Bomb-proof tunnel with air conditioning: Obama's security go to extraordinary measures..

It is also reported that a bomb-proof tunnel will be erected for Mr Obama ahead of his visit to Mani Bhavan - the Gandhi museum - on Saturday.

According to Daily News & Analysis, U.S. secret service agents visited the museum on Monday to plan Mr Obama's security during his tour. They were accompanied by Mumbai Police officers and civic officials of the D ward where Mani Bhavan is located. While they were inspecting the route and the buildings lining the path to the museum, U.S. security officers noticed a nearby skyscraper in the highly populated area that could pose a threat. To the amazement of the Indians accompanying the U.S. agents, it was apparently decided to erect a bomb-proof over-ground tunnel, which will be installed by U.S. military engineers in just an hour. The kilometre-long tunnel will measure 12ft by 12ft and will have air-conditioning, close-circuit television cameras, and will be heavily guarded at every point. It's being built so it is large enough for Mr Obama's cavalcade to pass through and will be manned at its entry and exit points.

The material that the tunnel would be made of has not been released but officials said that the structure would be dismantled immediately after Mr Obama and his party leaves the area...

Well put. In past American history, our security forces quietly protected our dignitaries in a very low profile manner. The Host is obliged to protect his guests.

In this case, the host is mightily embarrassed by the security entourage that must accompany the pres__ent - you can bet on it. Particularly in Asia where traditions of honor are still held in high regard.

The story about removing the coconuts is an attempt to recover some face for our Indian brethren - they are saying, ‘look at what lengths we will go to, to protect our guest’. They’re trying to point out that they, as the hosts, are doing everything they can. Then we slap them twice across the face in public bragging about how many ninjas, men in black, and men with steel we have to take along with us in order to visit them.

This country doesn’t pick up on the nuances of this visit, but you can bet the rest of the world will - the rest of Asia, Africa, South America. They all still have a modicum of honor that this white house can’t even begin to comprehend.

Sheesh. This post-American world of hussein is embarrassing, isn’t it?

Kit!

Well, actually we are not only visitors but the one lone Super Power.

As such, we travel with a heavy contingency of protection and incumbent countries understand our very special needs or we cannot come.

They aldo travel with their contingencies but rely on your national forces, state forces and local forces.(read FBI, SS, NSA, Sheriff and Police).

A tremendous amount of consultation and negotiation goes into the travel arrangements and security requirements.

Trust me, there are really bad actors out there and they use Anti-personal measures and weapons. LAWS rockets, .50 cal type weapon, swarming at levels of density such as 30+ in unit forces. It goes on and on.

But, whether or not we like Barry and I don’t, he needs to be protected at all times under our control and protection.

Even to the point of controlling ingress, egress and escape contingencies.

The only embarrassment for me, as an American, is there doesn’t seem to be an agenda.

Moreover, given the economic climate I think those countries should come and visit us if we are negotiating specific points in our national interest.

The Pentagon denies the warship part of this:

“Q: India’s state media is reporting that the president is going to bring an enormous amount of security with him during his visit to India this weekend, to include 34 U.S. warships that would be moved to the Mumbai area. Whether or not these reports are true, they’ve certainly stirred up a lot of interest. I was wondering if you could comment on specifically the 34 warships portion of that.

MR. MORRELL: Yeah, I mean, I think there’s been a lot of creative writing that’s been done on this trip over the last few days. I’ve seen other reports with some astronomical figures in terms of what it costs to take these trips.

I don’t know the cost. We don’t speak to the cost. We obviously have some support role for presidential travel. We don’t speak to that in detail for security reasons. But I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd this notion that somehow we were deploying 10 percent of the Navy — some 34 ships and an aircraft carrier — in support of the president’s trip to Asia. That’s just comical. Nothing close to that is being done.

But the notion that the president would require security as he travels to India and elsewhere should not come as a surprise to anyone. I mean, you know, this is a country that, sadly, withstood a devastating terrorist attack – what? — a couple of years ago. So it is — it stands to reason that we would want to take precautions for presidential travel.

