If this is true, Panetta should resign

[Ravi]

Link?

He's got a point with this one. Military policy should be the President's top priority..especially given that we are still at war. This was bad form no matter how you look at it.

One would think the person who has the title "Commander In Chief" would you know, be responsible for the men/women of whom he's "Commanding." Not in the Obama Regime, however - he gets a free pass...

I don't know where you get the idea that a president would micromanage security. He would leave it up to Panetta's security forces or the base commander.

 

[mudwhistle]

That was a tense situation?

Bod have you ever seen anything like this. Not playing politics here. Serious, you ever seen a moment where troops were disarmed before their Secretary of Defense spoke to them?

Please give me an honest answer.

Many in a space like an assembly...absolutely. And not because anyone is afraid...it's just not practical with all those people in there with weapons sticking out here and there.

That's BS.

We learned how to sleep with our weapons.

The problem here is no target is easier to take down than a tent full of disarmed soldiers.

Just ask the folks at Ft Hood.

 

[Article 15]

What is there to prove? Do you honestly believe that Obama was NOT briefed that the men/women he "Commands" were going to be disarmed during Panetta's visit? You seriously think he wasn't briefed on this, that you're asking for a "link" to show he was/wasn't?

You are seriously smarter than this, so come on...

Yes, I seriously think he wasn't briefed.

A link proving that he was is exactly what I am asking for.

Briefed or not..this is astoundingly bad policy. And it should be reversed post haste.

I agree.

 

[Peach]

He would leave it up to Panetta's security forces or the base commander.
*****************************************************
So I believe but this is a huge issue. MY concern was an Afghan who was NOT our "partner" getting a Marine's weapon and start shooting. I expect the SS to protect Panetta and be armed but farther away from the Afghanis.

 

[Intense]

He lost me when he was up in front of Congress in past week when he said they would 'Seek International approval' rather than the Congress...

Panetta: We'd Seek "International Approval," Not Congress', to Act in Syria

Understood. The one thing I would question was whether those were his words or Obama's. This is one Fucking Strange Administration. I doubt there is much trust on Pennsylvania Avenue now a days. I'm still waiting for The Strawberry Issue to pop up.

Granted. Good point...But WHY did he say it? I would have protested and told Obama to take the job and shove it.

I'd bet he has allot of days where he shares that sentiment. He did take a break from the Clinton Administration. Maybe he is a Sentinel, in a sense, doing damage control.

 

[Warrior102]

I don't know where you get the idea that a president would micromanage security. He would leave it up to Panetta's security forces or the base commander.

Silly me. I shouldn't assume that the Commander In Chief would be briefed that his men and women - in a war zone - are being asked to disarm. What in the world was I thinking? My apologies to Barack Hussein Obama.

 

[Ravi]

He would leave it up to Panetta's security forces or the base commander.
*****************************************************
So I believe but this is a huge issue. MY concern was an Afghan who was NOT our "partner" getting a Marine's weapon and start shooting. I expect the SS to protect Panetta and be armed but farther away from the Afghanis.

They don't let Afghanis that are not "our partner" on the base. Knowingly. I know it seems odd, but these Afganis are supposed to be the good guys.

Sounds to me the whole thing was done for diplomatic reasons.

I guess they could just keep "our partners" chained up.

 

[Ravi]

I don't know where you get the idea that a president would micromanage security. He would leave it up to Panetta's security forces or the base commander.

Silly me. I shouldn't assume that the Commander In Chief would be briefed that his men and women - in a war zone - are being asked to disarm. What in the world was I thinking? My apologies to Barack Hussein Obama.

Yes, you are pretty silly.

 

[Article 15]

One would think the person who has the title "Commander In Chief" would you know, be responsible for the men/women of whom he's "Commanding." Not in the Obama Regime, however - he gets a free pass...

He's responsible for whom he is commanding, however, you don't have any proof whatsoever that he was briefed on this and let it slide therefor your assertions about Obama in this thread are baseless.

So proof is now required that coversations/briefings occur? Short of that, his hands are clean? If that was the standard required for Bush, he'd be canonized.

Give me an example of the proof you require - i.e. do you have "Proof" he ordered OBL to be taken out? Do you have the transcript of the order ?

Thanks.

You are asserting that he was briefed and didn't stop them from disarming the Marines, so yeah, the burden of proof is on you.

And here is the President saying in plain English that he, himself gave the order to get bin Laden:

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to Bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located Bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.

Obama's Speech On Osama | President Obama's speech on Osama bin Laden's death - Los Angeles Times



^-------Do you have anything like this from Obama regarding the Marines being disarmed?

Do you have anything from anyone in the Chain of Command saying that Obama was briefed?

Do you have any kind of source at all?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

did obama do this or the base commander?

The base commander with direction from washington (panetta) who gets direction from obama.

Its one of those "the buck stops here" things I think...but obama is seperated by "layers". Much like it wasn't Obama who got bin laden but he gets credit, the same applies here.

I find it fascinating that the left are so quick to high 5 him when the Troops do good... and equally as quick to say it's not his fault when something is wrong. If it wasn't for double standards, the left would have no standards.

Hey I let obama take responsibility for the decisions made by those under him, much like I felt bush held responsibility for abu grave (sp).

I see the double standards on both sides all the time, my favorite are the people who are so blinded by their political ideology they don't even see themselves holding said double standard (and i've seen several posts like that since my last post in this thread)

 

[High_Gravity]

If it's true that Leon Panetta had Marines disarm before being in a room with him, he should resign.

You don't put your desire for personal safety above the honor of the United States Marine Corp.


