I did my time in the army in units that dealt with far less secretive matters than exposed in the book in question. Yet I was expected to observe both OPSEC and PERSEC at all times. I even signed a few NDA's in my time as well....
This book was not approved, it was deemed to be beyond editing to protect both past and current classified information. The author was told this and decided that he need not follow the rules.
I have had the honor and privilege of knowing men who have served in that Unit and others in the SOF Community. The author betrayed a trust, and he betrayed his Oath and his agreement to not discuss his actions or those of his Unit. Like I said I knew men who served in the Unit, I sure did not know what they did, nor did or will I ever need to know that. "Need to know" is not an excuse to hide away some dirty secrets, it is there to save lives, protect the men and woman who do the things on our behalf.... Sorry, but the attitude that we are all entitled somehow to information of this magnitude is ludicrous. Knowing that there are things going on, people out there laying their lives on the line should be enough. 99.99% of it we will never know, and their deeds will never be publicly acknowledged. Perhaps that is the only part that bothers me, but they know it going in, and accept it as a part of the job..

As to the Tax Payer comment.. man that just rubs me wrong and hard. I pay taxes too, I paid them while I served, as well. So was I paying my own salary? We all pay out taxes, we all pay our share, well perhaps not all of us. This does not give us any right to know anything beyond our pay grade, and or security clearance. Guess what? You do not need to know everything, and you sure do not need to know the level of detail the author went to in writing his book. If you really want to know, then I suggest a trip to the Army recruiting Office would be a good place to start. Make sure you get Airborne in your contract, volunteer for either Rangers or SF... then go ahead after you make your E-5 and request to be assessed...If you are even fortunate enough to be invited for that.

So to all those who did serve and continue to do so, I raise my glass to you and say a prayer that you all come home safe.

Posted by: Abn at November 14, 2008 09:59 AM

Yes, the military do work for the people of the United States of America. That's a given. The problem comes from someone, either in/formerly in the military or someone else, government, former government, Congress, former Congress or media, exposes classified information that has not yet been declassified. ONLY if the purpose is to expose illegal activity (and in the war on those radical islamic slimebags we're now fighting I'd make that not an exception) should ANYONE be permitted to expose classified information to non-authorized individuals.

THAT'S why you have Congress, and the Executive Branch of the US Government. The President, whoever he/she is, keeps a small group of Senators and Representatives in the loop. The greater the number of people who know a secret, the greater likelihood of that secret being blabbed.

For example, people involved in secret/top secret activities in World War II have (mostly) lived within any non-disclosure agreements they signed. Finally, in some cases 50 years after the end of the war, stuff is being declassified and made available. THAT'S the way this should work. And government, including the leaders of Congress and the Executive Branch, should immediately ferret out anyone who is leaking secret information and prosecute them to the full extent of the law. ESPECIALLY in cases like the NY Times publishing info on the banking activities that were LEGALLY but secretly being used to track and capture terrorists. We elect our government and we should let the government do its job. And a special punishment should be available for people like Jay Rockefeller who sat on a secret Congressional Committee and leaked secrets to the press!

OT, we should also be a lot quicker to prosecute violations of the Logan Act, too.

Posted by: Walter M. Clark at October 17, 2008 08:06 PM

Ladies & Gentlemen,

One thing that has happened in a greatly progressive manner, is the appearance of "Press" in zones of conflict. This is also proven by the growing number of casualties of said persons.
Such unprofessional personnel in zones of war with the excuse of "the public has a right to know" very often put the Professionals at work, at great risk. War has in a manner of speech become a game. It is NOT a game !
In my opinion it is NOT a place for amateurs and NOT for "soldiers of fortune" who operate outside regulation.
It is easy for a journalist or photographer to gain a reputation by being present under such circumstances and I suspect they do it for that reason in many cases.But it often puts the Professionals work in additional danger.
The Mercenaries are there for $'s (speaks for itself)
That some former Professional Soldiers chose to make money on their experiences (or use it as therapy) is their prerogative,as long as they stay within their N.C.N.D.,one can chose to like their choice or dislike it, its a free world (at least parts of the world.
What is the most worrying aspect of the wars being fought atm. in my view, are the enormous political blunders that has instigated these wars as well as the unpreparedness of the powers that be in not being able to understand the ramifications of their decisions and lack of proper equipment at time of engagement.
THAT is where any rant should be directed and not bitching and moaning over "weekend warriors" wet dreams.
Love & Peace (if we can find it)

Posted by: wielandt at October 11, 2008 06:35 AM

" pay your salary and we damned right want to know what you're doing. You work for us."

You and the general public may want to know. Want does not imply a necessity or right to know every detail of operations the government, military or intelligence services engage in. There are oversight committees in place for checks and balances, and they are held to account for disclosure as well.

What the American public know the world knows and that is the compelling reason for security of military operations and the military communities.

Mr. Christian, you state you and millions of Americans should get to know everything you want to know.

"You work for us. So I'm glad, as long as it doesn't deliberately put lives in danger of death... that these stories come out."

How the hell do you know what information will put lives at risk, deliberately or unintentionally. What gives you insight as to how past plans or operations might affect future plans or operations.

"But that's a case where the guilty pleasure of the inside gouge outweighed my scruples a bit...Inside Delta Force was SUCH a good read."

Well good to know you'll admit your priorities. Entertainment and bar room, water cooler, and coffee table quarterbacking first, security and lives of the military somewhere after that.

Posted by: SWF at October 10, 2008 03:00 PM

Steve,

I appreciate your response and the civility with which you express your disagreement with my comment.

In my view, the fact that the war is still in progress should have served as an additional reason (since living up to his word wasn't sufficient motivation) for Mr. Greer at least to have waited for the DoD to vet thoroughly his work.

Posted by: Sigaba at October 9, 2008 09:25 PM

I heard about this brouhaha and came over to read the original article and ensuing comments. FWIW, I am not impressed with what I have read here and doubt if I will ever be back as I have no interest in spending time on a web-site edited by the likes of Mr Lowe and his obvious disdain for us "knuckle draggers"...from which, BTW, he makes a living as a reporter and editor of military issues.

A few comments and I am gone:

Reading these commetns is like watching a bunch of hogs staring at a wristwatch--y'all know you're looking at something but you have no idea what it is or waht it says...but you're going to offer each other opinions about what you don't know anyway.

Having read Ernie Pyle's dispatches from the front and now reading a few of Mr Lowe's articles, I can say, "Mr Lowe, you are no Ernie Pyle."

Reading these comments and Mr Lowe's articles reminds me why our policy on the teams was to always avoid reporters and, if confronted, would tell them to go talk to our commander...who wears two stars and has an office at Fort Bragg, NC. End of conversation.

My opinion of most of what I read here gives me the impression that y'all are like those depicted on the cover of this magazine.

http://forums.techguy.org/random-discussion/528882-internet-tough-guy-magazine.html

Richard
__
BT

Posted by: Richard at October 9, 2008 09:00 PM

Sigaba: The doctor example is really poor.

A soldier who follows orders at the time, but, blows the whistle a few years down the road is a totally different animal. Spec Ops guys are expected to act with little supervision in politically and personally very volatile situations. They are the most trusted of all our forces. It's not in their nature to share in what they are doing due to the nature of their work. This guy came forward years after an operation to let people know what seems to be a poor decision by his higher ups. He followed his orders at the time, even though he strongly disagreed. He knows his risks for coming forward, he's just the kind of guy I want in that slot. You make it sound like you should never come forward or speak up.

Posted by: steve at October 9, 2008 05:36 PM

"There are MILLIONS of Real Americans that feel the way I do!"
Here's a hint. That is an argumentum ad majorem fallacy and therefore, would not support your point at all.
American gentleman,

I grew up with fishermen. All the men in my family fished, and taught a couple of us gals about rods, reels, tackle...and bait.

Baiting is an artform.

If I must say it clearly, Christian does NOT speak for the masses in his, "We pay your salary" comment.

Disgusting is too kind a word, IMHO, for the things this reporter has claimed.

But, the folks he is "calling out" can take care of themselves, so I should say no more, as I am just a civilian.

American Gal.

Posted by: American Gal at October 9, 2008 03:56 PM

"There are MILLIONS of Real Americans that feel the way I do!"

Here's a hint. That is an argumentum ad majorem fallacy and therefore, would not support your point at all.

Posted by: American Gentleman at October 9, 2008 02:17 PM

"As a reporter who's covered the military for a decade, I get a little annoyed at the knuckle-dragger attitude that someone who says anything about their covert activity should be banished. Give me a break. That attitude perpetuates an elitist, Samurai mentality that says "you don't need to know. Just trust us, we know what we're doing..."
Sorry, but I -- and millions of other Americans -- pay your salary and we damned right want to know what you're doing. You work for us. So I'm glad, as long as it doesn't deliberately put lives in danger of death (like the politically-motivated CIA tell-alls did back in the '70s), that these stories come out. There's been seven years between then and now, surely Delta and CIA have new ways of doing things that aren't compromised by this book."

