|
|
The Man Who Killed Osama bin Laden... Is Screwed
For the first time, the Navy SEAL who killed Osama bin Laden tells his story — speaking not just about the raid and the three shots that changed history, but about the personal aftermath for himself and his family. And the startling failure of the United States government to help its most experienced and skilled warriors carry on with their lives.
http://www.esquire.com/print-this/ma...-0313?page=all
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this.
They specifically mention he does not want to carry a firearm professionally in the civilian sector. I'm not entirely sure what else he expects to do with his training other than training others.
There are hundreds of thousands of military who find their jobs do not transfer well into the civilian world. I think he still has a leg up on many of them though. Hope he finds something he can enjoy doing.
I certainly hope he doesn't feel like a victim. I would have given up my left nut to have the opportunity to kill UBL.
It was the CIA woman, now immortalized in books and movies, who gave the briefing. "Yeah," she told us. "We got him. This is him. This is my life's work. I'm positive."Carrie Mathison?At Jalalabad, the Shooter saw the CIA analyst pacing. She asked me why I was so calm. I told her, We do this every night. We go to a house, we **** with some people, and we leave. This is just a longer flight. She looked at me and said, "One hundred percent he's on the third floor. So get to there if you can." She was probably 90 percent sure, and her emotion pushed that to 100.
What a great write up. Long read but I really enjoyed it. Thanks for posting.
mixed on this one......what did he think happens when you separate from the military? If you really need the bennies then stay to 20.
/didn't read the link just saw some headlines that some dude was surprised he didn't have tri-care after leaving the military.
Aren't many of our returning and ex vets having these issues? And every time there are chances for budget shortfalls cutting the pay of the military is the first thing mentioned. I'm not surprised by this. Dude needs to write a book and cash in. I'm thinking he might have a picture or two stashed away somewhere.
It wasn't just some guy. He was a member of Team 6, and the guy that killed bin Laden. It's troubling to say the least that we can gender norm so women can qualify, but we can't duty norm? Asking 20 years of guys that are SEALs, let alone Team 6, is silly--especially considering these guys have basically at a full combat pace for 11 years now. That's longer than our guys were running in WW II, when they signed up and stayed til the war was over. At their operational pace their bodies can't hold up for 20 years. People scoff and dislike Blackwater, but why do you think our guys sign up for work? We owe it to these guys to take care of them with fat retirements.Originally Posted by Sooner5030
2 users like oucub23's post: Bk2X, nolesooner
I put these guys in a different group than our regular vets. I've worked with enough military guys to know the tab is bigger for some than others.
The following users like this post: nolesooner
I understand that but the treatment of our military in general leaves a lot to be desired.
3 users like KCRuf/Nek's post: Aurora, nolesooner, oucub23
Oh, and if what he says in the article about Obama's position on what we would do if the Pakistani's showed up is accurate, huge props to him for that.
2 users like oucub23's post: DHF, nolesooner
There's a lot of system abuse happening and it's leading to excess cynicism. Not justifying, simply stating.
we take care of them with fat retirements after they put in 20 years....not for 11
Benefits are uniform among the service members. My Husky operators that experienced +300 lb HME blast multiple times didn't get any special treatment compared to other Soldiers. I'm sure the guy is a great american.......not sure about the details of his separation but it seems odd that someone would voluntarily leave at 16-17 years only to complain about the lack of support. Now if .gov wanted to make some unique decisions about protecting his family given who he allegedly killed I think that may be prudent.
Did the link talk about why/how he was separated?
Need to read the article. But, from the comments, I gather the operator thinks he is special because he chose to join Spec Ops?
Dunno. I'm reading it in segments.
Nope. He's not complaining. It's more the feeling you get from the writer.
The following users like this post: nolesooner
Read it. It's worth the time.
The following users like this post: nolesooner
Interesting read. I wish the story-telling was done better.
Too bad he's not illegal. He'd be totally covered then.
