Orange Duce

[Typical Lax Dad]

Members of Navy SEAL team called Eddie Gallagher "evil"





Chilling new details have emerged about the conduct of the Navy SEAL who was accused of war crimes but supported by President Trump. Confidential footage obtained by The New York Times shows members of SEAL team 7 being interviewed about the conduct of special operations chief Edward Gallagher. CBS News national security correspondent David Martin joined CBSN with more.

"standards" - hmmmm .....

I see Gallagher’s attorney on TV saying that his SEAL team members were cowards in combat. Interesting.

Deceptive, attention seeking reporting by CBS news, intended to trick viewers who have not followed the details of this story.
What "chilling new details have emerged" that were not heard by the members of the Court at trial ?
This is just trial evidence that has been leaked.
This is just a gimmick to retry Chief Gallagher in the media, & discredit him, before he can campaign for Trump

I was asking about his attorney’s comments as I heard the words come out of his mouth in an interview. You think those guys were cowards?

[Brooklyn]

Deceptive, attention seeking reporting by CBS news, intended to trick viewers who have not followed the details of this story.
What "chilling new details have emerged" that were not heard by the members of the Court at trial ?
This is just trial evidence that has been leaked.
This is just a gimmick to retry Chief Gallagher in the media, & discredit him, before he can campaign for Trump

"reporting" - by Gallagher's own pals. not a nice picture at all

[MDlaxfan76]

Members of Navy SEAL team called Eddie Gallagher "evil"





Chilling new details have emerged about the conduct of the Navy SEAL who was accused of war crimes but supported by President Trump. Confidential footage obtained by The New York Times shows members of SEAL team 7 being interviewed about the conduct of special operations chief Edward Gallagher. CBS News national security correspondent David Martin joined CBSN with more.

"standards" - hmmmm .....

I see Gallagher’s attorney on TV saying that his SEAL team members were cowards in combat. Interesting.

Deceptive, attention seeking reporting by CBS news, intended to trick viewers who have not followed the details of this story.
What "chilling new details have emerged" that were not heard by the members of the Court at trial ?
This is just trial evidence that has been leaked.
This is just a gimmick to retry Chief Gallagher in the media, & discredit him, before he can campaign for Trump

I was asking about his attorney’s comments as I heard the words come out of his mouth in an interview. You think those guys were cowards?

Actually, isn't that also what Gallagher himself is implying...all of these guys were cowards???

[Typical Lax Dad]

Members of Navy SEAL team called Eddie Gallagher "evil"





Chilling new details have emerged about the conduct of the Navy SEAL who was accused of war crimes but supported by President Trump. Confidential footage obtained by The New York Times shows members of SEAL team 7 being interviewed about the conduct of special operations chief Edward Gallagher. CBS News national security correspondent David Martin joined CBSN with more.

"standards" - hmmmm .....

I see Gallagher’s attorney on TV saying that his SEAL team members were cowards in combat. Interesting.

Deceptive, attention seeking reporting by CBS news, intended to trick viewers who have not followed the details of this story.
What "chilling new details have emerged" that were not heard by the members of the Court at trial ?
This is just trial evidence that has been leaked.
This is just a gimmick to retry Chief Gallagher in the media, & discredit him, before he can campaign for Trump

I was asking about his attorney’s comments as I heard the words come out of his mouth in an interview. You think those guys were cowards?

Actually, isn't that also what Gallagher himself is implying...all of these guys were cowards???

I know 4 or 5 Navy SEALs. None of them are what I would consider to be “cowards”.

[LandM]

TLD your momma cried home last night
TLD is it 4 or 5 - I worked in that community, i can spit out 30 names without thinking - none are cowards BUT rules of engagement - those pesky rules created by bureaucrats who have never done it - go do it man - seriously you have an 18 year old have him or her go do it. Some follow the rules of engagement, others just ignore them for their and their mens safety. Do not send people in harms way if they cannot defend themselves. If you have never done it, be careful of your criticism.
Dmac thank you for your posts - I say we sit and have a beer

[MDlaxfan76]

TLD your momma cried home last night
TLD is it 4 or 5 - I worked in that community, i can spit out 30 names without thinking - none are cowards BUT rules of engagement - those pesky rules created by bureaucrats who have never done it - go do it man - seriously you have an 18 year old have him or her go do it. Some follow the rules of engagement, others just ignore them for their and their mens safety. Do not send people in harms way if they cannot defend themselves. If you have never done it, be careful of your criticism.
Dmac thank you for your posts - I say we sit and have a beer

You do understand that Gallagher is calling his fellow Seals cowards, right?
Not for reporting him, but for their own behavior in combat.