Greetings Christian.

As an American Gal who has supported Our military for over a decade, I get very annoyed at the knuckle-dragger attitude of someone like you who has never worn Their Uniform, walked One day in Their shoes, or spent even one day fighting Their Enemy! They Do put thier lives in danger of death everyday, so sniveling civilians like us can even have this discussion.

Give me a break!

Your words are indeed very sorry, un-educated, and actually come across as pompus, in my civilian opinion. Our Brave Soldiers deserve a heck of a lot more Respect than you have shown with this "analysis." Oh, and here is a hint...There are MILLIONS of Real Americans that feel the way I do!

Sincerely!

An American Gal!

Posted by: American Gal at October 9, 2008 01:47 PM

Among the many points being missed here is the fact that Greer belonged to a profession.

If a doctor performs a procedure in violation of his profession's ethics because he thinks it is the 'right thing to do' or if a lawyer discloses confidential information against the interests of her client because the public has a 'right to know', those individuals are subject to censure, to discipline, and to punishment. (And for those of you who think such violations are no big deal, then you'll have no problem placing a loved one in the care of the quack in the strip mall down the street.)

The concept of professionalism is alien to today's journalist. Americans historically have had a tenuous grasp of the practice of military professionalism. We citizens have a desire to know the 'inside story' of just about everything. Yet, these facts do not translate into a viable argument that our desires absolve Greer from a code of conduct he agreed to observe. He gave his word, then he broke it, and now would have us believe that he's done nothing wrong.

Is that the kind of soldier you want protecting you?

Posted by: Sigaba at October 9, 2008 12:39 PM

I think you might find that British SBS/SAS had Bin laden pretty much cornered at tora bora but were told not to get him by Tony Blair as the big W wanted Delta force to capture him . By the time they arrived he had gone !

ps my theory for peace in iraq and with the afghans , give them jobs on good money, i`m sure twenty dollars a day is way more than the taliban pay , building infrastructure , far cheaper than keeping planes in the air and dropping jdam bombs and introduce air conditioning on a mass scale with a big kill switch in each local uk/us commanders base ! any trouble no air con ! no job ! if that does not work nuke north western pakistan end of ! the whole problem is that the muslim religious nutters are the equivalent of the torquemada in spain six hundred years ago , and we are living in the 21st century .

Posted by: lordwilson at October 8, 2008 03:30 PM

Higher HQ turned him down? Yeah, I bet Rumsfeld was the one. He was so incompetent..

Posted by: Rhyno327/lrsd at October 8, 2008 01:07 PM

Gentlemen,

Not being in the habit of writing in forum but none the less being interested in the subject matter, I would like to say the following.
When you go to war due to a "core belief" in what you are doing and you are defending "family" in the extended sense, its a much different matter than if you are on someone else soil.

What sometimes gets to me is when a forum gets on with rants and the objective of the original post is lost in white noise.

Having been under a rock for seven days, no food, one canister of water, urinating where you lay and going "down" to "clean up" for next day's "work" with the necessary education from one of the foremost Institutions in the world and the mentality to go with it, I have to say (with absolutely no offense intended) "please some of you get a grip....". The America I once knew is no more. I am certain that at the core, the American People are the same wonderful, compassionate, loving, folks that I knew and love but alas the course set atm. in my humble opinion is astray and will only bring sorrow to every one involved.
Guys, Semper Fi ! and remember to take care of your own, do not try to conquer the world, it won't work.
Love ya'll =)

1 shot, 1 kill

Posted by: wielandt at October 8, 2008 07:02 AM

RE: "Thinking that because you made this decision society now owes you something (respect, admiration, glory) is difficult to fathom."

What in the world are you reading?? Where in any of these comments did a military/former military man make any remark that he was owed *anything*??

The only one claiming entitlement to anything is Christian, claiming that because he wants to know something, he should be told it, every other consideration be damned.

So what exactly are you talking about?

Posted by: KragCulloden at October 7, 2008 10:44 PM

The amazaing thing about these posts is that the military personnel posting believe that something is owed to them. You are professional soliders, you and you alone elected to do a job, you were trained, paid, and taught a code that few will know and understand. Believe that society now owes you something because your a vet is something that I struggle with.

As for reporters and the media, with the first amendement comes the responsibility of ensuring your comments are factual, unbiased and accurate.. When the average Joe who could not find Iraq or Afghanistan with a GPS and guide believes that they see on the TV or the Web, that responsibility is even more critical. Personal opinion should be labelled as personal opinion.

You all claim liberty, freedom and justice, but are so quick to claim as unpatriotic, Unamerican or someother slur when the opinions or others are not comparable with your own. That's not democracy, its dictatorship, the only difference is that you have hollywood to dress the dilema.

Posted by: Matt from Oz at October 7, 2008 09:49 PM

I have just read all the comments posted on this topic and find it amazaing that there is clearly and Us and Them mentality. My observation would be:

As military personnel and professional soliders YOU all elected to serve, you alone made the decision to pull on a uniform and do the job. Thinking that because you made this decision society now owes you something (respect, admiration, glory) is difficult to fathom. You got paid, trained, feed, sheltered and taught a code that few among you will know. But that seems to be not enough. You are all professional soliders and should act like it.

As for the reporters, claiming an entitlement to information that clearly will not affect your daily lives is something that concerns me. Watching from afar and seeing the manner in which the media/reporters/bloggers publish information is also difficult to fathom. Reports claim the first amendment, but don't understand the responsibility that comes when the average Joe Citizen who could not find Iraq or Afghanistan with a GPS and guide is told what to think 24 hours a day.

There are always two sides to a coin, and the principle that the US seeks to export is the fundemental right to think what I want on any topic that I want. Seeking to silence that right is not different to any other dictatorship... the only difference is that you have cable TV.

Posted by: Matt from Oz at October 7, 2008 09:42 PM

You know, I think the elite forces operators take security a bit past the n-th degree.

Let's break it down to the basics.

We have SF, working for the military. The military is a branch of the government, is it not?

The SF is comprised mostly of American people. So is the military. So is the government. What is the purpose of government? To be the head of the people. Therefore, the military is part of the essential structure of the American people.

Now, if an analogy is put forth that the military, specifically the special forces are the hands of the American body and the civilians are the eyes and breadwinners of the American people, doesn't it make sense that they should see what America is doing?

I'm not saying we should put ourselves needlessly at risk, especially for greed (which seems to be often the driving force of a capitalist society). Highlighting an atrocity is one thing, but writing a book about how special forces operate is another.

I'm saying that no government should be allowed to order its valued military personnel to commit acts that would tarnish America's image at all, period. Therefore, the government and military directors should be accountable for their actions, and the American people should be able to inquire about what went on.

After all, if the hands of America are doing wrong, then shouldn't the rest of it know? And who would the people blame? Just the hands, or the whole American body?

Posted by: Fier at October 7, 2008 08:53 PM

Actually, I suppose that should be "typed scorn", not "verbal scorn", huh?

Krag

Posted by: KragCulloden at October 7, 2008 07:57 PM

"Krag,CK_MC, Kayaker - You're setting American civil-military relations back years with your rants concerning "whining" and your "us vs. them" mentality."

Ask me if I care....

"You're all squandering an opportunity to sell our collective story to the American people and get them to buy into what we're trying to accomplish in the GWOT."

No, I'm calling the boob that says "I'm a civilian and I pay your salary so tell me whatever I want to know" a boob. Nothing more, nothing less.

As I wrote previously, curiosity does not equal need to know. Apparently a few of these tax-paying (and therefore military-owning-and-commanding) civvies don't understand that.

Whether you pay taxes or not, doesn't entitle you to squat. Civilians, by simple fact of being civilians, do not have oversight authority over the military or any other executive branch agency.

Walk into an FBI field office and demand to know everything they are doing and you'll get about the same answer I responded with here in my first post.

The "I pay your salary so I own you" mentality of Christian's remarks pushed a button. As he hasn't retracted nor apologized for it, it appears to be his true attitude. Hence the verbal scorn he's received from me and other veterans in these posts.

Action >> Reaction. Real simple.

Posted by: KragCulloden at October 7, 2008 07:55 PM

What a highly charged atmosphere.

Krag,CK_MC, Kayaker - You're setting American civil-military relations back years with your rants concerning "whining" and your "us vs. them" mentality. We're an all-volunteer, professional force which is subservient to civilian gov't control. Hence, less than 1% of Americans will ever serve in the military. That's life. Get over it. Civilians are free not to serve if they choose not to. You're all squandering an opportunity to sell our collective story to the American people and get them to buy into what we're trying to accomplish in the GWOT. You should be glad that civilians look at this blog and post stuff here. Their doing so means that they care about what we're doing in this war.

