Report: SEAL Who Shot Bin Laden Unemployed, Broke

[J.C. Bahr]

In regards to why Esquire?... perhaps they are the only ones that have been successful at rooting out the shooter to get his story?

[scapilot]

No, never whats it like?

I didn't say be stupid about it. But Thats a good point, no one in the military has ever been able to find a way to get into an easier job than what they are doing now. EVER. especially one that did something extraordinary like this one, in a tight community that looks after its own. frankly after years on ST6 any kind of stateside duty is going to be easier. Not piece of cake fall asleep drunk by 1600 easier, but easier.

I don't disagree but is he so different, special, and unique as to warrant special treatment? if he gets special treatment for killing UBL, how about the grunt medic that lost both limbs trying to save a soldier?

seeing as the big gist of the article is he won't get a pension and you need to do 20 years to get a pension and he is opting out of reserve duty. If he wants to stop at 16 and never pick up a weapon again thats fine... but you are knowingly opting out of that pension. The article makes it sound like he is some kind of moron, who either doesn't understand this, or that he should get special treatment. (always a popular choice)

We are all adults here. 20-16 = 4. This is the part where you tell me that no one in the military runs out the clock on their last few years ever, ever.

BTW did you read the article?

LOL. Did I read the article??? No, I fly through forums and speak out of turn on subjects that I know nothing about. Your medic in Iraq...he's going home with 100% disability for the rest of his life that he can count on until he dies. True, he doesn't have arms anymore, but he knows what's next for him. I didn't really interpret that this guy was flying off the handle like some degenerate about how he doesn't understand why the Navy won't support him anymore, I think he was merely stating the fact that the transition is hard, and there are a lot of unexpecteds. And yes, simple math does deduce that 20-16= 4. 4 X 365= 1460 days remaining...1200 of those he can expect to be away at the same rate he's on now. Tell me how when you see it like that, you blame the guy? People get tired of it. They get tired of the way that the government is running the country into the ground, they get tired of fighting for half-cloaked rights that they're not even entitled to, and they're tired of being gone all the time.

Not to say that some people don't fall into the smooth ride out the door with the twilight tour on some skate duty, but recently...sea and shore rotations got all hacked up to where (depending on your rate) you're guaranteed to spend X amount of time on sea duty before you can roll out. Used to have a couple of different factors depending on your time in service, rank..etc. These days it merely boils down to what the hell you do. For example. After the restructuring...my rate as an AO was slotted for five years sea / two years shore. Since that new policy dropped, I know of three friends who have had their shore duty terminated early...one of them, nine months early so that they could fill a billet in a sea going command. But bet your dollar, that they're not yanking anyone out of a sea duty billet early to fill sandals in Key West. And as a spec ops role, those guys have no say so. They're gone, and they're gone some more, and most of the time, they're even gone while they're gone. That takes a toll on people. They get to the point where the negative outweighs everything, because there's certainly no positive left at all.

Back to my original topic as far as "riding out the end of your career" If you're needed some where, or your time frame doesn't fall to where you get skate duty for the last time in your career...then you can be up to and on deployment just days before your retirement. Happens all the time, and you don't have much say so in it. You go where you're ordered to go, and that's that. In regards to you stating that once you get into ST6 that you're there til' death...most of the guys who go that route ARE there until it's time to go home. The selection process to be apart of that group is so elite that once you're in, they want you to continue to recycle your skills and knowledge, either on an instructional level, or by deploying in that capability. They're no different than any other role in the military in that "It's cheaper to keep you than to to train someone new."

[82Whitey51]

No body is "Riding Out the End of Their Career" in todays military.

My last command was a "Scietific Research and Development" squadron...I deployed twice more to Iraq with them while on "Shore Duty".

You have guys in all Rates who rotate to Shore Duty and a few months into it get sent IA...IA? What started out as a "Hey, anyone wanna volunteer to go help out an Army unit?" 10 years ago, has turned into part of your Navy career path!

"What, you haven't gone IA yet? how do you expect to put on Chief?!"

"Well, Chief, no I haven't gone 'IA' but I just finished up three deployments to CENTCOM over the last 4 years..."

"Yeah but that's not going on an IA..."

Haaaaaaaa

"IA...Because ARMY STRONG Wasn't Strong Enough"

Edited February 13, 2013 by 82Whitey51

[Bigasshammm]

In regards to why Esquire?... perhaps they are the only ones that have been successful at rooting out the shooter to get his story?

