An online intervention …

I first blogg’d about Michael Yon five years ago, and like many of you have been following his work for quite awhile.

Along with a few other things, this Facebook quote from him left my puzzl’r puzzl’n,

Life was good before I went to Iraq. But after three friends were killed during the GWOT, and my growing mistrust for the media and for the US Government/Military, I quit traveling the world and went to war. The United States was in peril. I am American. Today, I do not trust McChrystal anymore than some people trust the New York Times, Obama or Bush. If McChrystal could be trusted, I would go back to my better life. McChrystal is a great killer but this war is above his head. He must be watched..

The folks at BLACKFIVE, Chuck, Kanani, LaughingWolf, YouServed, and others are voicing their concern – one that Greyhawk seemed to get a sniff of early last month.

Every man has to find his own way in life – but sometimes it is helpful to check around and grab hold of an external reference point. Anyone who has gone through the helo-dunker emergency egress training knows what I am talking about.

When everything and everyone around you all of a sudden seems out of kilter and swirling in chaos – it might be helpful to ponder if the problem isn’t what is around you – but just you.

The war will go on – the story will continue to be told – but everyone needs some time away. 6-months, 12-months — some time to clear the mind and reset perspective. Just a thought


Posted by CDRSalamander in Foreign Policy

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • YNSN

    When the bridge just outside base here was hit, Mr. Yon kinda lept before he looked. He said it was the Canadian’s fault because they were too busy playing/watching hockey (the Canadian’s have a hockey rink, of sorts here).

    He is a great writer and photographer. But, he lets his emotions get into his reporting to much. It also seems that the Commander of TF KANDAHAR had a negligent discharge of his weapon. Mr. Yon is nailing him right now, not letting the issue die. When he focuses on someone for doing something he feels is egregious, he locks on with blinders on.

    Honestly, he needs a vacation, I think. Everyone does from time to time. He seems really spun up.

  • wow guy. if i ever go wrong in your eyes CDR Salamander just send me a freakin e-mail.

    this thing has exploded and looks like a well time political hit piece.

    Michael Yon deserves better than this. if this is what you do to friends then i can’t wait to see and record what you do to enemies. this ain’t right!@!

  • Solomon,

    To ignore someone who is damaging himself is to show contempt and a lack of caring.

    I would hope that if I lost perspective, those who wished me well would try to tell me.

    There is nothing political about this. This is not a hit piece. This is an intervention.

  • Byron

    Solomon, everyone, including Salamander, who has discussed this has not said anything ill of him. Instead everyone respects him immensely and for his own good wishes he’d just get a bit of breathing space before his mission eats him alive. I found him years ago, back when I first found the milblogs, and I’ve had a lot of respect for what he’s doing. Everything that the CDR has said, and the rest of the Milblog I am in total agreement with. This in no way diminishes my respect for him.

  • you say that you respect Michael? then why the coordinated articles across many popular blogs. that’s not a wakeup call that’s a career damaging move. if you have someone that is messing up and you want to save them, you don’t do it publicly, you pull them in a room—you talk to them—beat them upside the head …whatever, I don’t care—-but you don’t take it public.

    and why this call to pull back? because he’s saying out loud what many line troops are saying quietly?

    remember the ultra restrictive Rules of Engagement? remember the endless apologies that are coming out of NATO headquarters??? remember MARSOC getting kicked out of Afghanistan for doing there jobs?

    alot of people are wondering what McChrystal’s game is. and lets not even get started on the quality of Generalship during this war.

    Byron. question. have you never wondered, or talked to your friends about the quality of senior leadership? if you haven’t then you’re seeing and have seen a different war than I have.

    Yon is asking the right questions…You all are right to attempt to pull him back…this method sucks though. Next time find a better way guys.

  • Solomon,

    As the Phibian says, this is not an attack.

    Also, it’s not the first step. Many who know Mr. Yon quite well had one-on-one discussions and private emails and phone calls.

    We are not saying that he is wrong to criticize military leadership. We are saying that when you step back and take a look at everything that has happened recently, you see a pattern.