You think he's probably right, and unlike the 30+ you know, these guys all in one unit are cowards? Or do you think it's more likely that these guys know that, one guy, Gallagher, is indeed a 'psychopath' and 'evil'?...their words under oath, not ours.

[seacoaster]

Ho hum....

https://www.citizensforethics.org/trump ... t-weekend/

[seacoaster]

Ho hum....

https://twitter.com/gtconway3d/status/1 ... 5265340416

[LandM]

MD,
Take an oath. You have never done it - grow some balls - a fight in a door room is way different then getting your arse shot at. I said, i do NOT agree with him period. I did SAY F$ing rules of engagement are stupid - you smart people create them.

[cradleandshoot]

TLD your momma cried home last night
TLD is it 4 or 5 - I worked in that community, i can spit out 30 names without thinking - none are cowards BUT rules of engagement - those pesky rules created by bureaucrats who have never done it - go do it man - seriously you have an 18 year old have him or her go do it. Some follow the rules of engagement, others just ignore them for their and their mens safety. Do not send people in harms way if they cannot defend themselves. If you have never done it, be careful of your criticism.
Dmac thank you for your posts - I say we sit and have a beer

You do understand that Gallagher is calling his fellow Seals cowards, right?
Not for reporting him, but for their own behavior in combat.

You think he's probably right, and unlike the 30+ you know these guys all in one unit are cowards? Or do you think it's more likely that these guys know that, one guy, Gallagher, is indeed a 'psychopath' and 'evil'?...their words under oath, not ours.

this is not as black and white as it is being made out to be. I would also be interested in hearing from the Navy Seals that served with Chief Gallagher over all of his deployments. This is only my speculation but when you train someone to kill and you send him on a mission to do what he has been trained to do, after repeated deployments they become oblivious to their own inhumanity to the enemy. I would think the higher ups in the Navy would understand what happens to any person who spends as much time in combat as Chief Gallagher did. The bottom line is to complete your mission. If a person has spent 6 or 7 deployments in harms way, you lose all sense of humanity. I can't defend what the Chief may or may not have done. I understand the indifference to human life that may have been ingrained in his mind after years of front line combat.

[Typical Lax Dad]

TLD your momma cried home last night
TLD is it 4 or 5 - I worked in that community, i can spit out 30 names without thinking - none are cowards BUT rules of engagement - those pesky rules created by bureaucrats who have never done it - go do it man - seriously you have an 18 year old have him or her go do it. Some follow the rules of engagement, others just ignore them for their and their mens safety. Do not send people in harms way if they cannot defend themselves. If you have never done it, be careful of your criticism.
Dmac thank you for your posts - I say we sit and have a beer

Were you at the Pinstripes Bowl? Did you bother to read my post? I was asking about Gallagher’s attorney calling these SEALs cowards. I made no comment about the “case”. That’s a dead horse. I was criticizing his stuffed shirt attorney calling these guys cowards. The venom should be directed at him. Not me. If you are ok with him calling them COWARDS that’s fine.

[MDlaxfan76]

MD,
Take an oath. You have never done it - grow some balls - a fight in a door room is way different then getting your arse shot at. I said, i do NOT agree with him period. I did SAY F$ing rules of engagement are stupid - you smart people create them.

Huh?
I've never taken an oath???
"grow some balls"???

How about you just respond to my question tough guy?
You were sarcastic with TLD as if he was some sort of softy because he knows some Seals and wouldn't ever think of them as cowards???
What the heck is that about?

This is Gallagher calling his fellow Seals cowards...surely you don't agree that he's likely correct about them?
If so, why wouldn't you believe them, not him?

I'm happy to discuss "rules of engagement", but I'm quite likely not as qualified to do so as perhaps you are, much less the "smart people" in the military who DO create them and enforce them.

