Saturday, July 18, 2015

Gen. Odierno: We have to be careful about over-arming ourselves

Well, we wouldn't want our armed services to be "OVERARMED" now would we?


KUETSA said...

"The ban is largely due to legal issues, such as the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prohibits the federal government from using the military for domestic law enforcement. U.S. forces don't routinely carry guns when they are not in combat or on military bases. And Pentagon officials are sensitive to any appearance of armed troops within the United States."

Now I understand! But Obama could build a gestapo force called the DHS and equip it to be every bit as powerful as the US MILITARY - that answers to him - IT DOESN'T GUARD THE BORDERS - IT DOESN'T REACT TO INNER CITY RIOTS - IT TRAINS TO FIGHT ARMED AMERICAN CITIZENS, WHO ARE LABELED "CONSTITUTIONALISTS" AND ARE CONSIDERED "DOMESTIC TERRORISTS"!

After all the warnings and enhanced security on the 4th of July because of ISIS threats of "lone wolf" attacks in our country during Ramadan - the warnings of ISIS ordered lone wolf attacks on our military - NOW THAT IT HAPPENED - WE DON'T WANNA JUMP TO ANY CONCLUSIONS! This is a case of a "domestic terrorist" (no ties to Islam or ISIS just because the attack was carried out by a Muslim).

We know how the government deals with "domestic terrorism" - THEY ATTACK AND LIMIT CITIZEN GUN RIGHTS!

Any and every excuse is used to attack their REAL ENEMY - US!!!

Justin Travis said...

If some intelligence is applied, and military personnel are allowed to be armed to protect themselves, lone wolf terrorists will eventually have nowhere to go except to soft targets, like shopping centers, and such.

The majority of states now allow concealed carry, but the majority of citizens do not presently see an urgent need for they, themselves to go armed.

That could change.

Once it does, the gun banners will never gain traction again.

Anonymous said...

Odierno is not going to deviate from what the POTUS wants him to say about this, I guarantee there was guidance issued to him regarding this. You don't get to be the Army Chief of Staff unless you are a politician who can be counted on not to say something you're not cleared to say. If Odierno were to say that soldiers everywhere should be allowed to carry a sidearm to guard against Jihahdi attacks he would be out on this ass by the end of the week. He would be forced to resign and would likely be dropped a star for purposes of his retirement benefits.

Actually he doesn't have much to lose, you would hope that this would free him up to do the right thing. The fact that he doesn't see it that way tells you everything you need to know about the man.

Fidel said...

Odierno should go without his security detail, then....

Fing political coward.

Anonymous said...

I'm not surprised he said this. Always remember that someone that high up got there because they were real good at brown nosing, not because they were actually competent commanders.

Sedition said...

Peace through superior firepower...that motto has always served me well.

Anonymous said...

Having dealt with Army-types (after 9/11), I can tell you that I never ran across another military organization more fearful of a loaded 9mm pistol than the US Army. But my experience is limited.

My organization was trained properly on how to carry and operate a 9mm with a round in the chamber. After that we never gave it a second thought (follow your training).

Sort of makes you wonder what the Army was teaching.

Arkindole said...

Well, I've read today that KS and LA have issued state EOs to arm. This should get interesting.

Informed42 said...

Odierno has already seen many examples of what happens to officers that speak out
or criticize the Zerobama Administration. Those that have been forced out of the services for such actions make a single spaced list at least 8 pages long. They've
all been replaced with candy-assed 'perfumed princes' as David Hackworth called them. Yes men that have sold their honor and personal integrity for a position.

I don't know about you, but I view them all as sell outs to the country and the
oath they swore. And in more than a few instances, failing to stand by your oath of office, is viewed as treason.

Anonymous said...

Posse Comitatus.

KUETSA said...

Gen. Odierno is there because he hasn't been "purged" - which means he goes along with Obama's agenda.

Anonymous said...

Many see a urgent "need" but simply cannot AFFORD the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of dollars required for the permit process. Others refuse to give up some rights in order to exercise another. A portion of these groups just exercise their rights regardless. I know this much - I will not beg for permission slips. I will not be extorted into paying huge poll taxes for access to my rights and I certainly won't be brow beaten and threatened into forgetting about my rights, leaving me defenseless in the times I need them the most. If I am jailed for it one day, then so be it. I guess I will just have to be made a POLITICAL PRISONER in my own country - as I aim to hurt nobody who doesn't mean me and mine harm.

To all the Fuddsters out there praising conceal and carry permits - fuck off! YOU are as much OR MORE a problem than the outright gunbanners!!! You fools might not want to admit it, you might not want to face it, but you are the gun control ENABLERS! So take your "moderate" position and shove it up your asses. You are just like "moderate Muslims". While moderate Muslims just want a radical Muslim to strike your necks, you Fuddsters just want someone else to grab the guns "from the bad guys" while leaving the "good guys" with permission slips.

