Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Marcus LUTTRELL, Navy SEAL. Hates libruls more than the Taliban.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 05:05 PM
Original message
Marcus LUTTRELL, Navy SEAL. Hates libruls more than the Taliban.
Edited on Tue Jun-12-07 05:18 PM by UTUSN
Earlier I posted about this fellow's appearance with Matt LAUER this morning, where LAUER read a quote from his new book about how he voted to release unarmed Afghans instead of executing them, and how his squad was later wiped out except for him. The quote gratuitously lambasted "liberals," since he called his vote a "Liberal" activity with many epithets. I couldn't paraphrase the quotation adequately. So I trekked to Barnes & Noble and tracked it down. In post #1 I'll recap the LAUER episode.

But even before finding the money quote, I found this LUTTRELL fellow dropping previous gratuitous slurs on "lefties." But perhaps some subtle DUers will find other meanings in his language. Is he using the aw-shucks lingo of pretending to put himself down as a liberal when he is actually elevating himself? Before the "liberal" slur, he calls his decision the product of his "Christian soul."

***********QUOTE********
From

Lone Survivor: The Eyewitness Account of Operation Redwing and the Lost Heroes of SEAL Team 10


By Marcus LUTTRELL with Patrick ROBINSON
Copyright 2007 by Marcus LUTTRELL

Little, Brown, and Company

p. 184. Sorry, lefties. But, like we say back home in Texas, a mans gotta do what a mans gotta do.

p. 202. The hard fact was, if these three Afghan scarecrows ran off to find Sharmak and his men, we were going to be in serious trouble, trapped out here on this mountain ridge. The military decision was clear: these guys could not leave there alive. I just stood there, looking at their filthy beards, rough skin, gnarled hands, and hard, angry faces. These guys did not like us. They showed no aggression, but neither did they offer or want the hand of friendship.

p. 203. Was I afraid of their possible buddies in the Taliban? No. Was I afraid of the liberal media back in the U.S.A.? Yes. And I suddenly flashed on the prospect of many, many years in a U.S. civilian jail alongside murderers and rapists.

p. 205. We could not possibly turn them loose. But my trouble is, I have another soul. My Christian soul. And it was crowding in on me. Something kept whispering in the back of my mind, it would be wrong to execute these unarmed men in cold blood. And the idea of doing that and then covering our tracks and slinking away like criminals, enying everything, would make it more wrong.

p. 206. I looked Mikey right in the eye, and I said, We gotta let em go.
It was the stupidest, most southern-fried, lame brained decision I ever made in my life. I must have been out of my mind. I had actually cast a vote which I knew could sign our death warrant. Id turned into a fucking liberal, a half-assed, no-logic nitwit, all heart, no brain, and the judgment of a jackrabbit.

***********UNQUOTE*********
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
1. Recap of the Matt LAUER interview
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

This would be one Marcus LUTTRELL, who was interviewed (or fawned over) by Matt LAUER. This was in the style of how Judith REGAN serviced, uh, I mean, PUBLISHED, Bernie KERIK: Take one HUGH physical specimen, furnish a co-"author" and let him ramble on, then interview him with dewey eyes, your heart pounding with empathy over a big, strong dude showing barely caged wrenching EMOTION.

He's a Navy SEAL (along the lines of Rogue Warrior, another one of REGAN's pets). His unit captured some Taliban and had to decide whether to EXECUTE them or let them go, with the letting-go meaning these Talibaners would be back to attack very soon. So they voted, and Marcus voted -- against his wingnut instincts he says -- to let them go and sure enough the unit is soon under seige and everybody is wiped out EXCEPT Marcus, the LONE SURVIVOR.

So then Matt said, "Let me read you something you wrote: (paraphrasing) 'So I voted to let them go against my gut feelings. I voted the goddamned LIBERAL bleeding heart way to let them go.' "

I can't do justice to the quote. He listed a good half-dozen epithets modifying the gratuitous "Liberal" word.

I don't doubt he has PTSD, that he has guilt over EVERYBODY dying except him, but where did the "Liberal" blame get into this?

In the wingnut item below (from Google), he is said to be the leader of the squad (sort of like Poppy in ditching two planes). Oh, and at the end, where Matt asked about his plans, the answer was that, after taking a break, the dude is going to MEDICAL SCHOOL, doubtlessly to bestow future patients with WINGNUT CARE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snbeast Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
63. Marcus Luttrell
I can not stand the thought of any person thinking Marcus
Luttrell is profiting from his experience.  I'll tell you
why.  Read his book.  You carry the burden he has carried. 
Achieve what he has achieved. And then go serve your country
in the peace corps, some NGO organization or for that matter
volunteer.  For God sakes or for a term you may not be
offended by, for your sake go join a team and put yourself up
to a really difficult task.  A task that asks you to sacrifice
for your fellow man.  

Marcus Luttrell is serving his country while we here in the
USA can sit back and rip our government and rip our country. 


When democrats get in office I swear I hope you all have the
kean eye to be objective and critical of what goes on in
politics and how the Armed Services actually works.  

Bow to those who serve willing and lay their lives down so
you can have freedom unmatched by other countries.  

And as for Marcus' Christian thoughts at the time when he has
to chose to kill or not.  Don't you dare for a minute make
little of another mans dealings with his God.  

