S.e.a.l.s

Dec 16, 2009 2:00 pm

Let’s see what kind of mess this starts.

BondGuy, [email protected] and company:  Should we prosecute these men?  Are they representative of all that is wrong with our country and Obama is finally taking out the trash?

Or is the administration turning on it’s heroes, thanking them on the news and then having JAG prosecute them?

Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist

Tuesday , November 24, 2009



By Rowan Scarborough





Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted
terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and
mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004.
And for their trouble, three of the SEALs, members of the Navy’s elite
commando unit, are now facing criminal charges, sources told
FoxNews.com.



The three have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and requested a trial by court-martial.



Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told
investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip
to prove it.



Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value
target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges
and have retained lawyers.



Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2),
is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for
willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official
statement, and assault.



Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of
performance of duty and making a false official statement.



Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.



The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7. Another three
SEALs — two officers and an enlisted sailor — have been identified by
investigators as witnesses but have not been charged.



FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the
three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and
still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken
to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.



The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.



“I gave the detainee a glance over and then left,” the SEAL wrote. "I
did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good
health."



Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations
component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com
that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a
detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.



United States Central Command declined to discuss the detainee, but a
legal source told FoxNews.com that the detainee was turned over to
Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then
returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up
the chain of command, and an investigation ensued.



The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated
that “Objective Amber” planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and "they had
been tracking this guy for some time."



The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in
Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its
grip over Iraq.



The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering
company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades.
Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They
hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the
world press to photograph.



Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.



The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in
the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse
in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment.

Dec 16, 2009 2:12 pm

This is a fukcing travesty.  Obama, and I blame him squarely, has turned our nation into a bunch of pu$$ies.  I’m not one for unnecessary militarism or barbarianism, but slapping around some terrorist doesn’t exactly qualify as barbaric.  We are very quickly demoting ourselves on the world’s landscape.

  When the f'ing detainee was turned over to Iraq, and made the complaints, Obama himself should have personally told Iraqi officials to go fukc themselves and suck his big, ^%#[email protected] d1ck.  I'm sure instead, he just apologized for our misbehavior and the years of oppression the United States has inflicted upon their wonderful nation.   So, I'm not sure exactly how I feel.
Dec 16, 2009 3:04 pm

Has this been reported on by another news service? Not that I think that this is unbelievable, I would just consider the source.

Dec 16, 2009 3:12 pm
SometimesNowhere:

Has this been reported on by another news service? Not that I think that this is unbelievable, I would just consider the source.

  STFU !
Dec 16, 2009 3:14 pm
Ron 14:

[quote=SometimesNowhere]Has this been reported on by another news service? Not that I think that this is unbelievable, I would just consider the source.

  STFU ![/quote] Ron, don't you have to go to work so you can repay some of my tax money?
Dec 16, 2009 3:15 pm

From Cnn:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/11/25/navy.seals.falluja/index.html

Dec 16, 2009 3:16 pm

CBS:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/25/crimesider/entry5773734.shtml

I don’t think Ron’s bank took TARP funds.

Some weird place.

http://www.makli.com/navy-seals-court-martial-0014562/

Dec 16, 2009 3:21 pm
Moraen:

CBS:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/25/crimesider/entry5773734.shtml

I don’t think Ron’s bank took TARP funds.

Some weird place.

http://www.makli.com/navy-seals-court-martial-0014562/

  Fair enough, that's why I ask. I don't trust Fox News any more than I trust CNN or the Huffington Post.   And, yes they did. They just allegedly didn't need them and paid them back quickly. I like Ron, so I wanted a muted, non-offensive jab at his employer. He can feel free to make some sort of doorknocking or American Funds portfolio joke now if he sees fit.
Dec 16, 2009 3:25 pm
SometimesNowhere:

[quote=Moraen] CBS:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/25/crimesider/entry5773734.shtml

I don’t think Ron’s bank took TARP funds.

Some weird place.

http://www.makli.com/navy-seals-court-martial-0014562/

  Fair enough, that's why I ask. I don't trust Fox News any more than I trust CNN or the Huffington Post.   And, yes they did. They just allegedly didn't need them and paid them back quickly. I like Ron, so I wanted a muted, non-offensive jab at his employer. He can feel free to make some sort of doorknocking or American Funds portfolio joke now if he sees fit. [/quote]

Fox may put a right slant on things, but nothing they report is factually inaccurate.  What has been reported wrong is usually issued a retraction and apology.

