When Will We Let Military Defend Itself From Terrorists?

[txradioguy]

War On Terror: Another Islamist extremist has slaughtered unarmed American troops on home soil. Will this, too, be declared "workplace violence" — just like the last act of terrorism committed against our disarmed military?

Here's what we knew at press time: An apparent lone gunman shot a barrage of gunfire at two military facilities in Tennessee, killing at least four Marines and wounding a soldier and a police officer. The shooter was killed, and the media quickly identified him as Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Kuwait.

Far be it from us to rush to judgment, but just before the shooting an ISIS-linked Twitter account tweeted out: "O Americans Dogs soon YOU Will see wonders #Chattanooga #USA #ISIS."

According to Jihad Watch, this tweet is similar to one sent out just before the attack on the "Draw Muhammad" cartoon event in Garland, Texas, last May, where two ISIS-linked gunmen opened fire.

So this was almost certainly a terrorist attack by an Islamic extremist.

But there's one key difference between this attack and the one in Garland: In Texas, the attack failed when an off-duty traffic cop took down the rifle-toting, body-armored Islamists Nadir Soofi and Elton Simpson with a single Glock pistol.

That didn't happen in Tennessee. According to a screen grab posted on the Internet, Thursday's attacks were made on a gun-free military facility. Perhaps if the victims had been themselves carrying weapons, they would have been able to defend themselves.

By the way, this is tragically similar to the 2009 Fort Hood attacks by Major Nidal Malik Hasan that left 13 dead and 30 wounded. The Obama administration then termed the slaughter of unarmed U.S. soldiers an instance of "workplace violence" — not terrorism.

As at Ft. Hood, the Marines in Tennessee didn't appear to have any weapons. They were disarmed not by their attacker, but by a foolish federal policy that put them in danger. If even one of them had been armed, perhaps he could have stopped the attack.

If our troops are going to be serially targeted by terrorists, as it now appears, shouldn't they at least be able to carry side arms to protect themselves?

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/071615-762049-chattanooga-attacks-kill-four-marines-in-apparent-gun-free-zone.htm

[RayRaytheSBS]

Good find TX. Will anyone at the DOD listen to it? Hell no. They don't give two shits about soldiers dying because 'Global warming is the biggest threat  facing the DOD today'.

[txradioguy]

Good find TX. Will anyone at the DOD listen to it? Hell no. They don't give two shits about soldiers dying because 'Global warming is the biggest threat  facing the DOD today'.

The states that did this were smart to do this over the weekend since they knew no one in D.C. Would be in a position to raise the red flag.

I'm fully expecting some kind of push from the Pentagon to squash what the Governors have done so far or to prevent any further action by the states. 

 I imagine General Grass has been told he has a meeting he wasn't expecting with the CSA and CJCS first thing this morning.

[RayRaytheSBS]

The states that did this were smart to do this over the weekend since they knew no one in D.C. Would be in a position to raise the red flag.

I'm fully expecting some kind of push from the Pentagon to squash what the Governors have done so far or to prevent any further action by the states. 

 I imagine General Grass has been told he has a meeting he wasn't expecting with the CSA and CJCS first thing this morning.

Indeed. But those commanders  adviwed their governors  in the best way they knew how. And whil it may be reactionary, I feel it is thebest decision  for the troops. This will let them stay safe in their OWN @#$%! OFFICES! If we can't trust soldiers, people  who allegedly  are supposed to be the guardians of the nation and USE FIREARMS  on a regular basis.... With firearms, then there  is only one reason why; the government  doesn't trust its guardians  with weapons. An interesting  theorem. .