According to the report, Marines guarding the embassy in Egypt are not allowed to carry live ammunition.

http://www.examiner.com/article/report-says-u-s-marines-cairo-not-allowed-to-carry-live-ammunition

Who needs ammo? Fix bayonets.

WTF!!!!!!

why do we report this to the public? hey world here are out plans.. i hope you are not listening in.

Un believable! I wonder if these orders came from the prophet Barack himself!

Better question, why do we believe every fly-by-night Internet report?

 

From FOX News:

 

http://nation.foxnew...o#ixzz26NVluxgG

 

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."

Obviously, If the Marines had ammo, There would be some body count in the crowd of attackers!

An armed Marine contingent should be non-negotiable.

 

Dear President, whatever your name is.

We are stationing a <platoon/company> of Marines at our embassy and they will be a fully-armed infantry fighting unit.

Be advised that US Marines will open fire upon any assemblage of 10 or more individuals who enters our embassy grounds without permission.

If you do not accept this we will withdraw our embassador and terminate all foreign aid to your pitiful 3rd-world-assed nation.

You have 8 hours to decide.

End of discussion.

Sincerely, a President with Balls.

 

ETA:

There is one thought that I am 100% certain NEVER went through Obummer's head while this was going down: "Hmmm, what would Teddy Roosevelt do if he were in my situation?"

Better question, why do we believe every fly-by-night Internet report?

 

From FOX News:

 

http://nation.foxnew...o#ixzz26NVluxgG

 

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."

 

Because people are sheep and panic when anyone cries wolf.

Perhaps other trusted news sources should be polled before posting possible inflammatory and misleading web articles. We have basically policed some forum members who played fast and loose with the truth and have enjoyed a period of succinct and relevant if not controversial postings.

I dare say I at times miss the controversy and dialog a contrary post can bring but not at the cost of the truth.

I doubt most of the members of this forum would actually believe that US Marines would be deployed without ammo..just picture that story..30 marines attacked and captured..werent given ammunition..i dont think even this clown administration we have is that dumb

I'm sure there was some kind of escalation of force... shotguns with less than lethal, FN 303's.

 

Marines are not the kind of people who panic easily. It's easy to second guess those guys from the safety of your computer, but my guess was that they weighed the option to fire with the risk. Sadly, the destruction of an American flag is not enough justification to slaughter people wholesale. Once you turn on the Marines, you may not like the results. They are very good at what they do.

I doubt most of the members of this forum would actually believe that US Marines would be deployed without ammo..just picture that story..30 marines attacked and captured..werent given ammunition..i dont think even this clown administration we have is that dumb

I too trust the Marines would not be put into a position where they could not defend their charges or selves without live ammunition......thus my posting. It was unbelievable for first sniff but it was still posted and here we are..........

There must be some clear rules of engagement for the Marines that run security at diplomatic missions. I don't know what it is. But, since diplomatic missions are technically sovereign soil...it can be sticky. We have numerous consulates in the US that are foreign sovereign soil. If there were a protest or vandalism in NY or in DC of a foreign embassy, we wouldn't want the foreign military security detail just slaughtering protestors in the street.

 

It's very very messy and it is the risk we run by having diplomatic installations in very unfriendly parts of the world.

There must be some clear rules of engagement for the Marines that run security at diplomatic missions. I don't know what it is. But, since diplomatic missions are technically sovereign soil...it can be sticky. We have numerous consulates in the US that are foreign sovereign soil. If there were a protest or vandalism in NY or in DC of a foreign embassy, we wouldn't want the foreign military security detail just slaughtering protestors in the street.

 

It's very very messy and it is the risk we run by having diplomatic installations in very unfriendly parts of the world.

I am cognizant of the challenges these fine leathernecks face but in essence they only follow the HMFIC's orders and forced to face the consequences.

I am cognizant of the challenges these fine leathernecks face but in essence they only follow the HMFIC's orders and forced to face the consequences.

 

yup.

 

btw....HMFIC...lol

There must be some clear rules of engagement for the Marines that run security at diplomatic missions. I don't know what it is. But, since diplomatic missions are technically sovereign soil...it can be sticky. We have numerous consulates in the US that are foreign sovereign soil. If there were a protest or vandalism in NY or in DC of a foreign embassy, we wouldn't want the foreign military security detail just slaughtering protestors in the street.