MSNBC is similar.  They are mainly opinion News organization.  The stories they do report are usually accurate, just that they only report the ones they want to.  And prominence on their website or news shows are varied.  For instance - I don't think you will find this story on MSNBC's web site.
Dec 16, 2009 3:28 pm

Regardless, this story is ridiculous.  If they are going to prosecute these guys, myself and several of my buddies may have to live in fear of prosecution.  Public adoration of the military is high, but apparently, our government wants to tear down it’s heroes.

Dec 16, 2009 3:28 pm

This is simply the new administration doing everything they can to be able to shield themselves of any responsibility for the next (and there will be one w/the way things are going) terrorist attack.  “Well, we took every precaution necessary!  Remember when we punished our own guys for a minor violation of the Geneva Convention because they slapped one of the worlds most dangerous terrorists in the face?  So don’t blame us because we didn’t provoke them!”  What a bunch of pu$$ies our government has become.

Dec 16, 2009 4:19 pm
Ron 14:

[quote=SometimesNowhere]Has this been reported on by another news service? Not that I think that this is unbelievable, I would just consider the source.

  STFU ![/quote]   Sorry, that was out of line. I just get so fired up about this kind of stuff. Many family members and friends are currently in or have served in our military.    
Dec 16, 2009 4:28 pm
Ron 14:

[quote=Ron 14][quote=SometimesNowhere]Has this been reported on by another news service? Not that I think that this is unbelievable, I would just consider the source.

  STFU ![/quote]   Sorry, that was out of line. I just get so fired up about this kind of stuff. Many family members and friends are currently in or have served in our military.    [/quote]   No prob.   And let me clarify, I was not intending to dismiss the story nor the importance of it. I too am very close to people who have and are serving, and feel that they deserve all the respect and adoration in the world, as well as being unshackled from the political correctness and sensitivity that seems to dictate all of our military activity lately. I am not sure why war has to be delicate all of a sudden. They can behead reporters and soldiers, stone women, and cut off limbs of innocent people and we can't punch them in the face? That's a f***ing Saturday Night Life punchline, not a military or diplomatic strategy.   With that said, I think the politicizing of military action is disgusting, and it happens from people wearing both red and blue ties. There is a job to be done, let the people you train to do that job go and do it, and if you are going to tell the story, tell it without coloring it either way. Let the people that care enough to pay attention come to their own conclusions about the information you provide.
Dec 16, 2009 4:32 pm

Dec 16, 2009 5:12 pm
SometimesNowhere:

[quote=Ron 14][quote=Ron 14][quote=SometimesNowhere]Has this been reported on by another news service? Not that I think that this is unbelievable, I would just consider the source.

  STFU ![/quote]   Sorry, that was out of line. I just get so fired up about this kind of stuff. Many family members and friends are currently in or have served in our military.    [/quote]   No prob.   And let me clarify, I was not intending to dismiss the story nor the importance of it. I too am very close to people who have and are serving, and feel that they deserve all the respect and adoration in the world, as well as being unshackled from the political correctness and sensitivity that seems to dictate all of our military activity lately. I am not sure why war has to be delicate all of a sudden. They can behead reporters and soldiers, stone women, and cut off limbs of innocent people and we can't punch them in the face? That's a f***ing Saturday Night Life punchline, not a military or diplomatic strategy.   With that said, I think the politicizing of military action is disgusting, and it happens from people wearing both red and blue ties. There is a job to be done, let the people you train to do that job go and do it, and if you are going to tell the story, tell it without coloring it either way. Let the people that care enough to pay attention come to their own conclusions about the information you provide. [/quote]

SN - Our country is full of people who think that handing out candy and smiling and waving and telling people, "You can do whatever you want!" will make people like us and want to do business with us. 

They don't recognize that sometimes you have to be violent with people.

I know a guy who thinks that he can do whatever he wants regardless of the consequences.  He is the head of finance for a pharma company that grew quickly.  He happened to be in the right place at the right time.  His parents thought that it was funny that he lied all of the time.  They protected him and basically raised him so that he could do whatever he wanted. 