Its simple. If you want retirement and medical you stay in the 20 otherwise you get nothing. Unless of course he suffered injuries during duty which i am sure he did. The va will take care of that. Not sure what he is expecting.
i recall a discussion about seals/special ops guys.......not wanting any recognition/special treatment.......doing it all for mission and country......the best of the best.............yada yada yada.......
the mystique seems to be wearing off on layer at a time.....
They should allow these specific individuals a down-hill coast to retirement after like... 15. Give them the opportunity to be an instructor.. a super.. a damn paper pusher if they so choose.
The following users like this post: oucub23
i served with one of the longest held pow's of viet nam....
he showed up to work when he wanted......he left when he wanted.....no one asked him to do much of anything....he was given every promotion
he was what we called "on the road" (retired on active duty).....
but he still whined about not making o-6
cub, you have a hero worship thing going on with the spec ops community. These guys are absolutely no different than any other service member.
Seal Team six are NOT the only heros through the years!!!! These guys VOLUNTEER for this duty and I am glad we have people that can do these jobs, but to reward these guys with FAT RETIREMENTS lessens the accomplishments of all other military that do jobs that allows rhe "6" members to do what they do! You might want to reconsider what you said. Think "TEAM".....
The following users like this post: smot poker
Sure they are. The physical toll by itself is higher. Beyond that, the situation we are in right now with them being at war for most of the last 11 years is unique in our history. They're not doing typical service deployments. Lastly, when they are applying for 'real' jobs, many can't say what they did. If the guy in the article says he was a SEAL on the bin laden raid, he gets a job but puts his family in more danger. If he writes a book like the No Easy Day guy did, he puts a target on his back, as well as his friends and family.
I'm pretty sure I know why you're saying what you're saying, and I respect your opinion. I simply believe you're wrong. How's that for irony?
2 users like oucub23's post: Bk2X, smot poker
Nowhere did I say only. Everyone should be rewarded equally because without the others around them they wouldn't be successful? Someone please tell that to the Kevin Durants, Derek Jeters, Peyton Mannings and David Beckhams of the world.
After reading dude's book I had a different perspective on these guys. Yes, to get to be an elite SEAL is a great accomplishment. It's something I can't even imagine doing and once there you have to maintain that high level to stay one. When they do go on a mission it's carefully planned and executed down to the second. They trained for months for the UBL raid. Although there is always a risk it is kept to a minimum. They faced a bigger danger by almost crashing than from anything in the compound. Even a disaster like Somalia could have been much better with the proper help from the WH. Although they details of them clearing that compound in that valley were a little hairy. I'm an outsider but I would bet that our soldiers serving on a regular basis are in more danger than these guys are. Having to deal with roadside bombs and ambushes from insurgents also seems to merit hazardous duty staus. JMO.
Anywho, they aren't going to help these guys unless it helps them politically. It would have been nice to give them some of the reward. The WH isn't going to acknowledge "**** Cheney's Death Squads" unless it benefits them.
The following users like this post: Aurora
Did you read the entire article? He talks about how many raids that his team did in Iraq on high value targets and AQ people. Every mission is different. What makes this team better than the rest is the training and the fact that they will go into any and every situation they are called to. The OBL raid might have seemed not so dangerous...but that's kinda subjective, dont you think? I would think for ANY high value target, there are so many scenarios that could happen. What if all those kids had suicide vests? What if all the women did? What if the whole house was trapped with mines or different things? I wouldn't have wanted to find out.
I have to say I have long disagreed with the treatment of active duty and retired active duty military (spare me your "they signed up for it"). If someone never sees combat it is different in my eyes and their retirement and benefits should not be the same. If you see combat you should have a decent retirement and benefits no matter the years or injuries you sustain. Our "ceo level" congress gets over paid and has the best health care all while doing nothing to better the country. Is the country better because of the military, maybe , maybe not but I don't want to risk finding out what happens without any of them. If the congress and president are willing to send them to fight they need to be willing to make their lives decent at home or the lives of their widows and widowers. Unfortunately congress will keep voting to make their pay and benefits better while we pick up the tab for them to not even p**** a ****ing budget.