They are the ones who paid him the most money.

Nobody does a story for free.

I'm sure he has quite the lump sum now and will continue to rake in money generated by this sob story.

[11bee]

They are the ones who paid him the most money.

Nobody does a story for free.

I'm sure he has quite the lump sum now and will continue to rake in money generated by this sob story.

I'm not going to speak on his pension / medical issues but the one thing "the shooter" will never have to worry about is money. If he elects to cash in to the fullest extent, he will make millions on book rights, interviews, etc, etc. Not to mention all the side gigs that would come his way as a consultant, doing endorsements, etc. The money to be made would vastly offset what he would get if he stuck around to get his 20 and then retired w/ full pension.

How much do you think the ex-SEAL who penned "No Easy Day" made on that one single book? And he wasn't even the guy that pulled the trigger. That being said, nothing in this article seems right. Has to be much more going on with this guy.

[TaiidanTomcat]

People get tired of it. They get tired of the way that the government is running the country into the ground, they get tired of fighting for half-cloaked rights that they're not even entitled to, and they're tired of being gone all the time.

Again though, thats his call. If he wanst to roll the dice with the VA its up to him.

Not to say that some people don't fall into the smooth ride out the door with the twilight tour on some skate duty,

Thank you, I would also point out that just about any job in the USN is considered easier compared to ST6, but its all relative.

they want you to continue to recycle your skills and knowledge, either on an instructional level,

Remember me suggesting Coronado? and you asked if I had watched too much Top Gun?

They are the ones who paid him the most money.

Nobody does a story for free.

FTFA page 6:

But even with the SEALs' strong history of institutional modesty,

Other than the books, movies, press releases, anonymous stories, recruiting commercials, and PR campaigns from leadership, its like no even knows these guys exist.

[Scooby]

I think this is a different set of circumstances and I partially side with the Navy Seal. I know I had to serve 20 years but this guy took down Bin Laden. I am sure there are more details to this story that we are not privy to, but I would be willing to bet a lot of bad people are trying to track him down now and he is likely fearful of them finding his family.

Loose lips will reveal his identity and he will then require a new identity. He likely left the military to watch over his family more closely.

Bin Laden was #1 on our hit list, he is likely #1 on Al Qaeda's hit list. There has never been another example of this in our history. He is in a unique position/dilemna.

[11bee]

I think this is a different set of circumstances and I partially side with the Navy Seal. I know I had to serve 20 years but this guy took down Bin Laden. I am sure there are more details to this story that we are not privy to, but I would be willing to bet a lot of bad people are trying to track him down now and he is likely fearful of them finding his family.

Loose lips will reveal his identity and he will then require a new identity. He likely left the military to watch over his family more closely.

Bin Laden was #1 on our hit list, he is likely #1 on Al Qaeda's hit list. There has never been another example of this in our history. He is in a unique position/dilemna.

If I were trying to keep a low profile to protect myself and my family, I think the first thing I would do would be to stay out of the media. That's just me though.....

Regardless, this guy is somewhat unique in the big scheme of things. I would think that the government might have offered to put him in something similar to the Witness Protection Program.

[TaiidanTomcat]

If I were trying to keep a low profile to protect myself and my family, I think the first thing I would do would be to stay out of the media. That's just me though.....

precisely. You know what else is odd, I would think this story would be captivating enough if it was just your "average" SEAL. But he identified his unit and his role in that unit...

Regardless, this guy is somewhat unique in the big scheme of things. I would think that the government might have offered to put him in something similar to the Witness Protection Program.

They did he refused it.Seeing as Al Queda claims every SEAL they kill post UBL is team 6 and was on the raid, I wonder if he is in any more danger than other SEALs or even other Spec Ops personnel in general. Thats not me trying to say he is not in danger, but that a lot of tier 1 personnel are in equal danger as well. or say this fellow:

Edited February 13, 2013 by TaiidanTomcat

[ChernayaAkula]

Okay, lemme get this straight: The general consensus seems to be that the system does treat its veterans shoddily. Now someone involved in a high-profile mission (perhaps THE high-profile mission of the last couple of decades) speaks out against that. And instead of some support for drawing attention to this unworthy treatment, he gets a "Suck it up, buttercup, we all have to go through this".

