama surely hasn't won the admiration of the special ops community.
 
2012-09-05 11:41:15 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: But back on topic or something, Obama surely hasn't won the admiration of the special ops community.


Has any president in the last 20 years? People freakin' quit special ops rather than deal with the clusterfark of the "Coalition of the Willing."

Hell, you can go back to the Americans Civil War and find soldier at all level complaining about politicians. That's the way of it when one group of people is being ordered to die by people sitting behind safe comfy desks.
 
2012-09-05 11:59:43 AM  

pissnmoan: Romney doesn't have any plans about anything..........we're supposed to just trust him?


Romney Energy Plan Or you could, you know, go looking.
 
2012-09-05 12:02:06 PM  
All I know is the Commander has given the order for navy seals to shut the hell up and be humble so I had better start seeing some navy seals flucking shutting the good god damn hell up and busting out with some mother flarking humble ass attitude ASAP!!
 
2012-09-05 12:02:29 PM  

fireclown: pissnmoan: Romney doesn't have any plans about anything..........we're supposed to just trust him?

Romney Energy Plan Or you could, you know, go looking.


In short, rape the environment while make the same soft promises bout renewable energy Obama did.
 
2012-09-05 12:07:31 PM  

BullBearMS: The major reason for political butthurt over this book seems to be that this guy says the mission was a lot more about kill than about "kill or capture".

"No Easy Day," the new pseudonymous book revealed to be by Navy SEAL Mark Bissonnette, claims that Osama bin Laden was unarmed when shot at his Abbottabad compound last May. That's another key discrepancy in a story that's already changed several times since the initial days after Obama, to much acclaim, announced the killing of the Al Qaeda leader.

If you remember, the initial story was that when Bin Laden was shot, he was firing weapons while hiding behind one of his wives who he used as a human shield.


Whether or not he was visibly holding a weapon in his hands is irrelevant - the only question would be "Did he immediately attempt to surrender?" If not, then of course he was going to get shot. That's kind of how military encounters between hostile parties work.
 
2012-09-05 12:11:38 PM  

Publikwerks: BullBearMS: The major reason for political butthurt over this book seems to be that this guy says the mission was a lot more about kill than about "kill or capture".

"No Easy Day," the new pseudonymous book revealed to be by Navy SEAL Mark Bissonnette, claims that Osama bin Laden was unarmed when shot at his Abbottabad compound last May. That's another key discrepancy in a story that's already changed several times since the initial days after Obama, to much acclaim, announced the killing of the Al Qaeda leader.

If you remember, the initial story was that when Bin Laden was shot, he was firing weapons while hiding behind one of his wives who he used as a human shield.

I read the book last night, and I think in context they went in with kill or capture, but a few things made them switch to just kill mode.

1. Chalk 1(the blackhawk the author rode on to UBL compound) crashed
2. The courier in the guest house opened fire.

After that, everyone in the compound knew that there was armed forces there. So I have no issue with them talk little to no chances. If UBL(SEALs used the CIA spelling Usama) wanted to surrender, he could have. But he didn't, and I don't fault the SEALs for not giving him more than one chance to surrender.

However, I did pick up some things that I need not know. Like how they mark rooms they have cleared with infrared chem lights. Or about how reliant they are on NVGs. They use IR lasers because they assume the other side isn't using NVG at all. If I was an insurgent, I would pick up a cheap sony handy cam, and if you see a bunch of ir beans moving around, you know where the SEALs are.


Thanks for chiming in since you actually read the book, which I am guessing nobody else here has yet (mysefl included).

As far as the 2 items you listed as being possibly helpful to an insurgent/enemy combatent, I didn't know about the chem lights used as markers, but the fact that troops us IR laser sites is something every single infantyman in the US Army knows, and as far as I know there isn't anything at all limiting that knowledge. In basic training all infantry learn to use NVG, including a night-fire exercise where you have to shoot targets using NVGs w/IR laser mounted on the rifle in the middle of the night.

I can't imagine that the insurgents we are after haven't wised up to our tactic of striking at night.
 
2012-09-05 12:13:09 PM  

KiplingKat872: soft promises


While I'm no friend of Romney's, if you interpret promises made during campaign season as anything more substantial than, say, cheesecloth, you might be naive.
 
2012-09-05 12:13:53 PM  
fireclown
Romney Energy Plan Or you could, you know, go looking.

I stand corrected. Just a question--Is Stephen King now acting as Mitt Romney's energy advisor? That is a horror story. How about some more detailed policy references.
 
2012-09-05 12:14:54 PM  

SkunkWerks: While I'm no friend of Romney's, if you interpret promises made during campaign season as anything more substantial than, say, cheesecloth, you might be naive.


Oh I don't. I was refuting the idea that somehow Romney's "plan" was better than Obama's.
 
2012-09-05 12:27:00 PM  
SEALS should have a limit of 50 miles or less from an ocean to operate in.
 
2012-09-05 12:34:38 PM  
Ooooh... Navy Seals!

cdn.chud.com
 
2012-09-05 12:38:47 PM  
kyrg
SEALS should have a limit of 50 miles or less from an ocean to operate in.

I don't think the SEALS need much help (meaning restrictions) from us on doing their jobs. Thankfully, much of their training covers dry land operations. I look at the SEALS as a great military economizer. They go in and get it done. They save us from much more costly military efforts to reach a military/political goal.
 
2012-09-05 12:43:46 PM  

dersk: Magorn: The Difference is, the attackers in Britian and India were citizens of those countries who actually carried out the attacks. Osama was a foriegn national who effectively declared war on the US and was the active head of a military organization planning further attacks. That makes him a military target, not a civilian lawbreaker

I'm pretty sure that several of the Mumbai attackers were Pakistani; at the very least they received a *lot* of support from the ISI. And one of the London bombers was Jamaican.