  • RickWilmes

    Michael Yon brings up a good point about McChrystal’s honesty.  In fact,
    McChrystal touches on this issue during a Senate hearing concerning the
    coverup surrounding Pat Tillman’s death.

    “I was a part of that, and I apologize for it,” Army Lt. Gen. Stanley
    McChrystal told a Senate hearing.

    “There is nothing we can do to automatically restore the trust which was
    the second casualty,” McChrystal said.

    Jon Krakauer discusses McChrystal’s involvement in his book, Where Men
    Win Glory: The Odyssey of Pat Tillman(p. 298-299)


    “Because only a handful of people in Washington were informed that
    Tillman had actually been killed by friendly fire, in the first days
    following the tragedy General McChrystal had begun to worry that
    speechwriters at the White House and the Pentagon might inadvertently
    script something that, if spoken by President Bush or a high-ranking
    administration official, would expose them as liars should the truth
    about Tillman happen to leak out.  McChrystal’s concerns became more
    acute on April 28 when an e-mail sent from the White House speechwriter
    John Currin to Rumsfeld’s office indicated that the president would be
    talking about Tillman on May 1 at the annual White House Correspondents’
    Association dinner.

    To forestall any potential gaffes, on April 29 McChrystal e-mailed a
    high-priority personal memo (known as a “Personal For” memo, or simply a
    “P4”) to General John Abizaid, the CENTCOM commander; General Bryan
    Brown, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOC); and
    Lieutenant General Kensinger, commander of the U.S. Army Special
    Operations Command (USASOC).

    “Sir, in the aftermath of Corporal(Tillman was posthumously promoted to
    the rank of corporal.) Patrick Tillman’s untimely yet heroic death in
    Afghanistan on 22 April 04,” McChrystal stated,

    it is anticipated that a 15-6 investigation nearing completion will find
    that it is highly possible that Corporal Tillman was killed by friendly
    fire.  This potential finding is exacerbated by the unconfirmed but
    suspected reports that POTUS [the president of the United States] and
    the Secretary of the Army might include comments about Corporal
    Tillman’s heroism and his approved Silver Star medal in speeches
    currently prepared…. I felt that it was essential that you received
    this information as soon as we detected it in order to preclude any
    unknowing statements by our country’s leaders which might cause public
    embarrassment if the circumstances of Corporal Tillman’s death become

    As it turned out, Kensinger had learned on April 23 that fratricide was
    definitely the cause of death, and it’s likely that Abizaid and Brown
    already knew as well.  The real intent of McChrystal’s P4 was to alert
    his superiors that someone needed to warn President Bush and Secretary
    Les Brownlee that the 15-6 would confirm Tillman’s death by friendly
    fire, which increased the likelihood that the truth might eventually be
    exposed one day.  The president and the secretary therefore needed to be
    especially mindful of what they said about Tillman when making public

    In the speech Bush gave at the correspondents’ dinner two days later, he
    lauded Tillman for his courage and sacrifice, but pointedly made no
    mention of how he died, indicating that McChrystal’s memo had been read
    and heeded by the president and/or his advisers.  Later, Abizaid,
    Kensinger, and the White House would all deny receiving McChrystal’s
    memo or knowing at the time that Tillman’s death was a fratricide.”


    And this is what Krakauer has to say about McChrystal’s explanation
    concerning the reasoning behind awarding Tillman the Silver Star.


    “MR. KRAKAUER: After Tillman died, the most important thing to know is
    that within–instantly, within 24 hours certainly, everybody on the
    ground, everyone intimately involved knew it was friendly fire.

    There’s never any doubt it was friendly fire. McChrystal was told within
    24 hours it was friendly fire. Also, immediately they started this
    paperwork to give Tillman a Silver Star. And the Silver Star ended up
    being at the center of the cover-up. So McChrystal–Tillman faced this
    devastating fire from his own guys, and he tried to protect a young
    private by exposing himself to this, this fire. That’s why he was killed
    and the private wasn’t. Without friendly fire there’s no valor, there’s
    no Silver Star. There was no enemy fire, yet McChrystal authored, he
    closely supervised over a number of days this fraudulent medal
    recommendation that talked about devastating enemy fire.

