January 11, 2014

Jake Tapper, Marcus Luttrell and Glenn Beck
— DrewM

No, it's not the start of a joke but rather the start of today's internet OUTRAGE!

Jake Tapper interviewed Marcus Luttrell and Mark Wahlberg about the movie version of Lone Survivor. A few minutes into it things got a little confrontational between Tapper and Lutrell.

TAPPER (voice-over): It's clear for Marcus Luttrell the battle, almost a decade ago, still cuts close to the bone today.

(on camera): One of the emotions I felt while watching the film is, first of all, just the hopelessness of the situation, how horrific it was and also just all that loss of life of these brave American men. And I was torn about the message of the film in the same way that I think I am about the war in Afghanistan itself. I don't want any more senseless American death and at the same time I know that there are dead people there and good people who need help. Was that intentional?

LUTTRELL: Well, I don't know what part of the film you were watching, but hopelessness really ever came into it. Where did you see that? We never felt like we were hopelessly lost or anything like that. We never gave up. We never felt like we were losing unless we were actually dead. That never came across in the battle and while we were fighting on the mountain and it was just us against them.

TAPPER: Hopelessness, just the sense of all these wonderful people who died. It seemed senseless. I don't mean to disrespect in any way but it seemed senseless, all of these wonderful people who were killed for an op that went wrong.

LUTTRELL: We spend our whole lives defending this country so you tell me because we were over there doing what we were told to do was senseless and they died for nothing?

TAPPER: No, I'm not saying that at all.

The full transcript of the exchange is at the link.

The Blaze picked it up and Beck himself got into it on Twitter last night so naturally...we're off and running.

A couple of thoughts...

Beck is either flat out wrong or dishonest when he kicked things off by saying Tapper "went after" Lutrell. Watch the video (the exchange starts around 3 minute mark).

Tapper wrote a book, The Outpost, about the courage and sacrifice of those who serve. I remember seeing notes on Twitter about how when one of the soldiers profiled in the book was awarded the Medal of Honor and a bunch of members of his unit were in DC for the ceremony they got together with Tapper for beer and pizza. Tapper is most certainly not an-anti troop reporter.

What he was expressing is something I think a lot of people agree with, myself included...an ambivalence about the cost of the war in American dead and wounded in exchange for...what? As Tapper acknowledged in his question there were bad guys that needed killing but they were killed at the cost of a lot of good men and women. Has the 12+ year effort to turn Afghanistan into something other than a hell hole been worth the cost? To consider that question is not to devalue the memory of those who died or what they accomplished. It's a necessary thing so that we as a country are better positioned to decide when to send men and women to war again.

Understandably as someone who fought and lost so much, Luttrell does not seem to share that ambivalence (though his certainty isn't universally shared among veterans).

I think this went off the rails in a couple of spots. First, I would not have used the word "senseless" as Tapper did. The deaths of Luttrell's team members were not "senseless". They died doing an important mission. Sometimes that's the price sailors pay. They knew it when they joined the Navy and they really knew it when they joined the SEALs.

More importantly, their deaths while tragic and unimaginably painful for their family and friends made perfect "sense" because of the event that set it in motion. They could have killed the villagers who discovered them but they were noble men who willingly put their lives in danger rather than take the lives of innocents. These men were warriors and it made perfect sense to them that if they died, so be it, but they would die with their honor.

Again, I think Tapper's use of "senseless" was a poor choice. But given his body of work on Afghanistan it was not meant to be disrespectful of those who died or to diminish their service and sacrifice. It was also clear from the body language and tone of voice the last thing on Tapper's mind was "taking on" Marcus Luttrell.

I'm not sure where Luttrell got the idea that Tapper thought the deaths of his team members were "meaningless". It's clearly not in anything Tapper said. One thing to consider is these interviews are brutal in the best of circumstances. What happens is the film's stars sit in this studio all day, sometimes for days at a time and the interviewers are rotated in for 5 or 10 minutes or whatever the ground rules allow. It's brutal to answer the same question 39 times about some romantic comedy let alone the events that lead to the deaths of your closest friends.

In other circumstances might Luttrell have seen where Tapper was coming from? Perhaps. Either way it led to a bit of tension and I think some genuine concern from Tapper. He's been on Twitter all morning defending himself. I've gotten into it with him about things before and he's pretty feisty in his engages. Right now he seems genuinely concerned that people think he disrespected Luttrell, the men who died that day or veterans in general.

One very important thing to consider...Tapper could have edited that out. This wasn't a live interview, it was taped weeks ago. He says he left it in because the divide between how civilians look at the war and how many veterans like Luttrell look at it is an important issue. For more on that, see this post from 2012...The Real 1%.

Airing that portion of the interview may help highlight that divide. throwing around incendiary charges like Beck did, doesn't.


Posted by: DrewM at 08:42 AM | Comments (285)
Post contains 1065 words, total size 7 kb.

1 I like this place.

Posted by: Boxxy at January 11, 2014 08:43 AM (Ua6T/)

2 And now, I'll read the post.

Posted by: Box-o-rama at January 11, 2014 08:44 AM (Ua6T/)

3 Still, third?

Posted by: Boxxy runs up the score at January 11, 2014 08:47 AM (Ua6T/)

4 I asked on the other thread, but why is the DC showing a photo of Michael Murphy and not Marcus Luttrell? They don't even mention Lt. Murphy in the article.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 08:47 AM (DmNpO)

5 "I'm not sure where Luttrell got the idea that Tapper thought the deaths of his team members were "meaningless". It's clearly not in anything Tapper said." He probably got the idea from the same place you did, Drew.... "First, I would not have used the word "senseless" as Tapper did. The deaths of Luttrell's team members were not "senseless". "

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 11, 2014 08:48 AM (bCEmE)

6 People like confrontation. "Reporter interviews guy" isn't an attention grabbing headline.

Posted by: fluffy thinks outside the box at January 11, 2014 08:49 AM (Ua6T/)

7 5 "I'm not sure where Luttrell got the idea that Tapper thought the deaths of his team members were "meaningless". It's clearly not in anything Tapper said."


He probably got the idea from the same place you did, Drew....


"First, I would not have used the word "senseless" as Tapper did. The deaths of Luttrell's team members were not "senseless". "

Posted by: Tami at January 11, 2014 12:48 PM (bCEmE)

 

That and basically being aware of how the media tends to view our troops and their mission.  You have that awareness and then Tapper uses the word "senseless" and it probably set off Luttrell's alarm bells.

Posted by: buzzion at January 11, 2014 08:50 AM (LI48c)

8 They could have killed the villagers who discovered them but they were noble men who willingly put their lives in danger rather than take the lives of innocents. These men were warriors and it made perfect sense to them that if they died, so be it, but they would die with their honor. *** They didn't just do the noble thing by saving the lives of the innocents because they were innocents. They took the risk because, if I understand Luttrell's prior statements, they did not want to put the entirety of the U.S. mission under fire for war crimes.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 08:51 AM (DmNpO)

9 Tapper is most certainly not an-anti troop reporter. Absolutely. Even though he (sadly) is what passes for a fair MSM reporter, one aspect in which he should be commended is that he portrays the troops accurately and with respect.

Posted by: AmishDude at January 11, 2014 08:51 AM (T0NGe)

10 Tapper is most certainly not an-anti troop reporter. Absolutely. Even though he (sadly) is what passes for a fair MSM reporter, one aspect in which he should be commended is that he portrays the troops accurately and with respect. *** I am not a Tapper fan, but even I will acquiesce to this.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 08:52 AM (DmNpO)

11 I don't want to know the nitty gritty of the story, because I haven't seen the movie, and at some point I might.

However, I think this sort of confrontation is almost inevitable, because both parties are essentially on  the same side, but one is viewing what he and they did, and MUST find meaning in the actions of him and his comrades. 

The outsider (Tapper) is looking at the same event, looks at the lost lives, and uses a perfectly appropriate word in  the macro sense... "senseless." 

It doesn't make sense.  Given our political will, as a nation, with both Republicans and Democrats in office, we send these heroes into these situations, and then fail to provide an  end result that lends meaning to their sacrifice. 

So  I guess they are talking about two different things, but that's hard to convey when emotions are involved.  I don't fault either individual. 

Posted by: BurtTC at January 11, 2014 08:53 AM (BeSEI)

12 I think I got a little whiplash between the POV of the last post and this one.

Posted by: Kate58 at January 11, 2014 08:53 AM (oLZsm)

13 Jesus. It brings tears to my eyes just thinking about how good and noble and courageous those men were.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 08:53 AM (DmNpO)

14
1. I said on the day OBL was dead that that was they day we should pack up and leave.  I stand by that and that was the ultimate point as far as I was concerned.  We owe the Afghanis NOTHING.

2.  Many more men have died under Obama because of his stupid policies than under Bush... maybe Tapper should ask the WH about the "senselessness", if  he isn't too much of a pussy that is.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 11, 2014 08:55 AM (n0DEs)

15 This is a good post and I agree with every word of it. Maybe "because" I agree with every word of it.

Posted by: spongeworthy at January 11, 2014 08:55 AM (r5w1L)

16
Why? Why do you take the wrong side of every issue?

Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one. And they all stink. Especially yours.

Tapper is a fucking idiot. The movie wasn't about Tapper or how he felt. It's not about the viewers; it's about the men. Period.

Posted by: soothsayer at January 11, 2014 08:58 AM (gYIst)

17 It brings tears to my eyes just thinking about how good and noble and courageous those men were. Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 12:53 PM (DmNpO) What brings tears to mine is how narcissistic golfers feel so warm and fuzzy using them as political tools, specifically. I so hate that SOB and his entire administration. Killary McPIAPS Benghazi would be even worse. You can bet on that.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Rounding Error Extraordinaire at January 11, 2014 08:59 AM (t1bqX)

18 14 Guy Mohawk wrote: 2. Many more men have died under Obama because of his stupid policies than under Bush... maybe Tapper should ask the WH about the "senselessness", if he isn't too much of a pussy that is. *************************** I agree. But I'm not holding my breath. Even if Tapper were to want to do so, his bosses might not let him. That's the screwed up media reality these days.

Posted by: My Name is Nobody at January 11, 2014 08:59 AM (5Q1ZU)

19
Yes it's quite the mystery why Marcus Lutrell got so bent out of shape.


Posted by: soothsayer at January 11, 2014 09:00 AM (gYIst)

20 I know people who haven't been there won't understand, but Afghanistan is infinitely better today than it was 10 years ago. The statistics bear that out as well, even though all we hear in the US is the bad news. The sacrifice has not been in vain.

It was time for us to go, from a ground combat perspective. The ANA and other ANSF can handle things acceptably well. They still need help with medevac, logistics, and intel. The real problem is Pakistan on the other side of the border, which until recently was an Islamist military dictatorship/ kleptocracy that was ambivalent, to say the least, about its stated commitment to security and stopping the Taliban and its allies. Note that Mullah Omar is still operating in Pakistan (probably in Karachi, although that's just IMHO). It remains to be seen what the civilian government will be able to do in maintaining control over the military and bringing stability to its relationships with its neighbors.

After this year's elections, I would not be surprised to see a Pashtun Islamist party, with ex-Taliban MPs, having a significant role in Parliament. They will never be able to elect a President or Speaker because they don't have enough numerical strength and the rest of the country hates the Taliban, but they will have some committee chairs and may be able to sway some votes. Kind of like the Democrats in the South after the Civil War.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at January 11, 2014 09:01 AM (HubSo)

21 So you agree that using senseless was a poor choice of words, but don't seem to grasp why a highly intelligent veteran who understood and agreed with his mission might take umbrage? Then, when it was painfully obvious to anyone watching - including the man conducting the interview - that it was a poor choice of words, yet the professional wordsmith doubled down on it, it's like a deer-in-the-headlights moment for some people?

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:01 AM (U1Tts)

22 What rubbed me wrong was Tapper going out of his way to finger local commanders for blame. Our failure to wage war is what's senseless. There is no mission; is our strategy only to supply targets? Our forces are inadequate to achieve anything lasting and meaningful, our strategy is what? And, don't get me started on ROEs. I want a desert of glass in the ME. I'd settle for carpet bombing. I got dead soldiers and commie in the WH.

Posted by: Beefus at January 11, 2014 09:01 AM (bUmSq)

23 Many more men have died under Obama because of his stupid policies than under Bush... maybe Tapper should ask the WH about the "senselessness", if he isn't too much of a pussy that is. **** You can't hesitate. Not when crossing traffic. Not when facing an invader in your home. Not when at war with an enemy who seeks to annihilate you. Obama, for all his bluster, has no courage and no genuine confidence and, I suspect, knows deep down that he is deeply unworthy of making life and death decisions for our troops. I hope the guilt eats him alive.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 09:02 AM (DmNpO)

24 I am humbled by men how make the call to give their all.  Again, and it cannot be said enough, thank you to all who have served and are serving now.  This commander / Chief is not fit to shine your shoes.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at January 11, 2014 09:02 AM (jucos)

25 My wife was right. Should have just nuked the place on 9/12/2001. And then said, "Any questions?"

Posted by: Meremortal at January 11, 2014 09:03 AM (jTKU5)

26 My wife was right. Should have just nuked the place on 9/12/2001. And then said, "Any questions?" *** I might now have a girl-crush on your wife.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 09:04 AM (DmNpO)

27 To get the same experience as Trapper, go see the 1978 VietNam Flick ... "The Boys in Company C".  It did for me to war what "North Dallas Forty" did to football.

Posted by: Neo at January 11, 2014 09:05 AM (e8kgV)

28 the only thing "senseless" here is Tapper's interview methods

Posted by: chemjeff at January 11, 2014 09:06 AM (9GG/0)

29 Isn't Glenn Beck the real hero in this story? He didn't have to tweet, but he flew into action without regard to his own safety. The balls on that guy!

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at January 11, 2014 09:06 AM (IRpZs)

30 I think this used to happen to Ernie Pyle all the time.
Journotypes who cover astronauts, pilots, race drivers, small businessmen, females, and the like step in it all the time. I can't remember the last time any one of them just said, "That was offensive, I wasn't thinking clearly, and I apologize."