Roy Smith - if your serve in the military, your political comments in a military forum such is this are unprofessional and are over the line as established by Article 88, Contempt Toward Officials. Shame on you.

Christian, Brian, SMSgtMac, and Steve - you're all spot on.

Posted by: Todd Terral at October 7, 2008 05:53 PM

Quote...

I'd like to close-out my own comments in this sandbox with memories of all the Kayakers I knew...

Kayaker,

You're the guy that I lock eyes with, point two fingers at my eyes, and then point one in the direction you're supposed to be looking.

~S~

No need amigo. But I do have Thermal optics and my "Field Of View" is quite wide. Matter of fact, look to your left. See Mr. Cool Aide !?

: )

Hums...."pick up your tracks and follow me...we are mechanized Infantry..."

: )

On a lighter note...though, "Grandjester" is Mr. Christian in disguise. Nice one...

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 05:32 PM

I'd like to close-out my own comments in this sandbox with memories of all the Kayakers I knew...

Kayaker,

You're the guy that I lock eyes with, point two fingers at my eyes, and then point one in the direction you're supposed to be looking.

Posted by: gsak at October 7, 2008 05:12 PM

"Kayaker,

I remind you AGAIN, you took an OATH to the Constitution of the United States, as did Mr. North. Mr. North VIOLATED that oath in addition to giving aid and comfort to our enemies. TREASON as defined by that same Constitution. And you defend and admire that traitor.

He should have gone to jail or the gallows.

Posted by: Grandjester at October 7, 2008 04:33 PM"

Oh.....I'm sorry Grandjester. I guess your a subject matter expert then right when it comes to US foreign policy huh? Do you work for the US State Department ?? Perhaps the NSA or the CIA ?? Are you a US Senator are you some elected Government Official we don't have the honor to know about here ??

What would you know about COL. North other than your calling him a "Traitor" ?? A traitor for what ??

The problem with you Sir is you tend to drink tainted cool aide and listen to all that Left Wing Marxist press they have out these days. Give yourself a break man and embrace reality. Have you ever met COL. North ? I have. And I can tell you he isn't some form of "traitor" as you may refer to him. If COL. North is a Traitor, then Cigar Boy Bill Clinton is a POSTER CHILD of good will and faith for the Democratic Party. NOT !! Yeah...drink up.

PS, don't try to change the subject regarding Mr. Christian and his ZERO credibility. I think the others would agree too.

Semper Fi

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 04:50 PM

Kayaker,

I remind you AGAIN, you took an OATH to the Constitution of the United States, as did Mr. North. Mr. North VIOLATED that oath in addition to giving aid and comfort to our enemies. TREASON as defined by that same Constitution. And you defend and admire that traitor.

He should have gone to jail or the gallows.

Posted by: Grandjester at October 7, 2008 04:33 PM

Dear Anonymous...

We don't ask for your "Respect". Respect is earned and not given. If you have never served in the trenches, then leave your personal feelings at the door.

Life is hard when you have to live and walk around real men especially veterans. If you can't stand the heat, go back to Mama.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 04:24 PM

JHFC - Bottomline: DF gave away no operational secrets. So, the bosses don't like the heat? Lay off him; nice to see someone telling the truth. Personally, I bet it was Rummy who did them in.

Posted by: Gwynn at October 7, 2008 04:24 PM

Reading this commentary has done wonders for my respect for military personnel.

Knowing that most military personnel think that I am a "whining civvie", a "nauseating effete intellectual", and a traitor to my country really retards my respect for military personnel.

Insulting someone has never been a way to gain their respect or trust.

Posted by: anonymous at October 7, 2008 04:19 PM

Grandjester...

Wow...you really need to stop drinking that Cool Aide man. You are suffering from a perverted illusion of reality. Guess you must be a liberal then eh to come up with that kind of statement.

Yeah, I respect COL. North much more than Mr. Christian thats for sure and he never wore boots.

As for Mr. Christian and his character, I call a spade a spade. He has ZERO credibility with me and I'm not SF. I can just imagine what the SF community thinks of him.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 04:06 PM

Kayaker,

Christian is a fine American, doing his job.

Ollie North is a traitor. Simple fact, he should have been hung for his crimes against this nation or spending the rest of his life in Levenworth at the very least.

If North is YOUR idea of a great American, then your service has taught you NOTHING.

Please remember the Oath both you and Mr. North took.

Posted by: Grandjester at October 7, 2008 03:55 PM

Christian....

Oh sorry...I got Team Sgt. confused with Mr. Christian. Face it man...your just a wannabe. If your half the man you think you are, you would go enlist and stop with your arrogance and inmaturity here trying to pass yourself off as some worthy "new man". I got a job for ya picking up trash on a beach. Snap to it man. You can then demand to know all you want about why your picking up trash and I can say...OPSEC my good man....OPSEC.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 03:26 PM

Team Sgt....

Wait....I'm a retired 11Bravo and former 11 Mike. I served over 22 years in boots. Whats that comment about me not understanding the US Army Green Berets? I have close friends who are SF and retired as well. I have older friends that I knew as a young kid who served in Special Forces in Vietnam as well. Trust me, I know more about SF than you give me credit for.

Semper Fi

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 03:21 PM

i dont understand why he's not wanted by the f.b.i for 9/11 hes wanted for other things but no 9/11

Posted by: prekay at October 7, 2008 03:14 PM

i dont understand why he's not wanted by the f.b.i for 9/11 hes wanted for other things but no 9/11

Posted by: prekay at October 7, 2008 03:13 PM

Team Sergeant,

I thought we were buds too...?

Anyway, read the post more carefully and you'll see I didn't rip anyone off. And earlier in the commenting I said why I didn't mention the board you and I both know about.

Also, I'll tell you and "kayaker" -- The Green Berets is more apt than you each could know. Reminds me of the time I had to hand a box of 5.56 to the SAW gunner on the roof of our COP during a night attack.

That was WAY harder than talking back to my preschool teacher and almost as risky as ripping the tags off my mattress...

Posted by: Christian at October 7, 2008 02:33 PM

BTW, speaking as currently a blue collar kind of guy. Jobsites and workplaces are usually nothing but strongly voiced uninformed opinions. He'd probably have a ball at UPS ;p

Fine, go find some of the people he writes for and give them hell. But, I'm pretty sure they already have read this. Most employers already know how to "get on the Google".

Posted by: steve at October 7, 2008 02:18 PM

Hey Christian,

Those are some pretty big words coming from individual such as you. Someone told me that if you had to list your most dangerous exploits that list would include talking back to your preschool teacher and ripping the tags off your mattresses.

Tell me little man what do you know about the warrior code or ethos? And what don’t you understand concerning the caveat of Top Secret?

Now why don’t you quiet down, men are talking.

Team Sergeant

Oh and by the way, where did “you” get/confirm the fact that Dalton Fury was indeed Thomas Greer? You didn’t take that from someone else’s website did you?

Posted by: Team Sergeant at October 7, 2008 02:10 PM

Steve...

When pigs roll in the mud, they are surely going to get others muddy as well. Mr. Christians employer undoubtedly wants to remain clean of any mud themselves and won't tolerate having their professional image tainted by an individual who comes across as arrogant and demeaning to our people in uniform and the important missions they must perform in war time.

As for Political Correctness, that has no place in the Armed Forces and has destroyed society in large part today over the course of the last 15 years. But on the other hand, when you embarass yourself and your employer and try to bring discredit to others when its not warranted, you will pay a hefty price that will follow you. Thats reality no matter where you go today. You practice that mindset in the work place, you won't be able to get a job tossing packages at UPS.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 02:10 PM

Welcome to the world of blogging, thanks for playing.

Posted by: steve at October 7, 2008 02:08 PM

afaik christian IS the editor of defense tech.

Posted by: unmannedanimal at October 7, 2008 02:07 PM

Well, I respect your opinion, even though I disagree with it. You were free to express it here, because you held him accountable for his opinions and directly called him on it. It's a great system. What makes you think his employers if any should have to share your opinion and follow your wishes? Are we going to go the Politically Correct route and have a check list of what he can or can't have for an opinion and have him fired for not complying?

Posted by: steve at October 7, 2008 02:02 PM

Steve....

Its your general attitude and lack of knowledge that is considered toxic regarding my reply as well as those others previous to mine. Just like my reply to Mr. Christian. You can say whatever you want to support some twisted belief but then you need to be held accountable for your actions by others that are interpreted as garbage.

We all know that blatant stupidity mixed with arrogance isn't an acceptable standard in society when you are demanding to know stuff that you are not entitled to. If Mr. Christian worked for me and knowing what I understand about his character now, I would kick him to the curb. Thats why Mr. Christian isn't like other respected reporters in the field like COL. Ollie North. He has no credibility. You can loose your credibility in a heart beat and he did with many of us veterans here.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 01:54 PM

Besides, do you have any idea what a flame fest like this does to his hits count? If I was his editor at another venue, I'd tell you to go piss up a rope just so you come to my website to post how much I suck.

