Posted on 02/11/2015 8:06:56 AM PST by McGruff
There are plenty of great Marines in service. They just don’t go around killing our ‘friends.’ Don’t blame our tactical forces for strategic failures. Your definition of military success is flawed if you think we haven’t had any success. The problem isn’t the forces on the ground; it’s the people commanding them.
I am proud to know many Marines and other service members and they are more than competent. I have seen the decline in our military for 30 years, but I don’t see it in the troops. Our forces are more capable now than any time since WWII. It’s not their fault that the leadership abandons them and keeps them from winning.
Blaming those on the ground denies the fact that the country as a whole is responsible for the failures. Troops don’t set policy; they follow the orders of their lawfully appointed leaders.
Typically when nations have to resort to putting women in their front line combat units that means that they are running out of qualified men to do the fighting. This is why the Kurds are forming “women” battalions. ISIS is replenishing their losses at a greater rate. I read where they have ~20,000 + recruits coming in from 90 different nations. We don’t need to put our women on the front lines but we do it because of “equality.” Women can pull a trigger just as effective as a man, but there are certain things psychologically that can break down moral of the unit and cause issues such as seeing women killed or maimed in combat, and of course love triangles and jealousy to name a few.
They may be able to fire a machine gun, but can they run around with 100 pounds of gear on?
How do MARINES feel about being disarmed without a fight?
As a Marine (’83-’87) I can answer that. They are more pissed than anyone could imagine. But Marines are incredibly disciplined and follow orders (lawful ones). The big question should be who ordered them to give up the weapons?
What should have happened is an additional rifle platoon with weapons attachment should have been flown in to the embassy and defended it against any attackers. Add to that a constant CAP on patrol ready to start hitting targets within minutes of getting a call for help.
Watch the pattern develop, folks.
Regardless of how watered-down the military is now, they’re still heavily armed soldiers in a VOLUNTARY military. If they’re profoundly not allowed to do exactly what they signed up to do, at some point they will, by nature, turn.
Throw enough under the bus, and the remaining passengers will conclude the driver should be next.
I’d not be surprised by a coup.
The Marines were created in the first place to fight back against Islamic terrorism
Incorrect! The Marine Corp was established on 10 November 1775 during the Revolutionary War. It was later during the Barbary Coast war that Marines fought muslims.
They were probably told not to get on their high horse...
The last time I heard of Marines voluntarily giving up their weapons was at an inspection formation where the Platoon Sergeant took them one at a time to inspect them - but then he gave them back.
Iowa Class.
If we had a real Commander-in-Chief, no one would be permitted to take a Marine's weapons. The United States Marines don't need help, just permission to be Marines. I am disgusted at the evil sissy in our White House, and I pray daily that our country will eventually recover from these eight terrible years under the usurper.
“...ordered to stand down and surrender their weapons by whom? “
Seriously? You have to ask?
My first thoughts also!
You would think by now we would be immune to the shock of "unbelievable" it seems far too many are; even though we have the very lowest of expectations of this administration; shock is prevalent on a daily basis.
Muslims do not recognize diplomatic rules................
No way. He’s probably smiling ear to ear.................
yes you are correct, I realized that just as soon as I posted ....thanks! just had
...”from the Shores of Tripoli...”
in mind was all...
I'm sure they were under orders and had to surrender their weapons rather than fight.
Why are they lucky? They're still alive and free. After disarming them the rebels could have easily taken them hostage, robbed them, or any other form of barbarity they chose. They could be hanging from a bridge beam or their dead bodies dragged through the streets...
Note to Americans overseas - if Embassy personnel aren't even allowed to protect themselves, how will they protect you?
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.