Marines told to disarm in warzone as SecDef's life in danger

[TLAM Strike]

WTF?

A tense visit to Afghanistan by Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta got off to an alarming start on Wednesday when a stolen pickup truck sped onto a ramp alongside a runway at a British military airfield and crashed into a ditch as Mr. Panetta’s plane was landing.

In a sign of the nervousness surrounding the trip, a sergeant major abruptly told the Marines gathered to hear Mr. Panetta in a tent at Camp Leatherneck to get up, place their M-16 and M-4 automatic rifles and 9-millimeter pistols outside, and return unarmed. The sergeant major, Brandon Hall, told reporters that he was acting on orders.

Normally, American forces in Afghanistan keep their weapons when the defense secretary visits and speaks to them. The Afghans in the tent had not been armed to begin with, as is typical.

Yea I would not trust those Afghans either.

General Gurganus told reporters later that he had wanted a consistent policy for everyone in the tent, and that “I wanted to have the Marines look just like their Afghan partners,” noting, “You’ve got one of the most important people in the world in the room.” He insisted that his decision had had nothing to do with the massacre; later, defense officials said the decision had had nothing to do with the truck at the airfield.

I smell something funny here...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/wo...acre.html?_r=3

[krashkart]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

I smell something funny here...

Hrm... I walked McBee an hour ago. Couldn't be him.

[RickC Sniper]

I'm not sure I'd obey that order to surrender arms.

[Stealhead]

Well if a higher ranking enlisted or officer gave you the order and it was lawful you would be disobeying a direct order.I do not recall in the oath that I took that one had to like the order given to them only that they must obey any lawful order given by an appointed NCO or officer.

It is an usual order. However I suspect that there may be some stretching as to the reasoning and situation of the removal of weapons.It is very common at all but FOBs these days for only those that are on duty Military Police and those on guard duty and those about to go out side the line to be fully armed and their weapon in a ready state.I think someone may have seen something that they did not fully understand and they may have seen something out of context.It was most likely not an order from on high but an order from some overly jumpy Marine at the base.If some Lieutenant Colonel or Colonel gives you an order that is a little unnecessary but not overtly dangerous one cant say "sir that is a stupid order" even if it might be.They are trying to make it sound like every Marine at the base was standing there unarmed...more like the handful of Marines that got picked to meet and greet Panetta this article is trying to make it sound like an entire base was told to put its weapons down they would never say that because that order would be bogus and stupid.

This article sounds very stir the potish to me.


It sounds to me like that story took tidbits of confused and unrelated information and made an attention grabbing story to get hits and sell papers.

Some of the whole stolen, flaming truck man is odd but I would say if anything is amiss it would be sketchy manner in which the article is written.

[Dowly]

[em2nought]

General Gurganus told reporters later that he had wanted a consistent policy for everyone in the tent, and that “I wanted to have the Marines look just like their Afghan partners,” noting, “You’ve got one of the most important people in the world in the room.”

sounds kind of elitist