It's always "Surely you realize that what I was really getting at was..."

Even the good ones. The less-bad ones.

Posted by: Stringer Davis at January 11, 2014 09:07 AM (xq1UY)

31
A point of confusion for many is the differentiation between veteran and combat engaged veteran.  In Vietnam for instance, assignment to an administrative position is within the definition of a designated combat zone, but not assigned to a combat unit.

The best example is typewriter maven Al Gore who claimed to have participated in combat patrols, but in actuality manned a guard post within the perimeter wire on a few occasions.  In Gork's case, this prevarication is described as Stolen Valor.

As a rear echelon troop, there was always the possibility of an errant mortar or rocket raining down upon your fart sack and blowing off your balls, but a higher probability for this person would be receiving a Dear John from his girlfriend and sobbing himself to sleep.  And when he discovers his girlfriend is now fucking his best friend, he goes off the deep end and writes a mean letter to pay them back for their infidelity.

Actively engaged combatants include the Queen of Battle, the Infantry, helicopter lift and attack units,  artillery based in forward fire bases, Ranger Battalions, SEAL units, Army Special Forces, and Air Force Special Operation, etc.

So when discussing this matter with veterans, the focus should be on determining whether he was a direct combatant, or simply provided a support function. 

Without doubt, support is absolutely necessary so the forward units can function properly, and the ratio of support to direct combat varies but is reasonably stated at somewhere between 1:6 or as high as 1:10. 

Over. 

Posted by: Doctor Fish at January 11, 2014 09:07 AM (pJF+c)

32 tapper isn't a bad guy, but it does follow the typical liberal offensive conversation plot: say something nasty someone takes it personally reply "oh i didn't mean YOU" but, yes you did

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at January 11, 2014 09:08 AM (RLTt1)

33 OK. I'll cut Tapper some slack. He acted stupidly. I think Beck is just pissed because he has spent a lot of time with Luttrell and considers him a friend. Hell, I don't even know the guy but I'd back him up in a heartbeat and then ask him later what we were doing. He's that kind of guy.

Posted by: Daybrother at January 11, 2014 09:08 AM (k3l60)

34 I weep for all the great Americans who have invested so much of their blood, sweat, and tears in land wars in Asia. As a country, and as a people, we have virtually nothing now to show for it - anything good, that is, but for the honor of their service.

Posted by: My Name is Nobody at January 11, 2014 09:08 AM (5Q1ZU)

35
And the estrogen levels in here just increased. This is why I call some of you the Low-T AoS commenters and co-bloggers.

Posted by: soothsayer at January 11, 2014 09:08 AM (gYIst)

36 Yeah, don't worry about a journo saying your mission was senseless to your face. He wrote a book about vets and bought them beer and pizza, so he's allowed to do that without being questioned.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:09 AM (U1Tts)

37 I hope the guilt eats him alive.

pfft... He doesn't care, if Tapper asked him how many of our Brave have died in HIS wars, he would get close.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 11, 2014 09:09 AM (n0DEs)

38 Whatever your opinion of Tapper and his question, there is one fundamental truth: Reporters don't get punched enough.

Posted by: --- at January 11, 2014 09:09 AM (MMC8r)

39
he wouldn't get close, I mean.

damn fingers.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 11, 2014 09:10 AM (n0DEs)

40 He wrote a book about vets and bought them beer and pizza, so he's allowed to do that without being questioned. *** He blocked me on twitter after I referred to him as "Celebrity Journalist Jake Tapper" and hit him on his look-at-me book tour.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 09:10 AM (DmNpO)

41 I hope the guilt eats him alive.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 01:02 PM (DmNpO)

__________________

That would require Teh JEF to have a conscience.  He doesn't.  He doesn't care who dies or how it affects anyone.  Malignant narcissist.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at January 11, 2014 09:10 AM (jucos)

42 I saw the movie yesterday with an actual retired SEAL and our wives also I had the chance to work with these guys during storm when I was at a SBU I think I have a little better on the mind of a SEAL than most with that said, with all Marcus has dealt with when it comes to the press since he's come home the key word was senseless which spun him up I think tapper used the word poorly in this context SEALs don't see any mission as senseless, they train and execute it to the best of their ability and fight till they can't tapper wasn''t disrespectfully, he just doesn't comprehend the world marcus is a part of therefore I agree with Drew's post which to be honest is scary and I shall seek a exorcism asap

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:11 AM (At8tV)

43 If Beck didn't cry, I don't know how this is news.

Posted by: garrett at January 11, 2014 09:12 AM (GXzHl)

44 Also, I'm sure I missed it, but I can't find these metaphorical "incendiary grenades" Beck was tossing into the mix here.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:12 AM (U1Tts)

45
Jake Tapper is the Bob Costas of the US military. A jock sniffer.

Posted by: soothsayer at January 11, 2014 09:12 AM (gYIst)

46 Language and communication are tough enough when we are given free range to express ourselves, never mind in the truncated formats of electronic media. I will say this: What is senseless is when men with honor serve under men without honor. Having said that, I will defer to those who have fought the good fight, walked in those shoes and lived through those experiences and let them tell their stories however they see fit, and may God bless them.

Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at January 11, 2014 09:13 AM (g4TxM)

47

Vietnam:  58,000 dead.  Everyone thinks it was a waste.   But it did slow the communist tide that was sweeping that part of the world at the time.  I know when I was in Thailand and  the Thai's found out I was in Vietnam, they've thanked me for keeping their country out of the hands of the hard-core communists.  

 

Even when I was in Bali, several people there  expressed that if it wouldn't have been for the American presence in Vietnam, they would have been one of the  communists targets.  

 

For a long time, Americans thought that our presence in SE Asia was a waste of time.  But time has proven otherwise. 

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 09:14 AM (CIOaw)

48 Posted by: BurtTC at January 11, 2014 12:53 PM (BeSEI) I think this is a reasonable interpretation. Words have multiple meanings and there was clearly a disconnect here on what meaning was being used. But when you have a CiC who's clearly more interested in politics than actually keeping our troops safe, it might be fair to start calling the deaths "senseless" in the idea that they lack common sense. However, this does not make them "meaningless" which is an entirely different connotation.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 11, 2014 09:14 AM (GaqMa)

49 Did Tapper mean pointless, silly, ridiculous, stupid, meaningless, absurd, insignificant or is there some other meaning of the word that I do not know?

Tapper is an asshole, only slightly smaller in his assholiness than most of the MBM.

Posted by: huerfano at January 11, 2014 09:14 AM (bAGA/)

50 And the estrogen levels in here just increased. This is why I call some of you the Low-T AoS commenters and co-bloggers. Posted by: soothsayer Please elaborate.

Posted by: Daybrother at January 11, 2014 09:15 AM (kgaCF)

51 It would have been worthwhile and it would have been successful, but the men there were betrayed, as has happened to our soldiers before. I strongly caution against anyone joining the military under a Democrat president, and especially this one.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at January 11, 2014 09:15 AM (zfY+H)

52 I view Tapper as among the best of the msm, a low bar but he is one of the more even keeled. So I am surprised that he would use the term senseless or hopeless with any combat veteran let alone Luttrell. I've heard a bunch of interviews with Luttrell and read the book and the one thing he has been clear about over and over is that he has done all of this for one purpose, to illuminate the bravery and selflessness of his fallen friends. This isn't about him or even necessarily about the war, it is about introducing people to a group of incredible men who sacrificed everything because of their sense of duty and honor. I don't think Tapper is a bad guy but he totally wiffed on this interview and understanding what Luttrell's story is all about.

Posted by: JackStraw at January 11, 2014 09:16 AM (g1DWB)

53
It doesn't apply to you, Daybrother.

Posted by: soothsayer at January 11, 2014 09:16 AM (gYIst)

54 Tapper hides his seething hatred for our soldiers by always blaming the "superiors." It's pretty obvious to anyone who's read The Outpost. I'm kind of surprised he's fooled so many people.

Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at January 11, 2014 09:17 AM (jqvOA)

55 4 I asked on the other thread, but why is the DC showing a photo of Michael Murphy and not Marcus Luttrell? They don't even mention Lt. Murphy in the article. Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 12:47 PM (DmNpO) In case it hasn't already been answered, Murphy is the MoH recipient who died in the mission which is the topic of Luttrell's book.

Posted by: baldilocks--Team SMOD at January 11, 2014 09:18 AM (36Rjy)

56 Amazing how much this is so like the thread below. Why do we put our best and brightest in the riskiest of places? Because that is what they do. I think Tapper is saying that as he watched, knowing what the outcome was going to be, that is what is hopeless. No matter their honor, their courage. All of that seems thrown away for what we now know the country does not give a shit about. And Luttrell is of course insulted to think that what he went through, what his buddies died for, was for nothing. Because he considers his honor a thing in itself. That sacrifice in the name of it is good in itself, whether or not we cause Afghanistan to become a modern place or not. Different perspectives. I don't think Tapper can understand Luttrell. Nor, do I think Luttrell can understand Tapper.

Posted by: blaster at January 11, 2014 09:18 AM (4+AaH)

57 48 -

Exactly. 

I don't watch tv news, so all I know about Tapper is what people say here.  I would think he  perhaps  should have had  more "sense" than to ask somebody who was in the middle of all that if the thing was senseless or not.

But it IS senseless for us to keep putting these men  in harms way, with no real purpose behind it.

George Bush wanted to give  Muslims an opportunity  to develop civilized, democratic societies.  Perhaps a noble idea, but one that we can clearly see was not going to work, not given the way WE behave as a nation, politically. 

So yeah, senseless.  

Posted by: BurtTC at January 11, 2014 09:19 AM (BeSEI)

58 In other circumstances might Luttrell have seen where Tapper was coming from? Perhaps. Either way it led to a bit of tension and I think some genuine concern from Tapper. He's been on Twitter all morning defending himself. I've gotten into it with him about things before and he's pretty feisty in his engages. Right now he seems genuinely concerned that people think he disrespected Luttrell, the men who died that day or veterans in general.


If someone said, to my face, that the deaths of my comrades in arms, men who chose to take the harder way, who chose to spare the innocent at the known near certainty of their own deaths was senseless?  I would rip his motherfucking throat out.


Tapper is the one who chose to haul senselessness and futility into this and Tapper is the one who chose to go down the but but but was it woooorrrtttthhhh it path.   He might not have intended to disrespect the troops but he is the one who chose to interject that into the interview.  


Yeah, I watched it and, I'm sorry, but Tapper was in the wrong.   He wanted to haul Greater Meaning into it.  He's a professional wordsmith.   He had time to prepare for this.  If he didn't know how offensive it would be?  That does nothing but reflect poorly on him.  In fact, his background should have made him far more aware of the importance of how he framed the statement.  


Sorry, but Tapper is the jackass in this scenario.

Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at January 11, 2014 09:19 AM (Gk3SS)

59 I will say this: What is senseless is when men with honor serve under men without honor.

This.



Posted by: HR at January 11, 2014 09:19 AM (hO8IJ)

60 51 but the men there were betrayed no they weren't they were compromised by the herder and made a decision, which I agreed with, which doomed them in the end their loss of comms killed them

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:19 AM (At8tV)

61
All these people on the left see every war as Vietnam, and wish to propel themselves back to the 60's.  The term has been used many times for these people which fits: 9/10ers.  or dumbasses.  whichever you prefer.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 11, 2014 09:20 AM (n0DEs)

62

Tapper is indeed one of the best reporters working today.  For the most part - and this is really not a slam on Tapper, per se - that reflects the appallingly low bar/standard by which Tapper can be so considered.  I left the defense journalism field myself many years ago, and while it had just been a convenient and fun perch for that period in any case, the pathologies were obvious and incurable (talking Beltway version, not technical side).

 

Just to pull the grenade pin, drop the thing, and saunter away, I'll add this:  any "senselessness" in these types of US interventions derives mostly from the laziness and unseriousness (can't think of another word) of the bulk of Americans when it comes to understanding and supporting them.  Part of this is related to the refusal of serious leaders to talk straight. 

 

 "Nation-building" (the mostly imagined bugaboo of so many, esp. otherwise pro-intervention sorts) has a hard-headed practical objective, not a fuzzy one.  Better term would be exploiting and solidifying the gains from intervention by leaving behind more capable and sustainable partners to continue the fight.  You really really do, for example, want to have an Iraqi military and security service that can function adequately to handle most threats from our common enemies (AQ, Iran, et al).  And one in which your connections and personal ties are deep and broad.  Ditto esp. for the intel services, for what should be obvious reasons.  And of course you want the overall structure of governance to have some stability and staying power.

 

Drive-by regime change, apart from, say, the exceptional case like Grenada, is quite stupid.  Extended involvement is hard and full of difficulties, drive-by intervention is guaranteed woe and truly, guaranteed wasted sacrifice.

 

It's amazing, with a governing group that is clueless, cynical, and despicable, as we have now, and more generally a populace that will cut and run in a nanosecond the instant things get "hard" (this includes many here, sadly), that anyone dons the uniform and does this stuff. 

Posted by: non-purist at January 11, 2014 09:20 AM (afQnV)

63 In case it hasn't already been answered, Murphy is the MoH recipient who died in the mission which is the topic of Luttrell's book. *** I know. But he is not mentioned in the article. And, the article is about the Luttrell interview specifically and there's no photo of Luttrell.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 09:20 AM (DmNpO)

64 I didn't see anything wrong with The Blazes's article. I agree that Tapper was being a jackass and Luttrell called him on it. Let's interview Tapper about his wife, who apparently is a HUGE Planned Parenthood person, and ask him about all the senseless deaths of innocent babies....

Posted by: Ruth at January 11, 2014 09:21 AM (XDMAg)

65 Tapper "wiffed", works for me. I expect nothing less from journalism today. "The knuckle sandwich felt 'round the world". I can dream.