I think we Americans are just kind of cowardly. I much rather would've seen bin Laden and all the rest on trial than killed or indefinitely detained. I mean, we're trying to show that our system is superior, right?


As a lawyer myself, I do tend to agree with you that demonstrating our commitment to the rule of law is a good and desirable thing like we did with Massoui and the origninal WTC bombers. But In this case I think they mission to kill him was far more effective in breaking the enemy's spirit ,a nd diplomatically and politically a smarter move. Leaving aside the fact that the American people would never have accepted any verdict except guilty and any sentence other than execution (which reduces any trial to a mere show trial) and the potential that had to turn OBL into a martyr; there is also the diplomatic angle to consider. Even Arabs, and in particular Saudis who didn't support bin Laden would have still balked at the idea of him being tired and executed by a Western country. The pressure on the royal house of Saud to demand custody of "one of their own" would have been enoromous and had the potential to destabilize their country, and in Pakistan? it would have been even MORE intense because of the potent combination of radical islamist Jihadi sentiment and fierce nationalism.

Far better to show AL-q that none of their leaders are safe, that the US can reach into anywhere at anytime like the Hand of God and simply erase them from existance, leaving not even a body to mourn. That's a seriously demoralizing proposition for its senior leadership.
 
2012-09-05 12:46:18 PM  

pissnmoan: I don't think the SEALS need much help (meaning restrictions) from us on doing their jobs. Thankfully, much of their training covers dry land operations. I look at the SEALS as a great military economizer. They go in and get it done. They save us from much more costly military efforts to reach a military/political goal.


Exactly, plus basing their operations from naval vessels means they have more rapid deployment times across the globe.

Speaking solely as an armchair general who has studied a little military history, in today's asymmetrical warfare, I think that special forces are a much better way to go than massive troop movements, at least once you get out beyond cities. You can excise a cancer much more effectively with a scalpel than with a club.
 
2012-09-05 12:58:58 PM  
So the moral of this story is if George Bush is in office and you release classified information that makes him look bad you're a whistle blowing hero a la Bradley Manning. But if Barak Obama is in office and you release classified information that makes him look bad you're a leak and should go to Leavenworth.

Glad to see the Fark double standard is still in full effect.
 
2012-09-05 01:01:21 PM  

Callous: So the moral of this story is if George Bush is in office and you release classified information that makes him look bad you're a whistle blowing hero a la Bradley Manning. But if Barak Obama is in office and you release classified information that makes him look bad you're a leak and should go to Leavenworth.

Glad to see the Fark double standard is still in full effect.


More like "if Bush is in office and someone in that administration leaks classified information exposing a CIA agent, they should get off scott free."
 
2012-09-05 01:12:09 PM  

KiplingKat872: Callous: So the moral of this story is if George Bush is in office and you release classified information that makes him look bad you're a whistle blowing hero a la Bradley Manning. But if Barak Obama is in office and you release classified information that makes him look bad you're a leak and should go to Leavenworth.

Glad to see the Fark double standard is still in full effect.

More like "if Bush is in office and someone in that administration leaks classified information exposing a CIA agent, they should get off scott free."


And by "More like" you mean completely different from. Neither Manning or Owen were members of the respective administrations so your comparison doesn't fit.
 
2012-09-05 01:14:39 PM  

Callous: And by "More like" you mean completely different from. Neither Manning or Owen were members of the respective administrations so your comparison doesn't fit.


Well, your statement was nonsensical to begin with since these leaks really did not make Obama look bad and no one is suggesting anyone be court martialed.
 
2012-09-05 01:18:55 PM  

BronyMedic: alienated: go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop

My Grandfather was enlisted Naval Intelligence in Vietnam, and served on the Camp David security staff. (I have his white house medals and service records to prove it. Along with some really interesting gifts from Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson's staff)

He taught me a really valuable lesson that I still hold onto today when dealing with people who claim to have been in the "Special Forces" of any branch: The ones that actually were don't brag about it for the most part. They either don't want you to know, or don't like to talk about it.


My grandpa was an Air Force vet. My biological father was a cable-layer for the Air Force.

Guess which one has the obsession with military and was the only one I felt pressure from, growing up, to consider a 'vet'.

/It's part of why I respect my grandfather so much. He's done a lot, and a lot of people would call him a hero, but I honestly was fuzzy on whether or not he was even in the Air Force until I was maybe fourteen or so. He cares more about living honorably and enjoying life. I hope I grow up to be half of what that guy is.
//...Though maybe without the fart jokes.
 
2012-09-05 01:27:33 PM  

vartian: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard does an insane amount of dangerous shiat on a near daily basis.


impaler: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.

Way to shat on our servicemen, Republican scum.



blogs.amctv.com
 
2012-09-05 01:30:58 PM  

my_cats_breath_smells_like_cat_food: In basic training all infantry soldiers learn to use NVG, including a night-fire exercise where you have to shoot targets using NVGs w/IR laser mounted on the rifle in the middle of the night.


Fixed that for you. It's not exclusive to Infantry OSUT. Night fire and use of NVG's and IR lasers was standard training in Basic when I went through a few years ago. Might not get it to do it constantly like the 11B's, but nowadays every soldier gets trained how to use NVGs, and that we use IR lasers and and IR chemlights for night ops for everything from marking rooms as clear, to marking LZ's for helicopters.

I'd imagine some might forget about it if they never use them after BCT, but it's not exactly classified info.
 
2012-09-05 01:32:11 PM  

Silverstaff: trotsky: I've seen stuff like this all over sites like Facebook and it's sickening that these shiatbags can twist a success into a partisan issue. What pisses me off the most is the use of "SEALS" who try to refute what happened and try to say Obama is taking all the credit. "SEALS" that haven't served in decades. "SEALS" who happen to be GOP shills.

Swift boating. Popular Republican tactic. See also John Kerry, 2004.

