Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Utah Bob #35998

NAS Pensacola shooting

Recommended Posts

 

It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.

George S. Patton

I disagree with ole George on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I disagree with ole George on that one.

 

I have to admit to being somewhat ambivalent about it.  I would render is more like, "We should mourn that they are no longer with us, but at the same time thank God that they lived."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

I have to admit to being somewhat ambivalent about it.  I would render is more like, "We should mourn that they are no longer with us, but at the same time thank God that they lived."

Exactly. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I disagree with ole George on that one.

How about doing both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

How about doing both?

Yeah. What SDJ said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting (disheartening) that the Navy is still training Saudis at our bases. This should have ended years ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My condolences to the family, of this brave man that honored the uniform and his last name. 

Rest in peace.

 

czhen

FL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I find it interesting (disheartening) that the Navy is still training Saudis at our bases. This should have ended years ago. 

I am sure Saudis aren't the only ones we are training. Usually part of a weapons system sale includes training of the foreign buyer's people on how to operate and maintain the system.

 

For years I helped train foreign armed forces members on systems they bought from the company I worked for. We traveled to their home country to monitor their successful use and integration of our stuff too. Nothing new here....except the political crap! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this beg the question, should our soldiers be armed on the base??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Does this beg the question, should our soldiers be armed on the base??

And if so, which ones? Combat arms or everyone. Clerks? Medical? Admin?

Despite what the public thinks not all service members are proficient in, or even familiar, with small arms. And the ones that are have combat skills that don’t necessarily translate to a shooter in a classroom scenario. That’s a law enforcement training thing. 
I don’t have an answer. At least one that’s anywhere near realistic.

The Saudis are still an important US ally in the Middle East. Cutting them off would not be in our best interests politically or militarily. And they’re not the only ones. We have been training foreign allies since before I was a slick sleeved recruit. In my brief service time I helped train soldiers from a number of different nations.
Like I said, I don’t have an answer. Only anger, frustration and sorrow. That I have in spades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

And if so, which ones? Combat arms or everyone. Clerks? Medical? Admin?

Despite what the public thinks not all service members are proficient in, or even familiar, with small arms. And the ones that are have combat skills that don’t necessarily translate to a shooter in a classroom scenario. That’s a law enforcement training thing. 
I don’t have an answer. At least one that’s anywhere near realistic.

The Saudis are still an important US ally in the Middle East. Cutting them off would not be in our best interests politically or militarily. And they’re not the only ones. We have been training foreign allies since before I was a slick sleeved recruit. In my brief service time I helped train soldiers from a number of different nations.
Like I said, I don’t have an answer. Only anger, frustration and sorrow. That I have in spades.

I agree with some of  what you’re saying but everyone does not need to be armed. The personnel that are familiar with firearms could be cleared to carry. You could also add some training much like they do with arming teachers. It only takes one person to stop a bad guy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I agree with some of  what you’re saying but everyone does not need to be armed. The personnel that are familiar with firearms could be cleared to carry. You could also add some training much like they do with arming teachers. It only takes one person to stop a bad guy. 

There are armed people on bases. But they are generally guarding the secure facilities. Having someone in the right place at the right time is the trick. You simply can’t cover all the possible places on a military base. A public school campus is much easier.

There have been shootings in admin buildings, at gates, in housing areas, medical facilities, etc. Who do you arm and what do you cover?
If individuals are to be armed, they would need additional training, yes. Only the law enforcement and special ops types are trained and skilled in the type of response we need in these situations. And they’re aren’t many of them.

For those who seem to thing the servicemen and women on bases have been disarmed that’s not the case. Soldiers and sailors haven’t been routinely armed on posts since the Indian Wars. Weapons have always been secured in arms rooms.

 

We’ve never faced a threat like this before.I wish I had a suggestion for solution that might work but I don’t.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

There are armed people on bases. But they are generally guarding the secure facilities. Having someone in the right place at the right time is the trick. You simply can’t cover all the possible places on a military base. A public school campus is much easier.

There have been shootings in admin buildings, at gates, in housing areas, medical facilities, etc. Who do you arm and what do you cover?
If individuals are to be armed, they would need additional training, yes. Only the law enforcement and special ops types are trained and skilled in the type of response we need in these situations. And they’re aren’t many of them.

For those who seem to thing the servicemen and women on bases have been disarmed that’s not the case. Soldiers and sailors haven’t been routinely armed on posts since the Indian Wars. Weapons have always been secured in arms rooms.

