The original reports referred to it as a “contracted” plane. Then it became a “commercial” or “civilian” plane. IMO, the reference changed inorder to explain the decision to disarm the Marines. Does anyone really believe US Marines extracted from a US embassy under emergency conditions were put on a commercial airliner with civilian passengers, leaving a chaotic hot spot in the ME? Commercial or civilian terminology simply means it was NOT a US military aircraft, government owned. I am betting the only people on that plane were US military and other embassy assets.
As well it should have been only the military and embassy assets on that plane.
As such, there was no need to leave personal weapons behind, as the plane would have been in the control of the US military.
If the plane’s owner did not want weapons on the plane, they should get business elsewhere, and the military could have sent in one or two C-130s to accomplish the task.
As usual with this administration,no explanation seems to make sense.
There is never a need for a US Marine to surrender a weapon in an evacuation scenario, unless they are a prisoner, as in Iran in 1979.
The more this type of scenario is allowed, the more there will be challenges to our military around the world.