But that discussion isn't what these guys are saying about Gallagher. They're claiming far more than simply crossing some lines of engagement in a situation in which it's their life or the life of their teammates on the line. Far more.

On that discussion of rules of engagement, though, I do think it's important to have clear understandings of what is expected in various situations. I'd want the warriors with actual experience of those situations setting those rules, and enforcing those rules, as long as the overall ethic is to achieve objectives with as limited loss of life as can be reasonably done. My understanding is that our volunteer, professional military does that as well or better than any other military in the world. And at the same time is the most lethal military in the world.

[MDlaxfan76]

TLD your momma cried home last night
TLD is it 4 or 5 - I worked in that community, i can spit out 30 names without thinking - none are cowards BUT rules of engagement - those pesky rules created by bureaucrats who have never done it - go do it man - seriously you have an 18 year old have him or her go do it. Some follow the rules of engagement, others just ignore them for their and their mens safety. Do not send people in harms way if they cannot defend themselves. If you have never done it, be careful of your criticism.
Dmac thank you for your posts - I say we sit and have a beer

You do understand that Gallagher is calling his fellow Seals cowards, right?
Not for reporting him, but for their own behavior in combat.

You think he's probably right, and unlike the 30+ you know these guys all in one unit are cowards? Or do you think it's more likely that these guys know that, one guy, Gallagher, is indeed a 'psychopath' and 'evil'?...their words under oath, not ours.

this is not as black and white as it is being made out to be. I would also be interested in hearing from the Navy Seals that served with Chief Gallagher over all of his deployments. This is only my speculation but when you train someone to kill and you send him on a mission to do what he has been trained to do, after repeated deployments they become oblivious to their own inhumanity to the enemy. I would think the higher ups in the Navy would understand what happens to any person who spends as much time in combat as Chief Gallagher did. The bottom line is to complete your mission. If a person has spent 6 or 7 deployments in harms way, you lose all sense of humanity. I can't defend what the Chief may or may not have done. I understand the indifference to human life that may have been ingrained in his mind after years of front line combat.

I agree that it's quite understandable how someone could devolve to "lose all sense on humanity" and have an "indifference to human life."

I think we can agree that this need not happen to every soldier, indeed does not necessarily happen with most or even many who go through such experiences.

But it can.

His fellow trained warriors are the best observers of his behaviors and state of mind in the deployment they were with him on.
I tend to believe them, not him.

[MDlaxfan76]

Ho hum....

https://www.citizensforethics.org/trump ... t-weekend/

Yikes.
Crazy that this isn't as surprising as it should be.

[Typical Lax Dad]

TLD your momma cried home last night
TLD is it 4 or 5 - I worked in that community, i can spit out 30 names without thinking - none are cowards BUT rules of engagement - those pesky rules created by bureaucrats who have never done it - go do it man - seriously you have an 18 year old have him or her go do it. Some follow the rules of engagement, others just ignore them for their and their mens safety. Do not send people in harms way if they cannot defend themselves. If you have never done it, be careful of your criticism.
Dmac thank you for your posts - I say we sit and have a beer

You do understand that Gallagher is calling his fellow Seals cowards, right?
Not for reporting him, but for their own behavior in combat.

You think he's probably right, and unlike the 30+ you know these guys all in one unit are cowards? Or do you think it's more likely that these guys know that, one guy, Gallagher, is indeed a 'psychopath' and 'evil'?...their words under oath, not ours.

this is not as black and white as it is being made out to be. I would also be interested in hearing from the Navy Seals that served with Chief Gallagher over all of his deployments. This is only my speculation but when you train someone to kill and you send him on a mission to do what he has been trained to do, after repeated deployments they become oblivious to their own inhumanity to the enemy. I would think the higher ups in the Navy would understand what happens to any person who spends as much time in combat as Chief Gallagher did. The bottom line is to complete your mission. If a person has spent 6 or 7 deployments in harms way, you lose all sense of humanity. I can't defend what the Chief may or may not have done. I understand the indifference to human life that may have been ingrained in his mind after years of front line combat.