Take the military accomplishments of a Democrat. Either in uniform, or as Commander In Chief, have retired/former servicemembers who were in a related unit to the accomplishment insult the accomplishment and cast doubts on the heroism, leadership or achievement involved.



that guy who was the king swiftboater, john oneil, has hated john Kerry for at least 4 decades now. he wasn't some republican fiction ginned up for the presidential fight. he was debating kerry back in 1971 for christ sake.
kerry made his political bones calling Vietnam soldiers war criminals, and some people have very long memories.

It is an open question whether Mr. Kerry's past will hurt him now, but his words to the Senate remain a special lightning rod, especially because he described soldiers' actions as "not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

Link
 
2012-09-05 01:32:16 PM  

KiplingKat872: Callous: And by "More like" you mean completely different from. Neither Manning or Owen were members of the respective administrations so your comparison doesn't fit.

Well, your statement was nonsensical to begin with since these leaks really did not make Obama look bad and no one is suggesting anyone be court martialed.


And by "did not make Obama look bad", you mean suggesting he ordered an unarmed man executed. And by "no one is suggesting anyone be court martialed", you mean the Pentagon General Council is threatening legal action against the author.



http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/04/politic s/seals-bin-laden-book/index.htm l
 
2012-09-05 01:38:45 PM  
btw, kerry lost not because of swifboat, but because he was possibly the worst presidential candidate in 20 years. IIRC Kerry's major legislative accomplishment in 20 years was creating secretaries day.
seriously, obama's senatorial accomplishments made john kerry look like a freshman senator.
only time will tell if romney is actually worse. now go get some ointment on that ass.


beldar.blogs.com

www.synthstuff.com

www.theamericanmind.com
 
2012-09-05 01:42:35 PM  

Callous: And by "did not make Obama look bad", you mean suggesting he ordered an unarmed man executed.


Dude, you do know Roosevelt and the Pentagon had kill orders out on Yamamoto in WWII, right? That's war pal. With the execution of a few Republican hypocrites trying to make as much political hay as Obama, there is no one saying Obama was wrong for finally ordering the hit.

If the author revealed classified information, then he is violation of the law. Just like Manning is still locked up in Leavenworth and will be standing trial in February.

Yeah, sorry to burst your bubble, but Manning is not being treated as a hero
 
2012-09-05 01:44:22 PM  

PsiChick: //...Though maybe without the fart jokes.


Hey now! Fart jokes make life worth living.

i43.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-05 01:52:38 PM  

KiplingKat872: Callous: And by "did not make Obama look bad", you mean suggesting he ordered an unarmed man executed.

Dude, you do know Roosevelt and the Pentagon had kill orders out on Yamamoto in WWII, right? That's war pal. With the execution of a few Republican hypocrites trying to make as much political hay as Obama, there is no one saying Obama was wrong for finally ordering the hit.

If the author revealed classified information, then he is violation of the law. Just like Manning is still locked up in Leavenworth and will be standing trial in February.

Yeah, sorry to burst your bubble, but Manning is not being treated as a hero


He is on Fark. And that's what I'm referring to. On Fark Meaning is a hero and Owen deserves to go to Leavenworth.

Please try and follow along.
 
2012-09-05 01:54:58 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Way to shat on our servicemen, Republican scum.


The guy on the right. Is that Lt. Coffey from The Abyss?

mimg.ugo.com
 
2012-09-05 01:58:16 PM  

Callous: He is on Fark. And that's what I'm referring to. On Fark Meaning is a hero and Owen deserves to go to Leavenworth.


So, wait. When I said, "No one is suggesting that the author of this book be court martialed," you cite the Pentagon, but when I cite the Pentagon court martialing Manning (who has been jailed for two years now), you say it's about Fark.

Have I got that right?

i.qkme.me

Hot like your butt.
 
2012-09-05 02:02:51 PM  

KiplingKat872: Callous: He is on Fark. And that's what I'm referring to. On Fark Meaning is a hero and Owen deserves to go to Leavenworth.

So, wait. When I said, "No one is suggesting that the author of this book be court martialed," you cite the Pentagon, but when I cite the Pentagon court martialing Manning (who has been jailed for two years now), you say it's about Fark.

Have I got that right?



Hot like your butt.


Check page one of this thread, more than one post about it. Both the pentagon and people on fark are calling for it.
 
2012-09-05 02:05:57 PM  

fireclown: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Way to shat on our servicemen, Republican scum.

The guy on the right. Is that Lt. Coffey from The Abyss?

[mimg.ugo.com image 300x300]


alicia-logic.com

Nope. Corporal Hicks from the Colonial Marines.
 
2012-09-05 02:12:06 PM  

SlothB77: "We do NOT advertise the nature of our work, NOR do we seek recognition for our actions,"

that's left for the politicians to do. though, i will say the WH wasn't shy about coming out and releasing all these supposed details of the raid. None of those details ended up being true, but they sure as hell weren't humble.

Obama is just mad he is about to be Swift Boated by these SEALS. Obama: this is your swift boat moment.



Bush administration creates entire fiction about Jessica Lynch = PATRIOT!

Obama administration exaggerates or gets wrong some parts of a raid = UNAMERICAN!

I love the double standard with you right wing shills. At least try and be less transparent next time
 
2012-09-05 02:20:14 PM  

moto-geek: fireclown: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Way to shat on our servicemen, Republican scum.

The guy on the right. Is that Lt. Coffey from The Abyss?

Nope. Corporal Hicks from the Colonial Marines.


images3.wikia.nocookie.net

Nope, that's Kyle Reese from the human resistance.
 
2012-09-05 02:25:15 PM  

moto-geek: Nope. Corporal Hicks from the Colonial Marines


Science_Guy_3.14159: Nope, that's Kyle Reese from the human resistance.



Well, it's STILL Coffeys mustache.

/harrumph.
 
2012-09-05 02:29:41 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Obama surely hasn't won the admiration of the special ops community.



How do you know that? Did you ask them all?
 