Posted by: steve at October 7, 2008 01:51 PM

Oh, I must have misread the Constitution, you know the whole part about freedom of expression. If you had him on a factual error or deliberate misreporting, you would have some point. However, since he merely stated his opinion, which would be under the purvue of editorials, you don't. Of course, I could be mistaken in my opinion that the owner of a website has the right to say pretty much fool thing he likes on it. He even gives you the oppurtunity to disagree with him in real time. Why so mad?

Posted by: steve at October 7, 2008 01:43 PM

Nice try "Steve". But this is the real world. You can say what you want then you need to held accountable.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 01:38 PM

"Hello? Editor? I disagree with one of your reporters and I demand you fire him, Yes, I know I'm free to choose not to read any more of his writings. But, I think it would be best if you fired him so noone ever gets offended again."

Posted by: steve at October 7, 2008 01:34 PM

Christian..

Cold ? Hey, I wear a Dry Suit, hopefully you do also. You come across as very inmature as well as a self righteous sort of guy. You remind me of that arrogant reporter who was in that famous movie with John Wayne, the "Green Berets". All full of himself and demanding to know everything yet couldn't handle the truth when complete strangers told him otherwise. Fortunately, later in the movie, he saw the light. Perhaps you need some of the same.

Personally, I would like to know who your employer is so he / she can get an earful. Your reporting is very toxic and you need to be held accountable as a result to your readers Mr. Christian.

Perhaps your in the wrong line of work Mr. Christian. Considering that the country is in its seventh year of war against a determined enemy, maybe you can enlist into either the US Army or the Marine Corps and experience the fight with a weapon instead of a legal pad and a pencil. Then you can learn all about OPSEC and what it means when your life is on the line.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 01:31 PM

Jimbo Jones:

Ouch! You want me to die in a fire!? And here I thought we were friends...

Kayaker:

"As far as this Christian character is concerned, he now seems more of a toxic character than anything that can be considered worthwhile. Perhaps its time that he be removed from his position by the people who pay his salary."

In this economy, that would kind of suck...Jimbo Jones wants me to die in a fire and you just want me fired...man, that's COOOOLD...

CK_MC:

I wanted to write a big 'ole response to all your ranting and raving about how stupid I am, but when I started, all it came down to was: "I rest my case."

You are a perfect example of the phenomenon I am talking about here and I've seen guys like you (yes, in freaking combat) before. I don't have to prove shit to you because it's not worth it. You'll never listen to a reasonable argument (though you do seem to have a lot of time on your hands to engage in the discussion, and for that I thank you) anyway, so why waste my time.

I respect what each and every servicemember does...from the finance Soldier missing a leg and wearing a colostomy bag I went fishing with this past weekend, to the SF guys I shot the shit with in Hit back in '06, to the ANGLICOs I met in Afghanistan, to the JTACs, Cobra pilots, snipers and Bradley drivers I took fire with in any number of sandboxed crapholes -- and on and on. All of them do great stuff and by and large love their jobs.

We respected eachother's jobs, perspectives and roles in this great Democracy that we ALL serve. I'm no hack, or "self appointed intellectual" (though I am sort of flattered by the notion) just a guy who's seen a lot, knows a few people, likes to write about it for those who can't join me and gets chafed at attitudes like yours.

But again, thanks for coming in! The water's nice and warm...

Posted by: Christian at October 7, 2008 01:14 PM

To listen to some of these guys when they say "I work for the country not you". Who is the country then? Do you take orders from the Rocky Mountains or the Great Lakes or do you work for people? Guess what little buckaroos, when our political leadership does stupid crap like this to our military, this is the kind of stuff that follows under Need To Know.

Do we need to know where the Deltas are deployed right now? No, no you don't

Do we need to know how many SEALS are in Afghanistan? No, no we don't.

Do we need to know are Spec Ops guys obeyed some pretty retarded orders at the risk of their own lives several years ago? Yeah, probably good for us to know.

Some posters are missing the whole point of a trustworthy military. When someone says they got called off the target and followed those orders. That is the definition of their job. Anyone who has served in any capacity should know "you don't have to like it, you just have to do it",is how it's done. Whether it's orders to stop going after Bin Laden or to destroy a vehicle that may have a civilian in it, once that order is given they have no choice in the matter but to follow orders. That isn't to say much later when the dust settles someone can't step forward and say "hey, this was pretty messed up, but, this is what happened". It's not easy for the military to do this, they walk a fine line between disloyalty and patriotism when they come forward.

Others here don't seem to understand the concept of military grade accountability. You can't be a mindless drone either. If a corporal is given a blatantly illegal order, (like shooting unarmed civilians or the like), and later claims he was following orders from a Lt., it won't do as an excuse, the UCMJ is still going to come down on you because you should have known better. Hell, you could probably wind up in jail for simply not reporting it. Of course this all depends on the political winds and what general officer is trying to cover their butt, sad but, true.

I understand their disdain for the press, most reporters who cover a war couldn't cover a fire back home. But, at least Christian has never referred to an M4 as a machine gun or a tracked cargo carrier as a tank. I think some of you have forgotten who's side everyone is on.

Posted by: steve at October 7, 2008 12:58 PM

gsac:

Well I slept in a Holiday In Express...Or something to that effect.

Since you are indoctrinated tell us what you think of a reporter declaring his constitutional right to know what you have done while basing his right to know on the fact that he pays your salary through his taxes. All justified and rationalized through his impunity as a journalist.

I don't care if you defend the press' rights to know or freedom of speech etc. I do, without them there are no checks and balances. However, there has to be some accountability on the part of the press as well. Defend Christian if you want but he should be jobless at this point as far as I am concerned.

So there is my logic along with the mile of crap this has become.

For the most part, I have enjoyed everyone's input. Although many of us disagree, I respect your opinions.

I hope you all stay safe.

Semper Fi

Posted by: CK_MC at October 7, 2008 12:54 PM

If we had a good NCO Corps and I'm trusting that we do, we wouldn't have ANY problems in the field now would we ? Former Infantry NCO here.

All I read here is excuses about why "Civilians" need to know what the military is doing in the field. Many civilians I know don't have the courage nor the stamina to serve in the active duty forces much less the National Guard much less need to know what our professional warriors are doing down range.

Your supposed to be professional soldiers performing a mission to the best of your ability. Thats why you have some form of ROE to conduct your mission. Also, we have Admirals, Generals and the like who have the Security Clearances to make the tough decisions against a determined enemy especially in war time. So make it happen and ensure victory to those who deserve it.

The average civilian on the street has no clue what the professional soldier does for their benefit nor do they care. They are more concerned about walking the dog and going to Star Bucks on a Saturday morning than knowing about what some Special Forces Team is doing at this exact moment while engaging Al-Queada on the Paki Afghan border area. Many of us who are retired veterans do understand and we are smart enough to realize that OPSEC is exactly that. Remember that old saying back in World War II ?? "Loose Lips Sink Ships". Well its true. When the John F. Kennedy assination hearings are still kept classified and hidden under a Federal law about what took place that fateful day long ago, the same rule applies to our SF Teams in the field. OPSEC is exactly that. You keep your lips shut and you continue on with the mission at hand.

Now with this Christian character, he just needs to be removed from reporting on an military issues since he has made himself very toxic at best. Perhaps we just need COL. Ollie North instead of Christian. Atleast COL. North understands what OPSEC really is and what it means.

Semper Fi.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 12:28 PM

Some people in this conversation are coming off like little petulant children who don't think they have to answer to anyone or anything.

They are embarrassing themselves and showing a lack of the discipline expected from people in their position.

Posted by: whiningcivvie at October 7, 2008 12:09 PM

Alright, heated discussion in the works...

From my point of view, people should know, BUT due to national security (and security to the unit doing the work) that makes it impossible. So we need a compromise. That's what our nation was founded on, compromise. (Among other things too, but I'll stick with this right now). So, why not keep the "operational security" during the operation and a little bit after for like a year or a couple of months (pick a time) and then when that time is up, we tell people. I am pretty sure that's what we do now and I have no problem with that. I think the only problem is when too many people are involved. Too many managers, admin along with too many military people who want nothing more than to gain rank. Keep the people in the know small, but make sure these people are competent.

So, back to the part about the guy not being able to kill Bin Laden. Seriously? What the hell...

Posted by: GMan20 at October 7, 2008 12:02 PM

Guys, there's an attitude of entitlement here by people on BOTH sides. You think civilians don't hear it when guys in the military say "oh, that's not for your sensitive ears". Then we find out that they screwed the pooch and launched a hellfire missile into a baby food factory. "Well, you don't need to know about that. National security, you know."

