Three more Navy SEALs spared review after Trump's intervention

[webfact]

Three more Navy SEALs spared review after Trump's intervention

By Phil Stewart

 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump holds a campaign rally in Sunrise, Florida, U.S., November 26, 2019. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Navy announced on Wednesday it would scrap plans to carry out reviews of three Navy SEALs that could have led to their ouster from the elite force, after President Donald Trump's extraordinary intervention in a related case.

 

"I have determined that any failures in conduct, performance, judgment, or professionalism exhibited by these officers be addressed through other administrative measures as appropriate," acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly said in a statement.

 

The decision follows Trump's order on Sunday that Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher keep his status as a Navy SEAL, even after he was convicted of battlefield misconduct. The review of the three other SEALs was connected to the Gallagher case.

 

Critics say the actions undermine military justice and send a message that battlefield atrocities will be tolerated. Trump's former Navy secretary, Richard Spencer, who was fired on Sunday over the case, has spoken out against the president on the issue.

 

"The president has very little understanding of what it means to be in the military, to fight ethically or to be governed by a uniform set of rules and practices," Spencer wrote in a piece published by the Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/richard-spencer-i-was-fired-as-navy-secretary-heres-what-ive-learned-because-of-it/2019/11/27/9c2e58bc-1092-11ea-bf62-eadd5d11f559_story.html on Wednesday.

 

Trump has argued that Gallagher's case was mishandled by the Navy and said that he is defending America's warfighters from unfair and unfounded prosecution.

 

The now-terminated reviews of the three remaining SEALs -- Lieutenant Jacob Portier, Lieutenant Commander Robert Breisch and Lieutenant Thomas MacNeil -- had received far less attention than the Gallagher case.

 

A military jury in July convicted Gallagher of illegally posing for pictures with the corpse of an Islamic State fighter while deployed to Iraq in 2017, but acquitted him of murder in the detainee's death. Gallagher also was cleared of charges of attempted murder in the wounding of two civilians, a schoolgirl and an elderly man, shot from a sniper's perch.

 

Portier, Breisch and MacNeil were under scrutiny in the Gallagher affair as his superiors.

 

Modly said his decision to scrap the reviews should not be interpreted as a diminishment of the SEAL ethos, which he quoted. It says the elite fighters serve with honor "on and off the battlefield."

 

"The United States Navy, and the Naval Special Warfare Community specifically, have dangerous and important work to do," he said in his statement. "In my judgment, neither deserves the continued distraction and negative attention that recent events have evoked."

 

(Reporting by Phil Stewart; Editing by Leslie Adler and Sonya Hepinstall)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-11-28

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Somtamnication]

Pathetic. There goes military discipline!

[Langsuan Man]

I wonder how long it will be before Trump thinks he can knight his warrior base 

[simple1]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

"The president has very little understanding of what it means to be in the military, to fight ethically or to be governed by a uniform set of rules and practices," Spencer wrote in a piece published by the Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/richard-spencer-i-was-fired-as-navy-secretary-heres-what-ive-learned-because-of-it/2019/11/27/9c2e58bc-1092-11ea-bf62-eadd5d11f559_story.html on Wednesday.

 

[Tug]

Just pandering to his base he has no clue nor cares how the brass keep a bunch of trained alpha males in line just another example of trumps unsuitable nature for the presidency 

[stevenl]

18 minutes ago, simple1 said:

 

Excellent letter from Spencer.

[Enoon]

Especially for those thinking that there was some sort of "lefty/millenial/Democrat/stupid civilian" conspiracy:

 

"The next day, the Navy established a review board to decide the status of Gallagher’s Trident pin. According to long-standing procedure, a group of four senior enlisted SEALs would rule on the question. This was critical: It would be Gallagher’s peers managing their own community. The senior enlisted ranks in our services are the foundation of good order and discipline."

 

 

[Boon Mee]

Trump is keeping moral high among the members of the military by not bowing down to the liberal panty waists that want see America crippled. 

 

MAGA 

[Cory1848]

56 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Trump is keeping moral high among the members of the military by not bowing down to the liberal panty waists that want see America crippled. 

 

MAGA 

What on earth are you talking about. He’s undermining military discipline and morale by injecting himself into a disciplinary procedure for political purposes. Do you think the thousands of soldiers who serve honorably, and their commanders who are responsible for maintaining discipline, want to see one of their own who commits a war crime get off the hook? How can you think this is somehow good for the military? Yet more utter chaos from the White House ...

