Top SEAL gives deadline

I’m not sure Navy personnel decisions that are the result of discipline or perceived poor performance need to the subject of public press releases.

I would usually agree, but in this case I believe that the Navy is doing a very public retooling of the SEAL’s.

My guess is that these announcements are also being made to show not just the other services, but possibly other nations, that something more than just lip service is actually being done about the SEAL’s and their ass-hattery.

Services do it all of the time with other units and I've seen previous instances where a relieved ST commander had an article written about him. There's nothing unusual about this case.
 
A wise old guy once said that sunlight was the best disinfectant - publishing relief-for-cause is chicken soup for the soul - not much different than putting an Article-15 on the company bulletin board.

If folks don't want to be humiliated in the public square - they shouldn't betray the public trust behind closed doors.


Just my two cents - I could be wrong.
 
I can appreciate the logic.

I suppose I'm of two minds on the subject. There's a significant public interest when we're talking about the commander of a major military unit. It's different than the guy managing the local Burger Thing. That said, absent criminal or near-criminal conduct (NJP), I don't know that a change of leadership requires the notification of literally everyone with internet access. I think there's a degree of personal privacy that should be considered, regardless of public employment.

I also think it's a matter of scale. I get that the Admiral wants to send a rocket into the NSW community (it's certainly warranted). However, might he achieve the same result within NSW by moving these dudes to a non-SOF assignment and distributing a memo internally that explains why the move was made?

I do agree with the idea of sunlight as a disinfectant. Who knows, maybe I'm just overthinking this because I'm used to working in organizations that don't publicly discuss disciplinary actions.
 
I can appreciate the logic.

I suppose I'm of two minds on the subject. There's a significant public interest when we're talking about the commander of a major military unit. It's different than the guy managing the local Burger Thing. That said, absent criminal or near-criminal conduct (NJP), I don't know that a change of leadership requires the notification of literally everyone with internet access. I think there's a degree of personal privacy that should be considered, regardless of public employment.

I also think it's a matter of scale. I get that the Admiral wants to send a rocket into the NSW community (it's certainly warranted). However, might he achieve the same result within NSW by moving these dudes to a non-SOF assignment and distributing a memo internally that explains why the move was made?

I do agree with the idea of sunlight as a disinfectant. Who knows, maybe I'm just overthinking this because I'm used to working in organizations that don't publicly discuss disciplinary actions.

All this asshattery has been widely publicized consequently resulting in very public (social media etc) demands for corrective action. The cat's already out of the bag. I think the Navy was obligated, for the sake of NSW's reputation (not to mention congressional purse strings) to issue a very public pronouncement of intent.

Now they just need to follow through, kick some ass, and get back into the shadows where they belong.
 
It has become a cultural problem, full on cancer in the system

It’s a damn shame, but they’re going to have to clean house and quickly, one way or another; just as if this was any other type of business.

My guess is that they will be substantially downsized, quietly, while trying to avoid any further public humiliation.

Others mentioned a focus on UDT, or eliminating redundancy by merging with MARSOC; I agree that this could be a practical, realistic solution.
 
Public flogging (I use that word intentionally because it is the Navy) is not new in the Navy. Everytime they sack a ship's captain, XO, or CMC, it is very public. I would agree that with regard to special warfare it is that much more so given all the weirdness of the past couple years and how much it has been thrust into the public and political landscape.
 
I’m tired of hearing about these guys, I’m tired of them stealing credit (see Rob O’neill Talking about the Red Wings rescue), and I’m tired of them killing fucking Army dudes. Which has gone on for years (that. Delta dude with the fake leg? Yeah he got shot by fucking SEALs).

Das,
I'd like to hear more about the fake leg operator story. I seem to hear ALL the dirt on SEALs but that's a new one for me.
 
SGM Yerry was shot by 6 when they came as QRF to a building Green had locked down and needed helping SSEing. They never deconflicted and entered the back and started clearing. They shot him in the leg.

Appreciate the info. That's definitely a bummer and sounds like it could have been even worse. Luckily they didn't use their "frag the hostage" technique on this one.
 
What is their frag the hostage technique? Have a specific example?
Linda Norgrove In ‘09. Silver Squadron dude thought she was a terrorist. Threw a frag at her. Killed her. Initial word passed to the JOC was a dude clacked himself off with an S vest and killed her. Guy tells his TL, TL sits on it for a day or two and finally reports it up that “hey, my dude threw the frag...”

End result- they are no longer issued frags when deployed for hostage rescues...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just so happens the guy that kidnapped Norgrove got a pardon two days ago in an Afghan gov amnesty deal.

I remember the story. In light of some things that transpired since Anaconda, it wasn't all that surprising that a SEAL might've chucked a frag in a buck-fever moment during a hostage rescue; and, sad to say, even less surprising that they tied to cover it up.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top