TL:DR; Quick, entertaining read that is never boring and always moving quickly. However, questions about O’Neill embellishing or inventing stories prevented me from enjoying this book as much as I would have liked.
————————
This is an enjoyable book - it is unpretentious, interesting, fast-paced, and tells stories about being a SEAL operator that Americans love to hear. O’Neill doesn’t try to sound like some flawless demigod; he mentions personal shortcomings and issues within the SEALs, although never in enough detail to really tell you anything. It’s a very short read, so it’s not as if he didn’t have space to talk about his family or about actually living as a SEAL.
Generally speaking, I enjoyed this book. However, there is one major issue that really prevented me from loving it.
It is abundantly clear that O’Neill stretches the truth in parts, and even tells a few easily verifiable falsehoods in others. This, to me, is a huge issue in reviewing and recommending The Operator to others.
Throughout the book, O’Neill repeatedly recounts stories that center himself in a heroic role, seeing things no one else on his SEAL team sees or thinking of solutions that no one else does. Is this possible? Technically, sure. It’s possible for one person to always be better than everyone else. However, I highly doubt it. I found somewhat ridiculous that O’Neill’s stories (repeatedly) included entire SEAL teams all making the same mistake or missing the same critical sign, only for Rob to save the day over and over again. It undermined my trust for him as a reliable narrator.
Exaggeration is bad, but the blatant falsehoods were worse. For example, during the section of the book about the bin Laden raid (on p. 313 of the hardcover), O’Neill wrote the following:
“Just then, I looked up at one of the neighboring houses and noticed a guy standing there, tapping something into his cell phone. Turns out, he was the guy who’d become famous around the world for live-tweeting the raid, blaming it on the Pakistani military”.
This man is real - you can read about him all over the internet in global news sources. However, he lived more than a mile from the bin Laden compound, and was tweeting about hearing the sounds of helicopters, and later explosions. He wasn’t even close to the compound, let alone so close he could look down on the SEAL teams carrying out their op.
It seems as though O’Neill read or heard this story after the fact, thought it would add a moment of levity to a very intense story, and added it even though he didn’t actually witness it. It’s a small addition. It doesn’t change the outcome of the raid and it doesn’t make him look more impressive or heroic. So why on earth make it up?
There are plenty of similar instances - times where I looked up from what I was reading with the inescapable feeling that what I was reading was 80-90% true and 10-20% embellishment either for the sake of a better story or for a more glowing tale of personal heroism. O’Neill says all the right things (“it’s not about me” “my brothers - they’re the real heroes”, things like that), but at the end of the day he’s the one who chose to write a book and build a lucrative public speaking career out of this set of experiences. This alone should disqualify him.
I have no doubt that most of this book is accurate, and I did enjoy reading it. But I found it hard to escape the feeling that O’Neill has a bit of an embellishing streak as a narrator, and that the events contained in his book had been given a Hollywood sheen with himself as the main character.
There’s of course a chance that everything is spot-on and I’m unfairly criticizing a Navy SEAL who is telling an important story, but I doubt it.