Email me and let's have a discussion and I'll tell you where
I'm coming from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #63
66. Do you know how many veterans we have here?
There are tons believe me, and THIS veteran thinks Luttrell is a nitwit. For one thing he professes to be a Christian, then claims those Christian beliefs caused him to act like a liberal, then denigrates liberals as hard as he can. By his logic his own Christian beliefs are liberal and wrong-headed, thus Christianity itself should be questioned. Well fine, why hasn't he denounced Christ and his teachings then? Or maybe, just maybe, his Christian instincts WERE in fact the right thing to do?

Frankly I have doubts about the story, but even taken at face value Luttrell comes off sounding terribly confused about just what he believes in.

Your apparent perception that Democrats or liberals do not know what it is to serve their country is totally ass-backwards. It is Republican leaders who have no idea what service actually is, and that is why they can so cynically use and abuse those who do for their own purposes. Bush joined the TANG to avoid Vietnam and YOU KNOW IT, Cheney got.... what was it, five deferments to avoid going? Karl Rove? Never served. Limbaugh? no. Let's have a look at the presidential candidates shall we? McCain served, obviously, and for this he receives a certain measure of respect on the left, but which of the rest of them has? Romney? Giuliani? No and no.

I am sick and tired of this meme that the left doesn't serve. Where do you think we come from anyway? A great many of us WERE more moderate or Republicans once upon a time. Serving our country actually opened the eyes of a great many of us and made us the Democrats we have become. Do you really think we are in Iraq because it was a military threat to anyone? What part of the military oath are our soldiers fulfilling there? They aren't, they are simply serving the political ends of one George W. Bush and his sidekick Dick Cheney. Furthermore, most of them have long since realized that. A lot of deluded kids who were sent to Iraq are going to come back infinitely older, sadder, wiser, and DEMOCRATIC. Believe it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. Poor confused fella
"But my trouble is, I have another soul. My Christian soul. Something kept whispering in the back of my mind, it would be wrong to execute these unarmed men in cold blood."

Jesus would be proud of him. After all, his commanding officer will not be there on Judgment Day to stand before the Lord and hold the hand of this poor, confused fuck, begging leniency, "St. Peter, isn't cold-blooded murder okay, at least some of the time?"

"Id turned into a fucking liberal, a half-assed, no-logic nitwit, all heart, no brain, and the judgment of a jackrabbit."

Sounds more like he let his conscience get the better of him.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
33. He basically identifies his Christian soul as being liberal
and despises this in him self, at least that's what it seems like to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
3. What a disgrace to the Navy. The smart individual NEVER mixes their politics with their uniform.
This bastard not only is doing that, he's making a bloodstained buck off his dead buddies.

Survivor's guilt? He sure seems to have no trouble shlocking his idiotic book in order to reap himself some of that survivor's gelt, the baaastid.

Is he splitting these blood-profits with the families of his dead comrades? Why do I suspect that he isn't....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 06:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. No, he's not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
26. On edit--I mistook your meaning!
Edited on Wed Jun-13-07 01:58 PM by MADem
I see that he ISN'T sharing the profits, and the family of his OIC seems to believe he's a lying sack of shit. From the thread you provided:

In the NBC interview and in the book, Luttrell describes a discussion by the four SEALs and then a vote to let the herders go. That account, said Daniel Murphy, a former Suffolk County prosecutor and now a law clerk in State Supreme Court in Riverhead, is a far cry from what he said Marcus told the Murphy family not long after the death of their son.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ngant17 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. The Pentagon is riff with pathological liars
and I would no sooner believe his version of events that I would believe the story about WMDs in Iraq.

They will never admit they are in the wrong war, in the wrong place at the wrong time, and fighting a losing battle for the wrong reasons.

Where's the evidence that Bin Ladin was responsible for 911? I'm still left with hearsay from habitual liars.

Further proof that truth is the first casualty in a war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
5. Very nice job pulling this up, and highlighting the exact info.
that this big man used to describe his experience. I watched this too, and when he described the point when the four voted on the outcome of these unarmed citizens of Iran, I really was impressed that he voted not to execute them.... Then his anger was placed on liberals for some reason. I guess his hell is the fault of liberals. Well then he states that the another group of Iraq citizens decided to be just as liberal as he was and protected him. Unfortunately he does not see how fortunate it is that liberal minds know now cultural boundaries. This is another story with just as powerful circumstances. Less liberal people in Iraq found out that one of their neighbor's helped American soldiers. The punishment was that that father of that young man was responsible for killing his own son. I thank god that their are liberal minded folks out their.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
6. I decided not to commit murder and a war crime
therefore, I am liberal scum
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #6
53. The flip side of that coin
Is that cons have no problem with committing murder and war crimes.

There you have it.

Bake
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
7. willfully ignorant barbarian.
he only cares about the sound his own rapacious savagery.

a satyr for blood.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
8. Ooh! Navy SEALs!
Edited on Tue Jun-12-07 07:24 PM by tjwash
Well, at least he knows how to pander to the base that will buy his book.











Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-12-07 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Yip, this is prime material for Judith REGAN. Here's a look back at her writers
at what used to be ReganBooks. I don't know if it went under when Faux shitcanned her over the O.J. project.

