Laurie Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Did you watch part one of the interview last night? I thought it was very interesting to learn about this man's early years growing up in Montana and about his Navy SEAL training. But I kept having this argument with myself...why would he risk his safety not to mention the safety of his whole family by doing this interview? He didn't wear a disguise, appear in shadows, have his voice changed or make any attempt to hide his identity. But why shouldn't he take his place in history? He was trained to be a military sniper and he used this skill to take out our enemy. Why shouldn't we know the names of the heroes and not just the names of people like John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald? What did you think of the interview? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettyandbob Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I didn't watch it. As soon as this hit the news last week I thought the same thing: way to put a target on yourself, your mother, your sister, etc. That would be the reason you don't reveal yourself in your lifetime. It's not like he can make money public speaking. Any large gathering for him will be a target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liz CA Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I saw a snippet of an interview. His colleagues are not too thrilled - at least some are not. I think it is indicative of our times when everyone seems to want to be in the spotlight. Navy SEALS have been doing their work in silence and secrecy for years. If all came forward with their accomplishments, we'd have a flood of (interesting) books, however, something inside me wishes he had remained silent. I would have thought no less of him not knowing him. I have the highest respect for special forces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie Posted November 12, 2014 Author Share Posted November 12, 2014 I didn't watch it. As soon as this hit the news last week I thought the same thing: way to put a target on yourself, your mother, your sister, etc. That would be the reason you don't reveal yourself in your lifetime. I'm the cautious type...I was thinking that if I had the same last name and lived in that state I'd get an unlisted number so no terrorist could find me by mistake in the phone book! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie Posted November 12, 2014 Author Share Posted November 12, 2014 I saw a snippet of an interview. His colleagues are not too thrilled - at least some are not. Fortunately the faces of other SEALS were blurred when they showed photographs that were taken while he was on rescue missions in Liberia, etc. before bin Laden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiden Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Part of the job--part of what he signed up for, what he agreed to, what he accepted--was secrecy. By coming forward, he puts a target on himself, his family, and anyone who has ever admitted, or who does ever admit, in any kind of public setting to having served with him. There may be men who served with him in the past who now are at risk if anyone follows the trail from him to them. I appreciate his service and the sacrifices that he and his family have made, but his decision to go public was a bad one. He went back on a very important agreement that he made when he accepted the training and the respect given to the Special Forces. The secrecy surrounding them protects them, and he breached it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAmomof4 Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I would have thought no less of him not knowing him. I have the highest respect for special forces. I agree. I watched the first part, thinking maybe there was a good reason the man came forward, other than his own personal glory. If there was, I didn't see it presented. We already had most of the details of the mission. The entire interview was about this guy's childhood and his own life story. It seemed, to me, inappropriate for him to be carrying on for hours on end for this interview. Most military men and women are humble and don't want to take personal credit for things. They have to be pressed to give more than "yes, sir" or "no, sir," or to say anything more than "I was just fulfilling my mission" or "we had a great team and we had each other's backs." My other immediate thought was, shame on Fox on Veteran's Day for making it all about this guy, and not about the tens of thousands of faceless soldiers who are currently going about their jobs and doing a damn fine job. Where is their two-hour special? I don't know, no disrespect to him, it just seems weird and...like I said, inappropriate. I won't be tuning in for the second half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pawz4me Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I agree. I watched the first part, thinking maybe there was a good reason the man came forward, other than his own personal glory. If there was, I didn't see it presented. We already had most of the details of the mission. The entire interview was about this guy's childhood and his own life story. It seemed, to me, inappropriate for him to be carrying on for hours on end for this interview. Most military men and women are humble and don't want to take personal credit for things. They have to be pressed to give more than "yes, sir" or "no, sir," or to say anything more than "I was just fulfilling my mission" or "we had a great team and we had each other's backs." My other immediate thought was, shame on Fox on Veteran's Day for making it all about this guy, and not about the tens of thousands of faceless soldiers who are currently going about their jobs and doing a damn fine job. Where is their two-hour special? I don't know, no disrespect to him, it just seems weird and...like I said, inappropriate. I won't be tuning in for the second half. Yes, to the bolded. I didn't watch the interview. I won't watch or read anything about him. I had (have) respect for what his SEAL team did and all that the special ops forces do. At the moment I don't have much respect at all for this particular person. Coming forward like he has is totally inappropriate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantlion Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I didn't watch, but also felt it was in at least bad form to come forward personally. He may have been the one, but he did not act alone and me, without a hint of military training, feels like he betrayed a sense of something by coming out like that. I don't know, brotherhood, secrecy, if not doing something illegal. I thought there would be regulations in place that would not allow him to speak out so boldly, I guess not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trulycrabby Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I am not sure why he came forward as the one who killed bin Laden. Sure he pulled the trigger, but was only able to do so because of the support and planning of the entire ops team. I did not watch the interview, mainly because I do not watch much tv. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I can't imagine this sits well with the other men who risked their lives on that mission?? This story should have been saved for 50 years, at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amira Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I'm also bothered that he's being called the man who killed bin Laden. There were many, many more people involved, and not just people in the military. Maybe that came out in the interview, but I don't really like having it be all about one person, and having him identified and interviewed does make it about him. But I suppose it would have been too long a title to say The Man Who Fired the Shot That Killed Bin Laden After Numerous People Gathered Intelligence, Trained Navy SEALS, Planned the Raid in Meticulous Detail, Made It Possible for That Man to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, and Did So Much More But This Title Is Already Out of Control. There are lots of jobs where people do things that make amazing stories, but they can't tell them. There are good reasons for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liz CA Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I can't help but wonder if this is intentional. I wonder if the government WANTS him to come forward in order to capture more known terrorists, or something. Sort of using him as bait? Maybe??? Oh my. Never thought of this angle...but who would volunteer to become bait in something this wicked and dangerous? I don't even know if he has family and even if he is not married, he probably has extended family. And special op forces are thrust into the spotlight which seems counterproductive to their usual status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie Posted November 12, 2014 Author Share Posted November 12, 2014 I watched the first part, thinking maybe there was a good reason the man came forward, other than his own personal glory. If there was, I didn't see it presented. We already had most of the details of the mission. The entire interview was about this guy's childhood and his own life story. It seemed, to me, inappropriate for him to be carrying on for hours on end for this interview. Most military men and women are humble and don't want to take personal credit for things. They have to be pressed to give more than "yes, sir" or "no, sir," or to say anything more than "I was just fulfilling my mission" or "we had a great team and we had each other's backs." My other immediate thought was, shame on Fox on Veteran's Day for making it all about this guy, and not about the tens of thousands of faceless soldiers who are currently going about their jobs and doing a damn fine job. Where is their two-hour special? The first part was intended to be about his life leading up to the mission. Part two will be about the actual mission. I'm still in awe of what he and the others had to go through as part of their training. There was training film included that shows what they go through...pool training with their hands tied behind their backs, 5 mile swims in the ocean, etc. I think they deserve to be proud of themselves just as we should all be proud of them. But unless we see/hear these types of stories, how does the average citizen even have a clue about what this job involves? This particular man didn't even know how to swim before he became interested in joining the Navy! (He hadn't even intended to join the Navy. He wanted to become a Marine, but the Marine recruiter wasn't there the day he walked in to the recruiting place so the Navy recruiter got to him first.) It's certainly a good story about being determined to succeed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie Posted November 12, 2014 Author Share Posted November 12, 2014 I had (have) respect for what his SEAL team did and all that the special ops forces do. At the moment I don't have much respect at all for this particular person. Coming forward like he has is totally inappropriate. I can understand this point of view, but then I also have to wonder whether it's proper for the White House to release a photo of the people who sat and watched the mission in the situation room. Is it proper for someone sitting in that room to include that experience in his/her book or talk about the experience in interviews or speeches? When I think about that, I don't see why the man who actually pulled the trigger should have to keep silent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katy Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I recorded the interview but haven't had the chance to watch yet. I had an ex and a family member in the special forces. Those guys are not generally the ones who brag. They're generally the ones who never talk about anything mission related, unless it's to talk about how they're shaken up over someone they know getting killed, and even then, only over a drink, and only for one or two nights and rarely ever again. I'd have a hard time believing he wasn't lying about it except I heard some blip on the radio about President Obama confirming he was on the team. The story is interesting, but he broke the code. It seems like a big red flag pointing to moral and/or narcissism issues that he'd do that. Kind of like when John Edwards or whatever his name was decided to run for President even though his wife had terminal cancer. I just knew something shady was going on there, but didn't know what until the affair story broke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 There has been quite a lot of push-back from the military and other members of ST6 regarding this guy's version of events. Others