Civilians NEED oversight over the military. When you guys put a nuclear missile on a plane and fly it over the continental United States, and you don't even KNOW YOU DID IT, that tells me there needs to be some more oversight.

No one here is saying that Delta Force needs to show up at Joe Mailman's house every morning and give him an operations report. The Marines don't need to hold a press briefing on Good Morning America and say "Today we're going to go into Derkaderkastan and attack the village of Hakkadakkadakkka." But you'd better believe it that we want to know what you guys are up to. We want to know when you get out of line. None of us want to see a bunch of glory boys joyriding around in billion dollar equipment bombing the wrong villages and starting wars with other nations.

There's this attitude amongst some in the military (we've seen it out in force on this thread) that we should just keep our mouths shut and be grateful. This is the Colonel Jessup attitude. "You can't handle the truth." This is a problem. It's a problem, and it turns normal people who would support the military into pansy-assed leftists who think we need to hold hands and sing Kumbayah. You'll see the joyride end real quick if enough of those legislators get elected. See funding get cut, and you can run around and pretend you're a Green Beret in your backyard with a paintball gun.

Christian is right. This hyper-secret mentality that what Sgt Johnson had for breakfast is somehow a matter of national security is ridiculous. No one wants to compromise active missions or put any of our soldiers in danger. But when you f*** up, or present some dumbass plan that has no hope in hell of ever being approved or put into action, then national security is NOT at stake.

Posted by: Brian at October 7, 2008 11:47 AM

Thanks. :) How's that coffee taste?

Posted by: gsak at October 7, 2008 11:46 AM

GOD BLESS THOSE THAT WEAR THE UNIFORM OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MILITARY,,,AMEN . I DO NOT NEED TO THE MISSION OF OUR SPEC/OPS ,,, EXCEPT OUR TROOPS WERE SUCEESSFUL , SAFE & HOME . I DID NOT SERVE , MY FATHER WAS LEFT BEHIND WHEN DUGOUT-DOUG PULLED OUT DURING WWII,GOING MIA , ,, ONCE AGAIN GOD BLESS AND THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO !

Posted by: RUSSell Hayes at October 7, 2008 11:45 AM

gsak - Don't bring logic to the argument. Wannabes and could'a'beens have to have their say as well. Even if they are talking out of their asses.

All I can say is that there have been more books written about elite units than there have been members.

Posted by: tontochoc at October 7, 2008 11:36 AM

CK_MC:

[RE: You are uninformed. Don't expect fine journalists like Christian to deliver revelations to your monitor. There are hundreds of books detailing the miscues and dumbass decisions being made. Hell you can even watch about a dozen episodes of Frontline on PBS and get a small clue. So they are obliging your thirst for knowledge to a degree(hopefully no TS stuff).]

I am an honorably-discharged veteran who held a Top Secret clearance. I've been trained by Blackwater in CQB, and I've seen a nuclear weapon in real life. I have a small clue, maybe.

[RE: If you think the warriors in uniform are robots you are kidding yourself. They must exercise there own judgement continuously. In fact, there is a legal precedent set that will not allow the "I was just following orders" defense. Google the different articles of the UCMJ you will see you must obey "lawful" orders.]

And you trusted me to self-evaluate my own judgment and decide when it was appropriate to follow orders and when it was not. I appreciate that a lot of people here are speaking from "on-paper" experience, or regurgitating ideals. That's fine for most of America, in their own minds. But I am speaking to you from experience. Not "I'm an old, salty E9 and have forgotten what it's like at the ground level" experience but real, E5-level military experience.

You guys out there... You can choose to quote every page of the UCMJ, every line in every movie that you've ever watched... or you can re-calibrate yourselves to the micro-realities of military service. That Christian, a civilian reporter, would be so insightful to have a clue... that honors me more than half of the yellow ribbons I've seen.

Maybe I'll write a book.

Posted by: gsak at October 7, 2008 11:19 AM

Wow, what a lively discussion! Even the Obamatrons are chiming in!

What's next? 9/11 Truthers?

QUOTE "You've got to love these cryptofascists telling Christian to SFU and "stay in your lane"...I'm a hard, hard right winger, former USMC, but if you think we citizens have no right or need to know what our military is doing, you need a civics lesson or twelve.

This is a Republic. If we citizens are not well informed, how can we choose wise leaders? "

Wes....

As a Veteran myself, you are very wrong in your views here. I served in the Marines as well and may be very similar to you but even I know that we as civilians and or military are not authorized to know nor do we have any need to know what happens out on the battlefield especially on covert missions. The only thing you need to understand and realize is that we have the right people doing the right jobs for a reason.

Wes...you can quote that "Republic" stuff all day long but your way out of line with your assessments. As a registered voter and a citizen not to mention a veteran, I want my military and SF Operators to do what they need to do in order to win and complete their mission period. You remember 9/11 or have you forgotten like the rest in society have ?

As far as this Christian character is concerned, he now seems more of a toxic character than anything that can be considered worthwhile. Perhaps its time that he be removed from his position by the people who pay his salary.

Semper Fi

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 10:59 AM

The posts to this thread have been very enlightening. Would Generals George Patton, Dwight Eisenhower or Douglas MacArthur said "the military doesn't work for you or any other whining civvie...." Well maybe Patton but on a serious note the military and I am a Viet-Nam era veteran does not hold "bake sales, yard sales or car washes or any other money raising activities. The budget which Congress votes on provides salaries, uniforms, equipment, etc. When I was in the military just my civilian counterparts I paid income taxes both federal and state. I presume with a few exceptions, the same thing applies today. Everyone here is getting in their jabs for their point of view. But hear me good who post here that are in military, you were civilians prior to your service entry and if you are blessed to do 20 years and get your honorable discharge you will transition back to the civilian world. Bear that in mind. Future members of local, state and federal government will consist of veterans from the Gulf War, Operation Iraqi Freedom and the the campaign in Afghanistan. I believe your comrades who chose government service will be up to the task. Someone posted that this is a Republic not a democracy. That person's right! The word republic comes up in the pledge of allegiance, as to why it does that is another subject for another time. As I conclude this, I am going to say that I have seen posts here which I would have heard from the "lifers" in the units I served in. "Spit and Shine Sargeants during the week, hell-raisers, skirt chasers, beer drinkers, gas passers and belchers during the weekend. Someone was right when they said "the more things change, the more they remain the same." Okay I put in my quarters worth,(due to the economic situation, two cents won't cut it anymore) y'all can go back to verbally beating up on each other. I'm loving this it is the equivalent of a bar fight before the Military Police come along to break it up.

Posted by: willielance at October 7, 2008 10:52 AM

Wow, what a lively discussion! Even the Obamatrons are chiming in!

What's next? 9/11 Truthers?

You've got to love these cryptofascists telling Christian to SFU and "stay in your lane"...I'm a hard, hard right winger, former USMC, but if you think we citizens have no right or need to know what our military is doing, you need a civics lesson or twelve.

This is a Republic. If we citizens are not well informed, how can we choose wise leaders?

Posted by: Wes at October 7, 2008 10:16 AM

This is the reason our country was not set up as a pure democracy. The populus as a whole is not smart enough or responsible enough to be able to run a country. Yes the taxpayers pay for everything the gov't needs but at the same time if each agency had to respond to every request from the taxpayers nothing would get done. The public elects representatives to make sure our country is run correctly, that includes the defense. If something is questioned by a taxpayer, it should go through your elected representatives, not directly to the source.

Posted by: JEFF at October 7, 2008 10:01 AM

the media nor the people need to know a damn thing that goes on in the military theres a reason we dont put stuff like that out its called national security. a reporter will try to make a name for themselves no matter how many lives could be lost over it

Posted by: cameron at October 7, 2008 09:12 AM

Oh no,the price of oil is falling because the common American cannot afford to buy gas,what to do,WHAT TO DO? Thank God for Iran claiming they shot down an American "warplane" & forced it to land in Iranian territory. Nothing like another "Iranian hostage crisis" to keep the price of oil high & big oil filthy rich at our expense.
Now if they can tie Obama Biden,oops,there I go again,I meant "Osama Bin Laden" to all of this.....

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 7, 2008 08:22 AM

I am not going to argue on the morality of Fury giving that interview or writing a book. If the Government wanted to stop him from doing both, then the Government would have.

I just find it interesting that those initial rumors about Bin Laden being spotted in Tora Bora and the US Military guys on the ground who spotted him and asked for permission to kill him were more-or-less accurate when the US Government said, "No." And then when the go ahead came and the air strikes began that Bin Laden was already moving out of the area.

Those initial rumors were more or less pretty darned accurate.

I find it incredibly demoralizing that my President who I voted for was playing politics with the hunt for Bin Laden. He gave away the game by playing this, 'Let the Afghanistans kill him" philosophy. He gave away the game by wanting Muslim rebels kill another Muslim rebel.