When this thing implodes - and it will- you "CCW" champions are going to be the FIRST to be visited by the confiscation cocksuckers. And then you will be the biggest whining babies - crying about what just happened to you. Fools.

Exercise your rights. Quit bowing and begging for permission! Jeeeeez man, do you beg for permission to for everything else too?

Anonymous said...

On point - rules for the military must come from the congress - not executive order.
Arming all soldiers on bases AND everywhere else they are is something congress CAN COMPEL, both in legislated rule making AND in funding.

As an aside - Judge on Fox today yesterday said it plainly - this is a Second Amendment issue and those backing disarming even the military have to be called out!!!

Anonymous said...

What is "over armed?" What is "under armed?" These questions have squishy answers based often on perception and 20/20 hindsight. For example, I probably have more guns than I "need" yet not as many as I "want". Am I "over armed" or "under armed?" On the other hand, if you don't have a gun when your survival depends on having one one could easily say you were "under armed."

Still boils down to a rather pithy comment by one of Americas most underrated philosophers, Robert A Heinlein who wrote:

“At least once every human should have to run for his life, to teach him that milk does not come from supermarkets, that safety does not come from policemen, that 'news' is not something that happens to other people. He might learn how his ancestors lived and that he himself is no different--in the crunch his life depends on his agility, alertness, and personal resourcefulness.”

Under "personal resourcefulness" one would have to include being armed sufficient to deal with any reasonable expectation of threat.

America has become fat, complacent, and lazy in the "perception of threat" and slow to harden soft targets even after seeing extremely effective attacks on such as schools and shopping malls both at home and abroad.

One only needs to search news articles for the last 20 years for the terms, unimaginable, unexpected, or inconceivable in stories about violent attacks on the home front.

Anonymous said...

Posse Comitatus applies to Title 10, USC (active duty) federal military personnel, not (NOT) Title 32, USC (national guard)state military personnel.

This is an all to common misunderstanding of Posse Comitatus and why it was passed in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Using posse Comitatus as an excuse is really lame. That Rubicon has been crossed long ago..

Anonymous said...

Obama apointee. Cut from the same cloth as Dempsey and Hagel. Piss on the lot of them. 'Nuff said.

Anonymous said...

PC can get sticky when the state guards are federalized.
BUT let's be clear about this. PC has nothing to do with people being ARMED. PC has to do with LAW ENFORCEMENT - specifically civilian law enforcement.

Defense of self - via arms- is a right of ALL that is to be protected best by EXERCISE.
We are not talkingunh about enforcing a legislated law here, this is about rights exercise.

I will point out that this is yet another reason why the NRA state preemption laws are so pathetically backward and harmful. When carrying is a state legislated allowance ...what do you expect?? PC is only the START of the problems. Here's a thought - keep this whole thing SIMPLE...... The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! WOW What a concept.

The argument winner is this -regarding the military anyway-
If a soldier cannot be "trusted" to bear arms then they ought not be soldiers.

Anonymous said...

Frankly its disgusting beyond words that a military officer acts more the politician than officer in our military...What a POS sell out and asshole. Im embarrassed these days to say i am a veteran when i see what a cesspool the military mind has become. i dodn't crawl out of that.

Sign me, fed up and sick of American politics and the non stop treason from our military members in support of the Obamanation.

Are you sick of your Anti-Christ in the White Whore House yet?

Sign me, Neal Jensen

Anonymous said...

As I read on another site, the Good General is called Oh-Dear-No behind his back.
These things just write themselves sometimes.

B Woodman

Anonymous said...

Some one needs to remind Dickless the very next time he asks for money for more weapons. Hell maybe we should issue muskets. That would fit their narrative. After all that is what the Army was armed with. That is the original intent according to the idiotic parrots. The Framers intended the Army to be armed with muskets right....

Easy enough to use logic on a Marxist, er I mean Liberal. Just try reasoning with a scared citizen who is not as well informed. Their fear exudes from them. Best way to get the Marxists, I mean liberals into a feeding frenzy, give them the least little idea that you are reacting to their dose of stupid.

Of course stupid is a fa├žade, Marxists feign stupid to give the air of ineptness. "...Nothing in politics happened by accident, if it happens you can bet it was planed that way", FDR our first Communist President.

Anonymous said...

I pack an HK USP Tactical in .45. I carry as much ammo as I can safely conceal because of the permit thing. I have a 9MM on my leg and a 1911A1 on the left hip and when the occasion suits me I carry a full size in the small of my back.

The side arms are so I can get back to my vehicle for my carbine and the 500 rounds I keep in a small mechanics bag. I wear a IIIA vest with a titanium plate, it is very concealable.

Having been in a couple of fights :), I consider myself barely sufficiently armed. Overly armed would be dragging a 1919 Browning around and an M2 in the vehicle at a church function.

If you are under attack there is no overly armed, otherwise we would have no nuclear weapons. I don't imagine we will get this idiot to even comprehend that statement. Way past his pay grade I suppose...