SOME of her men (NOTE, the 4th image is an abstract rendering of LIMBOsevic). LIMBOsevic is included because she published his first two, ghost written by John FUND (at least the first one) books:



*********QUOTE********

http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/columns/medi... /

.... Then Judith and Rupert found each other -- and ReganBooks was born. Not only did their commercial instincts mesh, but Judy's what's-the-world-ever-done-for-me politics were highly compatible with the Murdoch view.

And then the sex part. It's a one-woman show.

I have never heard anyone talk about sex the way Judy does. I have never heard anyone talk about their sexual partners the way Judy does. I have never heard anyone analyze individual motivations, the workings of the marketplace, and politics, too, in such precisely sexual terms. The other day, on her show, she kept interrupting her tempered guests on the subject of why women like Bill Clinton, and, voice rising, saying: "They want to have sex with him -- that's why they like him!"

Early in her career at Simon & Schuster, she published a book called The Rogue Warrior and fought tooth and nail for a full-face cover photo of the author. "Don't they understand?" she stormed to me. "Women will buy this because they want to fuck him!" She got the full face and a best-seller.

http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical/newlow.htm (by DUer Gloria: )

Regan looked straight into the camera and for almost 10 minutes, delivered a pseudo stream-of-consciousness poetry riff mocking Clinton. Referring to his sad boyhood, she mocked his loneliness, then proclaimed that he built himself up and called himself KING, because "I am rich and I can do what I want!" She likened him to the cast out Socks, and envisioned him an old man meeting up with Socks at 125th street, both holding tin cups. ....

It was incredibly vicious. What was especially appalling was how she took the most painful aspects of Bill's background--his truly grievous childhood--and twisted them, using them to mock him. If this wasn't the "politics of personal destruction" I don't know how else you could describe this horrific display. ....

**********UNQUOTE***********

And I (the poster) will claim credit for insight. Back when KERIK's book for REGAN was debutting, she hosted him on her Faux interview show. His tale was of his missing mother, who inexplicably abandoned him as a tot. She never showed up for a custody hearing. The premise of the book was that this tough uber-male had this hole in his heart, thereby setting the pants on fire of tough wingnuts of all genders. As she probed him about the book, she and KERIK locked smouldering, HOT gazes. Once the mother-thing was done, she moved on to his heroics (which were what?) on 9-11. She asked WHERE HE WAS when the planes hit. Without missing an eye-lock, he said, "Stepping out of the shower." She swallowed and held a long breath. The image of nekkid KERIK was plainly etched on the Faux camera lens during the LONG pause. He added, "In my office." Another LONG pause. He added, "After WORKING OUT." There was another swallow. I suspected BACK THEN that something was cooking between publisher and author, and it weren't spaghetti. Only 2 or 3 years later, when KERIK's many other past deeds floated to the surface like dead bodies did it become official that there was indeed WILD WINGNUT HOT LOVE between the two, that the two of them alternated their WILD WINGNUT HOT LOVE sessions with WORKING OUT together, that he had used NYPD to track down what happened to his mother, that he used NYPD to provide security for his personal WILD WINGNUT HOT LOVE sessions, that the WILD WINGNUT HOT LOVENEST was a city-paid apartment near the WTC intended as a rest site for rescue and recovery workers. The REGAN-KERIK Faux interview was pure musk in the air. Why don't Shrub's handlers hire some of US for intelligence work?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
11. "Lone Survivor of SEAL Team 10"
Maybe the conservative in him is reason he didn't die with the rest of his squad. When the shit hit the fan he looked out for number 1 and everyone else paid with their life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
12. He May Resent Liberals, But I Still Have The Utmost Respect For His Actions And Bravery.
He made the right decision morally, though it may have turned out to be the wrong one militarily. The story shows how absolutely complex war is and the decision making process is. What a horrible position to have to be in that was.

But after what he went through and how he's put his life on the line, I'm not going to criticize him or get overly dramatic because he put down liberals. I'm just not that petty.

And again the intolerance towards christians seen here. Why as a community do we always have to slam and mock other people's faith? Though I can see why the last line of your snip is bothersome, I can't for the life of me find any logical reason that you had to highlight 'christian soul' as if to say "how DARE he say that!". In the context, there was nothing wrong with it at all. It bothers me that people here constantly look for any phrase using religion so that they can attack it. It's really a sad display of intolerance that I wish was more condemned here then it is.

But overall, God bless him. I don't know a ton about him or the story but from what I've read it seems quite complex. I'm just unaware of what I'm supposed to be mad at him for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 07:35 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Be mad at him for his willful ignorance...
...in thinking that "liberals" are any threat to him, while his beloved "conservatives" force him into daily moral dilemmas such as this one. Admire his courage, and weep for its misuse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. No. To Do So Would Be Stupid In My Opinion. Especially Since It Didn't Say Anywhere That Liberals
Edited on Wed Jun-13-07 08:26 AM by OPERATIONMINDCRIME
were a threat to him.

And for the record, I don't just go on gettin mad at people because they don't conform to the same political ideology that I do. I'm comfortable enough in my positions to not take it so personally and emotionally when someone else doesn't agree with them.

I don't get offended because someone isn't a liberal nor am I under any illusion of expectation that everyone is supposed to be one or think like one.

