Marines Hand Over Weapons Before Leaving Yemen
BY Herschel Smith
9 years, 2 months ago
U.S. Embassy Marines in Yemen handed over their M-9 pistols and M-4 carbines before evacuating the chaotic country with diplomatic personnel, the Pentagon said Wednesday.
The Marines also left behind several vehicles at the airport in the capital city of Sanaa before departing on a civilian flight, said Army Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman.
Warren said the Marines destroyed their machine guns and other crew-served weapons before leaving the Embassy for the airport. He also said that it was unclear who now had custody of the weapons and vehicles that were surrendered.
A Marine spokesman could not immediately say whether the surrender of weapons by Embassy Marines in an evacuation was unprecedented.
[ … ]
Warren also could not say why a civilian charter flight was used rather than military aircraft for the evacuation. He suggested that the handover of weapons may have resulted from international rules barring weapons on a civilian flight.
And another report from Marine Corps Times:
“No Marines handed over a functional weapon to anybody,” the official said.
Each weapon was made inoperable before the Marines’ departure, the official said. It was not clear, he said, whether the Marines damaged the weapons’ barrels, removed rifle bolts, or taken other steps to render them unusable.
The Marine Corps Times is just painting a happy face on the sorry event. The Pentagon “official” is incorrect to suggest that because it was a commercial charter flight firearms weren’t allowed. My own son departed from Cherry Point bound for Iraq with his firearms in hand aboard a commercial chartered flight, as did the rest of the 2/6 Marine Corps.
This is a sad, sorry, horrible, embarrassing, shameful episode in Marine Corps History. I ashamed for them. What on earth has happened to America’s 911 fighting force?
|
|
On February 12, 2015 at 2:38 am, Jake said:
I was a part of the full evacuation of the US Embassy in Freetown Sierra Leone in 1997. I say this as an Infantry Squad Leader at the time – that was a hasty evacuation. State Dept personnel were loaded onto helicopters and flown to the USS Kearsarge off shore. Why in the world would Embassy guards leave their weapons behind if it was so coordinated that they took a chartered flight? And ya – bs to the excuse that weapons arent allowed – we often flew with our weapons on chartered flights. Maybe the Corps needs to stop making Embassy guards out of admin clerks and give that job back to grunts who would NEVER leave their weapons behind. I feel for the guys bc I know it was some diplomat or General that gave the order – but I know that how WE were trained our Drill Instructors would have killed us if they found out their recruits were among those who handed over their weapons before abandoning their Post. Sound off – Grunt yut.
On February 12, 2015 at 9:32 am, Ned Weatherby said:
“Warren also could not say why a civilian charter flight was used rather
than military aircraft for the evacuation. He suggested that the
handover of weapons may have resulted from international rules barring
weapons on a civilian flight.” Riiight. And I have some ocean-front property for sale in Arizona…
On February 12, 2015 at 9:57 am, cargosquid said:
We used charted civilian flights to go to and return from Kuwait. Our rifles were at our feet both ways.
On February 12, 2015 at 10:12 am, dan said:
PC requires a MARINE to give up his ‘scared vow’…HIS ‘rifle’ which is his ‘life’……total BS..that stems from liberalism as it is applied today….imho
On February 12, 2015 at 10:26 am, Ned Weatherby said:
If the aircraft had taken hits on takeoff and had to make a forced landing, the enemy would have had a turkey shoot. There seem to be a bunch of MANPADS missing from the sandbox. One day, our guys may be on the receiving end of one. This is idiocy of a grand scale.
On February 12, 2015 at 1:28 pm, Archer said:
My thoughts exactly. Who in their right mind would keep the Marine “guards”, but strip them of their means to … y’know … guard the other personnel?
Who gave that order? Someone would’ve had to.
This is just more politically-correct bull$#!+, part of the “pansification” of the U.S. Armed Forces.
On February 12, 2015 at 4:51 pm, Jack Crabb said:
Despicable. Chesty Puller must be rolling over in his grave thinking, “What in the hell has happened to my Marine Corps?!”
On February 13, 2015 at 3:14 pm, robertsgunshop said:
Hell, I’m wondering the same thing and I’m not dead. I’m amazed at the changes since the time I served.
On February 13, 2015 at 5:00 pm, madoradataman said:
Unfortunately, the Corps and other services have been subjected to PC notions for a long time. This is just the most recent. The Battalion HQ in Beirut was blown-up in part because some diplomat was worried the Marines would shoot anything that moved. The military command structure went along with this. Similar BS occurred in ‘Nam on some occasions.
On February 14, 2015 at 2:46 am, mcian said:
I find it hard to believe our Marines would just give up their weapons… sounds like the statists are working diligently to destroy morale.
On February 14, 2015 at 11:56 am, Pat Hines said:
As a southern nationalist, I’m standing aside while my enemy, the US government, is making this and other colossal mistakes.
Never interfere while your enemy is making mistakes, let him roll on.
On February 20, 2015 at 11:13 am, Grandpa said:
MARINES do not surrender their weapon. Period. “This is my weapon. Without me, my weapon is useless. Without my weapon, I am useless.” I don’t want to hear any b.s. about “rendered inoperable.” It is still a club, or a bat, it is never completely inoperable in the hands of a warrior. …Grandpa