The following users like this post: oucub23
Aurora...I love this post. Thank you for those words. They actually do mean a lot. Well thought out post and I agree with you 100%.
So , who gets to make the decision on who was in "combat?" I understand the sentiment but it would open a whole ****ed up bag of worms that does not belong in our military.
Like Nole said, I'm not sure you read the whole article. The 'Shooter' thought he was going on a suicide mission. They thought the roof would be rigged to blow--that's why they called themselves the Martyr Brigade. The point man tackled two women expecting to absorb suicide vest explosions so they could get the shot at UBL. The expected explosives hanging from ceilings to further spread damage. What's the saying? Something like the 'best laid plans survive until the first shot is fired' or something?
I understand what you're driving at here. A common sense approach would solve it, but w/the layers of bureaucracy we're dealing with, that's highly unlikely.
Didn't I read that they offered the guy other options to get his 20 years and full retirement?
Who doesn't know that if you get out before your 20 years that you don't get full benefits?
That's not the way the author describes it in No Easy Day. According to him the intel was so good that they had it down to what the people were wearing. They had issues with the copter going down and were pinned down for a minute by the guy in the guest house but he never mentioned anything about a suicide mission. According to the author the first person encountered upstairs was UBL sticking his head out the door. Was there a possibility of the women being strapped? Yes. I don't believe it was an overriding concern. One of their main concerns was the length of time it was taking and that they'd lost the element of surprise. Of course they didn't know what to expect once they got inside but every mission was like that. He said except for who the target was it was just another mission.
Did you read the article?
About half of it so far. Did you read the book I'm referring to?
And did the author of the article make **** up?
http://twitchy.com/2013/02/12/msm-se...ama-bin-laden/
I have not. I downloaded it last week--just haven't gotten to it yet. I'm trying to decide between NED and Kyle's book next.
I reckon the same folks who decide now, the world needs ditch diggers and CEOs and the military is pretty much broken down the same way. If you are not capable of combat roles you have no business being in combat roles. Also this country is a sue happy bunch of babies sometimes so yes I see what you are saying.
http://twitchy.com/2013/02/12/msm-se...ama-bin-laden/
Interesting stuff here.
Exactly! They expected the worst from these missions. He explains it very well that this group of people surrounding UBL got very complacent. I love "the shooters" candor.
oucub, did you read the book "no easy day"? I think the author of that book is indeed the guy that was with "the shooter" on the third floor. What do you think?
I haven't yet. I have it on my iPad but got caught up in some other stuff first. I was finishing a series off I've been reading for close to 20 years, read the new Clancy book after, and finished Breathless as well.
I'm pretty sure that it's widely known that the ****hole that poked his head out of the staircase was UBLs son. This article states that the ONLY man on the 3rd floor was UBL and that three women and a child were among him up there. The point man shot at the man behind the curtain who poked his head out (which was UBL). The point man (who I think is the author of the book) missed according to the shooter (who in interview said he shot UBL three times in the face (twice while UBL was standing and once when he was on the floor) He said he used his red dot that time. hahaha. Also, he indeed gave kudos to the point man for tackling those two women because he said he did that in order to save him, "the shooter" in case they were wearing those bomb vests. That way he could still get a shot off and kill UBL.
I don't know how in the hell ANY type of intel could suggest if they did or did not have suicide vests on, considering they wear them under their clothing. And since NONE of the intel had anything on the interior of the house, it was probably ****umed that there were all types of traps. Even the fake doors with walls behind them were unknown by intel before the raid.
Did you read the article?
My dad read both. Does the author claim to have "killed" UBL or just shot, UBL? I imagine and according to the interview, every team member probably put a round into UBLs body even though it was dead, so that they could say they shot that piece of ****.
I will say this. The point man (or author of the book) was a trained professional. If he missed as is claimed by the "shooter", would his ego allow him to believe that he missed? Or would he just claim to have killed UBL?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