So he's not a liberal. Sure, it would be nice if he was, but I'm not going to let the fact that he isn't become more important than the story itself. I'm just not that petty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #16
20. A man who's been shot at in the Bush wars...
...but is still complaining about liberals sees them as a threat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #12
18. To your posts 12 & 16, since they verge on personal attacks and misrepresent.
Edited on Wed Jun-13-07 09:31 AM by UTUSN
(Although I seem to recall from your handle that you and I tend to agree on things like, what is it, immigration? or Hugo? I forget, but look forward to common ground again, though I doubt it's going to happen.)

See link in post #10 regarding how different LUTTRELL's story was to MURPHY's parents.

"not going to get overly dramatic because he hates liberals. I'm just not that petty."

Could have fooled me on both counts. The not-petty crack, repeated in Post #16, protesteth muchly.

"And again the intolerance towards c(sic)hristians seen here. Why as a community do we always have to slam and mock other people's faith? ...I can't for the life of me find any logical reason that you had to highlight 'c(sic)hristian soul' as if to say 'how DARE he say that!'."

You're reacting to somebody else, not what is contained in my o.p. I clearly said that "subtle DUers" might explain whether he was SHAM-putting himself down with the L-word since he had also equated his choice with his "Christian soul." Since I STATED it IN WORDS, I don't know why you couldn't find "any logical reason" for my highlighting it. There is not a shred of slaming-and-mocking anybody's faith. And your adding the how-DARE part is totally YOURS.

Post #16: "...it didn't say anywhere that liberals were a threat to him."

The quote in the o.p. claims he wasn't afraid of the Taliban, but WAS afraid of the New York Times.


All that said, I've always lamented my fellow vets who happen to be wingnuts, or more specifically, who USE their vet status, decorations, and uniform for political points. I compartmentalize their commendable deeds over and away from what else they are doing to dishonor them themselves. I acknowedge their deeds, but reserve my right to outcry over their politics, like with ANYBODY ELSE. To confer special status is to miss the whole point of everything.


And just to spell out the point of the o.p., it was what we do here every minute of every day: Did-you-HEAR/SEE-what-so-&-so-said-about-Libs??? There was nowhere in it a DEMAND that all others share our/my political views.

I think I'll take this as my signature line: "respect...fairness and a genuine desire to wish good upon all. That's why I'm a liberal."

Hard to live up to, ain't it?!!1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #18
21. Yes, I Misrepresented That Part.
I'm so used to seeing some poke at religion every chance they get, that I took the context of your highlighting wrong. From your clarification, I can now see exactly what you meant and will agree with you that my rant about that part was completely off base.

But I do stand behind the rest though. I disagree completely with your title that he hates liberals more than the taliban and found the twisted premise to be a bit distasteful. Though he threw 'liberal' in there where it wasn't necessary, all he was saying in a nutshell was that he is brave in the face of the enemy, as he should be, but that if he was scared of anything at that moment it would be how his act would be skewered in the media and how he would be at grave risk at being locked up for murder etc.

I can understand his fear and don't take it for a minute to mean he fears or hates liberals more than the taliban. So I do still find that to be quite an overdramatic stance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. Well, I appreciate the part of your gracious admission.
I, for my part, am relieved NOT to be responded to with vehement flames.

Whether he "hates liberals more than the taliban," uh, as I said, slurs against liberals seem to be sprinkled throughout his book, judging just from the bits I skimmed, and in all cases appear to be GRATUITOUS. I really doubt that he actually fears or hates "liberals," since he seems to operate with a bumpersticker, stereotypic mentality.

Was he "brave in the face of the enemy"? - who knows. His squadmember's family believes he dishonored their son and all we've got is HIS OWN lone surviving version.

I was hoping for more of a dissection of his regionalistic dialect, whether he's actually being PROUD of the moral decision which he attributes BOTH to his Christian soul and to being a liberal.

Thanks again for not responding with ugly flames.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. You Answered Thoughtfully, Rationally, Respectfully And With Reasoned Belief.
You explained your position and provided substance for it. You also correctly called attention to my inaccurate assessment of part of your post.

There was no verifiable nor rational reason for me to flame you in response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #12
28. I have to say, honestly, that I have a REAL problem with the guy
And as far as I'm concerned, it will never go away. He's gone a bridge too far for me.

He didn't make the decision to let those guys go--at least according to the parents of his dead boss, the LT, who said that "little Rambo" here told them a VERY DIFFERENT story. And seeing as the dead LT's dad was a former prosecutor, I kinda believe him.

There's no one left to contradict his story, because they're all dead. He can lie with abandon, really, without consequence.

A responsible Navy man or woman doesn't mix their politics with their uniform, EVER. If you're really good at what you do, one shouldn't even know your political affiliation by your actions. And to use 'gol-durn lib-rul thankin' as a reason for their deaths, and JEEEBUS as a reason why he survived, is just fucking SICK.

Lastly, you don't, even with INNUENDO, disrespect your shipmates--most particularly, your DEAD shipmates. It's just not done.

This guy is a fucking rightwing tool and a craven liar.

He'll be exposed, unmasked, eventually...they always are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. Shit, I Didn't Know It Was All Like That. Do You Have Links To The Other Side Of The Story?
I just heard of this all today and could only go by what I found in the news story on it. From what I read I didn't find anything really to object about or that was really a big deal.

