Military Members on Pence Detail Reassigned for Bringing Women to Hotel

NBC News ^ | Aug. 24, 2017, 7:15 p.m | Courtney Kube

[tjd1454]

Your smug reply justifying sexual immorality is an offense to the many who serve honorably, and who choose to uphold their moral standards. It is the hallmark of those who are desperate to excuse their own behavior that they argue “well, everyone is doing it...”

[Leaning Right]

> They disobeyed the rules. <

Yep. And that’s they key point here. At the level of the VP’s detail, I want serious professionals, not a bunch of frat boys.

[Alberta's Child]

Something else I'll point out from my own experience is that a lot of people who strive to maintain high personal moral standards have no interest in serving in the U.S. military -- and some the posts you see on this thread are among the reasons for this.

Does anyone here think this speaks well of the U.S. military?

[Hawthorn]

This thread is useless without pictures of the gals in question.

[Alberta's Child]

You have a nice day, too.

You might want to sit down and ask yourself what a "security risk" is in U.S. military jargon, too. I suspect this -- not public morality (though clearly it is related to morality) -- is the single biggest reason why these guys were removed from the VP's detail.

[where's_the_Outrage?]

I am 99% in your corner here.

However, if the new model is for ships cruising in the standard paths to suddenly veer into you, and higher HQ has not alerted you to that threat, I may reconsider.

[Nifster]

You want to justify one spouse’s adultery by saying the other one did it too?

Just wow.

Single or married sex outside the bounds of marriage is immoral. Period end of story

[Buckeye McFrog]

Honeypot is a MAJOR infiltration tactic of our adversaries (Russia) as well as our friends (Israel).

I support heterosexuality in the military as much as the next FReeper, but this was a gross breach of operational security.

[tjd1454]

Thanks. I did not intend to insinuate that I was without sin or fault, but I did (do) feel an obligation to defend conservative morality on this pro-family forum. Let the attackers attack, it moves me not one whit.

[safeasthebanks]

Here’s a hint...my comments are in response to the (massive) over-reaction to Where’s the Outrage’s inital comment in this thread, which was:
_______________________________________________________

My first thought was that old saying “A soldier that won’t F*** won’t fight”

But if they infiltrated the women into a secure area, yea the deserved to be relieved. I have to wonder at the ROE.

______________________________________________________

As you can (hopefully) tell, this comment (and mine) have NOTHING to do with defending what these specific military guys did. If they broke the rules they clearly need to be punished.

Please try and have your facts straight before commenting on one of my posts.

[NorthMountain]

[Hawthorn]

>> Don’t these people get any training on what to do and what not to do? <<

Well, sure. Of course they get training. Did you never see one of those Army films on how to avoid VD?

[Nifster]

There are some on here who are not only libertarian but libertine as well

[Alberta's Child]

However, if the new model is for ships cruising in the standard paths to suddenly veer into you, and higher HQ has not alerted you to that threat, I may reconsider.

Right. LOL.

I typically refrain from posting opinions about things like this without knowing more facts, but based on my own knowledge of large vessels I would speculate that it's highly unlikely for an oceangoing container ship or oil tanker to "suddenly veer" into anyone's path.

[Nifster]

My facts are straight

Get your morals in order. Justify sex outside of marriage perhaps even drunken debauchery is hardly a conservative view point

[tjd1454]

“Shees, give it a break”. NEVER. There is nothing more important than defending traditional marriage (= sexual fidelity). Your cavalier dismissal of those who seek to defend God’s truth, I find abominable, and speaks volumes as to your own personal character.

[NonValueAdded]

And if they violated UCMJ (e.g, adultery), yea they deserved to be relieved

I believe getting "relieved" was the root of their problem.

[MrEdd]

Link proving your assertion that these men had wives or girlfriends?

[safeasthebanks]

So much for trying to play nice, as you’ve clearly slipped back into “moron mode” I see - I’ve never defended what these SPECIFIC guys did. They should clearly face consequences for their actions. Sheeesh.

All of my comments were about the over-reaction by the “Jimmy Swaggert crew” to the initial comment on this thread - which also didn’t defend what these guys did.

Do try and keep up.

[where's_the_Outrage?]

I served with combat soldiers. They are not politically correct, they are crass, unsocial, and yes a lot of time morally wrong. But I thanked God they had my back. I will take those into combat any day over your "many who serve honorably, and who choose to uphold their moral standards".

So get off your high horse enter the real world.