In our school system, fighting is punished.  But sometimes... sometimes people need their asses beaten.  They realize then that there are consequences.

Our society is much like this guy I mentioned.  Weak. 
Dec 16, 2009 7:40 pm

Iraq is a failure just like Vietnam (anyone 45+ is probably burning up right now). I disagreed with Bush’s push to war in '03 - But I gave him a chance. And, I was terribly disappointed with his results.

These charges are much smaller than a full war…but, based on the Fox News article, I don’t see how this makes any sense either. It also seems like a political disaster if Obama is personally behind it (which I do not believe is true - someone who can be fired is making this call). 

What seems to be happening is the current administration is trying to change the tone of the war among Iraqis. Since I do not know anything about Iraqi culture, I really can’t comment if this move is good or bad to that ends. But, I’m giving the Obama administration a chance to fix Bush’s mistakes.

If it somehow leads to less attacks on Americans, I got to say, those S.E.A.L.S. are property of the US Navy. The administration can do whatever they want with them (just like Pat Tillman). Anything to help the cause.

But, I agree…from the outside, it does look stupid.

Dec 16, 2009 7:52 pm

[[email protected]]

Iraq is a failure just like Vietnam (anyone 45+ is probably burning up right now). I disagreed with Bush’s push to war in '03 - But I gave him a chance. And, I was terribly disappointed with his results.

These charges are much smaller than a full war…but, based on the Fox News article, I don’t see how this makes any sense either. It also seems like a political disaster if Obama is personally behind it (which I do not believe is true - someone who can be fired is making this call). 

What seems to be happening is the current administration is trying to change the tone of the war among Iraqis. Since I do not know anything about Iraqi culture, I really can’t comment if this move is good or bad to that ends. But, I’m giving the Obama administration a chance to fix Bush’s mistakes.

If it somehow leads to less attacks on Americans, I got to say, those S.E.A.L.S. are property of the US Navy. The administration can do whatever they want with them (just like Pat Tillman). Anything to help the cause.

But, I agree…from the outside, it does look stupid.

[/quote]

In what world could prosecuting our own lead to less attacks on Americans?!?! 

If I am a terrorist, I’m thinking, “Wow, our guy kills four private American citizens, the SEALs, get him and slap him around a bit and then they are going to burn for it?  Where is my AK?  Let’s see if we can get some of those KBR cooks!”.

Change the tone?!?  Petraeus already changed the tone - under Bush!  The Iraq war and the Vietnam war are two completely different animals.  For one, the Viet Cong could fight and had balls.  Two, that war did not result in an insurgency after they sovereign had been defeated.  Three, the insurgency is fueled by religious fervor, not nationalism.  No one in Iraq is a nationlistic-type person.  Those that are, are anti-insurgency.

As for it being a failure, even Tony Blair said he would have gone in even if Hussein didn’t have WMD’s.  I am at a loss as to how it is a failure.  We built schools and bridges and dug wells and provided better medical care. 

Statistically, if you were a soldier in the ten years before 9/11, you were more likely to die in the States than post-9/11 in war.  That’s a net GAIN of soldiers.

Dec 16, 2009 9:18 pm

I think Clint Eastwood said it best: “We’re becoming juvenile as a nation. The guys who won World War II and that whole generation have disappeared, and now we have a bunch of teenage twits.”

 
Dec 16, 2009 9:22 pm

Whoops… well we know where this thread is going now

Dec 16, 2009 9:24 pm
[email protected]:

Iraq is a failure just like Vietnam (anyone 45+ is probably burning up right now). I disagreed with Bush’s push to war in '03 - But I gave him a chance. And, I was terribly disappointed with his results.

These charges are much smaller than a full war…but, based on the Fox News article, I don’t see how this makes any sense either. It also seems like a political disaster if Obama is personally behind it (which I do not believe is true - someone who can be fired is making this call). 

What seems to be happening is the current administration is trying to change the tone of the war among Iraqis. Since I do not know anything about Iraqi culture, I really can’t comment if this move is good or bad to that ends. But, I’m giving the Obama administration a chance to fix Bush’s mistakes.

