U.S. Marines ordered to disarm for Sec. of Defense.

[monovillage]

Yes I know the headline says "asked" , but further down General Gurganus says it was an order. The fact is that someone in the chain of command didn't want U.S. Marines to be armed in the presence of the U.S. Secretary of Defense's presence and they were ordered to disarm.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ked-to-disarm-during-Leon-Panetta-speech.html

Less than a week after a US staff sergeant allegedly massacred 16 civilians in Kandahar, American soldiers were banned from bringing guns into a talk by Mr Panetta at a base in Helmand province.

Around 200 troops who had gathered in a tent at Camp Leatherneck were told "something had come to light" and asked abruptly to file outside and lay down their automatic rifles and 9mm pistols

It looks as if this administration has no trust in its Marines that it orders them to disarm when in their presence. I'm a little bit disgusted by this, what say you?

 

[HAL9000]

So what? I think that makes perfect sense they should carry weapons in the presence of someone important.

Common sense...

 

[woolfe9999]

Yes I know the headline says "asked" , but further down General Gurganus says it was an order. The fact is that someone in the chain of command didn't want U.S. Marines to be armed in the presence of the U.S. Secretary of Defense's presence and they were ordered to disarm.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ked-to-disarm-during-Leon-Panetta-speech.html



It looks as if this administration has no trust in its Marines that it orders them to disarm when in their presence. I'm a little bit disgusted by this, what say you?

The article says the order was given by the military, not by civilian authorities within the administration. This is a case of the military not trusting its own, not the administration not trusting the military. Actually, a more likely scenario is that this was the brass covering their own ass after recent violent incidents. On the odd 1 in 100,000 chance that some mentally unstable marine shoots the SoD on the general's watch, it's his ass over the fire.

- wolf

 

[monovillage]

The article says the order was given by the military, not by civilian authorities within the administration. This is a case of the military not trusting its own, not the administration not trusting the military. Actually, a more likely scenario is that this was the brass covering their own ass after recent violent incidents. On the odd 1 in 100,000 chance that some mentally unstable marine shoots the SoD on the general's watch, it's his ass over the fire.

- wolf

My bet is that his ass is going to be in the fire over this order. I'd like to know if it was suggested to him by someone else. I knew you were going to say that.

 

[woolfe9999]

Why do I keep seeing posts showing up in time inverted order? For example, Mono's reply to me shows up before my post. In Perknose's thread, his OP appears after the first response post. Is this happening just on my end or is it systemic?

 

[Fern]

-snip-
It looks as if this administration has no trust in its Marines that it orders them to disarm when in their presence. I'm a little bit disgusted by this, what say you?

Well, after the Muslim military doctor shot and killed several people at that base in TX (? think was in TX) I've had concerns about our overly PC policies and their effect on our troops. Are they being 'infiltrated'?

Before that I think we had an incident where a Muslim Marine killed team his members by tossing grenades at them during the night.

My first thought upon hearing about the rogue sergeant was that he did it to force us out of Afghanistan. I'm really waiting to hear more info on this guy. Last I checked they haven't released even his name.

If I was charged with protecting the SoD, I might do the same.

Fern

 

[Fern]

Why do I keep seeing posts showing up in time inverted order? For example, Mono's reply to me shows up before my post. In Perknose's thread, his OP appears after the first response post. Is this happening just on my end or is it systemic?

Systemic.

It's happened before. I'm not a tech guy but IIRC it may have been something about the servers not being synched up. (Slightly different internal clock readings.)

Fern

 

[EXman]

The article says the order was given by the military, not by civilian authorities within the administration. This is a case of the military not trusting its own, not the administration not trusting the military. Actually, a more likely scenario is that this was the brass covering their own ass after recent violent incidents. On the odd 1 in 100,000 chance that some mentally unstable marine shoots the SoD on the general's watch, it's his ass over the fire.

- wolf

Do you really believe that?

 

[monovillage]

Well, after the Muslim military doctor shot and killed several people at that base in TX (? think was in TX) I've had concerns about our overly PC policies and their effect on our troops. Are they being 'infiltrated'?

Before that I think we had an incident where a Muslim Marine killed team his members by tossing grenades at them during the night.

My first thought upon hearing about the rogue sergeant was that he did it to force us out of Afghanistan. I'm really waiting to hear more info on this guy. Last I checked they haven't released even his name.

If I was charged with protecting the SoD, I might do the same.

Fern

I'm looking at everything through the political lens of the Presidential elections, and having the Sec. of Defense have U.S. Marines disarmed before they are allowed in a tent with him is a political negative in my opinion. I don't think it will play well on Main Street.

Yes, I know it's cynical and partisan.

 

[Thump553]

mono, yet again you are putting your own super-negative spin on the news and blatantly disregarding the actual facts. This was not a matter of the civilians not distrusting the marines. The order came from the US military. In addition to troops from other NATO countries present, there were Afgan troops as well, all of whom were already disarmed. The military's reason for disarming the US troops was so that their Afgan allies would not feel second class. It was to foster camaderie.

Geesh.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

If our marines can't be trusted then perhaps they ought to all lay their arms down for good and let the politicians risk their lives.

 

[monovillage]

mono, yet again you are putting your own super-negative spin on the news and blatantly disregarding the actual facts. This was not a matter of the civilians not distrusting the marines. The order came from the US military. In addition to troops from other NATO countries present, there were Afgan troops as well, all of whom were already disarmed. The military's reason for disarming the US troops was so that their Afgan allies would not feel second class. It was to foster camaderie.

Geesh.

Yes, and your old dog Spot is really at a farm someplace.