And you can't tell me that the US spec ops guys cannot kill someone from 6000ft away. If those soldiers could not, then it was because they were not given the proper hardware to do it.

Another jaw-dropper for me was that it took 6 FRIGGIN' MONTHS for our soldiers to go back to the battlefield and look for his remains. 6 F*CKING MONTHS..!? All the while Bin Laden was hiding in a house a stone's throw away.

If the spec ops guys wanted oxygen to go over the moutains (that even the Pakistani's don't go to because of the extreme altitude) then by all god damned means they should have been giving their request for oxygen. If the spec ops guys wanted to mine the pass that Bin Laden was going to take so that our military could watch for heat plumes when someone stepped on them, then by all means that should have been done.

No. The White House wanted Muslim rebels to kill a fellow Muslim rebel. That's along the same line of thinking if the British wanted an "American" Colonist to kill George Washington.

Ordinarily I would agree that Fury should have kept him mouth shut, but I am pleased that he had the balls to come out and tell us why Bin Laden is still alive and well, and that it is because of the idiotic thinking of the White House.

It just goes to point out again how the White House and the government periodically will not let out military "win".

Posted by: Not Avail at October 7, 2008 08:11 AM

From the DT article:
"As a reporter who's covered the military for a decade, I get a little annoyed at the knuckle-dragger attitude that someone who says anything about their covert activity should be banished. Give me a break."

Get real! The guys a fucking traitor mouthing off about things that should be kept top secret. Calling people kunckle draggers is fucking pathetic and i sincerly hope someone kills this cunt who wrote this book just to grab some cash and fame, failing that i hope he's locked up for life for treason. You, Christian have just made yourself look like a total wanker to be quite honest. I hope you die in a fire and will never be returning to DT. I don't need to be hanging about ona site devoted to defending traitors and i wouldn't mind guessing half your readers feel the same.

Posted by: Jimbo Jones at October 7, 2008 07:49 AM

The them and us attitude between the civilians and the military going on achieves nothing. Christian has a point and so do the the guys on the other side of the fence. Shit, the science fiction types who act that they are the only ones that fight wars; the front line guys versus the REMFs etc. permeates this discussion like a foul smell. Professional overseas shit stirrers are already in here, hello Foo, increasing the bile. Everyone has a part.

If the American public thinks they are being bull shitted to they will pull the plug on operations in kanunderstan or wherever. That is Christian's role. The US military works for the US government qho work for the people. Christian's arguemnt is the old 'I pay your wages' comment you tell the cop who gives you a speeding ticket. It's his right however to say it.

Work together people or it will turn into a bigger shit heap than it already is.

Posted by: tontochoc at October 7, 2008 05:47 AM

I actually took the time to read this guys chick like dribble, guess I'm getting slow these days.. ::kicks own a**::.

Posted by: Ken at October 7, 2008 03:56 AM

Nice way to spend our "energy" ? Heck, 20 years ago you would have beat to death in some side alley somewhere and no one would have looked at you twice. How's that for energy utilization !!

You talk thrash about our nations hero's and the fight against terrorism, prepare to get skinned.

As a veteran, I have nothing but the utmost respect for those who do the unthinkable while the rest of us can sit back and relax at night. Those who run black ops protecting our butts deserve all the recognition and support we can give them. But to those who betray a warriors code of silence, especially in the Delta Force world, I would hate to the perp.

This guy Christian, who does he work for ?

Posted by: Kayaker at October 7, 2008 02:02 AM

"How dare you."
"Keep to yourself."
"I'll put you on the enemies list."

All because of a dumb post on the internet.

Nice. Great way to spend your energy, people.

Posted by: Foo at October 7, 2008 12:54 AM

When you take the oath to uphold the Constitution, that includes the First Amendment, and the rights of a free press.

That doesn't mean the press can compromise opsec -- and IMHO, it shouldn't. That doesn't mean Christian's offhand comment about soldiers working for the taxpayers was genius. IMHO, that could have been more thoughtfully put.

Just the same, it's covered by the 1A. Disagree with Christian all you like, but the 1A isn't on the table. And, if you think it is, you need to talk to JAG, if not a shrink.

IMHO, some of you need to get a grip before you betray the oath. You don't burn the Constitution to save it.

Over and out.

Posted by: demophilus at October 7, 2008 12:38 AM

The attitude thats simply drips from your comment "Sorry, but I -- and millions of other Americans -- pay your salary and we damned right want to know what you're doing. You work for us." makes me want to vomit.

You, or anyone else, being a taxpayer neither garners nor affords you the right to know a thing. How dare you allude to anything contrary to that.

As Soldiers, we work not for you but to preserve and defend the United States of America against all enemies both foriegn and domestic.....perhaps you can be added to the list of the latter.

And as for your contribution to my salary.....I will gladly hand you a bright shiny penny for what you have given me.....just be aware that I WILL be wanting change back.

You are a low-life punk.

Posted by: Robert at October 6, 2008 11:46 PM

Elitist attitude you say? Yeah you in part pay their paycheck and they fight and if need be give their lives in defense of this country. They don't fight for you, they fight for our country, and by doing so defend you. To do this best of their ability they CANNOT have their operations leaked. You should know as well as anybody that "loose lips sink ships."

They are right, you don't need to know, and trust them they know what they are doing.

Wait until this war is over and then you can the details of SF operations.

Posted by: Lampshade111 at October 6, 2008 11:28 PM

Can you not see the difference between a civilian reporter giving away the location of a strike group (while they're deployed there) and letting American citizens know when our armed forces have operated on sovereign Pakistani soil?
The tactical situation is not our concern. The strategic is. It's not up to the military, especially the guys on the ground, to decide whether it's in our interest to operate in Pakistan.

That was one of my main points. We neither need nor want to know where every unit is operating and what they are doing at all times. But we do need to know when those operations have affected all of us. Again, you are operating on our behalf. US citizens are coincidentally protected by the military. That is it's sole purpose. It is our interests, therefore it is our business.

If a reporter is giving away your location or plans, feel free to kick Geraldo out of the country.

--

You're risking your life, I'm not. True. I see this so often in these types of arguments as though it should end the discussion. Unless you're on trial and I'm on the jury it doesn't matter. I'm not talking about those circumstances. I'm not talking about immediate oversight by every interested civilian with the power to punish anyone and everyone.
No. As was said, and I wish we all already understood, you have a chain of command. You answer to the people directly above you. But if the media manages to find out that our elected->appointed leaders are failing to do the job they claimed to be able to do, or find that they are in fact making poor strategic decisions on behalf of all citizens, we have an innate right to know. I don't necessarily blame them for not coming out and telling us. But I also think people like 60 Minutes and Christian are doing this country a service.

And another thing. We get so attached to the idea that the best (in fact, the only useful) view of any conflict is of the grunts on the ground. That's certainly the idea perpetrated by the civilians that watch these wars from home.
I would think people in the military would know better. I would think they more than anyone else would realize that those guys can't see enough of the picture to be able to best decide what course the entire group should take.

Posted by: Tom at October 6, 2008 10:30 PM

THIS. IS. SPAAARTAAA! All you helots need to STF and GBTW.

/Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?

Posted by: X Border at October 6, 2008 09:35 PM

"If the media and a bunch of whining civvies want to know what America is doing out there, we have a right to know. It is right that we know."

If by "doing out there" you mean details of military actions, tactics, techniques and procedures, or any other classified information, then NO, you don't have a right to know.

Furthermore, you don't have a right to decide *when* you get to know it, if you ever do get to know it at all.

Curiosity doesn't equal "Need To Know". Holding a security clearance doesn't even equal "Need To Know". Hence the qualifier, "Need To Know".

If that drives you insane you have two legal options: join the military and strive to enter whatever field you "must know" about;run for national office, jockey for key oversight committee membership, then hope to be included in periodic "sensitive" briefings from the military.

Don't say you don't have options.

Posted by: KragCulloden at October 6, 2008 08:57 PM

Scathsealgaire:

Christian has lost all my respect. His arrogance has seen to that. He represents that which I most despise outside of our enemies.

Posted by: CK_MC at October 6, 2008 07:59 PM

Tom:

Spirit and reality are two different things.

Case in point: Several years ago a CIA operation took out a Yemeni terrorist in a car in Yemen with a hellfire missile from a predator. (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/nov2002/yem-n12.shtml)

There was a known US civilian in the car with him. The operation was conducted anyway. That is right, we killed one of our own civilians while assassinating a bad guy.
Our government has side stepped the questioning by the media on the deal(at least from what I remember of the interview with Tom Ridge).

Now you can rationalize it any way you want but we killed someone our legal system definitely would not support killing(especially in the way we did it i.e. no jury, trial etc.) and it was as illegal as hell unless other "presidential findings" were written which supersedes the constitution.