If it somehow leads to less attacks on Americans, I got to say, those S.E.A.L.S. are property of the US Navy. The administration can do whatever they want with them (just like Pat Tillman). Anything to help the cause.

But, I agree…from the outside, it does look stupid.

  Disappointed in the results ? We captured and killed a mass murder who was a complete tyrant in the most unstable area of the world. Nothing to be disappointed about.
Dec 16, 2009 9:30 pm

Didn’t Bush & Petraeus “change the tone” by giving bribes to the
religious leaders who were encouraging the most violence? I thought
sending 30,000 more troops was a joke. It was just a political response
to the hammering the republican party took in '06. The timing proved to
me it was a political strategy not a real military strategy…this was obvious.


I have no idea what will change the minds of the people who are causing the most bloodshed in Iraq. All I can do is trust that Obama has some smart people helping him make the best decisions. A new President, new policies and new actions all give the signal that things are different now.

As for going into Iraq without WMDs, are you familiar with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)? (If you google it, you need to view the cached files from '96-'00) A full scale ground war in Iraq was a top priority for Bush/Cheney before they were even elected.

Moraen says, “We built schools and bridges and dug wells and provided better medical care.”
…liberal!

As for disappointed with the results…I wanted to remove Saddam the same way Clinton removed Milosovich; quick & painless. Why it turned into a 7 year cluster-f***, I don’t know. But I’m disappointed.

Dec 16, 2009 9:49 pm
Im glad it was a priority. Saddam was a mass murder and terrorist. Obama has sold you and 51% of the country on the fact that he is bringing something new to the table. New doesn't mean good when our military strategies work fine with or without this jackass at the helm. He has never even fired a gun in his entire life, how the hell is he going to bring "change" to our war strategies.
Dec 16, 2009 10:04 pm

[quote=Ron 14]

Im glad it was a priority. Saddam was a mass murder and terrorist. Obama has sold you and 51% of the country on the fact that he is bringing something new to the table. New doesn’t mean good when our military strategies work fine with or without this jackass at the helm. He has never even fired a gun in his entire life, how the hell is he going to bring “change” to our war strategies. [/quote]

See, here’s where we differ…I will not believe our military strategies are working fine until we can unfurl the “Mission Accomplished” banner again! Any moron can run a long, drawn-out 7 year war. A real leader can get the job done quickly and done right.

I don’t pretend to be an expert on anything to do with the military. But as a voting American citizen, I set the bar pretty high for what I expect of my leaders by election-time. And based on my expectations, Bush failed.

You might be more tolerant because you are a life-long republican or because you own a gun store, or because you supply bullets to the military, or any of a number of other reasons why people commit to a specific party. I am independent; my expectations are high. If they are not met, I switch to the other party.

People like me decide elections.
Dec 16, 2009 10:05 pm

[[email protected]]

Didn’t Bush & Petraeus “change the tone” by giving bribes to the
religious leaders who were encouraging the most violence? I thought
sending 30,000 more troops was a joke. It was just a political response
to the hammering the republican party took in '06. The timing proved to
me it was a political strategy not a real military strategy…this was obvious.  No.  That’s the problem with being on the outside looking in.  You get your information from Google.  There’s a bit of a difference between actually being on the ground, and picking things up on the internet.


I have no idea what will change the minds of the people who are causing the most bloodshed in Iraq. All I can do is trust that Obama has some smart people helping him make the best decisions. A new President, new policies and new actions all give the signal that things are different now.   Nothing will change their minds.  But, we humans are simple creatures.  If we put our hands on the stove and get burned, we learn that we don’t like hot things.  You punish terrorism hard enough, it stops.  At least for a time.
 
As for going into Iraq without WMDs, are you familiar with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)? (If you google it, you need to view the cached files from '96-'00) A full scale ground war in Iraq was a top priority for Bush/Cheney before they were even elected. Yes.  I googled it.  There are just as many liberal pages that purport to represent Obama.  I believe neither of them.

Moraen says, “We built schools and bridges and dug wells and provided better medical care.”
…liberal!  Providing quality medical care, building schools and promoting education (Bush was a big proponent of education), and bridges are not the province of liberals.  Quality medical care can be had without socializing it.  In fact, the only way to provide it responsibly is WITHOUT socializing it.