    GREGORY: And that’s the important piece of it. And, and he actually
    testified earlier this year before the Senate, and this is what he said
    about it.

    (Videotape, June 2, 2009)
    LT. GEN. STANLEY MCCHRYSTAL: Now, what happens, in retrospect, is–and I
    would do this differently if I had the chance again–in retrospect they
    look contradictory, because we sent a Silver Star that was not
    well-written. And although I went through the process, I will tell you
    now I didn’t review the citation well enough to capture–or I didn’t
    catch that if you read it you could imply that it was not friendly fire.

    (End videotape)
    GREGORY: Even those who were critical of him and the Army say they don’t
    think he willfully deceived anyone.
    MR. KRAKAUER: That’s correct. He, he just said now he didn’t read this
    hugely important document about the most famous soldier in the military.
    He didn’t read it carefully enough to notice that it talked about enemy
    fire instead of friendly fire? That’s preposterous. That, that’s not

  • YNSN

    No he is not. Mr. Yon actually is not asking any questions in regards to the ISAF Commanders performance. He is just making extreme accusations and focusing on single individuals out here.

    And no, not one Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine that I’ve talked to of any rank is really questioning any decisions, except loosing Burger King and Pizza Hut, and only then it is not a serious question.

    Look at what he said on facebook today: “Why is McChrystal unfit to run this war? He will show you in time.”

    His gut feeling? It counts for many things. But, when you have a cult like following, it becomes dangerous. When I say cult like following, I am not exaggerating.

    How important is it in war coverage to cover a negligent discharge by a General Officer? Yes, it was wrong and he must be held accountable. But, you do not need to crucify the guy when he already put himself in for investigation.

    How do you think it makes me feel when I read that my CG out here is a looser and I am not told why… It just is, give it time.
    That’s reckless and irresponsible, and can have a dramatic effect on troop morale. Mind you, he never said any of this before he was told he was going to be de-embedded in June.

    Lastly, under McChrystal we have seen the largest logistical operation since WWII. Units have been deployed to IRQ and then mid-tour redeployed to AFG. Entire FOBs worth of material have been trucked from IRQ to AFG. That is what you really have to judge him by. The main event hasn’t even started yet.

    Mr. Yon is an incredible reporter, who has done brilliant work. But, something has changed since I last spoke with him (about 6 weeks ago). It really, really seems like he needs some head space, downtime, R&R. He is too quick to jump onto facebook and put his feelings on there.

    Facebook while deployed is a dangerous thing. Not in terms of OPSEC. But, in terms of me saying something not meant for mass consumption. It is good that our families are far from it. They do not need to know what runs through our heads, and I do not need to post every emotional impulse I might have. I slip up at times. But, I always make sure not to mention when we’ve been attacked, because I do not need to put that emotional weight onto those who do not serve. Mr. Yon seems to not have the same discretion in putting his emotions out there. He is a journalist so he needs to write. But, I am not sure he notices what the emotional subtext of his facebook postings is. I don’t think anyone who hasn’t been there on facebook going through a deployment themselves can notice this either.

    He himself is probably too locked into his mission to notice how he is acting and what emotions he is going through. Most troops don’t and he’s been deployed longer than most.

  • How about you concentrate on the trigger puller issues YNSN. What about the ROE’s?

    Why can’t we call in artillery to nullify sniper hides? Why do we have to knock and wait before we can clear a building? Why are American lives less precious than Afghan’s?

    You want to get real, then we can talk about leadership. Until then save me your praise for a logistics effort that is unchallenged by enemy forces (for the large part). Save me your consternation about not being able to swill down another burger.

    I disagree with your position, you disagree with mine but the need to post ANOTHER long diatribe of your issues with YON is telling.

  • Solomon:
    How about treating the enlisted guy actually deployed to the ‘Stan with a little more argumentation and a little less aggro?