I, as many barbaric bastards say so what. Wish I could have contributed in some way. So am I not in the same "spirit" as you would prefer? Those operators could have been argued to serve their nation or their own agenda which do you prefer? Was it in you safety net known as spirit or breaking the law? Were they the representatives you were seeking? I hope so. But I do not care if you do not.

I really could not give two sh*** what the media portrays anymore unless it is over the freaking top bs statements like Christian made. The salary statement is complete bs.
That is the only thing I am defending passionately. Not military strategy or even this major's tactical decisions to withdraw from a hill 2000M from OBL. Hell everyone has a right to their opinion. However, I think Christian should be held to task for spewing that sh** on this site. As much as you think the military should be able to take a good cross examination from the media and discerning civilians such as yourself.

So if accountability is good for the military why not the media and particularly Christians statements as well?

Posted by: CK_MC at October 6, 2008 07:51 PM

Your lives are not on the line when some wistful civillan wants to know whats going on and blabs bout opsec. When my strike group deploys I dont want some journalist blabbing bout where were going or what were doing to the general public because guess what, terrorists watch the news also! Im not for complete secrecy cause then there will be no checks and balances and too much power on one side will never be good but there are corruption at every level, military and civillan. Reporters have been known to fabricate stories to their advantage, as does the military.

Posted by: PO2 USN at October 6, 2008 07:48 PM

Christian,

Unfortunately, son, you're not in the chain of command. The military follows a code of conduct and command structure from their superior officers up to the Commander-in-Chief. Sorry to say, but Christian the Reporter, just doesn't rank.

Your taxes may go in part to pay the salary of military personnel, but that does _not_ in any way entitle you to know everything when you deem that it's no longer necessary to be classified. Some people's ideas of entitlement in this country as FUBAR'd to 11.

As for someone who divulges their secret missions, programs, or information, they should not only be banished, but they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Period.

Trading secrets for wealth is treason of the highest and most despicable kind. Defending that action, Chris, is just as bad.

Posted by: Given to Fly at October 6, 2008 07:44 PM

I have been reading through all these comments and counters.
What I find interesting is that Christian and Co all trust the Military to tell the truth(if they were allowed), when the Government wont(even though they can).

Let me repeat that. They trust the Military over the Government.

Krag and CK, do you know why that is?

Because on the whole, the Military keep their oaths, and the opposite is true of Government.

Krag and CK, I think you need to respect Christian and Co for this. You may disagree about revealing of secrets, but you have more in common with them, than the politicans who are made fickle by the next lobbyist.

The Citizens of the US support the troops.
The Politicans find new and inventive ways of getting them killed.
The Military trains for war, but lives for peace.

Posted by: Scathsealgaire at October 6, 2008 07:29 PM

Dear Mr. Christian...

For a guy who has never served in the military yet you work as a "Reporter" covering the armed forces for the past ten years, you have a lot of nerve to pass judgement with this knuckle dragger comment of yours on those who take the fight to the enemy.

There is a certain code of conduct with professional soldiers that the regular civilian like yourself have no clue about. Yeah, you might "report" and write up stories about professional warriors especially during a time of war but your personal views need to be kept to yourself because you do have to report to someone yourself "Sir".

God bless our troops and god bless those in Special Operations. Without them we would be screwed.

Posted by: Kayaker at October 6, 2008 07:17 PM

Wasn't this article on here a couple months back:

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/004333.html#comments

In which an author writes "One would think that the people who have been authorized to handle classified information would take divulging this information more seriously. We should all be outraged when our country's secrets are disclosed for whatever reason. After all, it puts all of us at risk."

We having a case of selective-rule-disobeyment syndrome today?

Posted by: Joe at October 6, 2008 07:12 PM

gsak:

RE: "If we can trust our SF guys to listen to the government and do their jobs against the enemy, we can trust them to let the people know when the government lets the people down."

You are uninformed. Don't expect fine journalists like Christian to deliver revelations to your monitor. There are hundreds of books detailing the miscues and dumbass decisions being made. Hell you can even watch about a dozen episodes of Frontline on PBS and get a small clue. So they are obliging your thirst for knowledge to a degree(hopefully no TS stuff).

RE: "knowing what to do" and "knowing what you've been told to do."

If you think the warriors in uniform are robots you are kidding yourself. They must exercise there own judgement continuously. In fact, there is a legal precedent set that will not allow the "I was just following orders" defense. Google the different articles of the UCMJ you will see you must obey "lawful" orders.
I am not defending the Major's decision for not going up the hill after Bin Laden when the Afghan contingent left the scene. However, I have not read his book either. So I will wait and see. Just remember before you crucify him, hindsight is always 20/20.

However, I am damn proud my tax dollars supported his efforts and the others serving with him, as well as their families. And I would never dishonor any one's service by claiming they owe us because we pay their salaries with our taxes.

We as civilians deserve nothing. It is arrogant and misguided to believe otherwise. You are in a Republic which means most of your governing officials are appointed by whom you elect. Which means you are governed indirectly. And those appointees are who govern the military as Krag has already explained. The military does not serve you. Yet you benefit from their presence none the less.

Posted by: CK_MC at October 6, 2008 07:03 PM

Mostly well said Tom. Besides, I'd like to know some of the things you guys are doing to help decide which particular ass is in charge of you. I'd like to know what these guys are actually expecting you to do and how well you're being supported to do it.

Posted by: steve at October 6, 2008 06:50 PM

Christin,

Can you please send me the link to the SF forums? I will only observe and not comment. Sorry about contacting you in this way, but for some reason my email account won't let me send. thx.

Posted by: Kravkid at October 6, 2008 06:49 PM

If you can't take being second-guessed and having to answer to a bunch of people who weren't there when you did what you did/haven't gone through it themselves, you shouldn't serve in the United States military. It sucks. You'll get shit on plenty. That's why you deserve all the respect and honor. That's why we say you "serve".

By the letter of the law no one in the military answers directly to any of the citizens of the United States outside their chain of command.
But by the spirit, you represent us. You serve our interest.

If the media and a bunch of whining civvies want to know what America is doing out there, we have a right to know. It is right that we know.
No one here wants to compromise operational security. No one wants to find scapegoats.

Posted by: Tom at October 6, 2008 06:38 PM

Christian, you had me at "So", and lost me at "As a reporter..".

To paraphrase you a bit, 'That attitude perpetuates an elitist, journalist mentality that says "we need to know. Just trust us, we know what we're doing..."' -- Are you planning to lead a group of super secret journalist to capture Bin Laden now, or something? :)

"...pay your salary and we damned right want to know what you're doing" -- When did paying taxes entitle a person to a security clearance? For that matter, why even have security clearances? Wait, I know! It's to keep secrets from people who would cause harm to this republic.

"You work for us." -- That little phrase is very trite, and/or shows a great deal of contempt for people who place their minds, bodies, and lives in harms way each day in order to serve and defend this nation.

"So I'm glad, as long as it doesn't deliberately put lives in danger of death, that these stories come out." -- You may want to rethink that sentence. Because indeliberately putting peoples lives in danger isn't all that great either. And "in danger of death" is not much of a qualifier, nor comfort, for people who are maimed or crippled.

I really hope you're just trolling, or were a bit inebriated when you wrote this.

Regards.

Posted by: Camp at October 6, 2008 06:34 PM

The contractor analogy was a stretch, but, you should see the point.

I agree, we can't change Congress or the President. It's just going to be another jerk who answers a question with a question. The people who run for office want to be politicians instead of leaders. These are the same clowns who wouldn't sign over 750 billion because it was a lot of money, then passed it after adding 140 billion in special earmarks.

I can understand why these guys hate talking. You just know the first thing will be the Armchair Brigade second guessing everything they've ever done. But, Hell, they do that anyway. While it's true the citizens don't have any say in what you do, we do have a right to know some of the things you have been up to. This isn't really the military's fault or problem, the current adminstration like many before doesn't like to share what it's been up to. But, when you show such disdain for the frustration level of us civvies, it does us both a disservice.

Posted by: steve at October 6, 2008 06:19 PM

No, Krag isn't right. Christian is right.

I've seen the knuckle-dragger mentality for myself, and it is really annoying. What it would take to understand Christian's point is a down-to-earth, philosophical perspective and a balance of "knowing what to do" and "knowing what you've been told to do." Not everyone has that, and if you're reading this, you should consider the possibility that you might not, either.

If we can trust our SF guys to listen to the government and do their jobs against the enemy, we can trust them to let the people know when the government lets the people down.

Posted by: gsak at October 6, 2008 06:09 PM

Christian:

RE: "Sorry, but I -- and millions of other Americans -- pay your salary and we damned right want to know what you're doing. You work for us."

Along with "knuckle dragging" comments etc.

WTF are you trying to prove? Are you really that chicken sh**? Did someone snub you?

Why bite the hand that feeds you? If not for these knuckle draggers, would you not be back in Iowa on the farm?