But I didn't know there are charges that he's lying and making things up and being a dishonest fuckhead. Do you have the details?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. It's all in the link in post 29, downthread.-- a NEWSDAY article
I have to say that LT Murphy's father, the former prosecuting attorney, comes off as a more credible individual. I believe him when he says that this guy told a different story initially, and has changed his account completely. I spent decades in uniform, and never put matters of operational import to a vote--ever. Like I said elsewhere, the SEALS may do things differently (though I think not, really--esprit de corps aside), but responsibility and authority rested with (as they always do) the OIC, not the subordinates. For this guy to suggest that he cast the "deciding" vote is pure horseshit. The one who decides, and who takes the heat for the decision, no matter what, is the senior officer present. That's just the way it is.

I'm curious what the schmuck is going to do with the bloodstained dollars he gets from this ugly and self-serving missive. I rather doubt he'll share it with the families of his dead comrades.

It's the sort of tale that might con a civilian, but to anyone who's served in uniform it just doesn't ring true, as the military is not a democracy (that's repeated in every bootcamp/officer training school in all services, ad nauseum!). If this tale is true, it suggests that the USN, while in HIGHLY SELECTIVE recruiting and retention mode, allowed a weakling, indecisive SEAL to rise up the ranks from Ensign to Lieutenant, who led with a "So what youse guys wanna do?" leadership style...and that just doesn't smell right to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #12
61. And I ain't buying the story
last time I checked you don't vote on command decisions.

Or this new military is truly fucked
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-16-07 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #61
62. In the SpecOps world you do
vote on things like this........that's nothing new........
I believe it because I have heard other SEAL teams and SF Group guys telling me and others about voting on whether to kill people that they encountered on mission........In case anyone wants to know why I a lowly SFC is talking to SEAL and Group guys, well because when operating in our AO they must come to our FOB and coordinate with our S-2 shop where their movements will take them.........Can't have ODA and OGA people wandering around the AO, we might mistake the for hostiles and shoot them........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snbeast Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #12
64. Well said
Very well put and I appreciate your consideration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
13. he should be blaming jesus christ, not liberals.
after all, according to him- it was his christianity that was at fault for his 'decision'.

i guess that means that he's calling jesus a "...fucking liberal, a half-assed, no-logic nitwit, all heart, no brain, and the judgment of a jackrabbit." :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DFW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
15. I can be mad at him. Easy.
He implies that the people who killed his fellow SEALs are
less repugnant to him than "libbruls." Liberals didn't kill
his buddies, and Jesus Christ didn't save his life, not that
he seems to have much of one to boast of.

Just one more sick character who gets his lines from National Hate
Radio instead of thinking up his own.

I'm glad my life doesn't depend on the likes of him watching my back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Where Did He Imply That? Wasn't Contained In Any Part Of The OP.
Since there was no implication of that in the OP, I'm assuming you read the book and that there's a part in there that does imply such a thing. Can you provide the additional info?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DFW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #17
30. This does it for me.
"p. 203. Was I afraid of their possible buddies in the Taliban? No. Was I afraid of the liberal media back in the U.S.A.? Yes."

Just not my kind of people. I have been in interrogation rooms on the wrong side of the Berlin Wall back in the days of the GDR
when I was the only one in the room without an East German Uniform, a firearm, or the right to stand up without permission. There
is no way the American Media made me more nervous than East German military intelligence, I promise you. I made it out, obviously,
as they were not looking to create an international incident on my account (and my Russian was better than theirs, which spooked
them--they might have figured I had some high connection with the KGB or something, which I did not), but even so, I find the SEAL's
statement ridiculous, even if we are/were (in theory, anyway) on the same side. I stand by my opinion, though I represent it as
nothing other than that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
19. so who here still thinks that the military wouldn't turn on certain US citizens if ordered?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
22. I heard the same kind of crap from a Marine Captain in boot camp.
It was one of those "Why we fight" lectures. In 1961, Castro was the flavor of the month enemy. The captain regaled us with stories of evil commies and bloodthirsty slogans of wiping them out. My favorite line was that we should kill Cubans because Fidel had a "dirty beard".

The "lecture" fortified my belief that I had made a very, very, grievous mistake when I signed on the dotted line and held up my right hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BreweryYardRat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
23. He's a kook.
Honestly, liberalism has nothing to with his decision-it was just common human decency.

And speaking from a non-military perspective, it seems to me that the best thing do would have been to kneecap the prisoners and stash them somewhere until the squad got pulled out.

Not as morally right and decent as letting them go, but it doesn't kill them, and prevents them from showing up with reinforcements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #23
29. According to the lawyer-father of his dead OIC, it wasn't his decision at all--he's a liar, too
I can't speak from the perspective of SEALS, not having been one, but all I can tell you is that the sorts of things I've seen commonly put to a vote in the military are more like "Maxwell House or Folgers?" for the coffee mess, not these sorts of life and death decisions.

His account makes his dead OIC (who cannot respond) look like an indecisive wuss--I frankly doubt the veracity of his tale.

I also think it is important to remind everyone that, although the Army and Marines have lowered their standards mightily, the Navy and Air Force have not--in fact, they've RAISED them, because, up to now, they've been downsized in order to provide additional end strength numbers to the other branches. Thus, I'd guess that the good, late LT was probably a 99th percentile fellah, a real "cream of the crop" specimen...