Seriously? :blink:

[11bee]

Okay, lemme get this straight: The general consensus seems to be that the system does treat its veterans shoddily. Now someone involved in a high-profile mission (perhaps THE high-profile mission of the last couple of decades) speaks out against that. And instead of some support for drawing attention to this unworthy treatment, he gets a "Suck it up, buttercup, we all have to go through this".

Seriously? :blink:/>

I think you are mistaken. Not sure how the German military system works but the US military doesn't offer cradle to grave welfare for it members. They don't guarantee that you will get a high paying job when you separate from the service (despite what some recruiters might tell their 18 year old prospects). Depending on your length of service, medical condition, etc, you may be entitled to a pension, additional medical care and a multitude of other benefits but it all is spelled out in detail on your enlistment contract. The system isn't perfect but it isn't as broken as the article portrays.

I don't think anyone is mocking this guy, he should be commended for his service (as should every single service member who has deployed over the last decade +). They're only saying that there may be a bit more to the story than what was presented in the Esquire article.

[FM-Whip]

Sorry, but I have to agree with the rest of the posts. I left the military before 20, and nobody seems concerned that I don't have *ANY* (and I mean **zero**) benefits of any kind, including VA health benefits because I fell into the magic period between the end of Vietnam and the beginning of the new benefits in the early 1990s. Zip. No education benefit, no health benefit, no nothing. I don't cry about it (I wouldn't be caught dead in a VA hospital - or rather, I probably *would* be dead), and I paid for my education myself.

There was a post-Vietnam veteran benefits program, the VEAP, that at least covered educational benefits, but you had to contribute to it. This was from 1977 to 1985. Uncle Sugar matched two dollars for every dollar you put in out of your pay up to some sort of maximum. I also served in "the gap", and I used those benefits - they paid for two years of schooling. They weren't as generous as the Vietnam-era GI Bill benefits but they were there.

John Hairell (tpn18@yahoo.com)

[TaiidanTomcat]

My problem is that the guy who killed UBL (most directly) is somehow seen as a more tragic figure than hundreds of thousands of people that are going through the same thing... in some cases worse. Its a problem for everyone the whole system needs help, and it is a problem that is going to get more sharp as more people leave the service and enter into a very tenuous job market. PTSD, alcoholism, suicide, unemployment, radicalism, divorce, TBI, its going to get ugly-- this guy is one of the more famous and visible, however I have as much sympathy for him as anyone else.

What would be fair to him? Secret service detail? Free healthcare for life for him and his family? And if he is entitled to this, who else is as well? Was he on that raid alone?

How this man is in real life compared to the article could be widely different things, but the article is built to be sensational. He will have to wait in the same lines for his VA help, face the same problems, God knows how many people did critical missions that never made the headlines, and we aren't calling for special treatment for them.

I don't want special treatment for this veteran, I want special treatment for ALL veterans. the quality needs to go up for EVERYONE. 9 months for an appointment is not acceptable; whether you were the guy that fixed the stealth black hawks or whether you shot UBL in the skull.

Without delving too deeply into politics some people get money from the government by serving and risking their lives with unique skills and others get welfare for breathing. Its a mad world

The Shooter rather than go into hiding, would be an awesome spokesperson for veterans of the war on terror. he needs to go public.

Edited February 13, 2013 by TaiidanTomcat

[Aaronw]

All this guy has to do is get a Federal job and he starts with 16 years in (plus is almost guarunteed to be hired due to Veterans preference laws and a strong push from the administration to recruit veterans into Federal service). He could go be a letter carrier for the USPS for the next 9 years and walk away with a decent pension (25 years at age 50, or 30 years at any age).

I'm a little confused by the drama. It is not a good time for anyone to get a good job at the moment.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Aaronw

[Wayne S]

Okay, lemme get this straight: The general consensus seems to be that the system does treat its veterans shoddily. Now someone involved in a high-profile mission (perhaps THE high-profile mission of the last couple of decades) speaks out against that. And instead of some support for drawing attention to this unworthy treatment, he gets a "Suck it up, buttercup, we all have to go through this".

Seriously? :blink:/>/>

Reads to me like he was one of those guys who got their arses reamed out for that giving a gaming company information that the navy did not like.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Wayne S

[Chris D]

I've got to chime in on this one. I don't think this is a sob story by a Navy SEAL crying "boo-hoo for me". What he is saying is: this is the way it is, and the way it is is pretty poor. He's not using his fame to claim he's somehow better than every other veteran in his shoes; he's using his fame to highlight just how many veterans are in his shoes.