You are a hack. You go read something somewhere else and rewrite it here with an "informed" opinion. You remind me of a political "analyst" who after a debate, tells the public what to think.

I thought journalism required some semblance of objectivity.

Posted by: CK_MC at October 6, 2008 06:08 PM

Krag is spot on. This is a Republic gentlemen not a true democracy. You have no authority period. You are all just spectators whether you believe that or not makes no difference. Government's first responsibility is to protect itself. Your only hope is in your congress to change things.

Since we typically trade one a$$hole for another, good luck with that.

Posted by: CK_MC at October 6, 2008 05:39 PM

We need to do everything in our power to stop Obama Biden.....oops,sorry I meant Osama Bin Laden,or am I being redundant?

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 6, 2008 04:49 PM

"You try and parse out your duty as if you magically owe your allegiance to some document and not to the people it is designed to protect."

Our allegiance IS to the document first and foremost - we are sworn to uphold it upon entering military service.

We do not swear to bow to the whims of every tom, dick, and harry that reads Tom Clancy books and thinks he's an expert on defense issues. And especially not to the nauseating effete intellectuals that hold the military in contempt until its the only thing protecting their ass from imminent pain and death.

Posted by: KragCulloden at October 6, 2008 04:42 PM

@MC_CK
exactly. the social contract necessarily obfuscates the connections between tax-payers and those payed with taxes.

willingly begrudge != contractually obligated

in another way: i wouldn't pay taxes if i knew i was going to be responsible for managing the highway crew 1/100th (or whatever) of their total hours worked.

Posted by: unmannedanimal at October 6, 2008 04:36 PM

"It's really disturbing to hear from alleged members( who can really tell here) of the military who have that much disgust and disdain for the average citizen."

Its a learned response.

"It's like hiring a contractor to work for you...."

No, its not. If you hired a contractor, it would be like hiring a contractor. The US military is not working for any joe blow hanging out at McDonalds, the US military works for the collective defense of our constituation and takes *legal* orders from the civilian national command authority, or whatever Rummy changed that title to.

Unless you are in that NCA chain, you don't have any say in what we do, how we do it, or when we do it.

As a citizen (assuming you are one) you have the right to change the personnel that make up the civilian NCA, but that is the extent of your "authority" over the military.

Deal with it.

Posted by: KragCulloden at October 6, 2008 04:35 PM

Brian,

My reasoning is blunt but legit. If you think I am unaware where orders come from there is no need for further discussion with you.

Yes it sounds harsh that a military guy would say such distasteful things but I think my remarks have been impeccable considering the crap stated in this article.

Posted by: CK_MC at October 6, 2008 04:29 PM

Unmanned Animal:

I paid taxes too. At least when I was not in imminent danger zones.

So do the rest who are willfully begrudging the media and civilians.

Posted by: MC_CK at October 6, 2008 04:22 PM

CK_MC,

Grow up. I'm one of the biggest supporters of the military you will ever find, but there's a damn good reason why the US Armed Forces are set up under civilian control. A military that answers to no one but itself cannot be trusted at all. This attitude of "I don't have to answer to any of you civvies" only proves that.

You try and parse out your duty as if you magically owe your allegiance to some document and not to the people it is designed to protect. That is a recipe for disaster. This Rambo "crazy Vietnam vet" idea that you owe nothing to the people you serve, that only the guys in your unit are worthy of your concern may work fine on the battlefield itself, but it doesn't work outside of it. You're not operating with the great latitude given to battlefield operations now. You're in the real world.

Posted by: Brian at October 6, 2008 04:21 PM

citizens shouldn't have or want the keycodes for the nukes. hell, even carrier groups don't know where the subs are. i don't see how this is any different.

there's a difference between "i pay your salary so i'm your boss" and "i am entering into a social contract by paying taxes", they are mutually exclusive.

Posted by: unmannedanimal at October 6, 2008 04:12 PM

Steve:

I am not disputing your precious right to know. Tell me you paid my salary and I owe you something for it, and I assure you, that you will receive my utmost disdain. To the tune of **** yourself. That is what Christian said that pisses me off. I owe you nothing. The government is another matter. You personally may or may not have voted for Bush but remember as a collective you did! Your "DAMN WELL right to know" is going out the window on your own watch!
The masses are often wrong and we face the consequences of poor decision making on a daily basis. How you analyze, and what viewpoint you take on almost every military decision made, is really not my concern.
However, as Joe Blow civilian, your rights were not my focus and I suggest you and this hack journalist take it up with your congressmen since so many in uniform are letting you down by not keeping you informed.

Posted by: CK_MC at October 6, 2008 04:04 PM

bkdunn: Exactly, it's a tough balance in a democracy of legitimate secrets and transparency. While noone should give anything away that would bone active operations, we do need to some extent just what goes on during these wars.Let's face it, it has been a long time since the average American has even heard about the search for Bin Laden.

I find the attitude of some of the posters here very disturbing. It's never a good trait to consider yourself better than others. It's really disturbing to hear from alleged members( who can really tell here) of the military who have that much disgust and disdain for the average citizen.

Look at what some of you are saying. It's like hiring a contractor to work for you, you get the bill and question it and he and his workers say the same thing. "STFU and trust us and I'm not telling you crap because you haven't swung a hammer like I have". Well guess what troopers, I might not need to know every single nail you hammered and what type every screw was, I DAMN WELL have the right to know some of the things that were done.

Posted by: steve at October 6, 2008 03:44 PM

I agree that transparency (at least after a given length of time) and accountability are crucial. OTOH, as an absolute civilian, it still pisses me off that people try to make money off of "revealing secrets". It'd be one thing if the books that were written were done for the sake of truth-telling, but almost invariably the accounts are sensationalized and driven by sales and marketing. That's just tacky.

Posted by: bkdunn at October 6, 2008 03:33 PM

I have to go with Krag on this one. Your attitude is typical of every self proclaimed intellectual.
You can find fault with tactical and strategic decisions but never tell me someone risking their life owes you a damn thing.

When I was in I assure you I owed nothing to you or anyone else but the guys next to me and the guys I was responsible for leading. I have never felt this country was worth dying for because there are too many just like you with the "I pay you salary mentality". I will die for my family, friends, and at the time Marines but as it says all enemies foreign and domestic. Remarks like yours reminds me why that clause exists.

Posted by: CK_MC at October 6, 2008 03:30 PM

SMSgt Mac,

Agreed...my problem is that the attitude has been taken to the extreme and prompts angry reactions like Krag's. It strays into an "us" and "them" argument which worries me a lot. I've spent a lot of time with "elite" forces of all stripes and have been fighting this battle for 10 years. My feeling is be open to discussion and respectfully decline to comment if it strays into LEGITIMATE areas of danger for other personnel.

PGP:

It is an open forum and I'll reveal it, but I'd caution anyone going over there to not comment or engage in the discussion unless you are a member of the special forces or in any special operations unit. They will rip you to shreds and probably banish me from the forum if you do. Email me if you want to know where it is...

Posted by: Christian at October 6, 2008 03:19 PM

We DO NEED to know to some extant. Dubya is famous for trying to hide everything behind national security. That's one of the prices of a free society is that the military can't just tell civvies to mind their own business. We as a whole are entitled to know what is being done in our name. Although we're not entitled to know every single detail to protect ongoing operations.
Krag, you discredit anyone in a uniform. I've got news for you. You are paid by the civvies and like it or not they are who you're supposed to be working for and defending.If you're so concerned about the Constitution why don't you look into the power grab our commander-in-chief has been pulling. Or how about his lying to the American people to start a war in Iraq? Or isthatsort of thing just fine with you?

Posted by: steve at October 6, 2008 03:14 PM

"The military doesn't "work for" you or any other whining civvie"

WTF! The last time I read the Constitution, it said you work for the civilian government who works for us. Quite frankly they whine like babies everytime you turn around. Granted, we don't need to know everything, especially sources and methods, but we damn sure need to know what you are doing in our name. Just like we need to know what our politicians are doing in our name, I'll have to agree with Christian on this, get over YOURself!

Posted by: James at October 6, 2008 03:12 PM

What forum were you on? Is it public?

Posted by: PGP at October 6, 2008 03:07 PM

RE: That attitude perpetuates an elitist, Samurai mentality that says "you don't need to know. Just trust us, we know what we're doing..."

I guess I have an alternative view. I guess I find that "attitude" essential because it protects sources, tactics and techniques for later reuse. As long as those responsible know what they need to know, I have absolutely no problem being kept in the dark and would only add:
Good Luck and Good Hunting!

Posted by: SMSgt Mac at October 6, 2008 02:52 PM

I for one was extremely disturbed by his decision to turn back after closing to 1 Mile of UBL. WTF??? 50 mens lives to save countless thousands more? This is what you are paid to do. Now you screwed up that mission and want to call others out over it? I know what I would've done. Whether or not it would've worked, only God knows, but it