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-liseal0...

    THE FATHER / WHAT HE WAS TOLD

    This is what Daniel Murphy, Michael's father, said Luttrell has told him about the incident in which the four SEALs decided to spare the lives of the herders, as told in a Newsday account of the incident:

    Since a SEAL's strength is his ability to get in and out unseen, their cover was effectively blown and a decision had to be made.

    What should they do about the goat herder? As the team leader, Murphy was forced to make a fateful decision.

    If he were allowed to leave, the herder might tell insurgents in the area of their presence, putting their lives in jeopardy. Taking him prisoner would slow their movements and could bring others out to look for him. Aborting their mission would risk the lives of those who would have to come to extract them and possibly allow an important insurgent leader to go free.

    Murphy made clear to the others that killing the shepherd, a noncombatant, to ensure his silence was not an option.

    "You know what, we are not murderers," he told the three other SEALs. "We're not just going to kill someone."

    They would spare the herder and take their chances.
    Copyright 2007 Newsday Inc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BreweryYardRat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #29
34. Oh, that's charming.
You're right, the guy is a liar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #29
38. I agree- his story makes no sense. It left me scratching my head and asking myself
Edited on Fri Jun-15-07 11:23 AM by Marr
"vote"? Since when are military decisions made by vote?

This guy wants to sell his stupid book, and he seems to have a head full of Sean Hannity as well, giving him the undeniable urge to blame "libruls" for anything bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #38
40. I'm retired, but I didn't retire that long ago. I know a lot of the folks who are
now rising to the upper echelons. I keep in touch with some who are still in uniform, and they haven't told me about any drastic changes to the way command is exercised that would cause me to believe this fellow's account...so I have to say that I really think this individual is a crass prevaricator, to put it politely.

He might as well be a grave robber, really, making a buck of his dead comrades in that fashion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
27. Sounds like govt. sponsored all-around bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jonathan50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-13-07 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
32. Snicker...
All he did was admit that liberals are better "Christians" than are conservatives.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
37. Hooray
Edited on Fri Jun-15-07 11:08 AM by sanskritwarrior
for the 1,973,214th time I am reminded of why many in the military would vote for a fuckstick like bush over a Democrat. Responses like most in this thread I find disgusting. Aside from OMC, most of you make me sick in this thread. In most active duty circles this guy is a hero, his politics are distasteful but what he did and what he went through and survived is more than 99.9% of the Armchair quarterbacks on this site will ever go through. This thread is already being pimped on the military blogs and yet again we will see a few more meme's put out there about how a hero and survivor of this battle is drug through the mud by the left....We'll see that a man most people in the military refer to as "The One" a la Neo from The Matrix that is being trashed by liberals, and then we'll wonder why a lot of the military is less than trustful of the left in this country. But hey, keep being disgusted by a combat vet that did his duty and is admired by 99% of the people in the military today.......


P.S. Sorry mods, I know I got mad in this post, but this kind of military bashing is getting old at DU and it makes me want to vomit.........Way to support us troops guys and girls............. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. Well, there ARE some of us who actually believe in equitably sharing the burdens of military service
Edited on Fri Jun-15-07 11:42 AM by TahitiNut
Sadly, too many 'lefties' regard such service as "slavery" and something to be relegated to them "lesser folks" who are "stupid enough" to "volunteer."

:eyes:

That said, it must be noted that Audie Murphy's heroism didn't make hiim a good actor. John McCain's suffering as a POW didn't make him an honest politician. I knew decorated Viet Nam veterans I wouldn't trust to drive my car. Courage under the INSANE conditions of combat does not invest someone with the skills and insight of other areas of human endeavor. IMHO, national "service" is a minimum level of expectation for any citizen of a democracy. It's possible and to be expected that a person serve honorably even when deployed dishonorably. Any "dishoner" in the deployment of military forces lies solely at the feet of the citizenry, NOT the military.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #39
43. Thank you Tahitinut, I appreciate your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #43
50. Gosh, I know *I* have good will, too. Apparently I don't say it the correct way.
I wish *I* had gotten the same thanks and appreciation. Perhaps there's a lesson in this that Marcus might ALSO have gotten more help from his co-author and editors in expressing himself more clearly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #37
41. Uh....I'm retired military, and my complaint is that this guy told two different stories.
The one he told to the prosecuting attorney who happened to be the father of the dead OIC, the boss of this guy, was one eighty out from his "I cast the deciding vote" tale--a tale that NO ONE ELSE lived to verify. A tale that strains credulity of anyone who has served in the operational military.

The "Gold Star Parents" of the dead Lieutenant take STRONG issue with this account. So what, are we supposed to shut up and cheer this guy on because he was the lucky bastard who LIVED? And not question his account, seeing as "voting" is not a SOP in military life, his story has changed, he obliqely INSULTS his dead comrades by calling them liberal wussies, more or less, AND there's no one alive to contradict him?

As a retired senior officer, I can handle the childish commentary of a bunch of so-called troop supporting online assholes who aver that they're in uniform. All I can say is, when I was on active duty, we didn't have a shitload of time to whine about perceived slights on the internet when we were in operational environments...so all I can say is, consider that source, too. If they want to quote us, LET THEM.