Posted by: nip at January 11, 2014 09:21 AM (jI23+)

66 So it seems as if the prevailing opinion of people defending Tapper is that Luttrell should have recognized Tapper's street cred, but then the guy with all this military-journo street cred said in his clarification that it was senseless again because an Op went wrong. This is just a plainly stupid remark. Absurd on its face. So Tapper either doesn't really deserve praise for his understanding of the military, or he came up with a bullshit cover when called out.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:22 AM (U1Tts)

67 In other words, I suspect the DC doesn't know one soldier from the other.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 09:22 AM (DmNpO)

68 Here's the Shat for this and the thread below: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ErkeFA-QWk

Posted by: --- at January 11, 2014 09:22 AM (MMC8r)

69 Am I missing something re: the 'innocent' villagers? Didn't they inform the Taliban about the presence of the US Soldiers?

Posted by: garrett at January 11, 2014 09:22 AM (GXzHl)

70 A free country will either 'uselessly' sacrifice a small percentage of its youth in battle or sacrifice freedom and many more lives in different ways eventually. No one battle can cause this to happen to a superpower unless it is nuclear. So death in individual battles always brings these questions... ...from simpletons.

Posted by: Meremortal at January 11, 2014 09:23 AM (jTKU5)

71 69 the presence of the US Soldiers? sailors....they were SAILORS

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:24 AM (At8tV)

72 Am I missing something re: the 'innocent' villagers? Didn't they inform the Taliban about the presence of the US Soldiers? *** They were innocent at the time the decision to release them was made.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 09:24 AM (DmNpO)

73 I'm not sure why Tapper isn't just saying, "I chose my words poorly and can understand why Marcus would be offended and for that I apologize. I certainly meant no disrespect to him or his team." But nooooooo.....God forbid he admit he insulted the guy. No, he takes to Twitter for hours and hours trying to battle back. That's senseless!

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 11, 2014 09:24 AM (bCEmE)

74 I have this like-hate thing going with Beck. I love his show the Real News. Well his network and he is not on it. I hate his self promotion and wounded martyr game. Luttrell is reacting to a slight on the memories of honorable men. I am always being preached to about how minorities feel in situation or women or gays. So why not some training about how vets feel they are portrayed by the networks and the media? Tapper did nothing wrong here and is a stand up guy. Good post Drew.

Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at January 11, 2014 09:25 AM (yqIMw)

75 But nooooooo.....God forbid he admit he insulted the guy. No, he takes to Twitter for hours and hours trying to battle back. That's senseless! Posted by: Tami at January 11, 2014 01:24 PM (bCEmE) Perhaps this fits in with the article I just saw stating that Twitter users tend to be narcissists.

Posted by: Meremortal at January 11, 2014 09:26 AM (jTKU5)

76 It doesn't apply to you, Daybrother. Posted by: soothsayer Sorry. I'm a little touchy today.

Posted by: Daybrother at January 11, 2014 09:26 AM (QfspF)

77 I'm a caveman, to me senseless= for nothing. But I'm a caveman. So I asked my wife, who has a greater technical mastery of the English language than anyone I have ever met, she read it and said "yeah, I can see why the pissed off people are pissed." Tapper may not have meant it the way it came out, but damn guy, don't feign outrage over people interpreting words in an entirely reasonable manner.

Posted by: traye at January 11, 2014 09:26 AM (k3ra0)

78 63 In case it hasn't already been answered, Murphy is the MoH recipient who died in the mission which is the topic of Luttrell's book. *** I know. But he is not mentioned in the article. And, the article is about the Luttrell interview specifically and there's no photo of Luttrell. Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 01:20 PM (DmNpO) Well viewers need to know about Murphy who, of course, cannot speak for himself. I think it's a good choice. And Murphy is mentioned in the video.

Posted by: baldilocks--Team SMOD at January 11, 2014 09:26 AM (36Rjy)

79 I think it's poor analysis to say that the local Taliban leader was a nobody until the SEALs attacked him, and then, he became a force to be reckoned with.  Why would the people charged with taking out the insurgency wait until the guy is "a big enough threat?"  He was already a high value target.  You don't make it on that list because you like kittens. 

Posted by: no good deed at January 11, 2014 09:27 AM (HsJeN)

80 oh, the difference between any SEAL and navycopjoe BUDS day one: Instructor: Get wet you fucking maggots!!!! ***dips toe in the ocean*** DING DING DING DING NCJ: so where's my hot chocolate chief?

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:27 AM (At8tV)

81 BTW will probably wait for this to come out on video, because i hate Mark Wahlberg as an actor and as a human being

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at January 11, 2014 09:27 AM (RLTt1)

82 It's amazing, with a governing group that is clueless, cynical, and despicable, as we have now, and more generally a populace that will cut and run in a nanosecond the instant things get "hard" (this includes many here, sadly), that anyone dons the uniform and does this stuff.

Posted by: non-purist at January 11, 2014 01:20 PM (afQnV)

 

 

---------------------------------------------

 

 

When we literally ran away from SE Asia and left them for Russia and China, that's when American foreign policy started to die.

 

Or, perhaps even earlier.  When we agreed to be a part of the  UN.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 09:27 AM (CIOaw)

83 There is a mountain of media bias out there.  Why conservatives waste time, energy and (most importantly) credibility going after Tapper, one of the few fair journos out there, is beyond me.

Posted by: buzz at January 11, 2014 09:27 AM (i27M5)

84
It's become clearer now. If you don't like Glenn Beck, you take Jake Tapper's side on this...just to take a shot at Beck.

Posted by: soothsayer at January 11, 2014 09:28 AM (gYIst)

85 Tapper will eventually die a senseless death too, so there's that.

Posted by: Meremortal at January 11, 2014 09:28 AM (jTKU5)

86 Tapper knew he fucked up as evidenced by the fact that he recognized offense had been taken, acknowledged the fact, then doubled down on it. As someone else already said - everything else is bullshit.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:28 AM (U1Tts)

87 Stop defending that asshole Tapper. He was suppose to be interviewing the guy -- not letting his leftard freak fly. I'm so sick of "conservatives" licking Tapper's balls because he throws out a crumb to you once in a blue moon. He is hard left and he hates you.

Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 11, 2014 09:28 AM (Qev5V)

88 Innocent? If there's one thing I've learned, it's that No One Is Innocent

Posted by: Kingpin Says Kill'em All, Let GOD Sort 'em Out at January 11, 2014 09:29 AM (nbGZj)

89 They were innocent at the time the decision to release them was made.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 01:24 PM (DmNpO)

American Exceptionalism.

One reason why we were, and may be again, the greatest country on earth.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 11, 2014 09:29 AM (QFxY5)

90 Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at January 11, 2014 01:19 PM (Gk3SS) Incommiserablilty of moral frameworks and language my queen. 'Tis a common thing in this world. I hold no hatred for either party as they're just talking across that divide. Meanwhile these are questions that need to be asked. We've turned this war into something without a strategy, endpoint, or committed higher echelons (namely the CiC). To what end does it make sense for us to keep putting people in harms way for this?

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 11, 2014 09:30 AM (GaqMa)

91 You know, Tapper could defuse all this with an actual apology, and then shuts up. Doesn't sound to me like he's doing that.

Posted by: [/i][/b]KG at January 11, 2014 09:31 AM (IPz9m)

92

It's become clearer now. If you don't like Glenn Beck, you take Jake Tapper's side on this...just to take a shot at Beck.

 

Wrong ---- you can actually dislike both Glenn Beck and Jake Tapper.


But, I am a RINO and have a Big Tent philoshphy when it comes to hatin.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at January 11, 2014 09:31 AM (xt3Pv)

93 "senseless" and "meaningless" are synonyms. They mean the same thing.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 09:31 AM (ZPrif)

94 "He is hard left and he hates you." This. Looks like a couple of people here think he's beyond criticism.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:31 AM (U1Tts)

95 For a man who makes his living SOLELY with words, Tapper picked the absolute dumbest one to describe the deaths of Lutrell's teammates. They fought because it was their duty; because they took an oath. They were there to remove some very bad people from the earth and leave it a little better off. They fought for each other. Either Tapper doesn't understand a fucking thing about why Americans volunteer to serve, fight and very possibly die doing their duty does not lead me to believe that he is on balance, understanding of our troops. Or he's just asking Luttrell to accept the characterization of his and his teammates' sacrifice as "senseless" to make a cheap swipe at Teh Boosh! for ever sending troops in harm's way. No sale, you fucking lackwit. And you're surprised? As far as Beck? Fuck him. If I wanted to know what he said I'd ask catpiss.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 11, 2014 09:32 AM (1Nhff)

96 Well viewers need to know about Murphy who, of course, cannot speak for himself. I think it's a good choice. And Murphy is mentioned in the video. *** Yes. But what the DC did was fuck up and post a pic of Murphy instead of Luttrell because they clearly don't know the difference.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 09:32 AM (DmNpO)

97 "senseless" and "meaningless" are synonyms. They mean the same thing. ----------------------------- ..And that's when the fight started.

Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 11, 2014 09:32 AM (aDwsi)

98 "their loss of comms killed them"

This bugs me hugely.

A situation regularly encountered since the dawn of special operations is for small elite patrols to insert deep into Injun country, get in a bad situation where they either need fire support or prompt extraction, and then not be able to raise help on the radio, and they get mauled. A frequent feature of life in the SOG community during Vietnam; repeated elsewhere since then.

When the US started going on jihadi hunts up in the Afghan mountains, I buried my head in my hands and said, "Bet we are going to have a _Bravo Two Zero_ scenario sooner or later."

Yep. Sure did. Textbook example.

The incredibly frustrating thing is that from an engineering standpoint, ensuring absolutely bulletproof comms, even in remote big-ass mountains, is a wholly solvable problem. It just needs more effort and money.

Instead, the politicians and the service chiefs and the defense-contractor execs poured uncounted billions on vanity projects like JIEDDO, which yielded next to no tangible results in terms of saving servicemembers' lives, despite soaking up an incredible amount of cash.

Maybe focus on spending small amounts of money on problems where the fixes are obvious, instead of spending large amounts on problems where there is no clear path to a solution? That too hard to conceptualize?

Posted by: torquewrench at January 11, 2014 09:33 AM (gqT4g)

99 Tapper's a good guy.  He kinda fucked up here...give it a rest.

Posted by: Portnoy at January 11, 2014 09:33 AM (8N1kd)

100 84 It's become clearer now. If you don't like Glenn Beck, you take Jake Tapper's side on this...just to take a shot at Beck. Posted by: soothsayer at January 11, 2014 01:28 PM (gYIst) I actually like both of them. As for Luttrell, he has probably forgotten about it. I bought his book on Kindle a while back and I will read it before seeing the movie.

Posted by: baldilocks--Team SMOD at January 11, 2014 09:33 AM (36Rjy)

101 41 I hope the guilt eats him alive.Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 01:02 PM (DmNpO) __________________That would require Teh JEF to have a conscience. He doesn't. He doesn't care who dies or how it affects anyone. Malignant narcissist.

Posted by: Truck Monkey, Gruntled New Business Owner at January 11, 2014 01:10 PM (jucos)


True TM. He will feel no regret till he is burning in hell one day.

Posted by: Dandolo at January 11, 2014 09:33 AM (0XBx+)

102 To what end does it make sense for us to keep putting people in harms way for this?

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 11, 2014 01:30 PM (GaqMa)


Ah but see, *that* is a question Tapper and his ilk will never truly and honestly explore. It ends up too close to their idol.

Posted by: [/i][/b]KG at January 11, 2014 09:33 AM (IPz9m)

103 Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 01:31 PM (ZPrif) Pulling out a thesaurus isn't the only way to define terms though. Terms have a context and multiple meanings.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 11, 2014 09:33 AM (GaqMa)

104 89 They were innocent at the time the decision to release them was made. during storm a british team was compromised by a herder also and they let him go and he told the Iraqis where they were and most were killed while the others were captured the guy who wrote the book had a great quote on why they let him go: we're SAS, not the SS

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:33 AM (At8tV)

105 Tapper is worried he disrespected dead soldiers and sailors mainly because ... he actually did disrespect dead soldiers and sailors.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 09:34 AM (ZPrif)

106 B.S. Plaintiff. One can believe that the deaths of troops in Vietnam and Afghanistan that were caused, at least in part, by the rules of engagement were senseless.

Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at January 11, 2014 09:34 AM (yqIMw)

107 Perhaps this fits in with the article I just saw stating that Twitter users tend to be narcissists. Posted by: Meremortal at January 11, 2014 01:26 PM (jTKU5) Lol! Yep, I saw that article.

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 11, 2014 09:34 AM (bCEmE)

108 I'm not as generous to Tapper. He's a default establishmentarian liberal. These people are disconnected from the existential reality of the "enemy" (except if it's a conservative), a reality in which Luttrell is immersed to a life and death immediacy and extreme. Tapper may offer sentiments of understanding for the military but I think deep down he internalizes the modern elitist inability to comprehend the reality of evil and necessity of figthting it but sees all war in these grandly sad and preteniously ambivalent "humanistic" terms.

Posted by: rrpjr at January 11, 2014 09:34 AM (s/yC1)

109 Got the book right when it came out.   They are bad asses and deserve all our respect. 

Posted by: jrcobbstr at January 11, 2014 09:35 AM (1Noml)

110 Yes. But what the DC did was fuck up and post a pic of Murphy instead of Luttrell because they clearly don't know the difference. Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 01:32 PM (DmNpO) Now that, I believe.

Posted by: baldilocks--Team SMOD at January 11, 2014 09:35 AM (36Rjy)

111 In this context, that is what "senseless" means. The Left has been calling these deaths senseless, pointless, and meaningless for over a decade. They started calling them senseless before the war even started.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 09:35 AM (ZPrif)

112 93 -

I would disagree, in that "senseless" could be interpreted as the outsider's view of a situation, whereas "meaningless"  or "meaningful" is strictly for the people experiencing the situation to decide. 

I got the  impression  that is the crux of this disagreement here. 

Posted by: BurtTC at January 11, 2014 09:35 AM (BeSEI)

113 99 Tapper's a good guy. He kinda fucked up here...give it a rest. Posted by: Portnoy at January 11, 2014 01:33 PM (8N1kd) A 'good guy' would admit he fucked up. Not double down.

