• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

REPORTS: No Live Ammo for Marines

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
101,272
Reaction score
45,170
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
U.S. Marines defending the American embassy in Egypt were not permitted by the State Department to carry live ammunition, limiting their ability to respond to attacks like those this week on the U.S. consulate in Cairo.

Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit U.S. Marine guards to carry live ammunition,” according to multiple reports on U.S. Marine Corps blogs spotted by Nightwatch. “She neutralized any U.S. military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”

U.S. officials have yet to confirm or comment on the reports. Time magazine’s Battleland blog reported Thursday “Senior U.S. officials late Wednesday declined to discuss in detail the security at either Cairo or Benghazi, so answers may be slow in coming.”

If true, the reports indicate that Patterson shirked her obligation to protect U.S. interests, Nightwatch states.

“She did not defend U.S. sovereign territory and betrayed her oath of office,” the report states. “She neutered the Marines posted to defend the embassy, trusting the Egyptians over the Marines.”

read more at: http://freebeacon.com/reports-marines-not-permitted-live-ammo/

From my own first-hand experiences in the U.S. Army, I know exactly what it feels like to not be allowed to perform your duty.

Ms. Patterson is an idiot.
 
You can bet your ass Ms. Patterson's escorts are locked and loaded. Ms. Patterson is an idiot. She doesn't know her history very well either. She doesn't have a very high opinion of military men and women either.
 
From my own first-hand experiences in the U.S. Army, I know exactly what it feels like to not be allowed to perform your duty.

Ms. Patterson is an idiot.


Ms Patterson is an idiot.... after idiot Number 1, Mr Obama.


Why do they bother to send Marines at all!
 
It does not make sense that in a hot spot such as this, especially on the anniversary security was not allowed to be properly armed. Moreover, these rioters did not just show up and scale the wall in seconds, it took a great deal of time. Long enough to get the required ammunition if this is true. However, the Pentagon denies that this is true anf that soldiers did have ammunition.



A Marine spokesperson at the Pentagon denied the Free Beacon’s report in a statement to Fox News.

Pentagon Lt Col Chris Hughes told the outlet: “The Ambassador and RSO have been completely and appropriately engaged with the security situation. No restrictions on weapons or weapons status have been imposed. This information comes from the Det Commander at AMEMB Cairo.”

REPORTS: Marines Not Permitted Live Ammo **UPDATE** - US Embassy Attack - Fox Nation

http://freebeacon.com/reports-marines-not-permitted-live-ammo/
 
If true, it is outrageous. Worse, it is now known policy. In that much a hot spot, they should have had mini-guns, mortors, grenade launchers and a couple of Abrams. With zippy pinhead academics running the government now, things are going to keep getting worse. They actually believe the ideological world of their minds is reality.
 
Republicans should claim this is how extreme Obama and the Democrats hope in terms of gun controls. As Commander in Chief, Obama was the final word on those Marines. He can't disarm Americans - yet - but his administration can disarm Marines.

The critical question is WHEN were Marines at Embassies disarmed. Before or since Obama? If this occurred after Obama became president, the Republicans could really hurt him with it.
 
If true, it is outrageous. Worse, it is now known policy. In that much a hot spot, they should have had mini-guns, mortors, grenade launchers and a couple of Abrams. With zippy pinhead academics running the government now, things are going to keep getting worse. They actually believe the ideological world of their minds is reality.

Who appointed her?

It would have made more sense to have no Marines, than Marines with no bullets.

What thoughts and sense of helplessness - and betrayal by the zippy pinhead academia dreamers - went thru the minds of those Marines knowing they and everyone they were suppose to defend were doomed - and of all their own families will suffer - is more than I can even handle really thinking much about.

This also likely explains why this happened. Between various employees etc, the attackers probably knew the Marines were effectively unarmed. Truly sickening. This is more of a story and with deeper implications than even the attack itself.
 
Last edited:
From my own first-hand experiences in the U.S. Army, I know exactly what it feels like to not be allowed to perform your duty.

Ms. Patterson is an idiot.
This better not be true.
 
The Pentagon denies the Marines were not allowed to have bullets... BUT clarifies that the decision would be up to each ambassador...

I think whether the Marines had bullets or not is a very relevant question that must be answered.
 
You can bet your ass Ms. Patterson's escorts are locked and loaded. Ms. Patterson is an idiot. She doesn't know her history very well either. She doesn't have a very high opinion of military men and women either.

you ought to ask some of the agents or military men assigned to the clinton presidential details how Hillary treated such people.
 
Who appointed her?

It would have made more sense to have no Marines, than Marines with no bullets.

What thoughts and sense of helplessness - and betrayal by the zippy pinhead academia dreamers - went thru the minds of those Marines knowing they and everyone they were suppose to defend were doomed - and of all their own families will suffer - is more than I can even handle really thinking much about.

