Support NeoGAF

[shoelacer]

On the basis of rejecting article sources over criteria I've listed, yes.

Try to keep up.

sorry guess i'm a just big dumb dumb who can't keep up with your super smart histrionics

 

[Coriolanus]

So you rejected and ignored all of his legitimate criticisms of The Intercept to reduce his argument to purely "confirmation bias?"

it really wasn't particularly good criticism.

Editorializing always occurs within journalism, is like complaining that Paper X has a bias. Obviously. Still, when something has been too editorialized, so as to skew the truth in a particularly glaring manner, one can and should criticize the publication for that. He made no effort to detail which bits of the article he thinks suffered that fate.

Lack of citations is particularly silly. There are several in the article. If he meant lack of sources, that's the standard "complaining that the journalist didn't disclose his sources", which they aren't required to, unless he presents reason to assume that the writer is legit pulling shit outta his ass.

Clearly anti-us agenda is just a meaningless attack. Conflates the intercept with the writer, ignoring the content of the article to dismiss it out of hand.

I get the feeling that he didn't even give it a read.

 

[WinFonda]

interesting bit

The unit conducted a captain’s mast on at least seven SEALs for revealing sensitive information during a series of promotional videos for the video game “Medal of Honor: Warfighter.” The reprimand ended the careers of two veteran SEAL Team 6 noncommissioned officers.

was that known? pretty crazy

 

[Suikoguy]

Lack of citations is particularly silly. There are several in the article. If he meant lack of sources, that's the standard "complaining that the journalist didn't disclose his sources", which they aren't required to, unless he presents reason to assume that the writer is legit pulling shit outta his ass.

Clearly anti-us agenda is just a meaningless attack. Conflates the intercept with the writer, ignoring the content of the article to dismiss it out of hand.

You don't see how both of your statements are at odds with each other?

The Intercept has an anti-western agenda, which presents reason to be concerned of the validity of the article.

 

[randome]

from the author of the article's twitter:

Thanks. I guess what I dont understand after the term making no sense is...how does shooting someone in the head form a 'V'?

 

[Ordinaryundone]

Thanks. I guess what I dont understand after the term making no sense is...how does shooting someone in the head form a 'V'?

Where the bullet enters is smaller than where the bullet exits. Take off the top part of the skull and you'll see a v shape as the wound expands to its exit point.

 

[BajiBoxer]

So you rejected and ignored all of his legitimate criticisms of The Intercept to reduce his argument to purely "confirmation bias?"

What legitimate criticisms did he level against the intercept? Looking over the thread a couple times, I only saw one claiming they have an anti-U.S. bias without backing up the claim in anyway. I didn't see this list y'all are talking about. Was it edited out?

 

[Coriolanus]

You don't see how both of your statements are at odds with each other?

The Intercept has an anti-western agenda, which presents reason to be concerned of the validity of the article.

No. I do not. Explain.

Even assuming that it had an anti-western agenda (an argument that was supported with no evidence whatsoever), reasons to be concerned =/= dismiss it completely, and you've also equated the intercept with the writer. This is quite akin to concern trolling.

i mean, the site even has a precedent of fact-checking the stuff it publishes and then firing dudes that it finds making shit up. Which isn't exactly the kinda thing that a "Death To Amerikkka" news source usually does.

 

[Apocryphon]

might be missing something but i don't really see a huge deal with how many times they shot osama bin laden in the face.

if we're okay with sending special forces into other sovereign countries without their permission to assassinate people living there, we should be okay with how many times those people get shot in the face.

there isn't a 'legit' or kind way to go assassinate somebody.

Desecrating corpses a crime under both US military law and the Geneva conventions.

 

[Barajas_201]

It's pretty gross how some posters are praising this psychopaths. Hey Einsteins, this is what's happening:

The sooner you realize you're the bad guys in this, the better. Sincerely ~ Third worlders.