say that it was a different Seal, the "point man," who first rushed into the room and shot bin Laden in the head, then grabbed the two women in the room in case they were wearing explosives, to protect his comrades from any explosion. Then O'Neill and another Seal arrived and O'Neill shot bin Laden again, as he lay dying on the floor from the original head shot. This is the version supported by the military and other members of ST6. O'Neill has a grudge against the military because he left 2 years before he would have earned retirement (at 20 yrs) and now claims he was screwed out of benefits. The military said he was offered several possible assignments that would have allowed him to complete his 20 years of service, but he declined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CupOCoffee Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 There has been quite a lot of push-back from the military and other members of ST6 regarding this guy's version of events. Others say that it was a different Seal, the "point man," who first rushed into the room and shot bin Laden in the head, then grabbed the two women in the room in case they were wearing explosives, to protect his comrades from any explosion. Then O'Neill and another Seal arrived and O'Neill shot bin Laden again, as he lay dying on the floor from the original head shot. This is the version supported by the military and other members of ST6. O'Neill has a grudge against the military because he left 2 years before he would have earned retirement (at 20 yrs) and now claims he was screwed out of benefits. The military said he was offered several possible assignments that would have allowed him to complete his 20 years of service, but he declined. Well, there ya go, right there! That says a lot. ~coffee~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Well, there ya go, right there! That says a lot. ~coffee~ Hey, case closed for me, too! Summed up the guy's motivation and military career in a couple sentences. /end sarcasm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie Posted November 12, 2014 Author Share Posted November 12, 2014 There has been quite a lot of push-back from the military and other members of ST6 regarding this guy's version of events. Others say that it was a different Seal, the "point man," who first rushed into the room and shot bin Laden in the head, then grabbed the two women in the room in case they were wearing explosives, to protect his comrades from any explosion. Then O'Neill and another Seal arrived and O'Neill shot bin Laden again, as he lay dying on the floor from the original head shot. This is the version supported by the military and other members of ST6. O'Neill has a grudge against the military because he left 2 years before he would have earned retirement (at 20 yrs) and now claims he was screwed out of benefits. The military said he was offered several possible assignments that would have allowed him to complete his 20 years of service, but he declined. Since the people who were there aren't all in agreement about all that happened, it's good that the president and others in the situation room were witnesses , even if they aren't telling us all the details. I was just searching on the internet for more details...I didn't even realize that another member of the team had written a book already. (I don't know whether to think of these guys as brave or stupid. I guess I fear beheading more than I desire fame/fortune.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momto5blessings Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 The thing that makes me sick about this whole "interview"? The fact that the Pakistani doctor who enabled them to pin-point Bin Laden's whereabouts languishes in a Pakistan prison cell with no thank you, no ticket out of the country for his service to us. Wrong on so many levels. I wish I could link articles about what this wonderful doctor did to make it possible for us to find him, but I don't know how to do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie Posted November 13, 2014 Author Share Posted November 13, 2014 I'm glad I don't own cable? I don't understand. Is this meant to be an insult? FWIW, I also watched part two last night, but since it seems that only one person who commented about part one had even watched it I'll just keep my thoughts/ponderings to myself this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 I don't understand. Is this meant to be an insult? FWIW, I also watched part two last night, but since it seems that only one person who commented about part one had even watched it I'll just keep my thoughts/ponderings to myself this time. I watched both parts. I also read No Easy Day, and saw interviews with that author. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 There are plenty of ways to learn about how various members of the military train and how they fight. There is a whole documentary series on the Navy Seal BUDS training, an authorized documentary. There is Sebastian Unger's book "War." There are numerous stories that have been published in news sources and magazines like these from TIME: http://time.com/collection/vets/grid/ If you really care about veterans, then volunteer with your local VFW or USO or Wear Blue to Remember. There are a lot of problems with this specific story. If your interest is truly to learn more about the military, then I think there are better ways. I do understand the general interest in the story, and I'm not judging anyone for watching it. I'm just not sure that I agree with how he has gone about it. That's just me, not putting it on anyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nukeswife Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 I didn't watch the first part but the 2nd part was on in the background last night. He said at the end that he did this for the 9/11 families. Many were at the museum when he donated some items to it and were very grateful for him talking to them afterwards about it. That is what he said was his motivation. I can see how there are differing stories, just like there will be different versions of an accident because it all stems from each persons POV. If we want to talk about breaking the code of silence, the President himself did that when he said the words, Seal Team 6, up until then they were a unit that 'didn't exist' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.