[John1012]

Is taking a picture with a dead terrorist a war crime? Why is it that out military is persecuted, British paras prosecuted 40+ years after an event, and terrorists get forgiven. These men and women live and fight in extremely hazardous conditions, against a cruel and barbarous enemy (who have NO ROE), who would treat any captured soldiers with extreme cruelty and death, yet they are expected by the pantyhose liberal desk jockeys to act in a courteous and appeasing manner to these evil people. Perhaps Trump want a more aggressive and less forgiving group of military exponents, who are prepared to return the treatment that they expect to receive if they ever fall into the enemies hands. A deterrent. perhaps? Perhaps he is showing respect for the people at the sharp end taking the risks.

 

[stevenl]

8 minutes ago, John1012 said:

Is taking a picture with a dead terrorist a war crime? Why is it that out military is persecuted, British paras prosecuted 40+ years after an event, and terrorists get forgiven. These men and women live and fight in extremely hazardous conditions, against a cruel and barbarous enemy (who have NO ROE), who would treat any captured soldiers with extreme cruelty and death, yet they are expected by the pantyhose liberal desk jockeys to act in a courteous and appeasing manner to these evil people. Perhaps Trump want a more aggressive and less forgiving group of military exponents, who are prepared to return the treatment that they expect to receive if they ever fall into the enemies hands. A deterrent. perhaps? Perhaps he is showing respect for the people at the sharp end taking the risks.

 

The very people at the sharp end and taking the risks disagree with you. And that is just looking at where the complaints against Gallagher came from.

[howbri]

6 hours ago, Tug said:

Just pandering to his base he has no clue nor cares how the brass keep a bunch of trained alpha males in line just another example of trumps unsuitable nature for the presidency 

Honoring their service is NOT "pandering". Making America great again. Go Donald!

[NanLaew]

56 minutes ago, John1012 said:

...yet they are expected by the pantyhose liberal desk jockeys...

Expected by the who now?

 

Looks like you've got your metaphors in a twist.

[NanLaew]

58 minutes ago, John1012 said:

Perhaps Trump want a more aggressive and less forgiving group of military exponents, who are prepared to return the treatment that they expect to receive if they ever fall into the enemies hands. A deterrent. perhaps? Perhaps he is showing respect for the people at the sharp end taking the risks.

Perhaps. But I reckon the SEALS and the US military in general are doing just fine despite their current CIC.

 

All he's doing is showing a dangerous stiff middle finger to the military judiciary while pandering to his red-capped MAGA ra-ra boys on the pre-election stumps.

 

Forgive him his sins, he knows not what he does.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

9 hours ago, webfact said:

"I have determined that any failures in conduct, performance, judgment, or professionalism exhibited by these officers be addressed through other administrative measures as appropriate," acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly said in a statement.

 

Wonder what that means, exactly????

 

Sad that the president has decided to now insert himself into the U.S. military, decades after he consciously avoided what should have been his obligation to serve in the military.

 

Frankly, as by now has become apparent to most folks, the U.S. military probably would have better off without him.

 

Honor? Code? Professionalism?   He knows NOTHING about any of those things.

 

[Redline]

A draft dodger in action-degrades war hero’s that fought for the moral fight to remain in custody of the enemy until his comrades were released.  An authoritarian wanna be-pathetic he’s American-a total embarrassment and danger to the constitution of the republic 

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, Scott Tracy said:

Yet again, why is this here? It's for the United States to sort. Armchair warriors make no contribution.

So what do you think the purpose of a public discussion forum is ???? 

[metisdead]

A post containing inflammatory personal comments directed at another member has been removed.  Please keep it civil when posting and abide by this forum rule:

 

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

 

A post commenting on moderation regarding the placement of this news topic has been removed. 

[Bluespunk]

12 hours ago, webfact said:

Three more Navy SEALs spared review after Trump's intervention

 

War crimes R us

 

maga

Edited November 28, 2019 by Bluespunk

[Mac98]

8 hours ago, John1012 said:

Is taking a picture with a dead terrorist a war crime? Why is it that out military is persecuted, British paras prosecuted 40+ years after an event, and terrorists get forgiven. These men and women live and fight in extremely hazardous conditions, against a cruel and barbarous enemy (who have NO ROE), who would treat any captured soldiers with extreme cruelty and death, yet they are expected by the pantyhose liberal desk jockeys to act in a courteous and appeasing manner to these evil people. Perhaps Trump want a more aggressive and less forgiving group of military exponents, who are prepared to return the treatment that they expect to receive if they ever fall into the enemies hands. A deterrent. perhaps? Perhaps he is showing respect for the people at the sharp end taking the risks.

 

Trump is involved in showing voters that he is invulnerable to media criticism, court decisions, congressional action, and now the military. He wants service men and women to know they are protected from their own officers if he calls on them to take action anywhere, including the U.S. (Read that last part again.)     

