Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So it seems one of the guys from DEVGRU (or SEAL Team 6, or whatever it's called at the moment) that was on the run that killed bin Laden wrote himself a book on the raid. Aside from not clearing it with DoD publications oversight, leaving him open to some pretty serious prosecution if it turns out he dropped some info he shouldn't have, it seems he also got himself identified pretty quickly.

Between this, the recent Act of Valor brouhaha, and the slightly older "Dalton Fury" Tora Bora commentary, I'm wondering if capitalizing on the classified insider knowledge picked up doing secret squirrel stuff is really something that should be encouraged.

What was the recent Act of Valor brouhaha???

As to this book... I know I'm going to read it.

If Al Queda now know his identiy then more fool him.

 whembly wrote:
What was the recent Act of Valor brouhaha???

As to this book... I know I'm going to read it.

Some folks objected to active duty SEALs being required by the Navy (according to some sources, anyway) to participate in a commercial film.

 Seaward wrote:

 whembly wrote:
What was the recent Act of Valor brouhaha???

As to this book... I know I'm going to read it.

Some folks objected to active duty SEALs being required by the Navy (according to some sources, anyway) to participate in a commercial film.

Ah... gotcha

I thought it was an interesting flix and haven't heard of any controversy like that... I thought the complaint was that real-world tactics was shown.

It goes on sale September 11th?
I guess that's ironic?
Something like it anyway...

It's probably put on that date for purely economic reasons-- they think it'll sell more.

The Seal has to be ETSing out of service like NOW to meet the book release date If he stays with just the "boots on ground" portion then he be in the clear. I highly doubt he will divulge high level intell.

When the raid happened I did debate with myself whether or not it was 'right' for anyone to profit off of it by writing a book (I mean, if you were the guy who actually fired the shot, everyone in America would want to buy you a drink, right?). It occurred to me that it'd be pretty darn easy to *claim* it was you and not actually get challenged.

Either way, I am not sure that it is the right thing to do.

I find it ironic that special forces are campaining against Obama because "his realease of information related to the raid puts us all in danger", but writing books about it is okay.

I think if Bush Jr would have made the announcement everybody would have been happy, people are just happy it happened while Obama was president.

Of course I also find it ironic that FoxNews was the channel that broke the story that released his name.

find it ironic that special forces are campaining against Obama because "his realease of information related to the raid puts us all in danger", but writing books about it is okay.

Look more in depth on membership on the OPSEC organization. There are no active duty members.


edit



ALright...I'm laughing my arse off on this. I can see why SOCOM members are a bit...perturbed.

 Jihadin wrote:

find it ironic that special forces are campaining against Obama because "his realease of information related to the raid puts us all in danger", but writing books about it is okay.

Look more in depth on membership on the OPSEC organization. There are no active duty members.

Which doesn't change the fact that they were members of the SF community and are campaigning against Obama because "his release of information related to the raid puts operators in danger".

It's Swift Boat tactics all over again. It's pathetic.

It's no different than the garbage that was pulled about "Obama's taking credit for this as though he did the operation himself!". He and his team made a decision to go into Pakistan--which is still having repercussions for us in a political sense with a relatively key "ally" in terms of regional stability and operational jump-offs.

If the raid had been botched, you can bet your hindquarters that the Republicans would be crucifying him for making that decision.

 Seaward wrote:

 whembly wrote:
What was the recent Act of Valor brouhaha???

As to this book... I know I'm going to read it.

Some folks objected to active duty SEALs being required by the Navy (according to some sources, anyway) to participate in a commercial film.

But didn't they start filming in 2007 and had to work around the SEALs being deployed? There were plenty of scenes to shoot that DIDN'T have SEALs in them.

Which doesn't change the fact that they were members of the SF community and are campaigning against Obama because "his release of information related to the raid puts operators in danger".

Swift Boat called into question about Kerry decorations he recieved in Vietnam. How is this the same with his release of information related to the raid puts operators in danger. I'm not saying Obama release the information himself. You also forgot these were former active duty members who has 1st Amendment rights now. Those on active duty are limited on their 1st Amendment rights.