 

It's very very messy and it is the risk we run by having diplomatic installations in very unfriendly parts of the world.

 

I was under the impression that embassy's are built on land governed by that country..or in some fashion. US has very little jurisdiction when it comes to foreign embassy's if any even on US soil, since technical the US doesnt own the land they are built on.

I doubt most of the members of this forum would actually believe that US Marines would be deployed without ammo..just picture that story..30 marines attacked and captured..werent given ammunition..i dont think even this clown administration we have is that dumb

 

They have been before that is what makes it believable.. could the new report be a back pedal ?

They have been before that is what makes it believable.. could the new report be a back pedal ?

 

Of course they had no ammo. Same reason why there was private security instead of Marines at the Libyan embassy. Armed Marines may scare someone and we can't have that.

 

The military comment (HES LYING) was made because the average person would be dumbstruck if they thought that our government was stupid enough to have Marines with metal and plastic sticks (M4 with no ammo) defending our embassies.

You can have armed guards at a bar in Newark but heaven forbid we let our Marines be armed.

Redux of 1980.

According to the report, Marines guarding the embassy in Egypt are not allowed to carry live ammunition.

 

I have no idea if this story was true last week, but I'm willing to bet big $$ that the Marines have ammo this week....

Its the interwebs that took the ammo from the Marines

 

http://nation.time.com/2012/09/13/turns-out-the-marines-had-ammo/

 

 

From the USMC Office of Legislative Affairs via a friend of mine. This is unclassified information by the way:

 

From: Cross, Alex Maj OLA, LA-41B

Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 4:55 PM

To: Cross, Alex Maj OLA, LA-41B

Subject: Marines in Libya and Egypt

 

 

Ladies and Gentlemen-

 

The following information is provided regarding Marine involvement

in the recent actions in Egypt and Libya:

 

Egypt:

-The Ambassador did not impose restrictions on weapons or weapons

status on the Marine Corps Embassy Security Group (MCESG) detachment. The

MCESG Marines in Cairo were allowed to have live ammunition in their

weapons. The Ambassador and Regional Security Officer have been completely

and appropriately engaged with the security situation. Reports of Marines

not being able to have their weapons loaded per direction from the

Ambassador are not accurate.

- The Marine Corps does not establish Rules of Engagement (ROE).

Nonetheless, ROE is classified and release of that information would

jeopardize the Marines and U.S. interests. Any further inquiry should be

directed to the State Department, since Marine security guards report to the

ambassador not to a military commander.

-As reported in open sources, approximately 2000 personnel were

protesting outside the U.S. Embassy and six individuals entered Embassy

grounds. The Marines quickly took control of these six individuals and

subsequently turned them over to local security officials.

-There were no Marines injured in this, or other actions in Cairo.

-There are no Marine dependents in Cairo.

 

Libya:

-Contrary to open source reporting, there are no Marines currently

stationed at the Embassy in Tripoli, or the Consulate in Benghazi.

-There were no Marines killed in the attack on the Consulate in

Benghazi.

 

Yemen:

-The American Embassy in Sana'a, Yemen has a MCESG reinforced with a

Marine security force. Due to operational security, we are not at liberty

to provide additional details at this time.

 

Marine Corps Embassy Security Guards (MCESG):

Embassy security in Tripoli and the consulate in Benghazi fall under

the Regional Security Officer with the State Department. The U.S. maintains

over 285 diplomatic facilities worldwide. MCESG provides 152 security

detachments provide internal security at designated U.S. diplomatic and

consular facilities in order to prevent the compromise of classified

material vital to the national security of the United States. Perimeter

security is the responsibility of the host nation police/security forces.

AMEMB Tripoli does not have a MCESG detachment. Typically, when a new

embassy is established, it takes time to grow a new MCESG detachment. In

coordination with the State Department, there was discussion about

establishing a detachment in Tripoli sometime in the next five years.