As for disappointed with the results…I wanted to remove Saddam the same way Clinton removed Milosovich; quick & painless. Why it turned into a 7 year cluster-f***, I don’t know. But I’m disappointed.   Milosovich was not sitting on the third largest army in the world.  It turned into a 7-year war because the nature of the fighting and the searching for Saddam necessitated destruction of infrastructure and wiping out the government.  It is irresponsible to destroy a country’s infrastructure and leave.
[/quote]

Still - being a liberal doesn’t make you a bad person (or Jon Stewart or whatever).  But despite what you think about Bush and his war policies - they kept us safe.  And prosecuting three SEALS because they roughed up a guy who killed and hung four Americans as if we were in the middle ages is turning your back. 

Remember that Barack Obama is the Commander in Chief of the military.  There is one legal system that he has complete authority over.  The military’s.  The JAG of the Navy reports to the Secretary of the Navy, who reports to the SecDef, who reports to, Barack Obama.  This is not like the civilian courts. 

A president who allows such charges to be brought… I question his ability to function as Commander in Chief.

Dec 16, 2009 10:17 pm

This thread has feathered into about 10 complex topics that each deserve their own thread. 

I’ll just say that you are probably right about prosecuting the SEALS. Something like that has got to hurt the morale of our troops. Although, I am the furthest from an expert on this specific topic.

Dec 16, 2009 10:23 pm

A real leader can get the job done quickly and the job done right? What wars are you aware of that last 2 or 3 years ? What world are you living in ? This sh*t is complicated and it takes time. Especially when guys are roaming around in underground caves that are hundreds of years old.

  Independent is another name for "I bash everything and stand for nothing."
Dec 17, 2009 1:22 am

[quote=Ron 14]Independent is another name for “I bash everything and stand for nothing.”[/quote]

Are you saying that if my beliefs to not fit into one of two pre-defined boxes, there is something wrong with me? I disagree.

I can assure you I am not posting on a whim. My beliefs (right or wrong) are generally well thought out and based on facts, assumptions and life experience.

My beliefs about war are based mostly on assumptions which is probably why I enjoy debating them so much. I don’t mind being shown that I am wrong when someone can provide facts or life experiences to back their point.

I am certain I am not liberal because I get the same sick feeling listening to NPR that I get listening to Limbaugh. I like Jon Stewart mostly because he backs up what he says with interesting facts - plus, the show is funny.

Dec 17, 2009 1:37 am

I could give two sh*ts about the political parties. A man has to have core beliefs that they stand by. I find most people who claim "independent" straddle the fence on everything and often go with the flavor of the day because they don't want to offend. This may or may not be you.

Dec 17, 2009 3:13 pm

I hate America. I hate myself. I hate Edward Jones. I love the Greatful Dead.

Dec 17, 2009 3:34 pm

[quote=mlgone]I know this will piss many off…

  I think IRAQ was about oil and setting up a long term strategic base in the region[/quote]

I wish that was what it was about. 

My hope was that it was about providing a battlefield outside of the U.S. for soldiers to fight terrorists. 

Of course, you can't announce something like that.
Dec 22, 2009 8:34 pm

First thought: this sucks. let these guys do their jobs.

  Secondly: If the police kick a handcuffed subdued suspect is it a crime? And, yeah, the perp has got it coming, but? Why would it be any different in a military jail?   Third: Why is Obama's name connected to this post? Isn't the mid level of the naval command handling this?   I realize there is a lot of Obama hare on the thread. fair enough! However, if a cop on the beat does wrong, is it the mayor's fault? Not usually.   The rules suck in this situation and it looks like a lot of ass covering by the brass, but let's have a trial and three not guiltys.
Dec 22, 2009 8:36 pm

 make that Obama hate on this thread. He’s got no hare or hair.

Dec 22, 2009 8:42 pm
BondGuy:

 make that Obama hate on this thread. He’s got no hare or hair.

I have to admit, I almost dictionary.commed 'hare' to see if there was something I was missing.
Dec 24, 2009 4:38 am

It’s funny, GW screwed up everything he touched, started two unnecessary, unwinable wars, allowed sub-prime to ruin the worlds economy and left Obama with a sh-tstorm of trouble. Now the neocon nazi rebooblicans blame it all on “black” Obama.