  • Solomon:

    Watch you tone.

  • Taking a break from writing about subjects they are passionate about and have loyal readers for is always easier for the readers than it is the writer.

    Speaking from the POV of someone with a bit of ongoing personal experience.

  • Admin

    What in my tone bears watching?

    How am I writing any more aggressively than any other person on this board?


  • RickWilmes

    In one of the ‘intervention’ blogs, the following quote has been scrutinized.

    “If a writer wants to make money, he should avoid truth and tell people what they want to hear.”–Michael Yon

    How is this different from Alfred Thayer Mahan writing for money?


    “The practical beauty of the subordination method was that the use of a few carefully selected facts, and their careful grouping around a “ruling thought,” permitted speed of writing and required no great knowledge of history.  It was a technique perfectly suited to Mahan, who became a historian at the age of fifty and always felt that he had to write swiftly and write for money. (Alfred Thayer Mahan:The Man and His Letters, Robert Seager II, p. 433)

  • Michael Antoniewicz II

    An interesting tidbit in the ‘Does Michael Yon know what he’s talking about’ thread.!/posted.php?id=207730000664&share_id=119463718091766&comments=1#s119463718091766

    “When I reported in March that Brigadier General Daniel Menard is incompetent and should be fired, it caused an uproar and much irresponsible press. They called me incompetent for calling the ball where it landed. Please examine the instant replay. It’s all on the record.

    This just in: BG Menard is facing court martial.

    I had to stand alone to make those claims and took heavy fire for it.

    I stand alone saying same about General McChrystal.

    This is clear as day: General Stanley McChrystal will lose this war.”

  • Michael Antoniewicz II

    The next interesting tidbit in the ‘Does Michael Yon know what he’s talking about’ thread.

    “Brigadier General Daniel Menard pleads guilty

    The paragraph quoted below is consistent with what I was originally told, but did not release, in regard to the chief of defence staff being present during the shooting.

    After my inquiries regarding a helicopter, Canadian forces responded on 18 April:

    Mr Yon,

    BGen Menard initiated the investigation on 26 March. No
    personnel were injured and no equipment was damaged in the incident. I can also
    confirm that the incident took place on KAF, not in a helicopter.


    We now know that a helicopter was involved but no confirmation that the shooting happened while Menard was climbing aboard or while inside.

    Not mentioned in today’s stories (that I have seen) is that I was told the chief of defence staff was nearly hit and the rounds were shot inside the helicopter. This does not mean the helicopter was hit; doors are normally open until just before takeoff (or even during flight), and so if the bullets were fired from inside the helicopter they could have gone through and missed the helicopter. My information was that the firing occurred just over the lap of Gen. Natynczyk. I do not know this to be true, but what I know is that much of the information previous this paragraph is now proven true, and none is refuted.

    From National Post:

    “Brig.-Gen. Menard, who told reporters he was trying to put the weapon
    on safety when he fired two rounds, was at Kandahar Airfield preparing
    to board a helicopter with chief of defence staff Gen. Walt Natynczyk
    at the time of the March 25 incident.”

    All of this would have been irrelevant to me had Menard not allowed the Tarnak River Bridge to be blown up on 1 March, and the subsequent attacks on my integrity during the cover-up of the bridge bombing. A U.S. soldier was killed. The real negligence was in allowing a bomb to get onto a strategic bridge about 3.5 miles from Menard’s office. This caused many operations to standstill, and left Ian Gelig dead.

    It’s important to note that I was not tracking down Menard after I published “The Bridge.” After my disembed by General McChrystal’s staff, and my flight back to KAF, Canadians saw me at KAF and offered the information on Menard. I might have spent less than an hour looking into the negligent discharge. Menard realized I knew/suspected and he went public. Some people have said I went public with a rumor, while in fact one morning I inquired to his office and that afternoon he went public.

    For me, it’s all about the Tarnak River Bridge and the coverup.

    Oddly, I never would have discovered the negligent discharge or would have had (or taken) an hour to investigate if General McChrystal’s staff had left me alone in the field.”

  • Benson

    Frankly, I trust Yon more than I trust McChrystal at this point.

    The man who took part in the cover-up of Tillman’s death has lost quite a bit of credibility. In fact, McChrystal admitted as much — years later — before the Senate.

    Yon, meanwhile, was right about Iraq. He was right about Afghanistan. He was right about Petraeus. He was right about Menard.

    And I suspect he’s right about McChrystal.

    “How am I writing any more aggressively than any other person on this board?”

    No, but you’re expressing dissent. Which is evidently worthy of monitoring.

  • Ken Johnson

    This is vulgar. It’s not a real discussion; it’s a tarring, in absentia, followed by a cacophony of voices shouting down the lone dissenter. And then “admin” adds insult, like a bouncer throwing out the guy who’s getting the beat-down.

    What’s telling is that you (and the many vocal sycophants buzzing around it) deign to address the Yon issue at all. What’s disgusting is that it’s cloaked in the guise of caring about Yon.

    The most laughable part (so far) is that Yon is “focusing on single individuals”. He’s calling out not cooks and truck drivers, but senior leaders, the “individuals” responsible for personnel and operations. It’s called “command”, and they’re “commanders.”

    From here, it looks like Yon started asking hard questions, shining lights where senior commanders would prefer shadow, and was then summarily dis-embedded. If that doesn’t look retributive, I don’t know what does.

  • If Michael Yon got off his self-righteous high horse for a second or two, he might realise that a disciplinary hearing is mandatory in all the land forces of the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. BGEN Menard’s court-martial is a required process to determine cause and attribute fault if fault exists…it is NOT as YON seems to be triumphantly heralding an indication of guilt or blame: that will be determined by the officers sitting ont eh court-martial board. Perhaps if Yon had been in the Army a little longer than 4 years (20+ years ago)and achieved any rank, then perhaps he might be a little less myopic and self-righteous…as has been pointed out in other blogs ad nauseam, his behaviour this year has been little more than that of an immature disgruntled and VERY junior soldier.

  • You are a fool

    “Every man has to find his own way in life – but sometimes it is helpful to check around and grab hold of an external reference point. Anyone who has gone through the helo-dunker emergency egress training knows what I am talking about.”

    Mixed metaphors and strained reasoning?

    I’ve been through helo-dunker egress training, and I never came out with that.

    Maybe you’re just not all that competent at press criticism. Maybe you should stay in your lane. Maybe being an admiral confers on you no special ability to understand reporter freedom or a hard earned perspective, but it certainly seems to afford you plenty of time to parse complex topics in the bland stupidity of self-help advice, helicopter safety training and dull linking to hapless bloggers.

  • Richard Hanlin

    Have any NATO lives been lost because of something Michael Yon has written? Have any operations been compromised? Has the enemy learned anything useful to them because of Michael Yon? What has he done wrong?

  • Bob T Guy

    SPJOniel said, “BGEN Menard’s court-martial is a required process to determine cause and attribute fault if fault exists…”

    Since when is court martial part of the investigative process? Investigation leads to charges, prosecution and defense are court martial methods. By the way… he was convicted and fined. He admitted his error and requested the investigation.

    So, Yon was right. What a bunch of whiners.

  • bacsi

    It is easy to see from the supporters of the post here that the shared talking point is to show respect while commiserating that it is unfortunate that Yon is a mental case as proven by holding such illogical opinions … how idiotic do you think citizens are to buy that nonsense? This is an old tired put-down tested and used extensively on Vietnam Vets – down to this very day: oh, the poor poor men, they gave their all but are so traumatized by their experience in that hateful war that now they are just wacko mental cases – best to ignore them.. time to move on.. nothing here… Why don’t you all think up something new such as addressing the issues Yon writes about, instead of just being another faceless member of the Retro on cue talking points columns? Probably because you can’t…

    Lt. Col. Allen West made the same criticism of McChrystal back in February: He isn’t fit to hold command. Why? Simply because he acts like a politician, thinks like a politician, and speaks like a politician: reference his idiotic comments in regards to the Ft. Hood massacre and multi-culturalism. The troops and the country need commanders that put the welfare of their men and their country ahead of political considerations.

    Here is a heads up for you all, there is a deep and growing desire among veterans to see Lt. Col. West not just a Congressman, but rather the Commander in Chief and then maybe all the politico-military types can take a hard look at retirement options. And maybe Yon could be his media advisor…

    just another nam a-team medic
    Disclaimer: yes, former SF just like Yon – De Oppresso Liber – but haven’t read Yon’s blog since before he went to Afghanistan…

  • YAF,
    1. You’se funny! I guess the diver had to rescue you in the dunker, because with the dunker upside down and you’re wearing goggles – without an external reference point – you can’t get out – but maybe you are a very special person with a very special inner-ear and the spidey sense to make your way out. I bet they have your picture on the wall there as the only person to every successfully do that. I bet you never even touched the side at all – just perfectly swam through. Nothing but net!.
    2. Thank you for promoting me! I just thought I was a CDR (Ret.) I’ll take retired Admiral’s pay.

  • Buzz Adams

    I have followed Michael for a long time and contributed too. I joined his Facebook page and was surprised, so many posts were coming out daily from him. I was more surprised by the negative tone and political leanings of some of his posts.
    I had expected to find something similar to his website. The day to day workings of the troops in the field. This too was on his Facebook page, like the excellent piece about medical evacuations. I also appreciated his new camera work, but the commentary of his views on McCrystal and his staff seemed out of character. I worried they could damage morale and support for the mission. I commented about this on his Facebook page.

    I would hate to see Michael disappear from Afghanistan. I think he brings to us something missing from other news services, perspective. But, I can get all the negative views of the US military from the NYTimes and others. Michael, in my view, needs to get back to hard reporting and leave the political commentary to cable shows. It is enough to hear a General fired his rifle in a helicopter. Telling me this is a sign of incompetence is over the top. I’ll decide what I think about it. Similarly saying bombers got by the Canadian troops and blew up a key bridge is enough.

    Let’s not lynch Michael, we need him there. I believe the military is being thin skinned about this too. How about a sit down and say , if you report what you see, good, but unless your in the tents with the generals, don’t throw stones.

  • Bob,
    Though some commenters have brought it up, this post has nothing to do with Menard. Read the post.

  • Marco

    I don’t like the near simultaneous blasts from the milbloggers that promote similar themes. Smells of collusion to me. Was that coordinated effort to discredit Yon requested by anyone in Afg?

    Yon’s Dispatches are his reporting. His Facebook is his Facebook. Not the same.

  • Bob T Guy

    CDR Salamander noted that this post has nothing to do with Menard. That is incorrect. The thread has developed into a rather shallow discussion, beginning with the theme of an emotionally compromised embedded reporter, and evolving into accusations of cult leader, head hunter and liar, with the example of Menard incorrectly sputtered as an element of veracity.

    Ken has it right. The specious blather of the original poster and his cult have the trappings of underlying jealousy. This post… this thread, is a conglomeration of amateur over analysis. It seems to me that Mike Yon is just pissed off and popping off about it. So what.

    Quit your whining.

  • What rude manners … insulting your host.

    You need to read the post again. If you cannot tell the difference between posts and comments – then check your meds.

  • bacsi

    Correction: My comment a day or so ago attributing statements by Lt. Col. West against Gen. McChrystal was wrong. Col. West was speaking about Gen. Casey. My apologies to Gen. McChrystal and Col. West in this regard.

    However, it doesn’t look like the good CDR posted it anyway…

  • Byron

    I’m in a cult? Who’d a thunk it… maybe enough Bombay will wash my brain clean. Your turn to buy, Phib 😉

  • Wild Goose

    I think what everyone overlooks is the reason Michael’s not a big fan of Menard is because, in his opinion, the Kandahar bridge was in Menard’s AO & he failed to secure it, and passed the blame when a VBIED damaged the bridge.

    The negligent discharge is merely a symptom of the problem.

  • jdam

    Critical comments are not allowed here–USNI and/or CDR Salamander delete them regularly. Anyone expecting a fair dialogue at USNI should realize this place is not an open space for reasonable back and forth. It is an echo chamber for people to hear what they want to hear and not for challenging commentary.

    Too bad CDR Salamander cant take the heat for using USNI as a platform to push an organized dishonest assault on Michael Yon.

  • Bob T Guy


    I’ve read the post, the responses, Michael Yon’s commentary, the international news stories supporting what he says is fact as fact, and taken into consideration his tenure and personal involvement in war reporting, and am convinced that Yon is correct and the author is wrong, and a whiner, as is Salamander…

  • RickWilmes

    Cdr. Salamander,

    How many times did you personally attempt to contact Mr. Yon concerning this issue?

    Did he respond?

  • Just for the record jdam – I have not deleted one single comment on this post. Not a one. Try again.

    This post has nothing to do with Menard. You are following some autobot – may want to read this post again.

  • Wild Goose

    @CDR Salamander: wasn’t commenting on the post, rather the comments on Menard. People are focusing on the negligent discharge & now the affair instead of the bridge.

    For what it’s worth, I do think that time away will help Yon; you can’t keep a bow at full tension all the time, or a guitar’s strings at maximum tightness.

  • Rick,
    I think we exchanged three emails as of late … but this isn’t about me either.

  • jdam

    CDR Salamander,

    I am glad to hear you claim it wasnt you deleting my posts. I guess it was someone else deleting them for you because I objected to your sad gangup with those other “milbloggers” on Yon. For the record, I think you made USNI look horrible with this “concern” drivel.

    Why didnt you answer Rick specifically about whether you contacted Yon before you published this? You said you have exchanged three emails of late but you didnt say whether you got in touch with him before you published this to express your “concern” so you could conduct your sad little “intervention.”

    CDR, why dont you go read what you have been writing on your website lately and think about it and then read this and think about why you wanted to be part of an effort to keep Michael Yon from continuing to report from Afghanistan. Maybe you should intervene to keep stuff like this from happening (the following is from Michael Yon’s facebook page on Memorial Day):

    Thank you to the veterans, families, loved ones and friends. And thank you for emails such as this:

    [Email from Michael Broderick to Michael Yon.]


    This morning I attended the Memorial Day program at L.A. Nat’l Cemetery. It was a moving ceremony called “Remembering the War Correspondent”. Jon Voight, Robert Davi and others read dispatches about our military dating back to the Civil War. Powers Boothe read your February 18th dispatch, “Adam Ray”. He became emotional and had to pause a few times to collect himself. Many in the crowd were visibly moved by your words. I was a proper tribute to SGT Ray…and to you.

    Thanks for doing what you do.



  • jdam

    Maybe if you and your crew get your way, CDR, and Michael Yon no longer reports from Afghanistan, we wouldnt be bothered by his egotistical self centered garbage:

    Boy, we would all be better off then, wouldnt we?

  • RickWilmes

    Cdr. Salamander,

    I never said this was about you. It is about identifying the truth. I have already shown that Gen. McChrystal’s credibility is in question.

    My focus now is on the methods that were used for this “intervention.”

    My questions remain unanswered. Before this post was posted not as of late.

  • spool32

    Having read everything at blackfive about this, and everything on Yon’s site and his facebook page, and after watching events unfold… neither this post, nor the comments from supporters, make much sense really.

    I sense a concerted effort to cut someone from the herd of ‘milbloggers’. Not-so-surprisingly, the victim is the only guy criticizing the military leadership…

  • 1. Yon claims that he is not nor ever was a milblogger. I agree.
    2. “…the only guy criticizing the military leadership…” you don’t read my home blog much … or even here much either it seems.

    You should hang out more often.

  • jdam

    Still hard to believe you had the nerve to smear Yon in such a disgusting manner. I think you need to take a vacation, CDR, you seem a little unhinged.