 

We’ve never faced a threat like this before.I wish I had a suggestion for solution that might work but I don’t.

 

Maybe it's time they change the rules?? I hate to see our brave service men and women vulnerable to attacks by scumbags like the POS that did this!:angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I retired from the Navy I was involved with a terrorist shooting in Chattanooga, TN in July of 2015 by Al Qaeda.  The discussion of arming came up afterwards and I found out it's against Federal Law for the military to be armed while in the United States.  This law was passed to deter the military from performing a coup, military members also cannot carry a personal weapon on a military installation.   I of course don't think this law is in the best interest of the military.  I also don't think arming everyone is good either, but there has to be a happy medium.  The training is also to ensure when there are joint battles that both the U.S. and foreign war fighters are working with shared tactics and communications.  As always there is going to be a knee jerk reaction to this cowardly act to appease the politicians.  The vetting process for any foreign military coming to train must be improved, any U.S. troops that are involved in the training process should be armed at all times.  Barracks for foreign military should be away from U.S. barracks and their access to facilities should be limited in scope and duration and should be escorted.  Lastly all foreign troops should be limited to access of off installation businesses.  

 

Of course these are only my views and are slanted due to my experiences both here and overseas.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Before I retired from the Navy I was involved with a terrorist shooting in Chattanooga, TN in July of 2015 by Al Quida.  The discussion of arming came up afterwards and I found out it's against Federal Law for the military to be armed while in the United States.  This law was passed to deter the military from performing a coup, military members also cannot carry a personal weapon on a military installation.   I of course don't think this law is in the best interest of the military.  I also don't think arming everyone is good either, but there has to be a happy medium.  The training is also to ensure when there are joint battles that both the U.S. and foreign war fighters are working with shared tactics and communications.  As always there is going to be a knee jerk reaction to this cowardly act to appease the politicians.  The vetting process for any foreign military coming to train must be improved, any U.S. troops that are involved in the training process should be armed at all times.  Barracks for foreign military should be away from U.S. barracks and their access to facilities should be limited in scope and duration and should be escorted.  Lastly all foreign troops should be limited to access of off installation businesses.  

 

Of course these are only my views and are slanted due to my experiences both here and overseas.   

You were misinformed. It is not illegal for the military to be armed in the US. Under the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 it is illegal for the Federal military to take law enforcement action against the civilian population. On military bases, the military and Federal authorities have jurisdiction. As far as barracks for foreign military the vast majority are commissioned officers undergoing advanced or technical training and are not housed in barracks.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What might have been more effective would have been for the FBI or counter-intelligence to routinely monitor internet posting of foreign nationals training on our domestic military bases.  Yes, this would be expensive and probably would violate some law or protocol, but it might have alerted to the potential radicalization of this individual or his buddies.  Arming everyone might just result in a bunch of blue-on-blue crossfire, if everybody cut loose at an active shooter.  OTOH you have the case of the sailor at JB Pearl Harbor who killed several people.  He was allegedly being charged with Article 15 (captain's mast??), and was torqued off at several people.  (SIGH!)  Don't guess I've got good answers either. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet when it is all said and done that the real reason for the shooting was bullying and not terrorism. Naval Aviators have a long tradition of nicknames. One of the caveats being that you do not pick your nickname, your fellow aviators pick it for you. There is no set time or place when you will get a nickname they just seem to happen and occasionally they change over a career.

 

Some nicknames are cherished, some are liked and some are tolerated. HOWEVER, every so often someone gets saddled with a nickname they despise. Sometimes the person learns to tolerate it other times it becomes a real problem.

 

Funny thing about nicknames is that one can be tossed out that sticks like stink on fresh dung. Once it happens getting it to go away is impossible. In this case the nickname was 'Porn Stash" If you think about it just a little it is very easy to see how this particular person could find it extremely offensive. While others would think it very funny. I expect that there was a lot more hazing/bullying going on than just the nickname that made the news. When in a defined group of Naval Aviators can behave like members of an Animal House style college fraternity. When this happens a lot of very poor decisions columinate into the perfect storm of hazing/bullying.

 

The terrorist card is what the news media jumped on simply becasue the shooter happened to from a Middle Eastern country and it fits the current sterotype.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I bet when it is all said and done that the real reason for the shooting was bullying and not terrorism. Naval Aviators have a long tradition of nicknames. One of the caveats being that you do not pick your nickname, your fellow aviators pick it for you. There is no set time or place when you will get a nickname they just seem to happen and occasionally they change over a career.