Did he know that you have to do 20 years to get a pension? Of course. But the point remains that in order to get any return on what you've given to the country you have to do 20 years of service. And for lots of people, 20 years is just too many. Maybe you're burned out, maybe your body is breaking down, maybe the constant moves and time away from home is destroying your family. Whatever the reason, "just doing the last few years" isn't possible for plenty of people. But civilian jobs let you take your IRA with you or offer different programs to get at the money you've contributed to retirement. The military just blanks it out if you fall short of 20 magic years.

Is it possible to get a disability pension through the VA? Certainly. But the average wait nationwide for a claim to be processed is currently over 7 months and in areas with lots of new veterans it is over 9. There's still bills to pay and injuries to take care of during that time.

And yeah, there's veterans preference on many jobs, but with most government agencies shrinking jobs, there are more veterans looking than agencies hiring. Getting a job in the private sector is hard since most veterans have never gone through the hiring process for a civilian job. Besides that, finding those jobs is difficult given the current state of affairs. It isn't like bases have career fairs where interested companies come in to attract servicemembers. Servicemembers typically are kept at a high optempo until the day they separate. There isn't exactly a lot of opportunity to get a second career worked out before they separate.

This article isn't about how this guy is special and should be treated better; it's about how if even this guy is getting a pretty raw deal, what's things like for the "regular" veterans?

Chris

[J.C. Bahr]

If I were trying to keep a low profile to protect myself and my family, I think the first thing I would do would be to stay out of the media. That's just me though.....

Oh I don't know... not keeping a low profile has worked pretty well for Sammy "The Bull" Gravano so far! :D/> In this case the limelight makes him a hot target that would absolutely REQUIRE the heaviest "who done it" scrutiny if something WERE to happen to him... so maybe these two could be on to something.

[scapilot]

Remember me suggesting Coronado? and you asked if I had watched too much Top Gun?

Unfortunately, I was referring to the fact that they recycle them as ST6 instructors, which means that they still stay with the group. Which is stationed in Va. Beach.

Which is a long way from Coronado.

[11bee]

Commander of all Naval Special Warfare units rebuts this guy's claim:

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/02/15/navy-seal-commander-rebuts-shooter-claim/

From the article:

"Concerning recent writing and reporting on 'The Shooter' and his alleged situation, this former SEAL made a deliberate and informed decision to leave the Navy several years short of retirement status," said Rear Admiral Sean Pybus, commander of the Naval Special Warfare Command.

"Months ahead of his separation, he was counseled on status and benefits and provided with options to continue his career until retirement eligible. Claims to the contrary in these matters are false.

If they leave the service, he said, there are a number of programs aimed at easing transition or address health issues.

The Department of Veterans Affairs also disputed the claim that "The Shooter" had no health care access from the moment he left active duty.

Also taking a shot at other ex-SEAL's who have decided to cash in through books, etc:

"I am very disappointed with the few people who use their SEAL cachet for self-serving purposes, particularly through falsehoods and certainly when the safety and security of themselves and their active-duty teammates and families are put at risk," Pybus said.

[TaiidanTomcat]

"I am very disappointed with the few people who use their SEAL cachet for self-serving purposes, particularly through falsehoods and certainly when the safety and security of themselves and their active-duty teammates and families are put at risk," Pybus said.

Ouch

[Hawk10]

I'm sorry, but I can't really work up too much sympathy for the guy. He volunteered for BUDs, He volunteered for teams and he got what he wanted - and as far as shooting OBL, that in my mind was the luck of the draw - He had a chance for the shot, took it and the rest is history. Congratulations and thanks, you did what you were trained and paid for!

As far as not getting any retirement, I don't know anybody who has re-enlisted after their first hitch in any U.S. military unit that didn't understand if you stayed healthy, you had to serve a minimum of 20 years in order to get retirement benefits (whether in the Regulars, Reserves or the National Guard - and any combination of the three as long as it adds up to 20 good years). And there are a lot of places on the civilian side that require you have to have a minimum of 20 years on the job before you can retire.

Anyway, I get the distinct feeling we are not getting the entire story on why he's out of the service. My feeling is that he made someone very mad (or at least very unhappy) and they went to work on him and he decided to pull the plug. (one of the first things I learned about any military unit is that they can't make you do something - but they sure as hell could make you wish had done it in the long run. Any of you older Army guys remember the push to buy US Savings Bonds back in the sixties?)

