If the Pentagon was in control, they would not have done that.
You seem to forget the most U.S. military soldiers are conservative. Also, a soldier by law does not have to follow an illegal order, like ordering them to illegally disarm their families and friends.
First off, my contention was that the Posse Comitatus act and similar laws designed to prevent US military intervention against citizens can be effectively bypassed via a number of means, including "having loophools cut into them". That's what you say happened, basically.
I stand by my claim. The fact that Federal Agents, not military troops, were driving the tanks proves my point. How did the FBI or BATF or who ever you claim was driving those military vehicles (owned by the military, not civilian equivelents) get possession of them? How did they gain the skills to drive them?
If some non-military organization in the executive branch can whistle up tanks from the nearest armoury, get them, stick their own ex-military driver and gunners in them and proceed to use the against civilians we have posse comitatus in-name-only.
Further, I am not nearly as certain as you are that there were no military troops involved in Waco, though it has been a long time since I researched it. My recollection is that much evidence was destroyed almost immediately, the site was not treated as any other crime scene would have been, the survivors were railroaded into jail, where most remain and no serious inquiry took place into the events. Thus I really don't believe you can make this blanket statement with certainty or assurance.
As for most military people being "conservative", yes, I believe many or most are. They are also conditioned to obey orders and tend to be people who appreciate both order and heirarchy. Thus I am must less sure than you are that they would not run civilian disarmament or rural pacification operations in the USA. Certainly the vast majority are public school graduates, where they have not been taught what the basis of Republic and the Constitution really are. Thus, intellectually, they may not be equipped to make judgements like this.
Also, who knows what pretext could be used? I believe in the Waco case, after the Feds saw that the "child molesting" charge (probably true) was not enough to get them the tanks they wanted they escalated to "meth lab". (A patently bogus charge without even a pretext of a source, again no repurcussions ever happened). This, apparently allowed a posse comitatus bypass.
As needed more of these "escape clauses" will be created. A "anti terrorism" bypass, then you will just classify people as "domestic terrorists" and it will all be legal.
I appreciate you sticking up for the military. The US Military is one of the very finest large organizations in the world, as well as the greatest fighting force the world has ever seen. However it is still, by design, ultimately subject to the decisions of politicians. And our politicians (both parties) have shown little reluctance to violate the law, ignore the Constitution and misuse their power.
Thus, at a minimum I suspect the Army will have to make some very tough decisions in the future. Whether these decisions are all confined to, and made at the top, or whether they filter down to lower levels, and ultimately individual troops, we can't yet know.
Probably not all will decide the same thing. Which may result in army on army confrontations. Not a big surprise there. Our first Civil War featured West Point trained generals on both sides.