 

Some nicknames are cherished, some are liked and some are tolerated. HOWEVER, every so often someone gets saddled with a nickname they despise. Sometimes the person learns to tolerate it other times it becomes a real problem.

 

Funny thing about nicknames is that one can be tossed out that sticks like stink on fresh dung. Once it happens getting it to go away is impossible. In this case the nickname was 'Porn Stash" If you think about it just a little it is very easy to see how this particular person could find it extremely offensive. While others would think it very funny. I expect that there was a lot more hazing/bullying going on than just the nickname that made the news. When in a defined group of Naval Aviators can behave like members of an Animal House style college fraternity. When this happens a lot of very poor decisions columinate into the perfect storm of hazing/bullying.

 

The terrorist card is what the news media jumped on simply becasue the shooter happened to from a Middle Eastern country and it fits the current sterotype.

 

 

I didn't know that foreign students got Navy nicknames.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=111657

 

A graphic depiction of the Naval Aviator and Naval Aircrewman pins posthumously awarded, Dec. 10, 2019, by Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas B. Modly.

 

91210-N-DM308-001 WASHINGTON (Dec. 10, 2019) A graphic depiction of the Naval Aviator and Naval Aircrewman pins posthumously awarded, Dec. 10, 2019, by Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas B. Modly to the victims of the Dec. 6 Naval Air Station Pensacola shooting. (U.S. Navy graphic by Mass Communication Specialist Paul Archer/Released)

 

 

Story Number: NNS191210-22Release Date: 12/10/2019 4:28:00 PM
A  A  A   Email this story to a friend   Print this story
From Naval Air Training Command Public Affairs

PENSACOLA, Fla. (NNS) -- The Navy posthumously awarded Wings of Gold Dec. 10 to all three Sailors killed  during the Dec. 6 shooting at Naval Aviation Schools Command aboard Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida.

Acting Secretary of the Navy the Honorable Thomas B. Modly proclaimed Ensign Joshua K. Watson as a naval aviator, and Airman Mohammed S. Haitham and Airman Apprentice Cameron S. Walters as naval aircrewmen, Dec. 10.

“It is my honor today to present the Wings of Gold to the families of these three American heroes who were among the first to respond to horrific attacks upon our own naval family and tragically, were also our Sailors who made the ultimate sacrifice in protecting their brothers and sisters in arms,” said Modly. “Although this authorization pales in comparison to their immense bravery in the line of fire, this winging represents the symbolic achievement of the coveted goal that all three came to Pensacola to accomplish: to join the long line of naval aviators, flight officers, and aircrewmen who have served the cause of freedom so valiantly for over a century. Airman Haitham, Airman Walters, and Ensign Watson represent the highest virtues of naval aviation, and undoubtedly belong in that great fraternity of selfless service to our Navy, our Department, and our Nation.”

Chief of Naval Air Training Rear Adm. Daniel Dwyer oversees all undergraduate Naval Aviation training and is the designation authority for all naval aviators.

“The selfless acts of heroism displayed by these young Sailors the morning of Dec. 6 are nothing short of incredible,” Dwyer said. “They each embody the warrior ethos we expect and require of all wingmen. There is no doubt in my mind they each would have led the charge in their respective Naval Aviation careers. We are deeply saddened by this tragedy and our hearts are truly with the families and friends of our Shipmates.”

Commander, Naval Air Forces Vice Adm. DeWolfe H. Miller III is responsible for all Naval Aviation units. He expressed his condolences to the families of the Sailors and spoke of their bravery in the face of mortal danger.

“Ensign Watson, Airman Haitham and Airman Apprentice Walters are heroes,” Miller said. “Their actions and sacrifice embodied the competence, courage and character of those who wear Naval Aviation Wings of Gold. These wings were presented in honor of their brave actions and in everlasting memory of their sacrifice.”

Student naval aviators are selected based on their aptitude for flight training. A recent U.S. Naval Academy graduate, Watson possessed the education, skills, and tenacity required of naval aviators and was set to begin the rigorous training toward earning his coveted Wings of Gold. Naval aircrewmen, often said to be the Navy’s “guardian angels,” undergo some of the Navy’s most physically challenging training. Candidates must be comfortable in the water, and pass demanding physical fitness standards. Both Haitham and Walters possessed the strength, skill, and determination required of the Navy’s aircrewmen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.