Story to come, I'm sure.

I think Panetta was scared of our own troops after the incident that happened in Afghanistan this past weekend.

 

[High_Gravity]

He would leave it up to Panetta's security forces or the base commander.
*****************************************************
So I believe but this is a huge issue. MY concern was an Afghan who was NOT our "partner" getting a Marine's weapon and start shooting. I expect the SS to protect Panetta and be armed but farther away from the Afghanis.

They don't let Afghanis that are not "our partner" on the base. Knowingly. I know it seems odd, but these Afganis are supposed to be the good guys.

Sounds to me the whole thing was done for diplomatic reasons.

I guess they could just keep "our partners" chained up.

Those Afghan Troops are not our friends, and they are known to turn their guns on US troops when right situation presents itself.

 

[Article 15]

The base commander with direction from washington (panetta) who gets direction from obama.

Its one of those "the buck stops here" things I think...but obama is seperated by "layers". Much like it wasn't Obama who got bin laden but he gets credit, the same applies here.

I find it fascinating that the left are so quick to high 5 him when the Troops do good... and equally as quick to say it's not his fault when something is wrong. If it wasn't for double standards, the left would have no standards.

Hey I let obama take responsibility for the decisions made by those under him, much like I felt bush held responsibility for abu grave (sp).

I see the double standards on both sides all the time, my favorite are the people who are so blinded by their political ideology they don't even see themselves holding said double standard (and i've seen several posts like that since my last post in this thread)

Big difference between being "responsible" for the decisions made by those under him and making the decision himself which some are asserting here sans evidence.

 

[Article 15]

If it's true that Leon Panetta had Marines disarm before being in a room with him, he should resign.

You don't put your desire for personal safety above the honor of the United States Marine Corp.


Story to come, I'm sure.

I think Panetta was scared of our own troops after the incident that happened in Afghanistan this past weekend.

And if that's the case, he isn't fit to lead them and should step down.

 

[High_Gravity]

Bod have you ever seen anything like this. Not playing politics here. Serious, you ever seen a moment where troops were disarmed before their Secretary of Defense spoke to them?

Please give me an honest answer.

Many in a space like an assembly...absolutely. And not because anyone is afraid...it's just not practical with all those people in there with weapons sticking out here and there.

That's BS.

We learned how to sleep with our weapons.

The problem here is no target is easier to take down than a tent full of disarmed soldiers.

Just ask the folks at Ft Hood.

Exactly my man, a friend of mine deployed to Afghanistan with the Army, he used to sleep with his M-16 in his bunk.

 

[High_Gravity]

If it's true that Leon Panetta had Marines disarm before being in a room with him, he should resign.

You don't put your desire for personal safety above the honor of the United States Marine Corp.


Story to come, I'm sure.

I think Panetta was scared of our own troops after the incident that happened in Afghanistan this past weekend.

And if that's the case, he isn't fit to lead them and should step down.

I agree and Like MudWhistle said, a tent full of unarmed Marines or Soldiers makes a juicy target.

 

[Ravi]

I think Panetta was scared of our own troops after the incident that happened in Afghanistan this past weekend.

And if that's the case, he isn't fit to lead them and should step down.

I agree and Like MudWhistle said, a tent full of unarmed Marines or Soldiers makes a juicy target.

How many attacks have happened at Camp Leatherneck?

 

[High_Gravity]

And if that's the case, he isn't fit to lead them and should step down.

I agree and Like MudWhistle said, a tent full of unarmed Marines or Soldiers makes a juicy target.

How many attacks have happened at Camp Leatherneck?

I'm not sure if any happened at the camp, but I could give you a good list of Afghan Soldiers turning their guns on US Troops if you want me to.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If it's true that Leon Panetta had Marines disarm before being in a room with him, he should resign.

You don't put your desire for personal safety above the honor of the United States Marine Corp.

Story to come, I'm sure.

The difference between myself, a conservative, service connected disabled veteran, and that POS, turn our troops command over to the UN Panetta... I would INSIST the Marines bear their arms.

Panetta needs to have his cheesy, traitorous ass kicked to the curb, but don't expect the kenyan to do it. Panetta is just the kind of scum obama likes.

Correct about Panetta.

1. Leon Panetta is a leftist radical who should never have headed the CIA, period, much less be confirmed as Secretary of Defense. He poses a massive security risk and he has never been vetted – at all. For background on Panetta’s radical communist ties, visit the following research by Trevor Loudon and Cliff Kincaid: Leon Panetta and The Manchurian Approach to National Security « Romanticpoet's Weblog

2. Also, the group’s parent organization, the World Federalist Movement, promotes democratized global institutions with plenary constitutional power. It is a coordinator and member of Responsibility to Protect, the controversial military doctrine used by Obama as the main justification for U.S. and international airstrikes against Libya.As WND reported, billionaire George Soros is a primary funder and key proponent of the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect, the main organization pushing the doctrine. The center includes the World Federalist Movement as one of its members and coordinators.
Obama’s DoD nominee caught in 1-world scheme


BTW, Panetta began his political work as aid to a Republican Senator, albeit a ‘moderate.’ Today, he bears a very different stripe.

 

[Ravi]

I agree and Like MudWhistle said, a tent full of unarmed Marines or Soldiers makes a juicy target.

How many attacks have happened at Camp Leatherneck?

I'm not sure if any happened at the camp, but I could give you a good list of Afghan Soldiers turning their guns on US Troops if you want me to.

Oh, I know that has happened just as I know sometimes the reverse has happened.

I am still unable to get upset about people being disarmed on a military base when they are meeting as allies.