2012-09-05 02:35:17 PM  

Callous: On Fark Meaning is a hero and Owen deserves to go to Leavenworth.



Who is calling for him to be court marshaled? Link please

I searched and couldn't find one person using that phrase in the way you claimed


Callous: Check page one of this thread, more than one post about it. Both the pentagon and people on fark are calling for it.



Why can't you simply just link to the posts?

And why does one or 2 people saying this mean the entire Fark hivemind believes it?

Being a whistle blower by releasing documents to the press has a long history in America.

Writing a tell all book and releasing it to the public to make money is not being a whistle blower.

You are so desperate to make this an outrage you create a false equivalency
 
2012-09-05 03:27:15 PM  

ZipSplat: The National Guard was shiat. Worst decision I ever made. Those lazy, fat pieces of shiat - I couldn't believe the stuff that went on there. Contrasted with the Marine Corps I don't even consider them to be part of the military.


Maybe your guard sucked ass, but there are plenty of good ones out there.

So have a big fark you from PA's 28th Division

www.warhats.com

www.hampton.lib.nh.us

farm4.staticflickr.com

PA militia has been in every military engagement this country ever experienced. The 28th has been around formally since WWI and our guard units draw their linage to before we were even a formed nation.

From the Battle of the Bulge where they got their nickname... to both Iraq wars. They were there in Katrina and they will be there anytime anyone needs them.

You only get what you put in as a soldier... don't try to blame your unit because you had a bad experience. As a soldier if your unit was unacceptable you had an obligation to make a difference there. That's what real soldiers do. 

You can try to tell them they aren't part of the military, but they'll be too busy soldiering on to give a shiat what you have to say.
 
2012-09-05 03:32:32 PM  

Pockafrusta: vartian: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If they wanted to be careful, they'd have joined the Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard does an insane amount of dangerous shiat on a near daily basis.

Could you be a little more vague, please?

/Fark details... amirite?


i.imgur.com
i.imgur.com
i.imgur.com
i.imgur.com
i.imgur.com
 
2012-09-05 03:40:03 PM  

relcec: Silverstaff: trotsky: I've seen stuff like this all over sites like Facebook and it's sickening that these shiatbags can twist a success into a partisan issue. What pisses me off the most is the use of "SEALS" who try to refute what happened and try to say Obama is taking all the credit. "SEALS" that haven't served in decades. "SEALS" who happen to be GOP shills.

Swift boating. Popular Republican tactic. See also John Kerry, 2004.

Take the military accomplishments of a Democrat. Either in uniform, or as Commander In Chief, have retired/former servicemembers who were in a related unit to the accomplishment insult the accomplishment and cast doubts on the heroism, leadership or achievement involved.


that guy who was the king swiftboater, john oneil, has hated john Kerry for at least 4 decades now. he wasn't some republican fiction ginned up for the presidential fight. he was debating kerry back in 1971 for christ sake.
kerry made his political bones calling Vietnam soldiers war criminals, and some people have very long memories.

It is an open question whether Mr. Kerry's past will hurt him now, but his words to the Senate remain a special lightning rod, especially because he described soldiers' actions as "not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

Link


It's not like there weren't a bunch of war crimes being committed by some of our boys and Kerry saw that shiat first hand or anything.
 
2012-09-05 03:52:52 PM  
Noone ever said you had to be smart to become a soldier...
 
2012-09-05 03:55:22 PM  

BronyMedic: alienated: go ahead, armchair special ops types, tell me i am wrong, but please- include your class number so i can prove you are not, nor have even been a real specop

My Grandfather was enlisted Naval Intelligence in Vietnam, and served on the Camp David security staff. (I have his white house medals and service records to prove it. Along with some really interesting gifts from Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson's staff)

He taught me a really valuable lesson that I still hold onto today when dealing with people who claim to have been in the "Special Forces" of any branch: The ones that actually were don't brag about it for the most part. They either don't want you to know, or don't like to talk about it.


Those that know don't say and those that say don't know.
 
2012-09-05 04:21:23 PM  

trappedspirit: Speaker2Animals: WTF are you blubbering about? OK, so there were differences in the reports about exactly what happened. Have you ever in your life managed to read and understand a single word of a book about military history? In case they're beyond your comprehension, here's a little cheat sheet: "Early battlefield reports sometimes are inaccurate and subject to later revision. Rinse and repeat a million times throughout recorded history."

Uh, they were watching it live. You don't think things might have improved a bit in that regard.


Right, and I'm sure it was a high definition video feed in which everything was clear. Right.
 
2012-09-05 04:22:06 PM  

Publikwerks: BullBearMS: The major reason for political butthurt over this book seems to be that this guy says the mission was a lot more about kill than about "kill or capture".

"No Easy Day," the new pseudonymous book revealed to be by Navy SEAL Mark Bissonnette, claims that Osama bin Laden was unarmed when shot at his Abbottabad compound last May. That's another key discrepancy in a story that's already changed several times since the initial days after Obama, to much acclaim, announced the killing of the Al Qaeda leader.

If you remember, the initial story was that when Bin Laden was shot, he was firing weapons while hiding behind one of his wives who he used as a human shield.

I read the book last night, and I think in context they went in with kill or capture, but a few things made them switch to just kill mode.

1. Chalk 1(the blackhawk the author rode on to UBL compound) crashed
2. The courier in the guest house opened fire.

After that, everyone in the compound knew that there was armed forces there. So I have no issue with them talk little to no chances. If UBL(SEALs used the CIA spelling Usama) wanted to surrender, he could have. But he didn't, and I don't fault the SEALs for not giving him more than one chance to surrender.

However, I did pick up some things that I need not know. Like how they mark rooms they have cleared with infrared chem lights. Or about how reliant they are on NVGs. They use IR lasers because they assume the other side isn't using NVG at all. If I was an insurgent, I would pick up a cheap sony handy cam, and if you see a bunch of ir beans moving around, you know where the SEALs are.