As for the raid being a success its Yes and No. A complete success would have been no losses. We lost a MH60 from 160th due to it not being completely destroyed. A classified item can be seen from the footage of the tail cone of the Hawk.

So... ya'll saying that the SOCOM folks (or any retired military folks) shouldn't be doing this?

Bizarro world here...

They have rights just like everyone else.

If SOCOM folks didn't write books about their experiences I would lose a good 1/4 of my reading material. As long as they don't reveal the dates and names of operations, incredibly detailed training methods, and identities of comrades in arms, or anything else that is truly a security threat I don't see a problem with it.

I think a good example of this is Haney's Inside Delta Force. By the time it was released the training methods and some of the organizational info was outdated.

 whembly wrote:
So... ya'll saying that the SOCOM folks (or any retired military folks) shouldn't be doing this?

Bizarro world here...

They have rights just like everyone else.

Do you read topics, or just reply?

The author isn't retired. He's active duty.

This whole thing comes on the heels of a group which is claiming that Obama and his administration have "put operators in danger"--despite the fact that the author was almost immediately identified.

Swift Boat called into question about Kerry decorations he recieved in Vietnam. How is this the same with his release of information related to the raid puts operators in danger. I'm not saying Obama release the information himself. You also forgot these were former active duty members who has 1st Amendment rights now. Those on active duty are limited on their 1st Amendment rights.

Way to try to deflect. Swift Boat was an organization which was made up of Republican mouthpieces who happened to be former military.

That's exactly what we are seeing, again, with this whole OPSEC group. Their behavior makes it quite clear that they're not doing it because the organization is "concerned for the safety of operators" but rather they're doing it because the Republican party needs a trump card to draw voters in.
They play upon this absurd notion that an alarming number of people are under that the Democratic party, as an organization, would willingly do things which put military personnel in danger without any cares for the consequences.

The most alarming thing about the whole situation, however, is that it works.

As for the raid being a success its Yes and No. A complete success would have been no losses. We lost a MH60 from 160th due to it not being completely destroyed. A classified item can be seen from the footage of the tail cone of the Hawk.

Which is not the point I was making, another nice deflection on your part though.

The point I was making is that if the operation had failed--or if OBL had gotten away--the Republican party would be calling for Obama to be held accountable for that--personally.
It's no different than the bull that happened with Somalia, where Clinton was blamed--personally, mind you, when it came to the Republicans who spoke out on the matter--for refusing heavy armor to the U.S. forces on the ground.

It's politicking to the worst degree, and it's despicable that this organization is playing the "patriot" card and people refuse to see that.

They are campaigning against Obama because his conference about the raid endangers every military member. Yet I have not heard anything from them saying that they are concerned that a book with details about the raid and tactics is going to endanger every military member.

Way to try to deflect. Swift Boat was an organization which was made up of Republican mouthpieces who happened to be former military.

You know Swift Boat was made up by former members of Kerry unit in Vietnam right?

It's no different than the bull that happened with Somalia, where Clinton was blamed--personally, mind you, when it came to the Republicans who spoke out on the matter--for refusing heavy armor to the U.S. forces on the ground.

Sorry your wrong. I was there also exchanging C&C Blackhawks with 10th Mountain when all their birds failed a JAYCE inspection. Aspin denied armor not Clinton. Aspin took the heat for that. Clinton did not know the request was made if I remember correctly.

Do you know what informations has been released from the WH?

edit

They are campaigning against Obama because his conference about the raid endangers every military member. Yet I have not heard anything from them saying that they are concerned that a book with details about the raid and tactics is going to endanger every military member.

What details? No one know whats in the book till 11 Sep. Your assuming.

Have they spoken out against FoxNews for breaking the news and releasing the real identity of the author?

 Jihadin wrote:

Way to try to deflect. Swift Boat was an organization which was made up of Republican mouthpieces who happened to be former military.