This also likely explains why this happened. Between various employees etc, the attackers probably knew the Marines were effectively unarmed. Truly sickening. This is more of a story and with deeper implications than even the attack itself.

I suspect the ninnies in charge figured a few dead marines was less of a PR problem than a bunch of radical Jihadist assholes getting 5.56 NATO enemas.
 
More lies:


Quote:
U.S. Marines defending the American embassy in Egypt were not permitted by the State Department to carry live ammunition, limiting their ability to respond to attacks like those this week on the U.S. consulate in Cairo. Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit US Marine guards to carry live ammunition,” according to multiple reports on U.S. Marine Corps blog spotted by Nightwatch. “She neutralized any US military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”
And the correction.


After their OPPSS! moment.
Quote:
Further Marine spokesman at Pentagon Lt Col Chris Hughes says these reports are NOT true. This is on the record:
“The Ambassador and RSO have been completely and appropriately engaged with the security situation. No restrictions on weapons or weapons status have been imposed. This information comes from the Det Commander at AMEMB Cairo.”





Im really surprised that FOX corrected their story. Funny that they didnt change the title.
REPORTS: Marines Not Permitted Live Ammo **UPDATE** - US Embassy Attack - Fox Nation
 
So it's all just a case of mis-reporting by Fox, which has been seized upon by the gullible right? That explains a lot.
 
From my own first-hand experiences in the U.S. Army, I know exactly what it feels like to not be allowed to perform your duty.

Ms. Patterson is an idiot.

When hearing stories like this, it's always a good idea to go off half-cocked before actually getting the true story from the military. It makes righteous indignation so much easier.
 
I'll give some military experience about guards and ammo.

My wife was in ASA, a Morse code intercept operator. They eavesdropped on the Warsaw Pact's encoded CW transmissions. Their annual eval included them 'guarding' their building and barracks for a few days with empty weapons.

I was a grunt and we often pulled guard on the entire base in rotation with the other combat arm units. I NEVER, say again NEVER stood guard without ammo. Not even back in Ft. Lewis at the main PX, or the old barracks used as supply buildings.

It would be interesting to find out who is saying embassy guards stand post without ammo. Internet friends of a friend don't count.
 
So it's all just a case of mis-reporting by Fox, which has been seized upon by the gullible right? That explains a lot.
It seems to me that the right is becoming more and more desperate and shrill as their fears grow about Romney being able to beat Obama.
 
It seems to me that the right is becoming more and more desperate and shrill as their fears grow about Romney being able to beat Obama.

Really? Obama's entire Middle East foreign policy just took a ****. Better worry about your guy.
 
Really? Obama's entire Middle East foreign policy just took a ****. Better worry about your guy.

In what way? What exactly is Romney advocating? Bombing a pro-USA Libyian government? Sending marines to mow down protestors? How about after the release of a video that is purposely offensive he comes out saying that the Middle East needs to suck it up.

What exactly is Romney's policy in this decision? Be dumb but loud and bellicose?
 
Really? Obama's entire Middle East foreign policy just took a ****. Better worry about your guy.

So some right wing wack job decides to make a movie that insults Muslims, the uneducated rabble goes nuts and storms embassies, and that's Obama's fault?

Pretty lame.

Of course we could have the Marines open up on the demonstrators and kill a few score, or a hundred. Then what?
 
In what way? What exactly is Romney advocating? Bombing a pro-USA Libyian government? Sending marines to mow down protestors? How about after the release of a video that is purposely offensive he comes out saying that the Middle East needs to suck it up.

What exactly is Romney's policy in this decision? Be dumb but loud and bellicose?

I think you've nailed it with your last sentence. I suppose we could have sent U.S. troops in to prop up the crumbling regimes in Egypt and Libya, a tactic which has proven to be such a rousing success whenever it's been tried. I note that Mitt, like some - but not all Republicans - is long on criticism but short on any actual alternatives.
 
I think you've nailed it with your last sentence. I suppose we could have sent U.S. troops in to prop up the crumbling regimes in Egypt and Libya, a tactic which has proven to be such a rousing success whenever it's been tried. I note that Mitt, like some - but not all Republicans - is long on criticism but short on any actual alternatives.

That is true...it's one thing if he actually advocated a real policy. Regarding Libya he was for it before he was against it. He criticized Obama for "leading from behind" so honestly Romney's foreign policy seems to be centered around "not what that guy did".

If he wants to be a strong foreign policy leader you kinda have to have an actual vision of what your foreign policy would look like.
 
I love how the righties all the sudden shut up when the truth of the story comes out. Blow hard, then run away when the story crumbles.
 
From my own first-hand experiences in the U.S. Army, I know exactly what it feels like to not be allowed to perform your duty.

Ms. Patterson is an idiot.

Why pay Marines to be there then? They could have just had TSA man the gates.
 
You do understand that the entire Fox story is bull****, right?
 
Back
Top Bottom