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 11, 2014 09:35 AM (bCEmE)

114 (though his certainty isn't universally shared among veterans). [...] What he was expressing is something I think a lot of people agree with, myself included...an ambivalence about the cost of the war in American dead and wounded in exchange for...what? ***** Drew M. here is your problem-- YOUR view and Jack Tapper's view-- gets aired AD INFINITUM on LIberal media via the 24/7 cables, the Newsweeks, the ABC and CBS and NBC and PBS channels, the New York Times, The Washington Post... now ONE VETERAN gets to voice his opinion and you have to rush to Jack Tapper's aid because HE doesn't get enough air time? Absolutely lubricious. And to add insult to injury here: (though his certainty isn't universally shared among veterans) You have to USE the voices and borrow authority from OTHER Vets to counter the rare VEt that has been finally allowed to do some small measure of push back. And YOU won. Cindy Sheehan helped your "view" win. We LOST over there. But you still have to tap dance on his soul. And to do it now why-- just to gain some small favor with the "real" hero- Jack Tapper?

Posted by: Hawaii at January 11, 2014 09:35 AM (RJMhd)

115 92 have a Big Tent philoshphy when it comes to hatin. thank you, consider this stolen for my use

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:35 AM (At8tV)

116 It's no secret that the OPTEMPO was such that our SOF guys were executing several such missions a day (or more typically, a night) at one point in the war. It is irrelevant just how high up in the chain this particular leader was. Bottom line, through direct action we essentially wiped out the core leadership of the Taliban in Afghanistan. High level, low level, no level.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at January 11, 2014 09:36 AM (HubSo)

117 114 Hawaii hey, are you here or just an old sock?

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:37 AM (At8tV)

118 Tapper's meaning and usage of the word "senseless" were quite clear from context. And that clear meaning was why Luttrell took offense.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 09:37 AM (ZPrif)

119

>>87. I'm so sick of "conservatives" licking Tapper's balls because he throws out a crumb to you once in a blue moon. >>

 

 

 

Right. We do this with every liberal who deviates from his agenda for a few seconds to treat us like human beings. It's pathetic.

Posted by: rrpjr at January 11, 2014 09:37 AM (s/yC1)

120 "Yeah, I watched it and, I'm sorry, but Tapper was in the wrong. He wanted to haul Greater Meaning into it. He's a professional wordsmith...." ...Sorry, but Tapper is the jackass in this scenario. Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? This. Tapper wanted to sidle alongside Luttrell and get a 'just between us' reaction. That makes him an ass in any context. The Pro thing would have been to change the subject and ask for Lutrell's wider views on the goals of the War. That way he would not have run the risk of being an ass and he could have phrased the question as, "Do you think the US learned the lesson about a land war in Asia?" and still be a snarky douche, just not personally insulting.

Posted by: Daybrother at January 11, 2014 09:37 AM (mjqxU)

121 Every death in war is a waste. But not every death is meaningless or senseless or without purpose. Axe, Murphy and Dietz died for one another and for Marcus. That village risked their lives to save one man, an infidel and an invader of their lands. In war, you see the two extremes of the human condition. On one end you see humanity's only saving grace; selflessness and love. The other end you see what damns us; hate and cruelty. However, what was our purpose in Afghanistan? I think our servicemen and women know full well why we are fighting, but the civilian populace by and large do not. This is like an inverse Vietnam war, where the troops know why they fight and the country doesn't.

Posted by: Holger at January 11, 2014 09:37 AM (rIk1N)

122 Back in the '40's, Hollywood was pro war, pro American. Dig up some of those movies or the 'newsreels' that ran just before the movie.

John Wayne was a hero.

Then came the sixties, and the baby boomers were old enough to express an opinion. They mocked 'the Duke', they mocked heroes, heroism, and heroics.

That progressed until we are not allowed to have heroes; heroes must be destroyed, their faults revealed and reviled. No one was perfect, no one could be allowed to be perfect because it reflected badly on those who couldn't measure up to the high standards. Everyone was corrupt, and everything became corrupt. Nothing was sacred, not even Christianity.

 Now, after the fact, we can easily say, "Is there something we could have done better?"  (Look up the Port Chicago disaster).

"Mistakes were made" then we must crucify someone, someone must pay for those mistakes. Mistakes can not be tolerated. (Except if you are liberal. Your intentions were good, you meant well, it was a common mistake, everyone makes mistakes, it wasn't my fault.)

Those guys were heroes. (I haven't finished the book yet.) Were mistakes made? (I haven't finished the book yet. Haven't done the research.)

Posted by: I remember when at January 11, 2014 09:37 AM (yxqYi)

123 "Senseless" is the exact wrong word for him to have used. It does indeed imply that their deaths were for nothing, useless, worthless. It was a bad word choice compounded by Tapper using it 3 times in a row.

Posted by: Inspector Cussword at January 11, 2014 09:37 AM (xJS2Q)

124 I read that one, NCJ.  "Bravo Two Zero" by Andy McNabb. 

Posted by: no good deed at January 11, 2014 09:38 AM (HsJeN)

125 edit: Absolutely ^ludicrous^.

Posted by: Hawaii at January 11, 2014 09:38 AM (RJMhd)

126 106 B.S. Plaintiff. One can believe that the deaths of troops in Vietnam and Afghanistan that were caused, at least in part, by the rules of engagement were senseless. Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at January 11, 2014 01:34 PM (yqIMw) F.U., Locus. He's suppose to be asking questions -- not telling the guy what he thinks and feels which he had to know would offend Luttrell. If he didn't, he's an idiot -- like you.

Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 11, 2014 09:39 AM (Qev5V)

127 I can understand the differing views of Tapper and Luttrell.  One lived it and the other is commenting after the fact and knowing the outcome.  But I have to say that I see little difference in the words senseless and meaningless.   People like Mr. Luttrell don't train and die to do meaningless or senseless things.  Labeling them as such is the job of politicians and journalists.

Posted by: Cindy Munford at January 11, 2014 09:39 AM (6MiMG)

128 Tapper did nothing wrong here and is a stand up guy. Good post Drew.

Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at January 11, 2014 01:25 PM (yqIMw)


WTF is going on with all the Stockholm Syndrome?

Tapper is a lib douche who would never seriously report a story actually harmful to Dear Leader. Ever.

Fuck him.

Posted by: some other guy at January 11, 2014 09:40 AM (2DunM)

129 How fucking hard is it for a reporter to ask questions??? Sheesh! Instead they lecture and insult people. What an idiot.

Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 11, 2014 09:40 AM (Qev5V)

130 Posted by: rrpjr at January 11, 2014 01:37 PM (s/yC1) Pffft. I call them as I see them. Just that, nothing more. I've called Tapper an ass before, and called him fair. A world in which I have to live in perpetual hatred of people is frankly one I'm not interested in continuing.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 11, 2014 09:41 AM (GaqMa)

131 Tapper made a judgement on the whole of the Afghanistan war as senseless and expected Luttrell to agree with him. 

Posted by: no good deed at January 11, 2014 09:41 AM (HsJeN)

132 123 It does indeed imply that their deaths were for nothing, useless, worthless. Lt Murphy died while exposing himself to gunfire to establish comms in the open because two of his men were severely hurt that act can never be referred to as nothing, useless, worthless

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:41 AM (At8tV)

133 Luttrell was (and still is)  an honorable man engaged in an honest profession responding to orders from a worthless CiC supported by a spineless Congress that allow a war without a definition of victory to continue ad infinitum for political reasons.  The local actions taken by our military make sense.  The global actions taken by our military and the civilian leader are senseless.

And screw Tapper!

Posted by: Hrothgar at January 11, 2014 09:42 AM (o3MSL)

134 Tapper throws us a bone occasionally, mostly by not being a hard-core leftist dick all the time, and we rush to defend him as one of the good guys. Meanwhile, Beck is on our side 90% of the time, but let's savage him as a lying dirtbag. Makes sense.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 09:43 AM (ZPrif)

135 Kinda of on the topic of meaningless there was a story the other day about an Iraqi War Vet who lost his arm in Baghdad. He was in Dallas on business and had to take a cab, his driver was a Kurd. They were chatting and the driver asked how he lost his arm, the Vet told him and the driver almost lost it... in a good way. Thanked the Vet for his sacrifice, wouldn't let him pay for the cab ride and tried to pay for his hotel. So, I guess my point is, that even though things are portrayed as being meaningless to us, sometime they have meaning to the people that were actually affected. The tweets from the Vet about the incident are here: http://tinyurl.com/ma9wtfv

Posted by: lindafell at January 11, 2014 09:43 AM (PGO8C)

136 124 "Bravo Two Zero" by Andy McNabb that's the one the movie was meh though on youtube if anyone wants to see it

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:43 AM (At8tV)

137 119 >>87.I'm so sick of "conservatives" licking Tapper's balls because he throws out a crumb to you once in a blue moon. >> ******** Especially here in this instance given the disproportionality and asymmetric nature of it. ONE Vet gets to SPEAK for HIMSELF. And Drew M. has to make sure the over-aired opinion of the Liberal Elites gets one more airing and support. And more importantly Drew has to borrow authority from other vets to attack Luttrell's position. It's petty and it's gross.

Posted by: Hawaii at January 11, 2014 09:43 AM (RJMhd)

138 Yes. But what the DC did was fuck up and post a pic of Murphy instead of Luttrell because they clearly don't know the difference. ------------------- That is true of most 'journalists' these days. More often than not they are writing about something without having any background in topic. They are generally inexperienced and naive.

Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 11, 2014 09:43 AM (aDwsi)

139 Tapper wasn't disrespectful, but perhaps laboring under an misunderstanding.

Posted by: William Wallace at January 11, 2014 09:43 AM (Fyzha)

140 Pulling out a thesaurus isn't the only way to define terms though.

Terms have a context and multiple meanings.

Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 11, 2014 01:33 PM (GaqMa)

 

 

---------------------------------------------

 

 

Sorry.  Don't agree.  "Senseless" and  "meaningless" were used by the left as the same meme throughout the Vietnam era.  I know.  I heard those words so many times after I got home I wanted to puke.

 

Senseless and meaningless are the left,s buzzwords to any American  attempt to defend freedom, no matter where it is.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 09:43 AM (CIOaw)

141
Tapper is asking the wrong people if it is senseless.  He should ask the CiC "what is the fucking mission?"  Then ask that bastard if it makes sense.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 11, 2014 09:44 AM (n0DEs)

142 What is "senseless" is American leadership's policy on proportional force projection, mission specifics, and goals. 

And I could give two shits about the hearts and minds of our enemies.

Posted by: Fritz at January 11, 2014 09:44 AM (TKFmG)

143 I can tell you why Luttrell took offense. Because we (service-members/veterans) are sick and fucking tired of being treated like pathetic victims, who desperately need shoulders to cry on and open, bleeding-heart displays of faux empathy and PC-approved hand-wringing about the 'senselessness of war.' It's how liberals who hate the military bring themselves to express "support" for veterans. It's disingenuous and shameful. I've heard it for years and it drives me fucking crazy.

If you think that killing terrorists whose idea of a good day is executing little girls for learning to read and planning to blow up American buildings is 'senseless,' kindly throw yourself in front of a bus. But in any case, keep your decrepit moral compass to yourself.

And while Tapper may not be such a person (I have no idea), that's what Luttrell (and probably Beck) saw and heard.

Posted by: dawnfire82 at January 11, 2014 09:45 AM (1/hzQ)

144 Tapper was tactless and seemed to embrace the general error about war being essentially unnecessary and "senseless," as opposed to being something you must do in certain circumstances. One can disagree with the prudence of a given action and not fall into that error. I got a whiff of Utopianism mixed with mawkish sentimentalism from Tapper.

Posted by: William Wallace at January 11, 2014 09:45 AM (Fyzha)

145 Beck is an asshole. Just because I agree with him on certain issues doesn't mean he gets a pass. He's all about himself and his "brand."

Posted by: JoeyBagels at January 11, 2014 09:45 AM (j7qzp)

146 Why didn't they zip tie the two villagers it a couple of trees instead of just releasing them? Also note that other Afghans took care of Lutrell. So, there are really good Afghans.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 09:45 AM (dZQh7)

147 Sorry. Don't agree. "Senseless" and "meaningless" were used by the left as the same meme throughout the Vietnam era. I know. I heard those words so many times after I got home I wanted to puke. It's how I'd define getting involved in Syria.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 11, 2014 09:46 AM (X0j4A)

148 Oh typical. Drew dropped a stink bomb and then ran back behind the line.

Posted by: Hawaii at January 11, 2014 09:46 AM (RJMhd)

149 143 Because we (service-members/veterans) are sick and fucking tired of being treated like pathetic victims, who desperately need shoulders to cry on and open, bleeding-heart displays of faux empathy and PC-approved hand-wringing about the 'senselessness of war THIS!!

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:47 AM (At8tV)

150 143 I can tell you why Luttrell took offense. Because we (service-members/veterans) are sick and fucking tired of being treated like pathetic victims, who desperately need shoulders to cry on and open, bleeding-heart displays of faux empathy and PC-approved hand-wringing about the 'senselessness of war.' It's how liberals who hate the military bring themselves to express "support" for veterans. It's disingenuous and shameful. I've heard it for years and it drives me fucking crazy. ****** ^THIS a thousand fucking times over.

Posted by: Hawaii at January 11, 2014 09:47 AM (RJMhd)

151 Tapper is still on twitter claiming he's not an asshole and the usual suspects are defending him.

Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 11, 2014 09:47 AM (Qev5V)

152 Nice post Drew.  I honestly believe Lutrell's anger at Tapper springs from the cultural and moral divide between the civilian world(and the media world to point) and the military one.

I made a few posts in the threads below on the issue at hand and I did not engage in snark or my usual use of cryptic inscrutability.

Tapper has no choice but to speak from the seat Tapper sits in.  Tapper's wording belies a bias on his POV on the war.  He is entitled to that bias and I do not think he rendered it with intent nor do I feel that he does not strive to contain his biases.