Any servicemember with a brain who stayed awake in boot camp has the understanding that they serve to support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. And that includes that pesky First Amendment. So please, get off the "Way to support the troops" meme. Supporting a guy who is looking more and more like a profiteering bullshitter isn't supporting the troops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. No you are free to say whatever you wish, just as I am
And this is no perceived slight, this man went through hell and back and lost the 3 people in the world closest to him and some DU members want to verbally lynch him for his politics. As for the story, I would have told a different story, hell I have told a different story to a family about how their son died. One of my guys from the 03 deployment died shitting his pants and screaming his head off, I told his mom it was quick and painless............In the end I know I did the right thing........so yeah, I'll keep beating the drum how I want to. You are free to say what you want, I am free to criticize you for saying it, ain't America great? :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #44
55. "Verbally lynch?" I simply point out that he told two vastly differing stories.
And this calls into question his CREDIBILITY. Let's add to that the fact that he's making a fine chunk of money off telling a different story now.

I guess when he weighed the "sparing of parental grief" against that big publisher's payday, the payday won out.

I don't see how he honors the "three people closest to him" by painting his supposedly beloved OIC as an incompetent leader, frankly.

And while I understand your point, and note your example about sparing an anguished parent grief, do you now intend to write a book that features the death of your subordinate shitting and screaming, AND naming him so his parents can now know that you lied to them about how their son died? Because that's what this guy is doing.

FWIW, the manner of death of his OIC wasn't glossed over--it was in his MOH writeup (and I'm sure the autopsy results, if the parents requested them, also gave them a pretty good idea of how the LT died). They knew their son's cause of death.

If you can't see precisely what my difficulty is here, well, I can't help you. He certainly hasn't spared those parents, or the families of the others, any pain whatsoever. In fact, he's magnified it. He's caused them to relive the loss of their loved ones all over again, two years later, and he's suggested to the parents of the LT that their son was a wuss who led by consensus. He's putting them through a Tillman family pain, really.

And he's enriched himself, too. He's also made himself out to be a central character in a hideous drama where I suspect he only played a supporting role.

That's not "verbal lynching." If the guy didn't want his tale to be held up to scrutiny, he could have avoided it by not profiting from it, by turning down a fat cash advance for a ghostwritten book designed to appeal to wingnuts, Keyboard Commandos and Armchair Warriors. They're the ones who are cheering this opus--not the Gold Star Families who now live with uncertainty because this thoughtless profiteer decided to spin a new and improved version of events and make himself some money of of the corpses of his "good buddies."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. There is no military-bashing here. I am a vet. I *know* that politics are to be kept separate
Edited on Fri Jun-15-07 12:05 PM by UTUSN
from active duty. This fellow doesn't "get" that concept. What was intended to be shown here was this fellow's using bumpersticker cliches that were anti-"liberal" (whatever his understanding of what "liberal" is).

Since you are "reminded" of why SOME military people would rather vote for Shrub, how about sharing that? You might also point out what is "disgusting" that is said here.

What *I* find disgusting is a THIN, SHALLOW definition of "patriotism" (meaning outward SYMBOLS) instead of the patriotism that is IN THE HEART, patriotism that is defending the right of people who differ in their opinions from yours to speak their piece. Clowns like Shrub barking "tough" talk instead of decent policy is really disgusting.

It has been pointed out in a couple of posts with links to quotations that the family of at least one squad member believes this fellow has dishonored their son and that this guy has changed his story. I'm willing to reserve judgment until he clears things up. So far, all he's doing is papering over his feelings of guilt with cliches that appeal to wingnut NUTS.

If this thread is indeed being spread to active duty personnel, I *know* that there are significant numbers of you who understand what is being said here. Wingnuts do not own the military, or the flag, or the country, or God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. I am a current military member
Edited on Fri Jun-15-07 12:56 PM by sanskritwarrior
and if you think politics are private, when was the last time you had a bull session around a space heater??? Politics is the last things soldiers keep to themselves.........

As for this thread, it is being spread and a meme is already being developed about more evidence of the "left not supporting the troops".........This guy luttrell is a hero to people that know about him, for the longest time only the Spec Ops community knew his real name, the rest of us knew him as The One...........his nickname was mentioned with hushed breath and quiet reverence......This man is a hero to many in the military and any slights toward him perceived or real will not be treated kindly. I'm not trying to stop anyone from saying anything, I'm trying to save some people from themselves.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. Fine. So he was a hero before the whole story was even out. It might not be out even now.
And perhaps it might never be out.

The point of this thread was that he GRATUITOUSLY slurs whatever-he-thinks-"liberals-are. Gratuitously. "Liberals" had nothing to do with his situation.

I have said repeatedly that he also attributes whatever decision he made to his "Christian soul" which is therefore, by his fuzzy language, possibly equated with "liberalism," since he also attributed his decision to "liberals" (with mock-epithets).

