There were two others in 2019 as well.

It will never not be a shock to me that carrying of firearms on US military bases is highly restricted among personnel.

Isn't that supposed to be what they're there for?

In the old days being in a peacetime army was so awful that you either had to be rich going in or very dedicated. These days there is a huge block of rear area losers that are comfy and free to bring the conventional wisdom about being unable to defend yourself down to the local bases, while they sit safe in some comfy office in DC.

Imagine being so woke you want to remove the article forbidding slavery from your State constitution simply because the word "slavery" triggers you.
https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2019/12/31/words-matter-st-paul-police-chief-todd-axtell-aims-to-have-slavery-section-removed-from-minnesota-constitution/

Right, because foreign agents coming to American soil to train to kill weren't """screened""" before

what a load of shit

Fox is just as cucked as trump on the Saudi question

Honestly its America's own fault- here in the UK we don't trust anyone who isn't one of our western allies

We purposely place a guardian angel for those reasons

I was surprised by the news since after 9-11 I would have thought there would have been some change in the pilot training program, even if it wasn't cancelled. Stick them off in some base out in the wastelands and let them train away from everyone, or better yet do in out in Saudi somewhere.

There's a reason we train foreign officers. It comes down to logistics we want the fight to happen on the other side of the planet with an ocean full of our ships in between us and the enemy. That also means we end up fighting somewhere we do not have territory or native assets. It takes a lot of time energy and resources to move those assets. So having locals who know how to say coordinate with our close air support or integrate with our battle groups is kinda a big deal. So there are foreign exchange students at most of our military academies.

Otherwise you end up in a D-Day scenario. We took a lot of casualties at Normandy. Overall we prefer that the other guy takes most of the casualties.

Of course your professors will tell you that this is because we are an evil imperialist power. A bully, a threat to peace. I could go into how much peace and prosperity this practice of ours has brought to the world but fukkit, the end result is that we have a defensive border that is thousands of miles wide dominated by kilotons of our firepower so instead I'll quote my second favorite chess player;

They say my chess games should be more interesting. I could be more interesting - and also lose. - Tigran Petrosian

Tbh that is bullshit dude

My job was to fly out usually to Africa and assist in training the locals to fight in the proxy wars, there was never any need for them to come to my country

I think if we had a "normandy" against the people in the middle east these wars would be over by now.

and even when we were teaching them they were also watched by a guardian angel (a soldier with a gun made ready) so if they did anything percieved as threatening they caught a bullet

Exchange programs do happen but even then they are never in possession of a live weapon where instructors don't have one

these attacks on our home bases is showing alot of flaws with the systems we have, were i runing a base your sidearm would be part of your uniform, it better be in it's holster and ready to rock else you will be getting some KP.

That's a different task my guy (training local militia that is) usually we use Green Berets for that. What we do at the academies is more for command-level integration.

the fact that these people are being brought into our contries and left alone enough to make these attacks is a problem.

it's a failure that never ever for any reason needs to happen.

Sure this looks like a colossal fuckup. Wondering how the fuck he ended up with a live weapon at a flight school. Military restrictions on arm on base are fairly strict. I was speaking to the general policy of training foreign officers which has some pretty valid reasons.

Not really tbh

Exactly, they're strict enough. You can screen these fucking jihadi cunts as much as you like, they'll perform the duty of their god one way or another

It's fucking galling to me anyone would suggest that its our military regs that need to change, rather than our relationship to the number one jihadi kingdom, in the face of clear and present terrorism

These incidents happen. More servicemembers die each week from alcohol, training, and general-life related events. The system's pretty straightforward, can't do much about the occasional extremist

Obama's push for gender equity - compromising the standards of infantry training to ensure 1 or 2 females enter a unit - along with co-ed boot camp practices - did more damage on military readiness than any of the random jihadi's going postal on their base.

exactly, so why change the current regs when its our ill-concieved """"""""""alliance"""""""""" that must be dealth with

Uh Oh, Liz is feeling the pressure

https://www.wral.com/warren-isn-t-talking-much-about-medicare-for-all-anymore/18862798/

Looks like screaming at the TV/Radio/screen finally produced something positive.

https://youtu.be/GAIRKtseUMM

https://www.muslimcps.org/

@Diraphity Does that mean slavery will be legal in Minnesota? <:hyperthink:462282519883284480>

They'll probably call them involuntary volunteers

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/01/01/us/mountain-lions-human-remains-arizona-killed/index.html

But we need to take away the guns.

Just remember.

The Democrats just know.

There will be no blowback from this.