I read it last night as well. I'm a civilian and I didn't know about the IR chem lights either. Other than that there didn't seem to be any great revelations there.

Shoot, most of the ops stuff you get a good idea about from any decent military fiction novel.

I didn't get the feeling the author was particularly bashing Obama either. Every military person I know biatches about politicians being hand wringers, the pantsuit brigade, etc etc. the book just has a couple paragraphs along that line.

So in response to all the fuss my reaction is a big fat meh.
 
2012-09-05 04:22:26 PM  
Maybe Obama and the Navy Command should write their own book: If we were on the Bid Laden Raid.
 
2012-09-05 05:01:10 PM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: moto-geek: fireclown: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Way to shat on our servicemen, Republican scum.

The guy on the right. Is that Lt. Coffey from The Abyss?

Nope. Corporal Hicks from the Colonial Marines.

[images3.wikia.nocookie.net image 475x336]

Nope, that's Kyle Reese from the human resistance.


Dammit. You're right!
 
2012-09-05 06:51:50 PM  
Why should they keep quiet about that operation? Obama blew security on that as soon as he could to gain political points. He even brought in a bunch of Hollywood people for a personal briefing on the operation so they could make a movie. The military and intelligence people were absolutely livid.
 
2012-09-05 07:51:05 PM  

KiplingKat872: CMYK and PMS: It is Obama's only accomplishment

Sorry, what?

Putting slowly turning the economy around despite constant obstructionism from the GOP, in foriegn policy terms:

He assisted the revolution in Libya without getting us directly involved in a ground war there.

He removed most of the troops from Iraq so they could focus on the war in Afghanistan.

He has kept the tensions with Iran from exploding into war.

He has not kowtowed to Israel.

He has took an aggressive military posture toward North Korea when they sank South Korea Navy ship.

Love it or hate it, he has taken a strong position about eliminating Taliban camps on the Pakistan side.

He solidified relations with Japan after the Tsunami by sending the USS Ronald Regan for disaster relief.

He has at least partially repaired the U.S.'s reputation and standing on the Global Stage

To say he has accomplished nothing but the assassination of bin Laden is a lie, simple as that.


Damn... how much of that Koolaid did you drink?
 
2012-09-05 08:05:40 PM  

OgreMagi: Why should they keep quiet about that operation? Obama blew security on that as soon as he could to gain political points. He even brought in a bunch of Hollywood people for a personal briefing on the operation so they could make a movie. The military and intelligence people were absolutely livid.


Hey, this guy pointed out that the Obama administration had been repeatedly lying about what went down during the raid while we are in an election season.

What this guy has done is embarrass those at the top because all of the many versions of the "truth" they had previously revealed had some kind of "He's coming right for us!" twist.

The book reveals that instead Bin Laden poked his head out a door and Boom! Headshot..

That's not "kill or capture". That's "kill". That's an embarrassment.

You have to remember that although the Obama administration refuses to prosecute anyone involved with torturing people, even when the victims were literally beaten to death, they still are going to prosecute the whistle blower who exposed this illegal behavior to the press.

Murdering people is fine. Embarrassing those at the top? You're going down.
 
2012-09-05 08:21:19 PM  

OgreMagi: Obama blew security on that as soon as he could to gain political points



citation needed


BullBearMS: You have to remember that although the Obama administration refuses to prosecute anyone involved with torturing people, even when the victims were literally beaten to death



Surprise surprise when you don't have political capital you have to take a conservative stance, especially when it comes to the military and national defense.
 
2012-09-05 08:30:43 PM  

intelligent comment below: Surprise surprise when you don't have political capital you have to take a conservative stance, especially when it comes to the military and national defense.


Now I see once again why I have you favorited as a lying liar.

How the fark does your lame ass excuse explain why Obama is prosecuting the whistle blower who exposed torture, but not anyone who ordered torture or physically beat people to death?
 
2012-09-05 08:38:12 PM  

intelligent comment below: OgreMagi: Obama blew security on that as soon as he could to gain political points


citation needed


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXylZ4mLubE
 
2012-09-05 09:40:35 PM  

alienated: BullBearMS: All you have to do is admit that we never had any intention whatsoever of taking this guy captive.

well, duh. What could we have done ? I mean, besides making a stain on the walls out of him. Could we, even as a nation ruled by law, had a trial ? I am not being facetious here.I see no other solution except his summary execution. armed or not is immaterial at this point. Laden was a cancer and needed to be excised . By any and all means at our disposal. Cold ? yep. I would have done the same to McViegh, given the chance.


This guy could of had an interesting new room mate.

akamai.paramountcomedy.com
 
2012-09-05 09:59:35 PM  

BullBearMS: Now I see once again why I have you favorited as a lying liar.

How the fark does your lame ass excuse explain why Obama is prosecuting the whistle blower who exposed torture, but not anyone who ordered torture or physically beat people to death?



Oh because I really care what master copy paste both sides are bad troll has to say about me.

This is how politics works, idiot. You want RON PAUL to be appointed King. You think a President doesn't play to the other side who always pins you as weak on terrorism and defense? Welcome to America after 9/11. No President is going to be able to do anything you want, even Gary Johnson or Ron Paul. They wouldn't even be able to close Gitmo, their request would be blocked all the same just like Obama.
 
2012-09-05 10:00:13 PM  

OgreMagi: intelligent comment below: OgreMagi: Obama blew security on that as soon as he could to gain political points


citation needed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXylZ4mLubE



No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video
 
2012-09-05 10:07:14 PM  

intelligent comment below: No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video


You are seriously the most retarded idiot from the entire Politics tab.

Go back there.
 
2012-09-05 10:08:55 PM  

intelligent comment below: OgreMagi: intelligent comment below: OgreMagi: Obama blew security on that as soon as he could to gain political points


citation needed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXylZ4mLubE


No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video


Forget it Jake, it's Farktown.
 