You know Swift Boat was made up by former members of Kerry unit in Vietnam right?

Oh, I must have missed where we started assigning units based upon political affiliation! What a striking blow for political rights!

Just because they served in the same unit does not mean that they weren't allowing themselves to be used for political purposes.

It's no different than the bull that happened with Somalia, where Clinton was blamed--personally, mind you, when it came to the Republicans who spoke out on the matter--for refusing heavy armor to the U.S. forces on the ground.

Sorry your wrong. I was there also exchanging C&C Blackhawks with 10th Mountain when all their birds failed a JAYCE inspection. Aspin denied armor not Clinton. Aspin took the heat for that. Clinton did not know the request was made if I remember correctly.

I'm aware that Aspin denied armor.
I'm also aware that Garrison has stated that if Clinton had approved the request for armor, then the Mogadishu incident would not have happened.

Do you know what information has been released from the WH?

A video showing Obama and his cabinet sitting, watching a feed?
A press conference in the White House announcing that they killed Bin-Laden?

Unless you're suggesting, of course, that somehow that press conference is less of a breach of operational security than hosting a press conference on an aircraft carrier on deployment...

Oh, I must have missed where we started assigning units based upon political affiliation! What a striking blow for political rights!

No thats funny. You either don't understand/refusing what I was saying or even refering to. No biggie.

I'm aware that Aspin denied armor.
I'm also aware that Garrison has stated that if Clinton had approved the request for armor, then the Mogadishu incident would not have happened

Wow a few post ago you were saying Clinton was being blamed.

 Jihadin wrote:

Oh, I must have missed where we started assigning units based upon political affiliation! What a striking blow for political rights!

Now that's funny. You either don't understand/refusing what I was saying or even referring to. No biggie.

No, quite clearly you did not understand the snarky remark.

Political affiliations do not affect the units which individuals are assigned to. Nor does one being in the military preclude you from being paid to pull political shenanigans under the auspices of "truth".

I'm aware that Aspin denied armor.
I'm also aware that Garrison has stated that if Clinton had approved the request for armor, then the Mogadishu incident would not have happened

Wow a few post ago you were saying Clinton was being blamed.

It's like you can't read...

It's right there in my quote. Garrison, the general commanding forces in Mogadishu, was the one who has stated that if Clinton had approved the request for armor--then the Mogadishu debacle would not have happened as he could have smashed his way in.

He was not alone in saying this in later years.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 whembly wrote:
So... ya'll saying that the SOCOM folks (or any retired military folks) shouldn't be doing this?

Bizarro world here...

They have rights just like everyone else.

Do you read topics, or just reply?

The author isn't retired. He's active duty.

This whole thing comes on the heels of a group which is claiming that Obama and his administration have "put operators in danger"--despite the fact that the author was almost immediately identified.

Uh... from what I've read, he's retired:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ex-navy-seal-matt-bissonnette-revealed-author-easy-day-firsthand-account-mission-killed-osama-bin-laden-article-1.1143421
excerpt:

...According to the report, Bissonnette is now retired, but participated in both the Bin Laden raid ...

So.. again... do they not have the same rights as we do?

For the record, I don't believe that Obama has orchastrated these leaks... I believe it's his underlings leaking these out in an attempt to make their boss look good. But, it's his administration and as head of the office, it's happening on his watch.

Whembly give up lol. No one going to see both side points nor understand.

 Jihadin wrote:
Whembly give up lol. No one going to see both side points nor understand.

lol... yessir!

 whembly wrote:

So.. again... do they not have the same rights as we do?

No.

They put peoples lives in danger if they reveal information. For example if they were under cover at any point and any one they worked with is still in that position of cover they can blow it.

 Glorioski wrote:
They put peoples lives in danger if they reveal information. For example if they were under cover at any point and any one they worked with is still in that position of cover they can blow it.

Like if they worked at the CIA or something and were exposed as an agent as some form of political payback? Something like that?