Lutrell has an absolutely understandable from his seat anger at the US media's partisan and unpatriotic by extension narrative building on the conflicts in play.  The Navy Seals cannot and in fact do not measure the worthiness of what they do based on which civilian sits in office.  The target he wants to engage is too ethereal to be defeated in an interview with one person.(who is in my opinion not the worst offender by a measure and in fact is probably a good friend of the force)

Tapper's failing to truly live up to the ethical duties he has is the refusal or inability to fight to correct the coverage of the conflict towards egalitarianism in editorial bent relative to the facts on the ground.

"The media" is not Jake Tapper, and Jake Tapper should not be made to bear the scars his field has justly earned.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 09:48 AM (TE35l)

153 DrewM is interpreting Tapper's words in the most charitable possible light, while interpreting Beck's in the worst possible. Apparently Tapper is just a good guy who maybe used the wrong word in the wrong context, not realizing that stupid viewers that lack his grasp of the English language might overlook some aspects of his subtle usage. Meanwhile Beck is just a dishonest hack, deliberately twisting words cause he's just an evil bad guy. Gotcha.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 09:48 AM (ZPrif)

154  Tapper made a judgement on the whole of the Afghanistan war as senseless and expected Luttrell to agree with him.

Posted by: no good deed at January 11, 2014 01:41 PM (HsJeN)

 

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

 

And if Luttrell would have given any iota to that premise, I would almost bet this next month's pay that at some point after that Tapper would have fallen into the "it's Bush's fault" meme.

 

It seems like 90% of the US population has forgotten 9/11.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 09:49 AM (CIOaw)

155 It does suck to see Drew pull a Malor on this. Say whatever you want about ace, at least he defends his arguments.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:49 AM (U1Tts)

156 "Bottom line, through direct action we essentially wiped out the core leadership of the Taliban in Afghanistan."

There are certain questions that don't get asked often enough in life, and one of them is the "what then" question.

So: yes, special operations really were able to decapitate the Taliban leadership.

What then?

Because right over the border there's Pakistan, who essentially stood up the Taliban in the first place for their own purposes, and who have enormous strategic incentives to keep the Taliban going, and who have the connections and money to essentially infinitely regenerate new Taliban commanders as required.

What then?

So either there has to be a perpetual special operations presence in AFG and a continual process of attriting the enemy commanders as fast as the Pakis put them in place, or else there is no ongoing spec ops whack-a-mole and the enemy eventually are back in force.

Or else someone has to ask, can the rules of this rigged game be substantively changed to give any options other than these two bad ones?

Posted by: torquewrench at January 11, 2014 09:49 AM (gqT4g)

157 People are saying he just asked a "hard question." Where's the fucking question? There was no question.

Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 11, 2014 09:50 AM (Qev5V)

158 Meanwhile, Beck is on our side 90% of the time, but let's savage him as a lying dirtbag. Makes sense. Posted by: Flatbush -------------------- Yeah. I agree. The same is true of other predominantly conservative folk. I don't agree with O'Reilly, or Hannity, or Levin et al all of the time, but if we snipe at each other over who's turn it is to pick up the tab, we only weaken ourselves for the real fight. Beck isn't always right, but he takes a lot of hits for standing up and speaking frankly. We don't need fewer Becks, we need more.

Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 11, 2014 09:50 AM (aDwsi)

159 BTW...I am pretty sure they had a good reason not to tie up the villagers...just asking.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 09:51 AM (dZQh7)

160 Plaintiff, Thank you for your insights. I am defenseless against an ego of your magnitude. I will try to say this an a more efficient way. He was trying to frame a question, at least I think he was, about the rules of engagement. Let me pose a question. If a brave highly skilled soldier is lost due to the ineptness of his officers, is that senseless? To broaden the point. It the politicos wasted the most valuable of resources by being cavalier, is that senseless? The troops actions=never senseless Politicians actions that put troops in a no win situation=Sensless.

Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at January 11, 2014 09:51 AM (yqIMw)

161 Meanwhile Beck is just a dishonest hack, deliberately twisting words cause he's just an evil bad guy. Gotcha.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 01:48 PM (ZPrif)

 

 

----------------------------------------------

 

 

Beck knows Lutrell a hell of a lot better than Trapper does.  I'll stand with Beck on this one.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 09:51 AM (CIOaw)

162 Tapper's mistake was in addressing "senseless" to the wrong guy. It's not senseless for our warriors to fight our wars. What's senseless is for the civilian leadership to refuse to allow them to do it properly. Every war since WWII has been senseless-not that they haven't been justified, they have been, but that they've been half-assed to save some political cocksucker's "electability". What we are doing in Afghanistan now is especially senseless. American men and women are shedding their blood and lives so that a president doesn't "look weak" to voters. Like his side even cares. We need to either fight wars to win (meaning the complete, unconditional capitulation or death of every man, woman and child who opposes us. "Proportional response" is suicide. Exponential response ends wars and ensures peace) or not fight them at all. Anything else is absolutely senseless.

Posted by: Weirddave at January 11, 2014 09:51 AM (N/cFh)

163 120 -

I think it's also worth considering that Luttrell is going to have to decide how he is going to respond to these  situations, and not let his emotions dictate his actions.  Just as he would have been trained to do  for combat.

If he is going to go on tv and talk to reporters, he's going to get accosted with stupid questions.  It's the nature of the environment.  So if he knows that, there is  perhaps an opportunity for him  to talk beyond the stupid reporter, to get his message through to the audience in a way that better conveys the  perspective of the soldier/sailor on the ground. 

Outrage  is great, but it seems rather secondary to the mission here. 

Posted by: BurtTC at January 11, 2014 09:52 AM (BeSEI)

164 We don't need fewer Becks, we need more. *And that's when the fight started.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:52 AM (U1Tts)

165 To my way of looking at the exchange Tapper looks like he was clumsily trying to make a general point about the whole exercise in Afghanastan and Luttrell was talking specifically about his story, and the movie. Tapper was engaged in maladroit commentary, in other words, and should maybe have focused on Luttrell's story.

Posted by: MTF at January 11, 2014 09:52 AM (F58x4)

166 You know what this is here Drew--borrowing authority from other vets and pro-porting to speak for them in order to support your over aired opinion, what you did here: (though his certainty isn't universally shared among veterans). there is one word for it, not sure you can understand it but it is-- DISHONORABLE. It's akin to what Cindy Sheehan did--standing on her son's casket, to get a bull horn, the national spot light and then speaking for him. It's gross.

Posted by: Hawaii at January 11, 2014 09:52 AM (RJMhd)

167 156 can the rules of this rigged game be substantively changed to give any options other than these two bad ones? why yes, there's an easy option the pres can just make a phone call to india and tell them "okay, Pakistan is all yours to go fuck up, any support you want just say the word"

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:53 AM (At8tV)

168 I can tell you why Luttrell took offense. Because we (service-members/veterans) are sick and fucking tired of being treated like pathetic victims, who desperately need shoulders to cry on and open, bleeding-heart displays of faux empathy and PC-approved hand-wringing about the 'senselessness of war.' It's how liberals who hate the military bring themselves to express "support" for veterans. It's disingenuous and shameful. I've heard it for years and it drives me fucking crazy. If you think that killing terrorists whose idea of a good day is executing little girls for learning to read and planning to blow up American buildings is 'senseless,' kindly throw yourself in front of a bus. But in any case, keep your decrepit moral compass to yourself. --------------------------- Right on.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 11, 2014 09:53 AM (JDIKC)

169 8 Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 11, 2014 12:51 PM (DmNpO)

That is ABSOLUTELY correct, although there was no "let's have a vote" according to most accounts.  The commander of the LP team had expressed his reservations about the impact of the ROE on FP in the area, but felt it was his duty to comply because the WAR NEEDED IT.  The fact that the war needed it is why I made my series of tweets and posts that are getting some play and have attracted a few new people here.

In WW2 they would have killed the indigenous personnel or unassed the AO probably the same in Korea and Vietnam(mostly).  The media has decided that the US military has to have capes and use their heat vision to win every individual action in a conflict as cleanly as possible...UNLESS their guy is in the White House.  The media's assertion is the US military are pawns in the game of partisan bingo they play with the right.

There's a reason I invoke FM 3-24 when I speak of their actions and what they merit.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 09:53 AM (TE35l)

170 DAY ONE: Already a grim milestone as 160 comments are posted.

Posted by: Daybrother at January 11, 2014 09:53 AM (I4Tlh)

171 The troops actions=never senseless

Politicians actions that put troops in a no win situation=Sensless.

Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at January 11, 2014 01:51 PM (yqIMw)


You will notice that Tapper did not make such a distinction, and of course will never make such a distinction.

Posted by: [/i][/b]KG at January 11, 2014 09:54 AM (IPz9m)

172 135 Kinda of on the topic of meaningless there was a story the other day about an Iraqi War Vet who lost his arm in Baghdad. He was in Dallas on business and had to take a cab, his driver was a Kurd. They were chatting and the driver asked how he lost his arm, the Vet told him and the driver almost lost it... in a good way. Thanked the Vet for his sacrifice, wouldn't let him pay for the cab ride and tried to pay for his hotel. So, I guess my point is, that even though things are portrayed as being meaningless to us, sometime they have meaning to the people that were actually affected. The tweets from the Vet about the incident are here: http://tinyurl.com/ma9wtfv Posted by: lindafell at January 11, 2014 01:43 PM (PGO8C) That's a great story! Thanks for posting the link.

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 11, 2014 09:54 AM (bCEmE)

173

Tapper exposed his own clueless elitism -- twice -- and got called on it. He lives in a world where everyone claims to be "torn" over shit that Luttrell deals with every day and gets done. There you have it -- the great divide in America on display. 

 

Posted by: rrpjr at January 11, 2014 09:54 AM (s/yC1)

174 I know enough people who did tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and Tapper is an idiot to use the word "senseless". To those troops it is not senseless, they see it as their duty to fulfill the oaths they swore and they see it as honorable to serve. The only thing "senseless" in this damn war in Afghanistan are the senseless RoE that can tie up our troops in knots

Posted by: Ma Bell at January 11, 2014 09:54 AM (RLdcX)

175 People need to give Tapper a break...there are numerous ways to interpret what he said, and he may have just said something off the top of his head. People muff punts in the NFL too.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 09:55 AM (dZQh7)

176 Beck has a long established friendship with Mr. Luttrell and I think it is fair to say that he is protective of him.  Which is kind of funny but in a nice way.  If he went over board in his defense, Tapper will live and I am sure his friend appreciated it.

Posted by: Cindy Munford at January 11, 2014 09:55 AM (6MiMG)

177

>>168. Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 11, 2014 01:53 PM (JDIKC)<<

 

 

Thanks for that.

Posted by: rrpjr at January 11, 2014 09:55 AM (s/yC1)

178 18 My Name is Nobody at January 11, 2014 12:59 PM (5Q1ZU)

That is correct after a fashion.  Tapper has in my opinion a voice on editorial content but not final say.  I cannot KNOW definitively how hardly he pleads the case for a reinstating of proper ethical guidelines but I suspect it is not as much as one would like but more than the others.

The media's masters know what they are doing, and it is not patriotic.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 09:55 AM (TE35l)

179 I am always amazed how much Sven is the wavelength I am on, even when it is crypto logic. That is practically what I wrote above. People like Tapper think that the best and brightest should be journalists or politicians or whatever, people of words not actions. They see good people die and can make no sense of it. It is like trying to describe red and green to the colorblind. They just don't have the receptors. I don't think that this was an intention to belittle what Luttrell and his comrades did.

Posted by: blaster at January 11, 2014 09:56 AM (4+AaH)

180 DDG 112 USS Michael Murphy. 

Posted by: jrcobbstr at January 11, 2014 09:57 AM (1Noml)

181 Tapper is a lefty douche. I won't defend him even when he is right, so he certainly will get no sympathy from me when he is wrong. This is the world Tapper wanted, where tribe is everything, now he can sit and suck on it.

Posted by: toby928© has a dirty joke at January 11, 2014 09:57 AM (QupBk)

182 My two cents: Soldiers have always died "senselessly" in war. Don't you think the generals knew that many, many men would be slaughtered on Normandy beach before the Allies even could think about taking it?

The problem today is, our pols and general/pols don't necessarily want to win. They will settle for what is essentially a surrender with a few bells and whistles. They want to win the PR war. That is the real scandal.

Posted by: PJ at January 11, 2014 09:57 AM (ZWaLo)

183 KG Perhaps confirmation bias on my part.

Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at January 11, 2014 09:57 AM (yqIMw)

184 83 crabs in a bucket. Or, eighth-grade girls.

Posted by: MAx at January 11, 2014 09:57 AM (b7yum)

185 172 I've never charged anyone in uniform a fare and give a 50% military discount to all others let them save their money for better things

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:58 AM (At8tV)

186 Beck is an asshole. Just because I agree with him on certain issues doesn't mean he gets a pass. He's all about himself and his "brand." Posted by: JoeyBagels ----------------------- Interesting. I've met the man, and had one-on-one conversation. He never used the word 'I', or 'Me', he never tried to sell me anything. He expressed strong, objective fears about the direction of the country, and what it means for the children. I detected no self-possession. The word 'asshole', as a descriptor, never crossed my mind. I've known a few assholes, more than a few, actually, and Beck doesn't even move the meter compared to most politicians and major media folk.

Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 11, 2014 09:58 AM (aDwsi)

187 175 People need to give Tapper a break... Sorry, no. there are numerous ways to interpret what he said, Again, no...there are NOT numerous ways to interpret that. and he may have just said something off the top of his head. People muff punts in the NFL too. Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 01:55 PM (dZQh7) Then the top of his head comes to a point. He's a fuckin' "journalist" (spit)!

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 11, 2014 09:58 AM (bCEmE)

188 143 : dawnfire82 at January 11, 2014 01:45 PM (1/hzQ)

Yup. Well said.  The media is genuine in viewing the military as victims as a body, and they are also guilty of unethically using disparate treatment in caring about the "plight of the poor idiot GIs" based on the partisan designator of the guy in the Oval Office.  That is offensive.