 

[LlamaJohnson]

I do not agree with mutilation of a corpse. I know and work with dozens of vets, as well as men who have been in the various special forces and I would think, based on things we have discussed, that they wouldn't participate in this type of conduct. It's not the majority. It can't be. I can say this, based on my own experience and information I've obtained from them: in order to be a member of an elite group, you have to be cut from a different cloth. In the military, or also in law enforcement, you are trained knowing that at some point you may have to shoot somebody. In most cases of law enforcement, you'll never fire your gun on another person. In the military that changes based on war vs peace time, deployment, etc. But these guys, they are often tasked with missions that require the killing of others. You have to be wired a bit differently when your job for that day is to kill somebody.

Someone mentioned earlier that this type of behavior probably exists in most special forces units throughout the world and I would agree. Soldiers in general who have been in combat, and especially ones who have had been involved in these types of missions deal with stressers and mental issues that most people never could imagine. It's unfortunate. Again, this doesn't make it ok. I don't have the solution to stop it. I do think that it's very easy for us to judge them without experiencing the things that they do, seeing what they see, living in that type of hell that they do.

Killing someone changes you and your opinion on what it means to be alive. If you can take the idea of a flesh and blood human being, and change that to nothing more than a target, pretty soon you're not going to feel uncomfortable taking down that target. At that point, the target becomes something you look forward to taking down, and you might try to find different ways to get that feeling back, that feeling of making it important to you again.

 

[Seductivpancakes]

I like how people are "keyboard warriors" for voicing any sort of criticism.

So what, people can't voice their concerns. opinions and excise their freedom of speech cause soldier's put their lives on the line to protect their freedom of speech?

 

[jchap]

Remind me not to fuck with the Navy Seals

 

[HStallion]

Remind me not to fuck with the Navy Seals

Technically they fuck with you. They aren't a defensive group

 

[MUnited83]

Navy SEALS put their lives on the line for this country and it sucks to see such a disparaging article.

Putting your life on the line doesn't give you the right to be psychopathic monster that is allowed to commit horrible crimes with impunity.

 

[molnizzle]

I do not agree with mutilation of a corpse. I know and work with dozens of vets, as well as men who have been in the various special forces and I would think, based on things we have discussed, that they wouldn't participate in this type of conduct. It's not the majority. It can't be. I can say this, based on my own experience and information I've obtained from them: in order to be a member of an elite group, you have to be cut from a different cloth. In the military, or also in law enforcement, you are trained knowing that at some point you may have to shoot somebody. In most cases of law enforcement, you'll never fire your gun on another person. In the military that changes based on war vs peace time, deployment, etc. But these guys, they are often tasked with missions that require the killing of others. You have to be wired a bit differently when your job for that day is to kill somebody.

Someone mentioned earlier that this type of behavior probably exists in most special forces units throughout the world and I would agree. Soldiers in general who have been in combat, and especially ones who have had been involved in these types of missions deal with stressers and mental issues that most people never could imagine. It's unfortunate. Again, this doesn't make it ok. I don't have the solution to stop it. I do think that it's very easy for us to judge them without experiencing the things that they do, seeing what they see, living in that type of hell that they do.

Killing someone changes you and your opinion on what it means to be alive. If you can take the idea of a flesh and blood human being, and change that to nothing more than a target, pretty soon you're not going to feel uncomfortable taking down that target. At that point, the target becomes something you look forward to taking down, and you might try to find different ways to get that feeling back, that feeling of making it important to you again.

Good post.

I dunno about desecration, but "two in the chest, one in the head" was the standard motto for all soldiers when I was in Afghanistan. When we practiced battle drills and were sweeping an area with downed enemy, we were taught to release a "controlled pair" to the head to make sure they were dead. I was never in any real life situation where this was necessary but you bet your ass I'd have done it without thinking. Battle drills just get ingrained in you like that.

 

[Laughing Banana]

No, I am not strong enough to be a Navy SEAL - those men operate on a whole other level. I just respect anyone that serves their country and don't appreciate when people that don't have experience in the field start judging their actions.

So what would you say to the members of the Navy SEALS on the article that opinionated that there's something wrong in the group that needs correcting? Because there are plenty in there that have voiced their concerns.

Do you consider them weak? Or a traitor to the country?

