Why do they just keep reassigning these people

cb7893 said:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...r-bringing-women-back-to-hotel-in-panama.html

Reassigned? Is there no penalty in the military for being an idiot? Hurt feelings and embarrassment are not a penalty.
Click to expand...

*******************************
"At this time, no evidence of prostitution exists with any of the removed service members," Karen Brazell, the chief of staff to the White House Military Office, told the outlet.

Why not let the story play out before the soldiers are punished? They will be appropriately reprimanded if the facts of the case merit it.

There are careers, families, and reputations at stake. I'd like to give them the old "innocent until proven guilty."
 
Maplerock said:
"At this time, no evidence of prostitution exists with any of the removed service members," Karen Brazell, the chief of staff to the White House Military Office, told the outlet.
Click to expand...

What does prostitution have to do with it? This a security issue. They could have been playing Canasta.

"NBC News said Pence's staff became aware of the issue when they saw security footage of the men, all high-ranking members of the forces, bringing the women into the secure area."

I recall a discussion on SAF regarding a USAFA cadet who was booted after bringing his girlfriend to his room to spend the night. It was unanimous that bringing an unauthorized person into a secure military facility was worthy of separation.

You are correct. There hasn't been due process, but prima facie evidence was good enough to warrant the reassignments.
 
First I want to say that I in no way am defending what these soldiers did but just wanted to ad some perspective to this.

Now this was a while ago and regulations may have changed but from what I've heard they handle things close to the same now.

When we would travel with the President, once with the VP, they would have at least one floor of the hotel secured for POTUS and some of his senior staff. This floor was secured tight, you only entered that floor if they requested you be there. The rest of us would stay on different floors. The floor for POTUS was secure, but the rest of the hotel was considered technically secure, meaning they had swept the place and had personnel stationed about the building.
While the entire hotel was considered secure it was still filled with regular guests, I remember once that we had the Boston College Cheerleaders staying in the rooms next to us. I only mention this because when the press wrote that they brought these women into a secure area, it was probably not the type of secure area you would first think of. We would sometimes walk out our room to see Mom and Dad with 3 kids in bathing suits heading for the pool.
So while these soldiers probably broke the rules the level of security may not be as large an issue as the press reported. Should they have been reassigned, yes, and I'm sure they will no longer hold those positions and they could take a hit with their security clearance, and their service record will take a hit.....And if any were married, well, that's a whole different issue.

The issue with the AF cadet was different, he actually brought an unauthorized person on to a Military facility without permission and broke clearly spelled out rules and regulations for cadets. While it seems the same there is a difference when it comes to the military. The other point is that the hotel the soldiers were staying fell under the security of the Secret Service and was not a Military property, the rules are different.

I have no doubt these soldiers will be punished and their careers will take a hit but I doubt they will be removed from service, of course they will need to be promoted some day and that's another issue.
 
Last edited:
Removing them from these positions and reassigning them where they won't have access to White House communications would be standard procedure. Investigation will play out and if warranted, they will face charges. And I agree, secure area is a very broad term. If they in fact brought prostitues back, that would be an issue as it's against rules and also opens them up to a whole host of things that could happen. Investigation will either clear them or end their careers.
 
NavyHoops said:
If they in fact brought prostitues back
Click to expand...

Yep, that would be the nail in the coffin for sure.

And just from a guy's perspective, 4 guys in Panama go out and just happen to find 4 women that will come back to their hotel with them......I didn't just fall of the back of a truck yesterday, just saying.
 
Jcleppe said:
NavyHoops said:
If they in fact brought prostitues back
Click to expand...

Yep, that would be the nail in the coffin for sure.

And just from a guy's perspective, 4 guys in Panama go out and just happen to find 4 women that will come back to their hotel with them......I didn't just fall of the back of a truck yesterday, just saying.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the ladies wanted to practice their English conversation skills. :rolleyes:
 
Jcleppe said:
When we would travel with the President, once with the VP, they would have at least one floor of the hotel secured for POTUS and some of his senior staff. This floor was secured tight, you only entered that floor if they requested you be there. The rest of us would stay on different floors. The floor for POTUS was secure, but the rest of the hotel was considered technically secure, meaning they had swept the place and had personnel stationed about the building.
While the entire hotel was considered secure it was still filled with regular guests,
Click to expand...

So noted, but were there regulations concerning entertaining guests in your room...even for a game of canasta?
 
Hey, maybe the Army guys finished all of their Rosetta Stone modules and wanted to practice their Latin Spanish skills......
 
you can be assured their reassignment will be to some garden spot like Afghanistan or the embassy in Outer Mongolia. And their next ERs will not be career enhancing.
 
Not sure how the Army works, but in the USMC someone on legal hold isn't deployable. The USMC certainly wouldn't send someone to an embassy, regardless of how remote and miserable it is. I have spent lots of time at several embassys and across all services, embassy's are seen as a privilege. Now being stuck in the Ops shop rewriting SOPs, counting boxes or being given small miserable projects... yes.
 
+1 Hoops. USMC is probably not alone in finding terrible details to assign people to but it becomes an "art" for a clever Officer.

JCleppe: man, I want to be you. Bet you have some stories. I never had anything close to the stuff you are describing.

In summary, serving in the military brings all kinds of assignments that civilians would never dream of. It creates all kinds of challenges for a young LT as he deals with the reality of herding "cats" (or young enlisted men) day-to-day. Gosh... I can't think of a better job!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top