Tapper is not the villain, BUT I entirely understand and to a large degree sympathize with as much as I can Lutrell's anger at the media as a body.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 09:59 AM (TE35l)

189 And Beck's focus on his "brand" is getting conservative and libertarian ideas out to more people than almost anyone else in America. That's how the media works. If you don't promote yourself nobody will ever hear your ideas. And that "brand" is Blaze, not Beck. Beck has taken the money he made from being a tv/radio pundit and built a conservative media machine. None of the other big right-wing pundits have done that. I'm actually not a huge Beck fan, I don't listen or watch regularly, but he's done more to build an infrastructure for conservative media than almost anyone else. It's extremely impressive what he's done as a businessman. Most of the big name radio/tv guys - OReilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, Levin, Savage, etc, etc -- are content to just cash the checks and be rich. They opine on their tv/radio outlets, they put out a book or two a year to sell to their fans, and they enjoy their life as a fantastically rich dude. And most of those guys make a career bitching about left-wing control of the media. Meanwhile Beck actually does something about it. Actually builds alternative media instead of just bitching about left-wing media. I admire Michelle Malkin for similar reason. She doesn't just bitch about the media, she changes it, she builds HotAir, she builds Twitchy. That's really impressive.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 09:59 AM (ZPrif)

190 "there are numerous ways to interpret what he said, and he may have just said something off the top of his head. People muff punts in the NFL too." This isn't the NFL and return guys who muff punts three times in a row go ride the bench.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 09:59 AM (U1Tts)

191 OT why is my enter and backspace twisted? hmmmm, cat hair on the keyboard again FML

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 09:59 AM (At8tV)

192

>>163 "Outrage is great, but it seems rather secondary to the mission here."<<

 

 

I don't agree. Outrage is exactly the mission. Don't talk "beyond" stupid reporters. Call them stupid to their faces. They've gone way too long not being challenged. Look at how Tapper reacted. He was shocked, still is. Good. Do it again next time, Marcus.

Posted by: rrpjr at January 11, 2014 10:00 AM (s/yC1)

193 179 blaster at January 11, 2014 01:56 PM (4+AaH)

Thank you, I don't often express myself on this matter this clearly because frankly it spikes my blood pressure.

This is tearing the Republic apart.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:00 AM (TE35l)

194 Also, the entire senseless comment could be referring to Afghanistan as in...we tried to help those people, but they are insane, so its "Senseless" in that sense...Tapper won't admit to that of course. Its like Iraq and Syria now. Some of my friends who think Bush screwed the pooch and "caused" the insurgency are having to take a step back and realize that since no troops were in Syria, and they managed to have a sectarian civil war that maybe the Sunni-Shia conflict was always there and we just happened to be in the way so to speak.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 10:01 AM (dZQh7)

195

>>175 People need to give Tapper a break...

 

Fuck that.

Posted by: rrpjr at January 11, 2014 10:01 AM (s/yC1)

196 Tapper should all me for tips.

Posted by: Jane Fonda, MSNBC at January 11, 2014 10:02 AM (COglZ)

197 I admire Michelle Malkin for similar reason. She doesn't just bitch about the media, she changes it, she builds HotAir, she builds Twitchy. That's really impressive. --------------------------- Yeah. Thanks a pantload for giving Allahpussy and Poppin' Fresh a platform.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 11, 2014 10:03 AM (JDIKC)

198 "This isn't the NFL and return guys who muff punts three times in a row go ride the bench." This would seem to be a once, not a 3 times in a row occurrence. Also, Jake Tapper is one of the few decent reporters around who will ask any question of Democrats. I think we can give him a pass for some semi-dumb insensitive statement about Afghanistan. Or are we in full-on take scalps of everyone who offends us mode like liberals now? If so, carry on. Maybe you can go picket his house.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 10:04 AM (dZQh7)

199

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 01:59 PM (ZPrif)

 

 

--------------------------------------------

 

 

I have a strange feeling that Limbaugh  is invested heavily in the Blaze.  Beck makes a lot of money, but  not that much.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 10:05 AM (CIOaw)

200 166 Hawaii at January 11, 2014 01:52 PM (RJMhd)

Drew is a good guy, hell even Gabe is for the most part a good guy on these matters.

Drew is trying to speak his mind and heart on his understanding of the issue in play and I am not finding insincerity.  Drew is striving for, and to a large degree being far more polite about his execution of the patriotic duty to view the war through non-partisan eyes at times.  Benghazi comes to mind, that I disagree with some of his analyses does not mean his heart is is a bad place.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:05 AM (TE35l)

201 47 Vietnam: 58,000 dead. Everyone thinks it was a waste. But it did slow the communist tide that was sweeping that part of the world at the time. I know when I was in Thailand and the Thai's found out I was in Vietnam, they've thanked me for keeping their country out of the hands of the hard-core communists. Even when I was in Bali, several people there expressed that if it wouldn't have been for the American presence in Vietnam, they would have been one of the communists targets. For a long time, Americans thought that our presence in SE Asia was a waste of time. But time has proven otherwise. Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 01:14 PM (CIOaw) Hell Soona, I'll go even further than that. We won that goddamn war. If we had just honored our treaty commitments and given the ARVN the support we promised when we withdrew, no way does Saigon fall and we have a N Korea/S. Korea situation to this day (oh yea, and a couple of million people who trusted the US don't die). But the Dems in Congress were busy getting their Watergate on and gave no thought SE Asia. Politics is far more important than national security, donchaknow.

Posted by: Weirddave at January 11, 2014 10:05 AM (N/cFh)

202 OT why is my enter and backspace twisted? hmmmm, cat hair on the keyboard again ---------------- Heh. Just in the past few minutes, I have been 'mining' cat hair out of the keyboard, using a straightened paper clip. Vacuum needed next.

Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 11, 2014 10:06 AM (aDwsi)

203 All I can say is that my Vietnamese SIL, otherwise a mild-mannered sweetheart, will deck you if you call the American in Vietnam effort "senseless." Just because the American Left took away the victory doesn't make what all of those other Americans did "senseless." The nobility, generosity, courage, sacrifice for others --- all of these things can never be taken away.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at January 11, 2014 10:06 AM (dfYL9)

204 167 156 can the rules of this rigged game be substantively changed to give any options other than these two bad ones?

why yes, there's an easy option
the pres can just make a phone call to india and tell them "okay, Pakistan is all yours to go fuck up, any support you want just say the word"

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 01:53 PM (At8tV)


***********************


True in the short run. In the long run, let's see if Pakistan's new civilian leadership can make a dent in what has been a long-simmering problem with its Islamist kleptocracy military establishment. You know, the ones who were hiding bin Laden and still are hiding Mullah Omar and Zarkawi and got the bomb. But it's always been a Pakistan problem, not an Afghanistan problem.

Posted by: Caesar North of the Rubicon at January 11, 2014 10:08 AM (HubSo)

205 Frankly there is a natural difference between how civilians see the war and how soldiers, especially dedicated special forces soldiers like Marcus see things. Not to mention that Tapper is basically paid to take the objective, questioning view of things. His mistake was to not realize that his role and Luttrell's role are so different that questions Tapper think are natural are simply inappropriate for the soldiers on the ground, especially of Luttrell's caliber. I saw something yesterday from Luttrell's visit to Beck's show that Tapper should have seen. He has a very low threshold for stupidity in these kind of situations. The question he specifically mentioned as intolerable was "How did you feel watching your friends die?". Stupid question and Marcus is an intelligent man. If you want to ask him questions, make them intelligent questions that might allow people to gain insight. Tapper was only making an observation and then asking for Luttrell's reaction to that observation. If you think about it, what other reaction would he have ? And there was never any chance that question was going to provide anyone any insight.

Posted by: deadrody at January 11, 2014 10:08 AM (+Dpo7)

206 Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 02:04 PM (dZQh7) What do you mean "we"? Also, it appears as if you haven't read the thread (who does?), or the transcript. The professional wordsmith used "senseless" three times. Twice after he realized Luttrell had a problem with it. His clarification only showed he seems to have some fundamental misunderstandings about the military. So no, there weren't "numerous" interpretations here when viewed in context. And this wasn't some "off the top of his head" thing either. Of course, I didn't call for his scalp either and I'm pretty sure no one else here did. Or are you the keeper of who can and can't be criticized?

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 10:08 AM (U1Tts)

207 192 -

I don't think you and I are disagreeing here, I think it's possible my use of the term "talk beyond the reporter" is another way of saying don't let  the reporter get away with setting the agenda.

So if the purpose of being interviewed is to get a message to the audience, rather than just having a conversation with  the reporter, then it is ALWAYS the mission of the interviewee to not let  the reporter sway him from that.

I didn't watch the interview, because I generally hate tv news, so maybe Luttrell did exactly what he needed to do.  However, if he  DID get emotional, and let this become about stupid reporters asking stupid questions RATHER than being about what he wanted to say about the sacrifice of his comrades, then he's got to come up with  a  better strategy. 

Posted by: BurtTC at January 11, 2014 10:10 AM (BeSEI)

208 Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 02:05 PM (TE35l) So who questioned Drew's sincerity or where his heart is?

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 10:11 AM (U1Tts)

209 oh, if the poster Hawaii is still here we're going to hit the skeet range at kokohead around 1ish today so if you want to shoot come on down, look for the skinny dude with the hot tiny chick

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 10:11 AM (At8tV)

210 Overall, I think this was poor preparation by Tapper. He is one of the good guys, so to speak, of the ranks of die hard liberal journalists. Though, frankly, he's just doing so for his own best interests. The one way to stand out from the crowd is not to go along with the crowd and kneel down and blow Obama. I wouldn't give him any medals for valor just yet. As soon as the tide shifts and Republicans have more power than Democrats, he'll be right back to asking the same shitty questions as the rest of the liberal media.

Posted by: deadrody at January 11, 2014 10:12 AM (+Dpo7)

211 "seemed senseless, all of these wonderful people who were killed for an op that went wrong." I could take that to mean that in hindsight, its a lot of loss for not succeeding at all, and more men dying trying to rescue them. Now, if you trained for this stuff, you'd know that you can't win them all, and thus have to take the good with the bad, but Tapper is not a soldier. But mainly, I think Tapper thinks it senseless because Afghanistan unlike WW II will not have a clean ending. We may have changed Afghanistan to be better, or it could collapse, or it could muddle through. That is not a feel-good Hollywood ending. Thus it seems "senseless." And even senseless in terms of why the Taliban are fighting at all. "We want to be dumb and poor!" seems like a senseless goal to me.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 10:13 AM (dZQh7)

212 206 Or are you the keeper of who can and can't be criticized? as the token democrat that would be me sorry, just saying

Posted by: navycopjoe why god why? at January 11, 2014 10:13 AM (At8tV)

213

Vietnam, Afgahnistan, and Iraq.  If the military would have been given the go-ahead to wage an all-out offensive (as we did in Iraq in 1991) those wars would have been  short and victorious.

 

IMOH, one of the reasons we can't win wars anymore is our beholden to the UN.  The UN is America's curse.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 10:14 AM (CIOaw)

214 205 deadrody at January 11, 2014 02:08 PM (+Dpo7)

He's a Navy SEAL stupidity is considered as big an enemy as the opfor.

You just asked him how he felt about his brohter's "senseless" death...

yeah stupid question Jake he can't teach you a lifetime's worth of military dedication to mission, unit, and duty in a 45 second response.

Tapper is sincere in his posit he made no offense, perhaps Tapper should have pondered putting himself in his guest's seat to wargame a better turn of phrase.

Tapper loves the troops the best he knows how, I can't work up the ire for him that I can for people like Chuck Todd.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:14 AM (TE35l)

215 By the way, attacking media members and pundits for not toeing the line is how the game is played. Notice that Tapper keeps backing off. That's how you keep people in line. That's what the Left does and it works. Tapper is now less likely to use the phrase "senseless" in the future. This is corrective feedback. Doesn't mean we hate Tapper now. We are trying to make him behave the way we want. Remember how, for about 2-3 months in 2008 primary, the Left was attacking Bill Clinton for being racist? He quickly apologized and got back in line. Operant conditioning works.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 10:16 AM (ZPrif)

216 145 Beck is an asshole. Just because I agree with him on certain issues doesn't mean he gets a pass. He's all about himself and his "brand." How else is someone supposed to raise money? Not promote?? I see his self-promotion as a necessary task to keep the engine rolling. Does he have the same cashflow coming in that all the liberal networks have? No. So what are his choices? Is it chic to hate on Beck? Yes, it's very chic. But he's providing a service and is trying to rival the MSM and I appreciate that. Is he over-the-top? Yes, but for all who are not OTT, tell me how successful they are..... I LOVE the conservative blogs, they provide a GREAT service, but only reach a limited number of people. We need all the help we can get to educate the willfully uneducated.

Posted by: Ruth at January 11, 2014 10:17 AM (XDMAg)

217 Beck is not to be trusted, is my gut reaction to the man. I do not trust him. Jake Tapper was better than others in the MSM when he was at ABC, and I guess he is still somewhat better while at CNN. I wouldn't trust Tapper either, but Beck- there is something about him that comes off as incredibly phony. Mark Wahlberg is better than many in Hollywood, just from the few things I've heard him say. He was a thug in his youth, but I think he has changed.