Dec 24, 2009 8:41 pm

[quote=BondGuy]First thought: this sucks. let these guys do their jobs.  Yep.

  Secondly: If the police kick a handcuffed subdued suspect is it a crime? And, yeah, the perp has got it coming, but? Why would it be any different in a military jail?  Most people in the military are more professional that that, ESPECIALLY S.E.A.L.S and I find it highly unlikely that they would strike him unless he attempted something.  As for why it is different.... terrorists are not U.S. citizens slinging crack.  If some guy was a child rapist and you had him alone, you mean to say you wouldn't take shot at him?
  Third: Why is Obama's name connected to this post? Isn't the mid level of the naval command handling this?  President Obama is the Commander in Chief and therefore has the power to start or stop any court martial according to UCMJ.  The UCMJ is not the federal court system.  It is a military court and thus subject to the chain of command.
  I realize there is a lot of Obama hare on the thread. fair enough! However, if a cop on the beat does wrong, is it the mayor's fault? Not usually.  Nobody is saying that Obama is at fault for the sailors doing wrong.  We are saying he is at fault for not stopping it.   The rules suck in this situation and it looks like a lot of ass covering by the brass, but let's have a trial and three not guiltys.  Yes.  The brass is covering their ass because they are afraid that the administration will come after them next because they didn't make their sailors kinder and gentler.
[/quote]


Dec 24, 2009 8:45 pm

[quote=52new]It’s funny, GW screwed up everything he touched, started two unnecessary, unwinable wars, allowed sub-prime to ruin the worlds economy and left Obama with a sh-tstorm of trouble. Now the neocon nazi rebooblicans blame it all on “black” Obama. [/quote]

This thread is about S.E.A.L.s and the fact that they are being prosecuted for doing their job, numbnuts.

President Obama, as the CinC, has the authority to put a stop to this farce.  But he hasn’t.  The reason (and unless there is any evidence to contrary, or a statement), is that he would rather prosecute our service members than piss off extremists.

Once again, you have put your aged and weak mind to the task and come up with the wrong conclusion.

Don’t you have some floors to sweep?  I can disagree with BondGuy and still respect him.  You, on the other hand area  joke.

Dec 29, 2009 4:34 pm

[quote=Moraen] [quote=BondGuy]First thought: this sucks. let these guys do their jobs.  Yep.

  Secondly: If the police kick a handcuffed subdued suspect is it a crime? And, yeah, the perp has got it coming, but? Why would it be any different in a military jail?  Most people in the military are more professional that that, ESPECIALLY S.E.A.L.S and I find it highly unlikely that they would strike him unless he attempted something.  As for why it is different.... terrorists are not U.S. citizens slinging crack.  If some guy was a child rapist and you had him alone, you mean to say you wouldn't take shot at him?
  Third: Why is Obama's name connected to this post? Isn't the mid level of the naval command handling this?  President Obama is the Commander in Chief and therefore has the power to start or stop any court martial according to UCMJ.  The UCMJ is not the federal court system.  It is a military court and thus subject to the chain of command.
  I realize there is a lot of Obama hare on the thread. fair enough! However, if a cop on the beat does wrong, is it the mayor's fault? Not usually.  Nobody is saying that Obama is at fault for the sailors doing wrong.  We are saying he is at fault for not stopping it.   The rules suck in this situation and it looks like a lot of ass covering by the brass, but let's have a trial and three not guiltys.  Yes.  The brass is covering their ass because they are afraid that the administration will come after them next because they didn't make their sailors kinder and gentler.
[/quote]


[/quote]   Morean, let it play out. let's see where the CM leads. I believe there is a line you can't cross. There's a lot of PC going on here. For Obvious reasons, even if he wanted to the prez can't get involved. You shouldn't fault him for it. he's got to let his chain of command do its job. you know that better than most here.
Dec 29, 2009 4:40 pm

Ok BG.  I agree.  Let’s let it play out. 

However, these men do a VERY difficult job, but they do it with vigor and enthusiasm.  There is absolutely no reason to put them through this sham of a trial.

I hope whoever in the chain of command brought these charges chokes on a chicken bone. 

I know that presidents get involved all of the time, especially at the end of their terms.  Look at all of the people Bush and Clinton pardoned.