[Typical Lax Dad]

TLD your momma cried home last night
TLD is it 4 or 5 - I worked in that community, i can spit out 30 names without thinking - none are cowards BUT rules of engagement - those pesky rules created by bureaucrats who have never done it - go do it man - seriously you have an 18 year old have him or her go do it. Some follow the rules of engagement, others just ignore them for their and their mens safety. Do not send people in harms way if they cannot defend themselves. If you have never done it, be careful of your criticism.
Dmac thank you for your posts - I say we sit and have a beer

You do understand that Gallagher is calling his fellow Seals cowards, right?
Not for reporting him, but for their own behavior in combat.

You think he's probably right, and unlike the 30+ you know, these guys all in one unit are cowards? Or do you think it's more likely that these guys know that, one guy, Gallagher, is indeed a 'psychopath' and 'evil'?...their words under oath, not ours.

Must have been SEAL team “C” guys.

[DMac]

There is a lot of truth to what cradle says above, MDlax. I've said many times in the past that rules of engagement is an oxymoron (that's a bit strong but no so wrong either). You dehumanize the enemy and view them as no higher life form than a cockroach or rat. Now hype the troops up, work them into a frenzy, tell them to kill, kill, kill and what do you think is going happen (My Lai)? "Rules" of engagement falls to the bottom of your list of things you're concerned about, believe that from a person who has been in that environment. While I never went into the bush and fought alongside any infantrymen, I spent a whole lot of time hanging out with the 101st Airborne boys in Tan My who did. I think you have to experience that in order to understand the mentality of the folks you send out to do that kind of work.
Suffice it to say that none of us know what was going on in Gallagher's unit, but it appears as if there was some dissention among the troops. Everybody doesn't always get along with everybody in the military just as in the civilian world. Nasty little derogatory things are said (talk to a divorced couple and tell me how much truth you're hearing there) which might have an iota of truth to them but you're not getting an accurate picture there. Fact is, these are pre trial vidoes and some of these stories changed during the trial, enough so that he was aquitted of everything except for posing in a picture (alongside a whole bunch of other guys) with their kill. I maintain my BFD attitude about that. As for the under oath part, is that to say people don't lie under oath?
Can we get this part right (this has got to be about the 40th time I've pointed this out), it's SEALs, not seals. There's a real big difference there.

[cradleandshoot]

TLD your momma cried home last night
TLD is it 4 or 5 - I worked in that community, i can spit out 30 names without thinking - none are cowards BUT rules of engagement - those pesky rules created by bureaucrats who have never done it - go do it man - seriously you have an 18 year old have him or her go do it. Some follow the rules of engagement, others just ignore them for their and their mens safety. Do not send people in harms way if they cannot defend themselves. If you have never done it, be careful of your criticism.
Dmac thank you for your posts - I say we sit and have a beer

You do understand that Gallagher is calling his fellow Seals cowards, right?
Not for reporting him, but for their own behavior in combat.

You think he's probably right, and unlike the 30+ you know these guys all in one unit are cowards? Or do you think it's more likely that these guys know that, one guy, Gallagher, is indeed a 'psychopath' and 'evil'?...their words under oath, not ours.

this is not as black and white as it is being made out to be. I would also be interested in hearing from the Navy Seals that served with Chief Gallagher over all of his deployments. This is only my speculation but when you train someone to kill and you send him on a mission to do what he has been trained to do, after repeated deployments they become oblivious to their own inhumanity to the enemy. I would think the higher ups in the Navy would understand what happens to any person who spends as much time in combat as Chief Gallagher did. The bottom line is to complete your mission. If a person has spent 6 or 7 deployments in harms way, you lose all sense of humanity. I can't defend what the Chief may or may not have done. I understand the indifference to human life that may have been ingrained in his mind after years of front line combat.

I agree that it's quite understandable how someone could devolve to "lose all sense on humanity" and have an "indifference to human life."

I think we can agree that this need not happen to every soldier, indeed does not necessarily happen with most or even many who go through such experiences.

But it can.

His fellow trained warriors are the best observers of his behaviors and state of mind in the deployment they were with him on.
I tend to believe them, not him.