Posted by: Baldy at January 11, 2014 10:18 AM (2bql3)

218 135 --- Great link! Thanks. http://tinyurl.com/ma9wtfv Anyone who hasn't read that exchange between a wounded vet and a Kurdish cabdriver should do so.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at January 11, 2014 10:18 AM (dfYL9)

219 "I could take that to mean that in hindsight, its a lot of loss for not succeeding at all, and more men dying trying to rescue them. Now, if you trained for this stuff, you'd know that you can't win them all, and thus have to take the good with the bad, but Tapper is not a soldier." You could take it that way, but to do so is insulting to the intelligence of the interviewee and shows a striking amount of ignorance of the military by someone whose military interaction is being sold as a reason we're supposed to cut Tapper some slack. So, in this interpretation it's something Luttrell should rightfully have called him on. But mainly, I think Tapper thinks it senseless because Afghanistan unlike WW II will not have a clean ending. We may have changed Afghanistan to be better, or it could collapse, or it could muddle through. That is not a feel-good Hollywood ending. Thus it seems "senseless." And even senseless in terms of why the Taliban are fighting at all. "We want to be dumb and poor!" seems like a senseless goal to me." These interpretations don't wash in context of the interview or in terms of Tapper's clarification.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 10:19 AM (U1Tts)

220 "The professional wordsmith used "senseless" three times. Twice after he realized Luttrell had a problem with it. His clarification only showed he seems to have some fundamental misunderstandings about the military. So no, there weren't "numerous" interpretations here when viewed in context. And this wasn't some "off the top of his head" thing either." Right...each time someone says a word counts in 60 second exchange...because after you say it once, you immediately can fathom why the other person is upset...or do you occasionally have to ask a bit more to figure it out? "Of course, I didn't call for his scalp either and I'm pretty sure no one else here did. Or are you the keeper of who can and can't be criticized?" Criticize away. But people sure seem "outraged" over this. Are we fishing for an apology? What's the end goal? I guess I'm here wasting time too, so I shouldn't say I'm immune either from outrage. BTW, I guarantee you that some in the military feel Afghanistan is senseless too. Let's not claim the military is some monolithic bloc of thinkers on this stuff.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 10:19 AM (dZQh7)

221 And since Jake Tapper is a rising media personality, and often predicted to be elevated to ever higher positions and become one of America's most powerful media personalities (often suggested for Meet the Press, for example), getting him to toe the line more in the future is helpful.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 11, 2014 10:19 AM (ZPrif)

222 But mainly, I think Tapper thinks it senseless because Afghanistan unlike WW II will not have a clean ending.


Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 02:13 PM (dZQh7)


East Germany, Iron Curtain, Korean war, Vietnam war, Cold war, etc, all of that came from the "clean ending" of WWII.

Posted by: some other guy at January 11, 2014 10:19 AM (2DunM)

223 "Criticize away. But people sure seem "outraged" over this. Are we fishing for an apology? What's the end goal?" People are expressing their opinions. Just like you. Expressing an opinion isn't outrage. BTW, I guarantee you that some in the military feel Afghanistan is senseless too. Let's not claim the military is some monolithic bloc of thinkers on this stuff. Strawman.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 10:22 AM (U1Tts)

224 Wow drewmtips....tapper has fooled you just like christie did. Hilarious how you guys actually think tapper is some kind of actual "newsman" without a liberal axe to grind because he has asked a FEW tough questions in 20 years lol.

Posted by: Dan at January 11, 2014 10:23 AM (gR5OX)

225 222 -

Eh, clean in the sense that our boys got to come home to a loving nation, embracing them for their service.

Still, maybe clean was a senseless word to be used in  this circumstance.

/

Posted by: BurtTC at January 11, 2014 10:23 AM (BeSEI)

226 208 Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 02:11 PM (U1Tts)

I was responding to Hawaii @166 saying that Drew was grabbing Veteran's moral standing and granting Tapper wiggle room.

There are veterans, real combat veterans who do say things like Drew is acknowledging. That a majority of the force that I know of does not share that point of view does not mean they do not exist.  My own service was small relative to many, not as a combat soldier and I cannot speak for the morality of their actions from a position of unassailable authority nor would I.

I do wonder if they would have developed the attitude alluded to if the current wildly partisan, unpatriotic by traditional American definition media had not cultivated that fissure point.

My mentioning Drew's sincerity and heart on the matter was to express my inability to feel ire with Drew's posit whether I personally agree with his points or not.

I have what is likely on the whole unpopular point of view that through I detest her I cannot fault Cindy Sheehan for a lack of patriotism on the plane of ethics I described earlier today.  She has not altered the prism she views the war through and if you track down her rantings and analyses she is just as harsh towards Obama as she was Bush.  The villain in this matter is again in my view the media that used her as a cudgel against Bush in the same way they used the coffins of our veterans in a hypocritical and inconsistent way.

Regards,
Sven

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:24 AM (TE35l)

227 213 Vietnam, Afgahnistan, and Iraq. If the military would have been given the go-ahead to wage an all-out offensive (as we did in Iraq in 1991) those wars would have been short and victorious. IMOH, one of the reasons we can't win wars anymore is our beholden to the UN. The UN is America's curse. Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 02:14 PM (CIOaw) -------------------------- Korea. If it weren't for the UN, we would have liberated ALL of Korea and the Nork chamber of horrors would not exist today. In fairness to Truman, the UN was still a new organization and one might forgive a mid-century Democrat's dewy-eyed idealism about it. But a generation later? No such excuse.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at January 11, 2014 10:24 AM (dfYL9)

228 "You could take it that way, but to do so is insulting to the intelligence of the interviewee and shows a striking amount of ignorance of the military by someone whose military interaction is being sold as a reason we're supposed to cut Tapper some slack. So, in this interpretation it's something Luttrell should rightfully have called him on." Lutrell was totally right to call him on it, I agree. Even if he became emotional, that's fine too. I just think people are over-analyzing this. And in light of stories about Marines being disappointed that AQ is now back in control in Fallujah, you can understand how some might feel Afghanistan may turn out the same way.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 10:25 AM (dZQh7)

229 East Germany, Iron Curtain, Korean war, Vietnam war, Cold war, etc, all of that came from the "clean ending" of WWII.

Posted by: some other guy at January 11, 2014 02:19 PM (2DunM)

 

 

-----------------------------------------------

 

 

Something you should learn and remember.  There will always be war.  There'll always be people wanting to take freedom and/or prosperity from somebody else.  It's why I consider that DC is at war with Americans.  Wars never  really end.  We just have brief respites.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 10:27 AM (CIOaw)

230 "Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. If the military would have been given the go-ahead to wage an all-out offensive (as we did in Iraq in 1991) those wars would have been short and victorious." Time is also a major factor. Counter-insurgency requires lots and lots of time. America simply does not want to fight a 20-30 year war to help Afghanistan figure out it does not want to be in the 7th century. And occupying countries that have not been smashed to bits leads to insurgencies.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 10:27 AM (dZQh7)

231 "Without question in this hyper-partisan environment, Republicans operatives are fanning flames and creating suspicions where thereÂ’s no evidence of wrongdoing, trafficking in false rumors and idle speculation. The White House has felt the necessity to pop its head up to shoot down stories it says are false."
from The Benghazi Drip-Drip-Drip by Jake Tapper Nov 1, 2012
http://tinyurl.com/as55buk

Posted by: jeannebodine at January 11, 2014 10:27 AM (2LJqa)

232 "East Germany, Iron Curtain, Korean war, Vietnam war, Cold war, etc, all of that came from the "clean ending" of WWII." GREAT POINT! but WW II was not a fight against communism.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 10:28 AM (dZQh7)

233 143 I can tell you why Luttrell took offense. Because we (service-members/veterans) are sick and fucking tired of being treated like pathetic victims, who desperately need shoulders to cry on and open, bleeding-heart displays of faux empathy and PC-approved hand-wringing about the 'senselessness of war.' It's how liberals who hate the military bring themselves to express "support" for veterans. It's disingenuous and shameful. I've heard it for years and it drives me fucking crazy.

************

This!

Posted by: gracepmc at January 11, 2014 10:28 AM (rznx3)

234 And in light of stories about Marines being disappointed that AQ is now back in control in Fallujah, you can understand how some might feel Afghanistan may turn out the same way.


Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 02:25 PM (dZQh7)


I'm sure the President is doing his damnedest.

Posted by: some other guy at January 11, 2014 10:29 AM (2DunM)

235 I just watched this slip again with my wife and had a little epiphany about Marcus' response. I think he is saying: "You voted for these people who made the decision to send us there and now you want to be wishy washy about us being there. It's too late for that. You feel bad now, about our loss? FU!" It is a great point that is sobering. We love our 20/20 hindsight. We can not do the etch-a-sketch shake and make it all right.

Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at January 11, 2014 10:29 AM (yqIMw)

236 "My mentioning Drew's sincerity and heart on the matter was to express my inability to feel ire with Drew's posit whether I personally agree with his points or not." I don't think anyone who disagree with Drew doubts his sincerity or his heart. It's just that his post is a stretch. Tami pretty much had this nailed by #5.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 10:30 AM (U1Tts)

237 For us at least.

Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 10:30 AM (dZQh7)

238 231 jeannebodine at January 11, 2014 02:27 PM (2LJqa)

Yup and that is why I was warning people here not to fall in love with Jake ma'am.  The fact is he is at his core a liberal and he does work to advance their agenda.  He strives to be Cronkite not Rather and for the most part wins.

Jake and I had a 45 tweet argument with Richard Grenell being involved on the ethics of the press' coverage of Benghazi.  I was amazed he did not block me because he does happily to a lot of folks.  My suspicion is he respected my intellect behind my use of charts, clips, and foreign reporting enough to grant me a "pass."

He appreciates the power to insulate the democrats, and it altered my view on him for the foreseeable future but he is not the worst reporter and can be used at times to tip the narrative.

Just so long as the big prize is not on the line.

(which gets us back to Patriotism....)

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:33 AM (TE35l)

239 I just think people are over-analyzing this. No, the analysis is actually pretty simple really: Tapper stuck to his guns after getting called out. Tapper sticks to his guns later than night despite being called out. No over-analyzation necessary.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 10:35 AM (U1Tts)

240 236 Burn the Witch at January 11, 2014 02:30 PM (U1Tts)

Yeah she did.  I try to look at the span of a person's output before making that call.  Tapper has tried to do enough for the force and was so far as the big 3 Networks' White House guys went most ethical in his conduct between the two admins.  My view is Tapper is living in the area Rumsfield explained that made PERFECT sense to almost ANY service member on "known unknowns and unknown unknwons" the newsies had such fun mocking.

Tapper was inquiring into a mindset he likely has no commonality with.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:37 AM (TE35l)

241 but WW II was not a fight against communism. Posted by: sexypig at January 11, 2014 02:28 PM (dZQh7) --------------------------- Operation Barbarossa. Look it up.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 11, 2014 10:38 AM (JDIKC)

242 241 Empire of Jeff at January 11, 2014 02:38 PM (JDIKC)

World War 2 was a fight against communism, we just decided to fight the fascists and aid the communists.

I can't say I am in love with that, but I was not in love with the Fascists either at home or abroad from that era.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:41 AM (TE35l)

243

I think what many don't realize and that perhaps people like Marcus, Beck, and many who comment here  do realize  is that we're already in a world war.  And what makes it worse is that we're having to battle it here at home  as well as on foreign soil.  There's  a lot of people, including most holding governing positions in DC, that want to see America  and all that it stands for destroyed.  And this most definitely includes the media as well.

 

We should constantly challenge the media and, for the most part, try to bring it down.  The MFM  and anyone willing to  work or shill for it needs to be  nullified  one way or the other.  They are the enemy.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 10:43 AM (CIOaw)

244 When I red the book in 07 I knew it would make a great movie, and is sounds like it is.  So much to respect in these sailors.  LUTTRELL had been given a treatment dog, and some lowlives killed it for kicks (they did not know whom they were f-ing with).  He chased them down in his truck and showed the restraint of a pro and just held them until the cops showed up.  The newest DDG is for Murphy.  I agree.  We should just be punitive from now on.   You mess with us and we will go mid-evil on your ass.  The Romans had peace and civilization for a thousand years by stomping the barbarians then making them part of the team.  We should not fight unless it is to win.  No nation building until the enemy is totally smashed and they know it.  Then don't finish half ass.  Japan and Germany are two of our strongest allies, because we stomped them to dust.  That is the model.

Posted by: jrcobbstr at January 11, 2014 10:43 AM (1Noml)

245 Sven, he blocked me over Benghazi. I do think he's fairer than most which is damning with faint praise but never make the mistake of forgetting his agenda. He is a dyed in the wool progressive and when it counts, he will do whatever is necessary to protect his ideology.

As to this outrage, I only have enough left to sustain me through the continuing disaster of Obamacare. Still no coverage, been to the ER, had to self-pay for lab work, dr visits, etc. although I'm supposedly "covered". On the plus side, I've been featured in Yahoo, Philly Inquirer, NYT and interviewed yesterday by CNN so I may just be famous enough to be the first dead Obamacare victim.

Posted by: jeannebodine at January 11, 2014 10:44 AM (2LJqa)

246 I did not take umbrage at anything that was said. I do abhor the fact that the military geniuses sent four soldiers into the danger zone based on what? ...childish intelligence that did not consider the options and apparently did not consider recovering the soldiers if everything went south. This is reminiscent of the Viet Nam suicide mission, where the military geniuses sent companies and battalions of soldiers to their deaths for nothing to be gained. I was drafted for Viet Nam in 1973. I took the aptitude test in LA with some 500 other draftees. I was standing in line naked to have my testicles and anus examined when an officer took me out of line, told me to dress, and wait. I was sent to a bird colonel. He told me that I aced the aptitude test and was considered unsuitable for combat! The reason: the military only wanted cannon fodder. I was more valuable as a chemical engineer working in a petroleum refinery. The times never change. The idiocy of sending four soldiers, no matter their skill set, into combat boggles my mind.

Posted by: Quaoar at January 11, 2014 10:44 AM (huV3N)

247 Tapper screwed up. He knew what he was asking. He got called on it. The smart play would be to acknowledge that, at least to the extent of using the old fall back "poor word choice" fiction.

Posted by: Just A Guy at January 11, 2014 10:49 AM (CGzAz)

248 246 Quaoar at January 11, 2014 02:44 PM (huV3N)

The command decision matrix was there that led to this hail mary stab with the LP and a ~80 man raid(that would have happened had the LP not gotten outed and popped) in an effort to reduce US losses and have the most precise triggers in the biz doing the target analysis.

The absolute terror at US losses is because of the media's behavior.  The press doesn't think the Taliban blowing up the most planes the US has lost in conflict since Vietnam in a sitting is "news."  Oddly 6 years ago it would have been a scandal.