Nobody has any control as to what other people choose to read into something, or what THEIR UNDERSTANDING makes of it. No military bashing was the intent. Since you imply something about Democrats compared to Shrub (whatever it IS you imply), let me extrapolate that Democrats have the right to defend ourselves against bumpersticker bullies, too. So you might be surprised to find that we are "tough in defense."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. I know WE are tough
and if anyone is being a bully, it's people attacking this man after what's he has been through. I have never seen a thread that made me as disappointed in DU as this one, I need to take a few days break and remind myself that very few Liberals feel like the people in this thread do towards this combat veteran........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #48
54. "attacking this man" is not the purpose. If he's going to be on countless media circuses
badmouthing "liberals," this thread was a heads up to one more wingnut basher out there we here need to be aware of and prepare to COUNTER (not "attack").

You continue to attack this whole thread, and since I started the thread, you might understand why I'm concerned. You also continue to make allegations of military bashing and now about how SOMEBODY (who?) "feels about the combat veteran."

You gloss over the points that he has changed versions, that he is the only one WITH a version, and that he might have considered taking a few years off to rest instead of jumping into a world-class media trip. By the way, I myself do NOT allege he is doing this to make money, since a link from another thread, somewhere upthread, says he is splitting the money with the families of the other squad members.

Now, you can't have it both ways, claiming that this fellow is a sweet, innocent dude while allowing him a free pass to slur OTHER PEOPLE. We are not slurring "combat veterans." We are defending against attacks. Why did he throw the word "liberal" onto every other page of his book? (O.K., "every other page" is my ONE exaggeration here.)

Now, it's a sign of a failed "discussion" when one party keeps harping on the same misrepresentations or hurt feelings or whatever you're doing, instead of acknowledging the REASONS being put forward in response.

My lowly Combat Action Ribbon makes me a "combat veteran", no? What interest would I have in bashing veterans or combat veterans? I bash WINGNUTS, no matter what their role in life is. Whether they are minorities like Clarence THOMAS or Alberto GONZALES or (can't think of a Gay wingnut at this very minute, maybe later). It was Marcus who decided to jump into the political fire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #45
58. What would you rather have care packages or emty
bed sheets with signatures?

many of us hate filled liberals send care packages to troops we don't know in a REAL effort to support them.

I guess I should stop doing that... after all I seem to hate the troops
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #37
51. It's because of our respect for the troops...
that we criticize sad sacks of shit like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #37
57. Let me get this straight
Edited on Fri Jun-15-07 02:47 PM by nadinbrzezinski
you condone mixing politics with the uniform

Isn't that against the Code? (UCMJ for those not initiated in the military code)

He is a hero for surviving, but once he crossed the POLITICAL line, he broke the unwritten rule in the military not to mix politics with military action... and he is also dishonoring the memory of his OIC by showing his OIC to be an indecisive son of a bitch, hardly what anybody things off as a Seal, and tell me, when was the last time you voted for anything in the military, beyond what brand of coffee to have in the mess hall?

Yes, his buddies are heroes

Yes, he has gone through hell

And no, don't give me that bullshit about civilians. Many of the civilians on this thread ARE former military

So was a man with disgusting politics as well, his name was Tim McVeigh, who if I remember correctly, earned a bronze star in the First Gulf War. Need I remind you where or what Tim McVeigh ended up doing?

Being a hero, does not preclude any of us for calling bullshit when we see it, regardless of where it is coming from

By the way, in my best crisis intervention mode, this guy needs help, the kind of help that he'll probably refuse due to that false pride of being a Navy Seal,

Oh and if he is still active, he should be court martial ed for his political statements, no less than Major General Boykin and my god is better than his BS.

If he is not active duty, I hope FOR HIS SAKE, he gets the psychiatric care he OBVIOUSLY needs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
46. remember - the whole time he was in Afghanistan, the only
views were from pigboy or faux news.

He obviously believed their line of crap - how the conservatives are intellectually superior and the faux listers are infinitely better informed.

What can you expect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. What are you on about?
On every FOB and most firebases we get the AFN out of Europe where we get CNN, MSNBC, Faux, as well as selected programs from PBS and one night we even got Democracy Now with Amy Goodman........I wish this Urban legend that Faux is all we get in theater would die already.......I'm tired of swatting it down...........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
52. "...like we say back home in Texas,"
That pretty well explains the pathology.

These guys did not like us. They showed no aggression, but neither did they offer or want the hand of friendship.


That's about how the vast majority feel about his ilk in Portland-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snbeast Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #52
65. Ilk
In Portland do your type enjoy the freedoms of expression and the fact that so many give so you can have whatever you choose?

I am from California and live in Texas. In Texas we stand by our word and believe in God, Country, and rights for all man kind. We even believe in what the bible says.

Don't put down the man because you don't want to spend time protecting your family and freedom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
56. Why oh why does the name tim McVeigh come
clearly to my head?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
59. SEAL Team 10's "capturing a POW" training seems lacking
It seems to me, being an armchair quarterback here and all, that if Petty Officer Luttrell's team would have followed the basics of PW/noncombatant handling--search, silence, segregate,safeguard and speed to the rear--by ball-gagging and restraining these guys then sticking them in the back of their fighting position until the 160th showed up to extract them, we might be up one MH-47E, eight Nightstalkers and three SEALs and down one flag-waving, I-hate-liberals book...since the shit didn't hit the fan until after the SEALs released the three Talibanis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
60. Sounds like he is actually complaining that he did not have the
"courage" to kill innocent people.

He considers it a "weakness."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug 01st 2014, 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC