Why Special Ops Reject Formalities and Embrace Gray‑Area Tactics

The discussion begins with a chart illustrating the prevalence of violence, defined as being in a physical fight or deliberately hitting someone in the past five years, across different IQ standard deviations. The chart shows a linear decrease in violent behavior as IQ increases. For individuals with an IQ between 70 and 79, the prevalence is around 11.4%, dropping to 7.9% for those with an IQ between 80 and 89. At an IQ of 100, the prevalence is approximately 10%. This trend continues downwards, with 5.2% for IQs between 110 and 119, and 2.9% for IQs between 120 and 129.

A tweet is then referenced, stating that the percentage of individuals with 130+ IQ who enjoy both books and bar fights is "incredibly small," which is why it's difficult to mass-produce elite special operators for the military. The speaker acknowledges this observation, humorously noting that while he doesn't have a 130 IQ, he does enjoy both reading and physical altercations.

Special Operations Culture and Constraints

The conversation shifts to the culture within special operations. The speaker emphasizes that special operations personnel are often more constrained than one might imagine. He describes his ideal special operations guys as not conforming to typical military stereotypes: no flat-top haircuts, no bloused boots, no "sir" or saluting. While they are capable of these formalities, the nature of their job is "filthy," and such rituals are seen as unnecessary "pump and circumstance" that don't contribute to the outcome.

These formalities, like clean shaves and no tattoos, are often used as punishment. This leads to a common sentiment among service members that upon leaving the military, they grow beards and let their hair grow out, expressing a desire to break free from these constraints. This is likened to a "you can't tell me what to wear, mom" equivalent for special forces. The speaker humorously recalls a meme of green berets with their hands in their pockets, stating that this freedom was a motivation for him to go through selection.

Navigating the "Gray Area"

Special operations are described as operating in a "gray area," where everything is not black and white. The goal is to find a way to navigate this ambiguity to achieve the desired end state. As long as the "why" and the objective are clear, they will find a way to get there, even if it's not "pretty." The speaker states he would break every rule in the book if it put his team in a better position, even if it jeopardized his career or life.

However, this "lawlessness" is not to be misunderstood as a free-for-all. There is no murder, rape, or widespread drug use. The speaker notes that few special operations personnel transition to become police officers because the job is "too constraining." He personally dislikes the idea of being constrained and openly admits to operating in the gray area, which makes him unsuitable for roles like a police officer or FBI agent, despite respecting those professions.

The Incompatibility of Modern Morality and War

The discussion then touches on the perceived incompatibility of the modern world's moral standards with some of the "ugly parts of war." The speaker suggests that when the focus is solely on the outcome, the means to achieve that outcome can become debatable. While the ends are often not scrutinized, the means frequently are.

The speaker reflects on his military career, stating he has never witnessed anything he would consider "morally questionable" for a civilian profession like a cop, fireman, or school teacher. Everything has always been "above board." However, he admits there are moments of intense frustration where one feels the urge to act outside conventional rules.

He describes a profound internal conflict when faced with individuals known to be "bad guys" but who cannot be dealt with decisively due to systemic constraints. He recounts seeing and knowing things, particularly concerning the abuse of children, that are so disgusting that if he were a tourist without the military's flag on his arm, he would kill the perpetrator. The flag, representing his duty and constraints, prevents him from acting on this righteous anger, leading to resentment towards the very system he serves.

This systemic constraint, especially when fueled by righteous anger and the loss of friends (like in the Extortion 17 incident where an entire troop was killed), is described as incredibly difficult. He gives an example of apprehending a known bad guy who is not currently committing a crime, forcing them to be handcuffed and released after a short detention, knowing that if the roles were reversed, he would be killed. This perceived unfairness is a source of frustration.

The Osama Bin Laden Raid and its Aftermath

The conversation moves to the fallout from Rob O'Neill's appearance on Andy's show, discussing the Osama Bin Laden raid. The speaker expresses his dislike for the public discussion of the raid, wishing it had remained a secret. He knows Rob personally, as Rob was his first team leader and instrumental in his career.

He clarifies that he was not part of the raid team because he was too junior at the time. The raid involved cherry-picking the most experienced individuals (those with two or more deployments) from various teams, a departure from the usual practice of deploying entire teams or troops. This selection process, while effective, could potentially create animosity and resentment among those not chosen.

The speaker uses a sports analogy: taking the "Steph Curry or Kevin Durant" from each team to form an elite squad. While this maximizes individual talent, it can disrupt team cohesion, which is often crucial for performance. He notes that historically, missions were carried out by established teams or squadrons.

He recalls the secrecy surrounding the Bin Laden raid. They were told it was a "training mission," and he, being on his first cycle after selection, was assured he wasn't missing anything significant. However, about five days before the mission, the atmosphere changed. People were buying expensive items, believing they might not return. They initially thought the target was Gaddafi.

When President Obama announced the successful raid, the speaker was at home with his wife and a friend, screaming with pride and joy, never having been prouder in his life. The full details and aftermath of the raid then began to unfold.