2012-09-05 10:11:55 PM  

BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video

You are seriously the most retarded idiot from the entire Politics tab.

Go back there.


What happened to GaryPDX?
 
2012-09-05 10:15:19 PM  

Harry_Seldon: BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video

You are seriously the most retarded idiot from the entire Politics tab.

Go back there.

What happened to GaryPDX?


He's gone. Don't know why.
 
2012-09-05 10:23:15 PM  

simplicimus: Harry_Seldon: BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video

You are seriously the most retarded idiot from the entire Politics tab.

Go back there.

What happened to GaryPDX?

He's gone. Don't know why.


Can we have Gary back and banish farktards like this one back to the Politics tab where they belong?
 
2012-09-05 10:29:33 PM  

BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video

You are seriously the most retarded idiot from the entire Politics tab.

Go back there.



A Swift Boat smear campaign funded by Karl Rove is considered a "citation" these days? Wow you Fark Independents are desperate



BullBearMS: Can we have Gary back and banish farktards like this one back to the Politics tab where they belong?



Who's we? And who do you speak on behalf of? The only thing you do is smear up these topics with nonsense both sides are bad copy paste trolls and you can never have a rational thought on your own

I challenge you to actually debate anything I say. Not cry because I wont listen to a Swift Boat "documentary" on Obama and throw childish insults because you have no idea how government and politics works when you are a ruling party with little actual voting power.

Clinton had to adopt many Republican ideologies like welfare reform, debt repayments, high military spending, bank deregulation, etc. because he wanted to get some of his stuff passed.

Obama had to accept tax cuts for the rich to get unemployment extensions.

This is how government works.

You can't point the blame on the party who gives in to Republican ideas to get what they want passed, you should start blaming Republicans.

But then that would show your true self, your goal is to blame Democrats so more Republicans get into office. Your both sides are bad schtick has been rinsed repeated for years on the internet.
 
2012-09-05 10:30:35 PM  

simplicimus: intelligent comment below: OgreMagi: intelligent comment below: OgreMagi: Obama blew security on that as soon as he could to gain political points


citation needed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXylZ4mLubE


No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video

Forget it Jake, it's Farktown.


Who's Jake?
 
2012-09-05 10:32:33 PM  

BullBearMS: simplicimus: Harry_Seldon: BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video

You are seriously the most retarded idiot from the entire Politics tab.

Go back there.

What happened to GaryPDX?

He's gone. Don't know why.

Can we have Gary back and banish farktards like this one back to the Politics tab where they belong?


I doubt Gary will be coming back. Just like whoever channeled the freeper threads. But I am here to argue, not to insult.
 
2012-09-05 10:34:25 PM  

intelligent comment below: simplicimus: intelligent comment below: OgreMagi: intelligent comment below: OgreMagi: Obama blew security on that as soon as he could to gain political points


citation needed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXylZ4mLubE


No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video

Forget it Jake, it's Farktown.

Who's Jake?


Never seen Chinatown?
 
2012-09-05 10:35:27 PM  
Negative
 
2012-09-05 10:36:19 PM  

simplicimus: BullBearMS: simplicimus: Harry_Seldon: BullBearMS: intelligent comment below: No, I asked for a citation, not a youtube video

You are seriously the most retarded idiot from the entire Politics tab.

Go back there.

What happened to GaryPDX?

He's gone. Don't know why.

Can we have Gary back and banish farktards like this one back to the Politics tab where they belong?

I doubt Gary will be coming back. Just like whoever channeled the freeper threads. But I am here to argue, not to insult.



Gary is still here, using alts and proxies. I believe he was one of the accounts banned last year in the troll sweep someone was talking about yesterday
 
2012-09-05 10:36:41 PM  
 
2012-09-05 10:38:53 PM  

intelligent comment below: Negative


Well, put it on you to-do list. Great modern film noir.
 
2012-09-05 10:40:49 PM  

BullBearMS: Derp. Lot's and lots of retarded farking Derp.

Look, retard. Answer the farking question.

Why is it OK for Obama to prosecute the guy who blew the whistle on torture, but not prosecute any of those who ordered torture, carried out torture, or destroyed videotaped evidence of torture once the truth came out?


Actually, that's a damn good question. And I'm a liberal Democrat.
 
2012-09-05 10:41:14 PM  

MurphyMurphy: You only get what you put in as a soldier... don't try to blame your unit because you had a bad experience. As a soldier if your unit was unacceptable you had an obligation to make a difference there. That's what real soldiers do.


LOL, thanks for the advice. I filed two IG complaints and eventually went to my congresswoman about the issue because the IG's in the National Guard are generally well entrenched in the Good Ol' Boys' Club because the organization is so small. I put up a pretty good fight while I was in and paid for it personally, and it has been extremely vindicating to me to see the investigations that have begun piling on top of the CalGuard's head in response to mine and others' persistence.

dl.dropbox.com

Anything else? No? Go f*ck yourself. I am putting myself on the line, and it's not f*cking easy.
 
2012-09-05 10:45:32 PM  
Especially when the Commander is pandering to the CinC.

I never saw a Marine Corps Officer act in a dishornorable manner, but the likes of Mr. North, and this Chairborne pouge irk me.
 
2012-09-05 11:24:13 PM  
So I guess people who leak these important facts are not supposed to tell them to people so reporters who report these things are barred from say, reporting the actual facts that were actually in violation of the law so we can determine the severity of the violation. So we are left without context or content to judge the legitimacy of the accusation. Great. I'm sure no one would ever exaggerate or abuse that. So prove me wrong, please. I always hear about these leaks but rarely are the facts in question brought to the press about them. WHAT ARE THE SECRETS TELL ME.
 