[mamypoko]

The highest Court of Appeals - Fox News

[thaibeachlovers]

23 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump's former Navy secretary, Richard Spencer, who was fired on Sunday over the case, has spoken out against the president on the issue.

 

"The president has very little understanding of what it means to be in the military, to fight ethically or to be governed by a uniform set of rules and practices," Spencer wrote in a piece published by the Washington Post

Spencer served in the marines as an aviator ( as an officer ) for 5 years. I served longer than that, but I wouldn't consider myself to know about SEALS, which he seems to saying he does.

 

I do know what the ranks think about officers and especially high ranking ones that work in an office, as opposed to the ones that get down and dirty with the troops.

 

He should have kept his big yap closed.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, Mac98 said:

Trump is involved in showing voters that he is invulnerable to media criticism, court decisions, congressional action, and now the military. He wants service men and women to know they are protected from their own officers if he calls on them to take action anywhere, including the U.S. (Read that last part again.)     

NO, he wants them to know that they are protected from the namby pambys that sit in offices and pass judgement on the rough guys that get the job done.

Seems there are a lot of people out there that have no clue about being a soldier and what they have to do. They'd faint in horror at what really goes on in war. Unfortunately, the US military seems to be run now by people never served in action.

[Sujo]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

NO, he wants them to know that they are protected from the namby pambys that sit in offices and pass judgement on the rough guys that get the job done.

Seems there are a lot of people out there that have no clue about being a soldier and what they have to do. They'd faint in horror at what really goes on in war. Unfortunately, the US military seems to be run now by people never served in action.

It was the rough guys that get the job done that complained about it.

 

I can assure you the soldiers that made the complaints do know about soldiering.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You've got to be kidding. That is your reaction after Trump, you know, the one with the bone spurs, interferes in military court decisions?

5555555555555555555555 X a million

He's the commander in chief. He can do whatever he likes far as the military is concerned. 

 

If you don't like it change the constitution.

[Langsuan Man]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

5555555555555555555555 X a million

He's the commander in chief. He can do whatever he likes far as the military is concerned. 

 

If you don't like it change the constitution.

CIC yes, King Donald, no

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

5555555555555555555555 X a million

He's the commander in chief. He can do whatever he likes far as the military is concerned. 

 

If you don't like it change the constitution.

Which is not related to your post or my reaction to that. To remind you, you were talking about respect from the ranks.

[Cory1848]

17 hours ago, John1012 said:

Is taking a picture with a dead terrorist a war crime? Why is it that out military is persecuted, British paras prosecuted 40+ years after an event, and terrorists get forgiven. These men and women live and fight in extremely hazardous conditions, against a cruel and barbarous enemy (who have NO ROE), who would treat any captured soldiers with extreme cruelty and death, yet they are expected by the pantyhose liberal desk jockeys to act in a courteous and appeasing manner to these evil people. Perhaps Trump want a more aggressive and less forgiving group of military exponents, who are prepared to return the treatment that they expect to receive if they ever fall into the enemies hands. A deterrent. perhaps? Perhaps he is showing respect for the people at the sharp end taking the risks.

 

The soldier was charged with first-degree murder and attempted murder (he took potshots at a schoolgirl). He was reported for these crimes by several members of his SEAL platoon, and was tried in a military court by his peers. I am sure that any of these soldiers would dismiss being labeled “pantyhose liberal desk jockeys” with the derision that such juvenile name-calling deserves.

[mtls2005]

23 hours ago, Tug said:

Just pandering to his base

 

In these cases I don't think he's pandering to his base, exactly. Although the president has said he would like Gallagher to join him on the campaign trail. 

 

He's simply acquiescing to personal appeals (Marc Mukasey, Pete Hesgeth in this case), a la Kim Kardashian/Kanye/A$AP Rocky, et al.

 

Look at the odd pattern of pardons, and awards. It seems pretty easy to get to him, by appealing to his vanity or wallet, and then ask him to exercise his nearly unlimited power.

 

He's attacked nearly every institution, surprised the military lasted this long.

 

Posing with a deceased enemy combatant may or may not violate the UCMJ. Fatally stabbing a 16 YO enemy combatant brought in for medical treatment, and then posing with the body might violate the UCMJ. In a military tribunal, Gallagher was found not guilty of the murder, but was found guilty of "mis-treating" the dead.

 

Gallagher's platoon was said to alter the scope on his rifle as he was said to be fond of sniping civilians.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Which is not related to your post or my reaction to that. To remind you, you were talking about respect from the ranks.

What respect?

Respect from the ranks toward penpushers in offices that never saw action of any kind, sitting in judgement on the men that do?

LOL.