Edited February 19, 2013 by Hawk10

[Hawkeye's Hobbies]

There are several reasons why those serving leave active duty. First and foremost you serve the needs of the military, when the military determines you are excess, then they show you the door without a choice.

The armed forces are at this very moment offering early discharges to those with 2013/2014 normal separation dates as well as those who wish to apply to leave. If they don't get enough participation, then out some will go without a choice.

Reasons not to put in your full twenty can vary for a lot of reasons, including ones ability to climb the promotion ladder. If you're not going to see a promotion, then what's the point of staying with the odds against you anyway. If you're not achieving rank at the specific benchmarks in your career, then you'll be selected for separation as a non volunteer, so you might as well especially if they offer an incentive to leave early.

Yes, it is a choice to not to reenlist for another hitch. Many make the decision to leave after their first 4, 6 or 8 but is more the norm now that folks get out right up to their last four years. Mostly because they haven't filled the necessary squares to go all the way to 20 to collect that pension.

Speaking of pension and the benefits one is entitled to after retirement...they are not what they were 20 years ago. As more and more bases and facilities are closed and or reduced, access to those perks no longer exists. Take here in the upper mid west. For me to visit a real base with full amenities its an eight hour drive one way. Not worth the few dollars saved by shopping at the BX/PX. Not worth the long trip to see a doctor either...if you can get an appointment. 50% of ones base pay doesn't really do much for you either, unless you were a very senior NCO or Officer. You're going to have to work to support yourself. And the longer you wait, the older you get and less likely you'll find suitable employment. I'm not saying you won't but its tougher today than it once was.

I've known several who got out and languished, unable to adapt or just simply lacked the personal fortitude to do what it takes. It is a choice, and the harder decisions have the greater consequences...both good and bad. One thing they don't tell you, but some Vets will...if you enlist, pick a job that has options once you're out. Not many openings for many of the very specialized military occupations. If a Vet doesn't keep the work ethic instilled and demanded in the military, they won't do well out of it.

My decision to separate after 13 years was based on multiple reasons...career progression was one. Of the 1300 eligible for the next pay grade, the AF was only promoting 9-13 per cycle. Which meant if I didn't sew on the next stripe during my next enlistment I would be forced to separate. There was also a mandatory reduction of forces...early separation with bonuses to those who did so. Pending overseas assignment (long tour) to a base which was being closed with no discussion on where I would relocate to or where my family could live. Manning balancing...that is a redistribution of manning among the career fields. Those too full were forced into those which couldn't attract or keep people. Medical issues. Family. All were considerations that I had to weigh before getting out. For me separation was the best option and in the end far better than having stayed 20 to retire. My dad lives near me and he retired with 23...but he soon discovered even back then, those perks disappeared faster than his hair grew. Fortunately he and I both found work after the military.

[JasonW]

Interesting read:

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/02/21/obl-shooter-story-victim-narrative-unintended.html?ESRC=eb.nl

[11bee]

Interesting read:

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/02/21/obl-shooter-story-victim-narrative-unintended.html?ESRC=eb.nl

A Stars and Stripes item written by Megan McCloskey pointed out that Bronstein’s article left out basic facts regarding the Shooter’s benefits eligibility and quoted former VA official Brandon Friedman as saying, “Misinformation like this doesn’t help veterans. When one veteran hears in a high-profile story that another veteran was denied care, it makes him or her less likely to enroll in the VA system.â€

In turn, Esquire put out a statement claiming that they had omitted benefits details in the online version of the story and that those details had been reinserted.

Sounds like Esquire just wanted to put out a typical anti-military story and now has to do damage control when they got held accountable for a bunch of omissions / errors.

I like the fact that an editor at Esquire added the statement that the shooter was "screwed" by the military even though it wasn't in the original text. Gotta hype things up as much as possible in articles like this.

[JasonW]

Sounds like Esquire just wanted to put out a typical anti-military story and now has to do damage control when they got held accountable for a bunch of omissions / errors.

I like the fact that an editor at Esquire added the statement that the shooter was "screwed" by the military even though it wasn't in the original text. Gotta hype things up as much as possible in articles like this.

Pretty much. Gotta sell those magazines. Somehow, none of this surprises me.

Have to admit I've never really read/purchased or even really considered reading/purchasing Esquire magazine anyhow.