2012-09-05 11:29:39 PM  

UseLessHuman: So I guess people who leak these important facts are not supposed to tell them to people so reporters who report these things are barred from say, reporting the actual facts that were actually in violation of the law so we can determine the severity of the violation. So we are left without context or content to judge the legitimacy of the accusation. Great. I'm sure no one would ever exaggerate or abuse that. So prove me wrong, please. I always hear about these leaks but rarely are the facts in question brought to the press about them. WHAT ARE THE SECRETS TELL ME.


Psst, here's the secret: we stopped being under the rule of law in the 1960's. Everything you've been told since then is more spin than fact.
 
2012-09-05 11:34:33 PM  

BullBearMS: Derp. Lot's and lots of retarded farking Derp.

Look, retard. Answer the farking question.

Why is it OK for Obama to prosecute the guy who blew the whistle on torture, but not prosecute any of those who ordered torture, carried out torture, or destroyed videotaped evidence of torture once the truth came out?



So you admit that America is a Republic, not a Monarchy? Well at least we're finally getting somewhere

I never said it was okay, I said the reason why Obama was doing it.

The best part? Now Republican's cant say shiat about Democrats being soft on terror and "not support the troops"
 
2012-09-05 11:35:22 PM  

simplicimus: Actually, that's a damn good question. And I'm a liberal Democrat.



Because a sitting administration doesn't want to prosecute former administration officials for the policies they created
 
2012-09-05 11:37:21 PM  

intelligent comment below: BullBearMS: Derp. Lot's and lots of retarded farking Derp.

Look, retard. Answer the farking question.

Why is it OK for Obama to prosecute the guy who blew the whistle on torture, but not prosecute any of those who ordered torture, carried out torture, or destroyed videotaped evidence of torture once the truth came out?


So you admit that America is a Republic, not a Monarchy? Well at least we're finally getting somewhere

I never said it was okay, I said the reason why Obama was doing it.

The best part? Now Republican's cant say shiat about Democrats being soft on terror and "not support the troops"


You missed the part where Obama is Emperor of the world and can cause Oil prices to change at his whim?
 
2012-09-05 11:41:28 PM  

intelligent comment below: simplicimus: Actually, that's a damn good question. And I'm a liberal Democrat.


Because a sitting administration doesn't want to prosecute former administration officials for the policies they created


So they don't go after war criminals because it's impolite?
 
2012-09-06 12:22:06 AM  

simplicimus: So they don't go after war criminals because it's impolite?



You can't go after individual soldiers. They were acting under direct orders from the President. Signed off by the Justice Dept. Also the CIA's use was also signed off by the Bush admin and Justice and supported by the director of CIA.

So unless you start bringing in Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, Alberto Gonzalez, Yoo, etc. then you wont get anywhere. I support the idea of prosecuting all of them, but lets be honest now, it isn't politically possible.
 
2012-09-06 01:11:36 AM  

intelligent comment below: You can't go after individual soldiers. They were acting under direct orders from the President. Signed off by the Justice Dept. Also the CIA's use was also signed off by the Bush admin and Justice and supported by the director of CIA.


Let's take a look at the Convention Against Torture which was Signed by President Regan and ratified into law by the US Senate.

Article 2

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

Your claims are patently illegal under US and International law.

intelligent comment below: So unless you start bringing in Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, Alberto Gonzalez, Yoo, etc. then you wont get anywhere. I support the idea of prosecuting all of them, but lets be honest now, it isn't politically possible.


Obama not only hasn't prosecuted those responsible for torture, he's been working to prevent those responsible for torture from being held accountable for their acts all along.

He worked to shut down the Democrats own Congressional investigations.


He worked with Republicans to shut down Spain's investigation into our torture of their citizens.

He worked with Republicans to shut down Germany's investigation into our torture of their citizens.

He threatened that the United States would no longer share intelligence information with Great Britain if they did not prevent a British citizen from suing his own government for their complicity with US torture.

He shielded Bush officials from civil charges over their role in ordering torture.
 

You have yet to address why it's perfectly OK to go after the whistle blower who exposed torture even after you excuse those guilty of it.
 
2012-09-06 01:19:53 AM  

BullBearMS: alienated: simplicimus: I think the problem is that any information from the prisoners is compromised by Bush's enhanced interrogation techniques. We're stuck with these prisoners.

yer overthinking it. space them .

How about we do something radical, like follow the rule of law.

Prosecute those guilty of the enhanced interrogation techniques.

We are party to international treaties that make this a requirement that we cannot legally ignore. Obama's "Look forward, not back on torture" is purest illegal bullshiat.

Then we either charge the people in Gitmo (and our other political prisons in places like Bagram, Afghanistan) with crimes or we let them go. Just as the rule of law requires.


Uhm, rule of law states we should take them to a convenient place, and shoot them. Them being irregular troops, fighting without benefit of state sponsorship.

Ok, I think I am good with your idea of just shooting them, saves money, and people are going to be mad anyways.
 
2012-09-06 03:51:36 AM  
www.jwz.org
 
2012-09-06 02:22:02 PM  

intelligent comment below: simplicimus: So they don't go after war criminals because it's impolite?


You can't go after individual soldiers. They were acting under direct orders from the President. Signed off by the Justice Dept. Also the CIA's use was also signed off by the Bush admin and Justice and supported by the director of CIA.

So unless you start bringing in Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, Alberto Gonzalez, Yoo, etc. then you wont get anywhere. I support the idea of prosecuting all of them, but lets be honest now, it isn't politically possible.


Ah yes, the old "Nuremberg defense".
 
2012-09-06 02:28:37 PM  

scalpod: Ah yes, the old "Nuremberg defense".



So mass murdering innocent civilians is the same thing as a dozen cases of torture? false equivalency is false
 
2012-09-06 02:32:47 PM  

BullBearMS: and ratified into law by the US Senate.



So your argument finally goes to where it should have in the first place. Instead of blaming Obama for everything and ignoring the Republicans who actually PUSHED FOR THESE ACTIONS, you should be blaming the Congress for not getting involved in such a political topic. You should be blaming Congress for not creating committees investigating who did what and who might have broken what laws.