I can't ignore what they are saying. The Chief also served with a number of different team members over multiple deployments. If he had mentally crossed over from spending too much time in combat, his superiors should have recognized and pulled him back. I find it disturbing that his own team members were concerned about his behavior. I am even more disturbed that his superiors did not recognize he was becoming unstable and undisciplined. I have all the respect in the world for the chiefs combat service. The navy may have kept him out there fighting for too long. He may have started enjoying the job too much. The question I would ask is how many combat deployments do you ask of these men?

[cradleandshoot]

There is a lot of truth to what cradle says above, MDlax. I've said many times in the past that rules of engagement is an oxymoron (that's a bit strong but no so wrong either). You dehumanize the enemy and view them as no higher life form than a cockroach or rat. Now hype the troops up, work them into a frenzy, tell them to kill, kill, kill and what do you think is going happen (My Lai)? "Rules" of engagement falls to the bottom of your list of things you're concerned about, believe that from a person who has been in that environment. While I never went into the bush and fought alongside any infantrymen, I spent a whole lot of time hanging out with the 101st Airborne boys in Tan My who did. I think you have to experience that in order to understand the mentality of the folks you send out to do that kind of work.
Suffice it to say that none of us know what was going on in Gallagher's unit, but it appears as if there was some dissention among the troops. Everybody doesn't always get along with everybody in the military just as in the civilian world. Nasty little derogatory things are said (talk to a divorced couple and tell me how much truth you're hearing there) which might have an iota of truth to them but you're not getting an accurate picture there. Fact is, these are pre trial vidoes and some of these stories changed during the trial, enough so that he was aquitted of everything except for posing in a picture (alongside a whole bunch of other guys) with their kill. I maintain my BFD attitude about that. As for the under oath part, is that to say people don't lie under oath?
Can we get this part right (this has got to be about the 40th time I've pointed this out), it's SEALs, not seals. There's a real big difference there.

I also know of several Vietnam vets who make those necklaces from ears cut off from dead VC. Try and explain that to someone who was never over there. Mans inhumanity to man knows no limits. I am guessing all of us read the Lord of the Flies when we were in school.

[MDlaxfan76]

There is a lot of truth to what cradle says above, MDlax. I've said many times in the past that rules of engagement is an oxymoron (that's a bit strong but no so wrong either). You dehumanize the enemy and view them as no higher life form than a cockroach or rat. Now hype the troops up, work them into a frenzy, tell them to kill, kill, kill and what do you think is going happen (My Lai)? "Rules" of engagement falls to the bottom of your list of things you're concerned about, believe that from a person who has been in that environment. While I never went into the bush and fought alongside any infantrymen, I spent a whole lot of time hanging out with the 101st Airborne boys in Tan My who did. I think you have to experience that in order to understand the mentality of the folks you send out to do that kind of work.
Suffice it to say that none of us know what was going on in Gallagher's unit, but it appears as if there was some dissention among the troops. Everybody doesn't always get along with everybody in the military just as in the civilian world. Nasty little derogatory things are said (talk to a divorced couple and tell me how much truth you're hearing there) which might have an iota of truth to them but you're not getting an accurate picture there. Fact is, these are pre trial vidoes and some of these stories changed during the trial, enough so that he was aquitted of everything except for posing in a picture (alongside a whole bunch of other guys) with their kill. I maintain my BFD attitude about that. As for the under oath part, is that to say people don't lie under oath?
Can we get this part right (this has got to be about the 40th time I've pointed this out), it's SEALs, not seals. There's a real big difference there.

Thanks for the 'correction' on capitalization...talk about rule bound though.

My understanding is that our SEALs (and other special forces) are far better trained and prepared for their roles than would have been the case in the bulk of soldiers in the Vietnam era. If I'm not mistaken, this "dehumanize the enemy" etc is no longer how they are trained.

Which in no way is to suggest that it's not understandable how that psychological defense mechanism wouldn't be a very possible outcome of combat, much less many deployments.

On these SEALs, are you really saying these guys all lied under oath and it's Gallagher telling the truth??? The guy calling SEALs cowards??

If I'm not mistaken, the change of story that mattered to the most serious charge was that the medic claimed he'd actually delivered the final act, attempting to be actually merciful under the expectation that the young fighter was about to be tortured....by Gallagher. So, Gallagher did not 'kill' the fighter in captivity...

"Psychopath" and "evil" were not retracted.