 

[Throckmorton]

How is this even an issue? Do Marines always carry their weapons? Is there really no circumstance normally where they'd be required to disarm?

 

[IBMer]

I'm looking at everything through the political lens of the Presidential elections, and having the Sec. of Defense have U.S. Marines disarmed before they are allowed in a tent with him is a political negative in my opinion. I don't think it will play well on Main Street.

Yes, I know it's cynical and partisan.

This it the kind of spin that works for Fox News viewers.... republicans already have those votes...

 

[Doppel]

Are we really to think that all US marines, simply by virtue of that status, are vetted to the degree they can carry a firearm close to super high value VIPs?

What about a regular grunt? What if it's the president? And what about normal police? Are they as vetted as military? What about a regular citizen? This is simply using basic common sense you limit who has firearms around VIPs. I am positive any country follows similar guidelines.

 

[JEDIYoda]

The article says the order was given by the military, not by civilian authorities within the administration. This is a case of the military not trusting its own, not the administration not trusting the military. Actually, a more likely scenario is that this was the brass covering their own ass after recent violent incidents. On the odd 1 in 100,000 chance that some mentally unstable marine shoots the SoD on the general's watch, it's his ass over the fire.

- wolf

You guys are being way too nice.....
Actually the military was making sure that some marine who just happened to be of islamic faith did not take a pot shot at the SoD!!!


Now that wasn`t so hard was it.....

 

[xBiffx]

Pussy! That is all.

 

[Nebor]

How is this even an issue? Do Marines always carry their weapons? Is there really no circumstance normally where they'd be required to disarm?

Yes, everyone in a combat zone should always carry a weapon. There are few circumstances where you do not (checked into mental health\suicide watch, some of the large airfields don't allow them in the gym for clutter purposes.)

My view? The Sec Def is their (and my) commander. You send me to fight for your cause, under your command, but you don't trust me to have a weapon in your presence?

This case is a little different, since it was some Marine general that gave the disarm order, not the Sec Def. I'd bet that Marine's ass is in a sling over it, because just hearing about it today made me (and my coworkers) hot under the collar.

 

[Farang]

Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marine.

Frankly it does not take much to become a Marine. You sign up, have no medical qualifications, and then are forced to go through some tough shit because you have no other choice. If you qualify, it is basically a guaranteed job. For this reason a lot of people who have no place else to go join the Marines.

That isn't PC but it is true. A lot of great folks serve, too, of course. But let's not pretend plenty of riff-raff doesn't make its way into our military.

Regardless, that large a group of people (the military in general) should not get a free pass to carry weapons around senior members of our government. There is no halo around these guys' heads.

 

[monovillage]

This it the kind of spin that works for Fox News viewers.... republicans already have those votes...

I think quite a few undecided/moderate voters may not be particularly happy that the Secretary of Defense has someone order U.S. Marines to disarm in Afghanistan while he gives them a pep talk. It kinda looks like he's suspicious of his own countries Marines. It's OK with me if you just dismiss it out of hand though.

 

[monovillage]

Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marine.

Frankly it does not take much to become a Marine. You sign up, have no medical qualifications, and then are forced to go through some tough shit because you have no other choice. If you qualify, it is basically a guaranteed job. For this reason a lot of people who have no place else to go join the Marines.

That isn't PC but it is true. A lot of great folks serve, too, of course. But let's not pretend plenty of riff-raff doesn't make its way into our military.

Regardless, that large a group of people (the military in general) should not get a free pass to carry weapons around senior members of our government. There is no halo around these guys' heads.

I'm sure President Obama and the rest of his cabinet and party agree with you 100%.

 

[Nebor]

Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marine.

Frankly it does not take much to become a Marine. You sign up, have no medical qualifications, and then are forced to go through some tough shit because you have no other choice. If you qualify, it is basically a guaranteed job. For this reason a lot of people who have no place else to go join the Marines.

That isn't PC but it is true. A lot of great folks serve, too, of course. But let's not pretend plenty of riff-raff doesn't make its way into our military.

Regardless, that large a group of people (the military in general) should not get a free pass to carry weapons around senior members of our government. There is no halo around these guys' heads.

If you are in the profession of arms, and your boss (commander) doesn't trust you with arms, then one of you is in the wrong profession.

 

[Farang]

If you are in the profession of arms, and your boss (commander) doesn't trust you with arms, then one of you is in the wrong profession.

You're absolutely right--plenty of folks in the military are in the wrong profession. Like the guy who killed 13 or so in Ft. Worth. Or the other who just murdered 17 or so in Afghanistan, mostly women and children.

You take the number of people who have snapped in the military, and take that percentage and constantly put the Defense secretary, Vice President, President, etc. consistently in front of them with loaded weapons, you are asking for trouble.

I have tons of respect for people who choose to serve. But taking a critical look you see there are plenty of undesirables given the nature of how one enters the military, and who the military targets for recruitment. In addition the nature of military work can create or enhance mental instability. This is not a blanket statement, for all members, but something you need to keep in mind for the one it takes to use a loaded gun against a VIP.

 

[zinfamous]

It was ordered by the base commander. Afghani soldiers are always disarmed when in barracks, and in such functions; their weapons remaining outside. The commander estimated that it would be a good move to show solidarity by having US soldiers unarmed, as well, nothing more. Maybe it was a good idea, maybe it wasn't.


slow news day, or what?

 

[Generator]

It doesn't take much review of soldiers to realize that they are basically inmates with guns. The way they are treated by their superiors and politicians with constant contempt. I suppose it is with good reason, I mean these people do have guns. But make no mistake the solider knows he is not a free man and that the politician is his warden.