I agree that defacing osama bin trashcans corpse was wrong, but I understand why it could happen emotionally. Those SEALS were representing every single victim that fell during 9/11.

It was a powerful moment.

Psychologically, I get what happened too. It was an emotionally powerful encounter for those operatives, and to boot many of them likely suffer from long-term mental health issues from their time in the field, all of which came to the surface in the defacing of a corpse they were specifically told not to deface.

Just because I "get" why it happened doesn't mean I'm willing to let it slide.

What is quite funny is that, at least according to the article, the one's that doing the defacing/canoeing did it in order to be famous/for his own profit and not because "he was emotional", while the actual guy that did Osama in, the "Red" guy, didn't do anything after he confirmed Osama's death and by all accounts was actually reserved and even heroic.

 

[geestack]

I kind of wonder if there's some sort of psychological warfare element to their actions...
Like, if you're the OpFor and you go to check why your outpost has gone quiet. Finding all your people shot dead is going to be less disturbing than finding them scalped, amputated, & mutilated... right?

the article addresses this through an account related by a former SEAL commander; apparently there was a nazi germany book called "The Devil's Guard" that advocated corpse desecrations and massacres as a means of psychological warfare. but, the SEAL commander notes that this is all bullshit because all that does is make the enemy even more motivated:

”These fucking morons read the book ‘The Devil's Guard' and believed it," said one of the former SEAL Team 6 leaders who investigated Slabinski and Blue Squadron. ”It's a work of fiction billed as the Bible, as the truth. In reality, it's bullshit. But we all see what we want to see." Slabinski and the Blue Squadron SEALs deployed to Afghanistan were ”frustrated, and that book gave them the answers they wanted to see: Terrorize the Taliban and they'd surrender. The truth is that such stuff only galvanizes the enemy."

the fact that there was a faction inside the SEALs looking to nazi germany propaganda for inspiration and how to behave in the field isn't really good.

 

[archangelmorph]

the article addresses this through an account related by a former SEAL commander; apparently there was a nazi germany book called "The Devil's Guard" that advocated corpse desecrations and massacres as a means of psychological warfare. but, the SEAL commander notes that this is all bullshit because all that does is make the enemy even more motivated:



the fact that there was a faction inside the SEALs looking to nazi germany propaganda for inspiration and how to behave in the field isn't really good.

Christ...

 

[Prinz Eugn]

Are you guys in the special forces or the military in general? Do you guys understand what kind of enemy Al Queda was?

It's easy to be a tough guy behind a keyboard.



The training to join the Navy SEALS is held to the highest standards. And even higher for SEAL Team 6.



Seems like they are doing their job well since America is protected and continuously cementing her place as a world superpower.

The important distinction is that these sorts of actions they are accused of are not only way beyond their mission and duty, but counterproductive to them, and part of an avoidable pattern. A few incidents here and there is forgivable (and probably unpreventable) because they are under unknowable pressure, but what the article described is systemic neglect, which can and should be addressed.

 

[Boney]

The concept of canoeing is revolting.

You don't see how both of your statements are at odds with each other?

The Intercept has an anti-western agenda, which presents reason to be concerned of the validity of the article.

Pray tell, what exactly is "anti-western" propaganda?


Would something like this qualify as "anti-western" propaganda for you? It's clearly undermining police authority by exposing different practices they use to dismiss accountability.

https://theintercept.com/2016/10/06...e-bosses-say-it-didnt-happen-it-didnt-happen/

Or how about this? It clearly is undermining the school system, the penitentiary system and the overall "self made man" myth.

http://m.truthdig.com/report/item/a_pipeline_straight_to_jail_20151011

At that point, why not skip reporting altogether and go straight to advertising?

 

[sugarhigh4242]

You don't see how both of your statements are at odds with each other?

The Intercept has an anti-western agenda, which presents reason to be concerned of the validity of the article.

It's really outrageous for you to say that an anti-war position is an "anti-western agenda". A lot of us in the US think that our government's foreign policy is putting the safety of the world (including our own) at risk.

 

[firehawk12]

I think there's something hilarious about the fact that the people deciding how they were going to make money off of Bin Laden's death before the mission happened.