The media played a less refined version of the same game in Vietnam.

The idiocy of this war is directly attributable to the double and triple binding the media has engaged in.

To the point I am CERTAIN they could dig up the post by me on the day after election 08 was done raging that Obama has deference and latitude by the press to win this war if inclined because they will NEVER report on it with equanimity.

THAT power is the problem, and the problem imperils the Republic.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:50 AM (TE35l)

249 The times never change. The idiocy of sending four soldiers, no matter their skill set, into combat boggles my mind.

Posted by: Quaoar at January 11, 2014 02:44 PM (huV3N)

 

 

------------------------------------------------

 

 

I'm glad you didn't become a soldier too.   

 

 

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 10:51 AM (CIOaw)

250 249 Soona at January 11, 2014 02:51 PM (CIOaw)

I'm glad I was dumb enough they let me enlist.

My 137 GT was not an enlistment bar I suppose.


Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 10:53 AM (TE35l)

251 I'm glad I was dumb enough they let me enlist.

My 137 GT was not an enlistment bar I suppose.


Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 02:53 PM (TE35l)

 

 

---------------------------------------------------

 

 

Heh.  Me too.  It was one of the most purposeful periods of my life.  I'm proud to be  enough of a dumbass to serve my country.

Posted by: Soona at January 11, 2014 10:56 AM (CIOaw)

252 251 Soona at January 11, 2014 02:56 PM (CIOaw)

It was the center of my dreams.  The loss of it darn near short-circuited my emotional equilibrium.  If serving America requires being Forrest Gump I am ready to be a box of candy.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 11:00 AM (TE35l)

253 http://tinyurl.com/ohjykob

//OT Breitbart-Pat Buchanan laments lack of GOP Governors coming to Christie's aid...

yeah Pat I guess so....you and Christie share a lot of the same ideas on loyalty first buddy.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 11:03 AM (TE35l)

254 Tapper's wife makes mega bucks working for Planned Parenthood. he should be turning over in bed and ask her why she is involved in the SENSELESS deaths of children.

Posted by: Madamex at January 11, 2014 11:03 AM (vaWdD)

255 254 Madamex at January 11, 2014 03:03 PM (vaWdD)

Yup, that's why "the legend of Jake Tapper" and Jake Tapper are different people.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 11:04 AM (TE35l)

256 The 60s radicals took their marching orders from the reds.  Methodically took over key institutions, journalism, education (esp. teacher education), then the Dumbocratic Party.  Think Antonio Gramsky or the Frankfurt School.  When the USSR was around we could always point at it and go "this is what they want to do to us."  After The Gipper finished them off, no more very ugly example.  It's evil is not taught today, and it has our government.  We must first take back the Republican Party, then the institutions that nurture freedom.  The family, churches, education, get them back, all our institutions.  They are trying to kill our military, a 200 year old institution.  It may be to late, if the bottom falls out of the dollar.

Posted by: jrcobbstr at January 11, 2014 11:04 AM (1Noml)

257 You really do have to watch the clip. To suggest that not only WAS it senseless, but that they intentionally set out to portray that senselessness is ridiculous. That was pure liberal douchebaggery on display. The idea that Marcus would NOT react that way to it, especially since Tapper voluntarily offers that he doesn't mean to be disrespectful, BUT... is the tip off. The simplest definition of "but" ? Everything that came before it was a lie, now...

Posted by: deadrody at January 11, 2014 11:06 AM (+Dpo7)

258 The.
Media.
Is.
The.
Enemy.

Posted by: LeBron Horowitz at January 11, 2014 11:11 AM (cL+9V)

259 "I was standing in line naked to have my testicles and anus examined when an officer took me out of line, told me to dress, and wait."

Bummer

Well heck dang Sonny Jim, just leave a single edge razor blade in the bottom of your ditty bag and the TSA will give your anus all the attention that you have obviously missed these many years

Posted by: Ardmore at January 11, 2014 11:17 AM (1L5zK)

260 I believe that Anti-Military is the default setting for the 'media'

Posted by: Erowmero at January 11, 2014 11:31 AM (OONaw)

261 American soldiers are not victims Drew. When you try to force that classification on them, they will kick you in the tongue. They don't fight as victims. They don't die as victims. They make war. They are not innocents. They are combatants. What you and Tapper are doing, I'm sure unintentionally, is trying to take from them the deliberateness of their actions. They are warriors making war, not victims of it. The warrior ethos does not permit self-victimization. A warrior who dies for his country is a hero, not a victim. You diminish them by feeling sorry for them. A soldier cannot chose his president or his war, but he can chose how he fights it and, if necessary, how he meets his end. It is an insult to feel sorry for him. It is a proud thing to face an impossible fight and to yet strive to win it.

Posted by: Immolate at January 11, 2014 11:51 AM (AaHJC)

262 The only problem with what Jake said is the word  "senseless" because he said that to Luttrell....  say that word to Obama, to someone else... not the guy who was the only survivor... dumb word to use in this interview.

Posted by: PhilipJames at January 11, 2014 12:19 PM (Zrs1R)

263 For a guy who makes a living using words, Tapper's phraseology sucks and is right along the party line that any good journolister would have used.

Lutrell's actions cannot be viewed by anyone, save a lefty/prog, as anything less than honorable and principled.  The actions of several (unexpectedly unnamed) CiC's, Sec State's, senior military staff, and Sec Def's cannot be viewed as anything less than despicable leading directly to senseless outcomes.

Posted by: Hrothgar at January 11, 2014 12:28 PM (o3MSL)

264 Good thing that Tapper's "wedding tackle" didn't sail over the goalposts for a 3 point play in one of today's NFL playoff games. Luttrell does not suffer civilian fools gladly.

Posted by: Comanche Voter at January 11, 2014 12:32 PM (VAche)

265 Glenn Beck is a stupid douche. Always has been, always will be.

Posted by: packsoldier at January 11, 2014 12:32 PM (6FxSD)

266 Um, can I get an example of a meaningful death ? (Good Friday excluded )

Posted by: seamrog at January 11, 2014 01:11 PM (sHJDI)

267 With very few exceptions, and I cannot think of any since 1776, wars are started by politicians and bankers and fought by someone else's children. In that context, they are all senseless.

Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood (Mentioned in Despatches) at January 11, 2014 01:18 PM (G7Yr9)

268 @266 VT 8 attacked the Japanese carriers at Midway as ordered, despite not having fighter escort. They were all shot down, with only one man surviving. By making an unescorted torpedo run at the ships, they drew enemy fighters down to a few hundred feet of sea level, and unable to fight off a subsequent, high-altitude dive bomber attack that hit three Japanese carriers.

Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 11, 2014 01:18 PM (prEM5)

269 I would say senseless is a synonym for meaningless.

Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 11, 2014 01:18 PM (prEM5)

270 P.S. F ____ Jake Tapper and all other media scum. TV news is by idiots, for idiots, and largely about idiots.

Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood (Mentioned in Despatches) at January 11, 2014 01:20 PM (G7Yr9)

271 Why is giving Jake Tapper giving his opinion on the war on Afghanistan in the first place? He's a journalist. He's editorializing here. He was there to interview them two, not to spout off how senseless the war was?

Posted by: TAO at January 11, 2014 01:22 PM (HGQES)

272 I don't blame Luttrell at all for his reaction. He watched his friends fight and die at his side, only to come back here and have people like Tapper saying their deaths were senseless.

I know Tapper has done some decent reporting on the War on Terror, but that doesn't excuse what he said here.

Posted by: Chris at January 11, 2014 01:23 PM (ApnMt)

273 271 Why is giving Jake Tapper giving his opinion on the war on Afghanistan in the first place? He's a journalist. He's editorializing here. He was there to interview them two, not to spout off how senseless the war was? Posted by: TAO at January 11, 2014 05:22 PM (HGQES) Because he's not as great of a journalist as he and his ball lickers make him out to be.

Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 11, 2014 01:25 PM (Qev5V)

274 266 seamrog at January 11, 2014 05:11 PM (sHJDI)

Sure...

http://youtu.be/BfKm0XXfiis

Chernobyl

Go to ~ 5 minutes...

They saved about 100,000 people from radiation poisoning....

watch them dive in and know they were dead.

They volunteered because they loved humanity, in a lot of ways a lot like people who soldier and learn to do bad things to help their nation.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 01:27 PM (TE35l)

275 273 Plaintiff Pug at January 11, 2014 05:25 PM (Qev5V)

It's what the industry has devolved to, Tapper at least knows where his ethics are kept even if they are not always used. We go to war(sadly) with the media we have not the media we want.

The poster above who said to give him some heat for pavlovian corrections was right IMHO.

Of course, I would mete out a lot of correctin' if I could.

Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 11, 2014 01:30 PM (TE35l)

276 274 Sven good example.

Posted by: seamrog at January 11, 2014 01:50 PM (sHJDI)

277 Does anyone really believe either of these two wars had any point? I would have thought we would have wished up by now, And beck is a total idiot

Posted by: Mike at January 11, 2014 02:04 PM (9hxA+)

278 Nearly everything in Afghanistan since around early 2002 has been a waste of U.S. lives, money, and liberty.

Posted by: MlR at January 11, 2014 06:13 PM (evbjR)

279 Luttrell's buddies deaths were senseless. all the deaths in Iraq were senseless, wasted, and as soon as obama abandons afghanistan, all those deaths will be rendered senseless and wasted.  

     Luttrell and everyone that sacrificed anything for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were betrayed by the politicians, but more importantly by the American voter who put free contraception or a million other things before any consideration of who would best execute the wars to make the sacrifices mean something. 
        
          they dont fight for liberty at home. American's lives have arguably gotten worse with the fighting, as we sink further and further into the fascist spy state east germany could only dream of.  No one cares what happens in afghanistan, except to the degree that it affects their ebt card, or medicare, or social security.

   even this tete a tete is farcical in the attention it commands vs its importantance.  Its a movie promotion interview.... why isnt this Luttrell before some congressional oversight trying to effect positive change? Instead he feels his honor or usefulness or something is being attacked.


    

Posted by: plithy at January 12, 2014 06:05 AM (Ect5L)

280 #261    "It is a proud thing to face an impossible fight and to yet strive to win it."


     An impossible fight is the spartans against the persians at the hot gates, or the british air battle against the germans.   It is the defender against a more powerful aggressor.

   It is not a superpower picking day missions against mountain sheep herders.

   You could argue that trying to turn Afghanistan into a productive peaceful sovereign is the impossible fight... and it would be a proud thing indeed if we could fight that fight and win it, but we are no where near executing properly to make that happen.

Posted by: plithy at January 12, 2014 06:16 AM (Ect5L)

281 Hey Drew - this is so far down on the list of comments that I doubt you'll read it, but........you said:

"What he was expressing is something I think a lot of people agree with, myself included...an ambivalence about the cost of the war in American dead and wounded in exchange for...what? As Tapper acknowledged in his question there were bad guys that needed killing but they were killed at the cost of a lot of good men and women. Has the 12+ year effort to turn Afghanistan into something other than a hell hole been worth the cost?"

As a Vietnam Veteran (class of '70) I believe the exact same sentiments could be expressed concerning the Vietnam War, with far more American Troops (58,000 KIA) and some 700,000 WIA over a shorter time period, but NO ONE ever asked US about that issue.  Was the 11 year effort to "defend" or turn South Vietnam into a democracy worth the cost?  Was the treatment of many Vietnam Veterans worth that cost?

Posted by: realwest at January 12, 2014 07:28 AM (30LIS)

282

231: Much more to it (and 4 people's name are on it):

 

But that doesnÂ’t mean the myriad questions stacking up are all political in nature, nor that those interested in answers about the Benghazi tragedy are motivated by partisan and nefarious aims.

from The Benghazi Drip-Drip-Drip by Jake Tapper Nov 1, 2012
http://tinyurl.com/as55buk

 

Posted by: livingproof at January 12, 2014 11:40 AM (eXzQH)

283 I think Luttrell said it right. He wasn't drafted. He chose to enlist. Then he chose BUDS school. These guys don't sign up to learn to be medics, clerks, cooks, or most any other vocational skill that can would be transferable to the private sector. They volunteer to be warriors. To kill the people they are told to kill, with a high risk they may be killed in the process. Tapper's question ought to be addressed to a DoD civilian or some general fighting the war with a fountain pen from the Pentagon. Not a guy who takes orders to kill our enemies.

Posted by: Scott at January 12, 2014 11:48 AM (EkSjb)

284 I rarely followed Tapper until his coverage of Beneghazi. He gained my attention as the only left of center reporter, outside of Woodward, that would criticize Obama and his actions taken over Beneghazi while the rest of the msm completely refused to do so. Remember the WH press meetings when he cornered the WH press secretary? Since then, I've marked him down as one of the few journalists that make an effort to act like a real reporter. That takes some intregrity during an era where the cost package may be your career. I may not agree with his political viewpoints but he gained some respect. So I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he had the hindsight reaction that conservatives and libertarians have also expressed. We may differ on whether Obama's actions destroyed any chance that we could have left the siutation as a success(my belief) but frustration over the huge sacrifices made and the end results is shared by many regardless of their support of the war. Tapper also reacts as someone who never experienced fighting in a war, and doesn't appear to understand a military mindset. I haven't either, but at least I have had the benefit of talking with military friends often. I can only hope I could act with similiar courage if called upon to fight in a large combat situation. In comparison of attitudes, we are in deep trouble if Tapper's reaction to facing a battle is widespread.

Posted by: I'd rather be surfin at January 12, 2014 04:00 PM (0ibSB)

285 Benghazi, darn it *blush*

Posted by: I'd rather be surfin at January 12, 2014 04:02 PM (0ibSB)

Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
266kb generated in CPU 0.1882, elapsed 0.4952 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.4132 seconds, 413 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Support





Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact

Change the At to "@" and the DOT to "."




Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Search Thingy



Archives

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 31422
  • Files: 372
  • Bytes: 822.7M
  • CPU Time: 38:15
  • Queries: 898521

Content

  • Posts: 22824
  • Comments: 5953260

Feeds


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0