About Us
Mission Statement
Rules of Conduct
 
Name:
Pswd:
Remember Me
Register
 

Ask a Vet
Author: TriSec    Date: 02/23/2021 13:55:58

Good Morning.

Well, at least with the new schedule, if I remember it's Tuesday at 8:30, I still have time to recover.


Let's dive right in. Remember folks, these are our allies.


WASHINGTON — Victims of a 2019 shooting at a Florida military base and their families are suing Saudi Arabia, claiming the kingdom knew the gunman had been radicalized and that it could have prevented the killings.

The suit, filed Monday, also claims that Saudi trainees knew in advance about plans for the shooting but did nothing to stop it.

The suit centers on the Dec. 6, 2019, shooting at Naval Air Station Pensacola in which Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani shot and killed three U.S. sailors. It comes nine months after U.S. officials revealed that Alshamrani, a Saudi Air Force officer, had communicated with al-Qaida operatives about planning and tactics in the weeks leading up to the attack and that he had been radicalized abroad before coming to the U.S. to participate in a military training program.

The lawsuit casts a wide net of blame beyond Alshamrani. It alleges, for instance, that Saudi Arabia knew about Alshamrani’s associations with al-Qaida and his radicalization and yet failed to monitor, supervise or report him. It also says the gunman told fellow Saudi trainees at a dinner party the night before the attack that he planned to carry out the shooting the following day, but instead of reporting it, they called out sick morning of the killings. One recorded the shootings while standing outside the building; two others watched from a car nearby.

“None of the Royal Saudi Air Force trainees at the scene of the attack reported Al-Shamrani’s behavior nor did they try to stop” it, the lawsuit says. “Because they supported it.”


It will be interesting to see if anything comes of it. This is, of course, being viewed through a post-Trump lens, so who knows?

Meanwhile, the fallout from January 6 continues. As reported previously, many of the military branches are starting some intense looking in the mirror; extremists seem to have easily found a home in the US military. Which is why the Navy taking this step seems extraordinary.


When the Navy holds its daylong stand-downs to address the extremist ideologies that leaders say have infiltrated the military ranks, sailors across the fleet will be required to reaffirm the oath they took to the U.S. Constitution.

All Navy personnel -- uniformed and civilian -- will have to repeat the oath of enlistment or office and discuss what actions betray that promise during the virtual or in-person learning sessions that must be held by April 6. The stand-downs will focus on the "damaging effects of extremism" and how to eliminate it, Chief of Naval Personnel Vice Adm. John Nowell wrote in a service-wide message.

"As public servants, we took an oath to the Constitution and we will not tolerate those who participate in actions that go against the fundamental principles of the oath we share, particularly actions associated with extremist or dissident ideologies," Nowell wrote.

The Navy is the first military service to reveal what leaders will cover during the military's upcoming stand-downs. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered the one-day events last month after dozens of veterans and service members were arrested in connection with the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Stand-downs are typically held after accidents to ensure safety protocols are being met, but military leaders have used them to address other problems, such as sexual assault or suicides. Pentagon spokesman John Kirby called the arrests following the Capitol siege a "wake-up call" for defense leaders.

Whether extremists are in the ranks is no longer debatable, he added this week. "It's really just about to what degree," Kirby said.


An oath is something that can be alien to civilians. However, some things have oaths that we might be familiar with. The Scout Oath, for one. Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath. There is a Public Service Oath for certain sectors (Police, Fire, etc.)

But the military is the one that perhaps carries the most weight. Let's take a look at that US Navy oath.


I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

The oath is for an indeterminate period; no duration is specifically defined.


"So help me God".

While members of the service that took that oath, and then participated in the events of January 6 may have to answer to the Constitution (Specifically, Article III, Section 3, Clause 1), there is an eventual higher authority that they all will have to answer to.

I'd love to see those Courts-Martial. I'd say the afterlife might just have an impressive jury pool.






 

10 comments (Latest Comment: 02/23/2021 16:39:37 by livingonli)
   Perma Link

Share This!

Furl it!
Spurl
NewsVine
Reddit
Technorati