But your job on here is to play the "both sides are bad so vote Republican/Libertarian" so your intellectual dishonesty is old and tired bullshiat.
 
2012-09-06 03:02:09 PM  

intelligent comment below: scalpod: Ah yes, the old "Nuremberg defense".


So mass murdering innocent civilians is the same thing as a dozen cases of torture? false equivalency is false


The Nuremberg trials created that following illegal orders is not a defense. Whether one person or a million were affected is irrelevant. I was only following orders hasn't been a valid defense since 1948.
 
2012-09-06 04:33:03 PM  

simplicimus: intelligent comment below: scalpod: Ah yes, the old "Nuremberg defense".


So mass murdering innocent civilians is the same thing as a dozen cases of torture? false equivalency is false

The Nuremberg trials created that following illegal orders is not a defense. Whether one person or a million were affected is irrelevant. I was only following orders hasn't been a valid defense since 1948.


Do you think that being informed that his derpy claims are completely illegal both under International law following the Neremberg trials and illegal under American law after the ratification of the UN Convention Against Torture will matter to the most retarded Obama shill on the entire politics tab?

His M.O. is to just fling poo faster when you catch him in his lies. I have him favorited as lying liar for a reason.

Notice how he also continues to avoid the subject of Obama going after the guy who blew the whistle on the use of torture under the Bush administration.

Obama is perfectly wiling to ignore the UN Convention Against Torture which requires us to arrest and prosecute anyone suspected of torture. Here Obama is in direct violation of law since this is a treaty ratified by the Senate and is thus "supreme law" under the Constitution.

Remember that whole taking an oath to defend the Constitution thing? You don't defend it by violating it.

However, the guy who made the US stop torture by exposing this illegal activity to the press? That guy Obama is going after.
 
2012-09-06 04:53:23 PM  

BullBearMS: simplicimus: intelligent comment below: scalpod: Ah yes, the old "Nuremberg defense".


So mass murdering innocent civilians is the same thing as a dozen cases of torture? false equivalency is false

The Nuremberg trials created that following illegal orders is not a defense. Whether one person or a million were affected is irrelevant. I was only following orders hasn't been a valid defense since 1948.

Obama is perfectly wiling to ignore the UN Convention Against Torture which requires us to arrest and prosecute anyone suspected of torture. Here Obama is in direct violation of law since this is a treaty ratified by the Senate and is thus "supreme law" under the Constitution.

Remember that whole taking an oath to defend the Constitution thing? You don't defend it by violating it.

However, the guy who made the US stop torture by exposing this illegal activity to the press? That guy Obama is going after.


Well, there's the rub, isn't it. The list of the guilty under Bush's Administration would be quite lengthy. And most likely be viewed as politically motivated.
 
2012-09-06 05:32:34 PM  

simplicimus: Well, there's the rub, isn't it.


Um. No.

The entire foundational concept behind our nation is that all are equal under the law.

It's just that the Democrats and Republicans refuse to prosecute the rich and well connected regardless of political party.
 
2012-09-06 05:37:20 PM  

BullBearMS: simplicimus: Well, there's the rub, isn't it.

Um. No.

The entire foundational concept behind our nation is that all are equal under the law.

It's just that the Democrats and Republicans refuse to prosecute the rich and well connected regardless of political party.


Same as it ever was. Could have just as well said Whigs and Federalists.
 
2012-09-06 05:38:16 PM  
I'll plug this book again.

In language as clear as English permits, section 1809 of FISA provided that anyone who violates its mandates by eavesdropping without the requisite judicial approval has committed a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine for each offense. And there was no question that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, former NSA and CIA director Michael Hayden, and many other Bush officials had violated FISA's requirements by spying on Americans without warrants. Not only had the New York Times article exposed that illegality, but Bush himself had confirmed the findings on national television. If we were a country that actually lived under the rule of law, the illegal actions would have carried grave consequences for the lawbreakers-just as if they had been caught robbing a bank, embezzling money, or dealing drugs. But since we're not such a country, it has done nothing of the kind. From the start of the wiretapping scandal, the nation's media stars and the leaders of both political parties unanimously adhered to the same piety: whatever else one might want to say about the NSA spying program, it was simply wrong-inappropriate, unserious, and reckless-to talk about it as though it were a crime.
 
2012-09-06 05:43:06 PM  

simplicimus: Same as it ever was.


No.

Obama has actively protected Bush from the legal consequences of his lawbreaking. As I've already pointed out, Obama worked with Republicans to shut down investigations in our nation as well as throughout the EU.

Then he invoked state secrets to shield Bush from civil charges as well.

Give another example of Democrats going all out to shield Republicans from justice for illegal acts. (or vice versa)
 
2012-09-06 05:43:47 PM  

BullBearMS:
In language as clear as English permits


Just repeating that line, because it's the whole reason I studied German.
 
2012-09-06 05:47:21 PM  

BullBearMS: simplicimus: Same as it ever was.

No.

Obama has actively protected Bush from the legal consequences of his lawbreaking. As I've already pointed out, Obama worked with Republicans to shut down investigations in our nation as well as throughout the EU.

Then he invoked state secrets to shield Bush from civil charges as well.

Give another example of Democrats going all out to shield Republicans from justice for illegal acts. (or vice versa)


Well, Clinton didn't go after Reagan for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, much less Treason, for Iran-Contra.
 
2012-09-06 05:56:13 PM  

simplicimus: Well, Clinton didn't go after Reagan for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, much less Treason, for Iran-Contra.


Bush 1 had already pardoned everybody there was evidence on.

This still isn't the same as Obama shutting down investigations here and abroad.

He literally threatened the British with no longer sharing intelligence data if they didn't kill a court case from one of the people we tortured.
 
Displayed 317 of 317 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report