But that is a, really, issue that you should probably most directly address, again, to my friends at the White House. Does that answer your question?

Q It does. Unless any, you know, special security requests come this time around with this trip. We’d be interested to know —

MR. MORRELL: Well, I — we would not speak to you about special security requests. We wouldn’t speak to you about any security requests. All we’ll say is that this department does play a role in support of presidential missions, but we don’t care to, for security reasons, discuss the particulars of that.

I made an exception in batting down this absurd notion of there being 34 ships, or more than 10 percent of the Navy, deployed in support of this trip. That is most certainly not the case.”

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4710

Seriously. Feel free to whack me with a Clue by Four.

Seven plus One already tried to. We cannot go into a foreign country, especially one like India, with our military and do whatever we want to. Even if things get seriously nasty. It would be a huge international incident if we did. A major setback in relations if we even acted like we would.

Our own security details, working under the close supervision of Indian authorities, yes. But they would never allow military boots on the ground. That's why I asked earlier what good warships would be. India has war ships and they control their own waters. There is no possible use for ours there.

If targets on the ground needed striking India would do it themselves. Using heavy air or sea power would be a bizarre way to deal with a terrorist cell on your own soil anyway. It would be highly insulting to India to even offer military assistance beyond the basic security detail.

I see your point. However, I disagree.

Do you remember when Bush’s agent was suddenly held back in South America?

Bush literally turned around and grabbed his agent by the collar pulling him into position of proximity.

The host country doesn’t have to agree to our security requirements. We just won’t go.

We are also doing the host country a huge favor with such a large security detail and apparatus.

I mean, can you imagine how embarrassing it would be to the host country if anything happened to POTUS? The ramifications would be horrible.

No other head of state would dare visit India.

All other countries would immediately lock down their embassies.

All other countries would immediately reduce business operations, in particular, the USA. Not good for your country if the POTUS isn’t safe with his security detail then business men would most certainly not be safe.

A huge blow to the prestige of the host country from which they might take generations to resolve.

The ramifications are just unacceptable for the host country.

Besides, having the POTUS in your country is a big, big deal. The presence of the POTUS is more than a status symbol but by its very nature elevates the international status of the host country.
power elevation

Now to another point. Imagine a foreign force takes out the POTUS. Now it’s not just the important items mentions above but would be even more devastating than an internal force acting. An external force would so damage their national security and military they would never taken seriously again.

Who want’s to be known for having crap control of borders, which would further demonstrate how weak they are if a foreign force couldn’t be detected.

Talk about Martial law, I mean, the current leadership of say India or any other country would immediately lock the country down. Curfews, old enemies attacked, less people able to interact with their leaders.

The people could never hope to petition the countries leadership as they will be in a bunker somewhere for a very long time.

The POTUS being succesfully attacked would immediately give prestige to the attackers.

Can you imagine what the recruitment numbers would be if Al Qaeda were successful?

What an embarrasement for our own country as well and you know Al Qaeda would film the attack and play it all over the Internet with their Allah music.

Besides, who has all the badass toys for surveillance, detection, attack and defense? Well that would be us. The good ole’ USofA.

Our guys have it all. They are trained and coordinate well.

We have the best comms in the world.

We have the best jets in the world

We can Jam any damn thing we want.

We have guys that can shoot from more than a mile away and are very experienced at it.

We have the best electronics surveilance equipment.

We have robots and in ground sensors.

We have drones that perform a jillion things a human can’t do for hours on end.

We can afford to purchase a tunnel Hesco and put it up to protect our people and the POTUS.

BTW, we are not just providing protection to the POTUS but also for FLOTUS and some 250 business men.

We simply have more assets, better training and comms to do this.

But if you feel like we should send just a security detail, then you won’t mind if an Anwar Sadaat or Bhutto incident takes place. For that matter an incident on par with Ford or Reagan.

Bottom line: The host country is free to not have us come but it affects their prestige not ours.

Conversely if we do come, anything that happens also affects their prestige and coincidentally ours.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.