Overall, the plan is to grow the number of MCESG detachments worldwide to

173. The size of a MCESG detachment depends on the size of the Embassy and

the security situation on the ground. They normally range anywhere from

5-20+ Marines in size. MCESG can, and have, provided security at Consulates

as well as Embassies. For example, Marines guard the US Consulate in Hong

Kong and, in the past, have guarded the US Consulate in addition to the

Embassy in Haiti. The decision as to which consulates receive this

augmented security lies with the State Department. State identifies its

requirements and DOD/Marines work to provide it. A U.S. Ambassador serving

in an unstable region can/will normally have a security detail provided by

the State Departments Diplomatic Security Corps. State has agents specially

trained to provide personal security details (similar to the Secret

Service). Stephanie Hoostal at the State Liaison Office (B-330) can be

reached at 6-4542 if you have questions specific to the State Dept.

 

Fleet Anti-Terrorism Support Team (FAST):

A FAST platoon deployed to Libya yesterday (12 Sep 12) to provide

security for the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli. Established in 1987, FAST

platoons provide a limited-duration, expeditionary security force to protect

vital naval and national assets. FAST companies maintain forward-deployed

platoons at various naval commands around the globe and possess U.S.-based

alert forces capable of rapidly responding to unforeseen contingencies

worldwide. FAST is not designed to provide a permanent security force for

installations. FAST platoons are primarily designed to conduct defensive

combat operations, military security operations, and rear area security

operations in response to approved requests in support of geographic

combatant and fleet commanders. When deployed to reinforce embassies with

existing MCESG detachments, FAST platoons will customarily provide an outer

cordon of security inside the embassy compound, while MCESG Marines maintain

security of the chancery proper, and host nation police/security forces

provide an outer cordon of security beyond embassy grounds.

 

NOTE: Although a Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) has traditionally

been forward deployed to the Mediterranean (2.5 MEU forward deployment-1 x

east coast MEU to the Med, 1 x west coast MEU to the Pacific, and the 31st

MEU forward based out of Okinawa, Japan), there is currently no MEU presence

in the Mediterranean. The Marine Corps currently maintains a 1.5 MEU

presence forward deployed. We currently have the 24th MEU from the east

coast deployed to the Persian Gulf, a west coast MEU is conducting work-ups

for deployment, and the 31st MEU is operating from Okinawa.

 

Please see the attachments for more information on FAST or MCESG.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact your Marine

Corps Liaison Office in RHOB-B324.

 

Respectfully,

Alex Cross, Maj USMC

Deputy Director, Marine Liaison Office

U.S. House of Representatives

 

An armed Marine contingent should be non-negotiable.

 

Dear President, whatever your name is.

We are stationing a <platoon/company> of Marines at our embassy and they will be a fully-armed infantry fighting unit.

Be advised that US Marines will open fire upon any assemblage of 10 or more individuals who enters our embassy grounds without permission.

If you do not accept this we will withdraw our embassador and terminate all foreign aid to your pitiful 3rd-world-assed nation.

You have 8 hours to decide.

End of discussion.

Sincerely, a President with Balls.

 

ETA:

There is one thought that I am 100% certain NEVER went through Obummer's head while this was going down: "Hmmm, what would Teddy Roosevelt do if he were in my situation?"

 

FYI: Department of State handles physical security at US Consulates and Embassies, usually by hiring local (foreign) assets in country to conduct physical security. Sometimes PMCs are used. A USMC Security (MCESG) detachments primary mission is to safeguard classified information. They protect American personnel as well, but that is a secondary mission. They're good at what they do but they are more like cops than infantry.

 

The MCSEGs fall under the operational control of the Regional Security Officer (RSO) who makes the final call. So it's a military unit that answers and takes it's orders from civilian officials.

 

Without going into specifics, they have a limited ability to deal with crowd situations and it is typically in conjunction with the security provided by the host nation and external guard force which are usually local, sometimes PMCs (as mentioned above) who are responsible for securing the gates and walls of the compound. While the RSO (or whichever State official at the time) has operational control of the detachment, the decision to employ those measures is situation dependent. The size of the detachment vs. the size and intent of the crowd factors in. Detachments are typically as small as they need to be to get the job done. As a result, they're always outnumbered and more often than not, it's wise to keep a cool head and leave whatever is happening outside the gates well enough alone and let the crowd burn out.

 

The idea that "Every Embassy is an Alamo" is all fine and good, but not very practical when you take into consideration the disparity between the number of Americans on scene able and willing to fight to the last man, then include the number of American non-combatants present and compare that against an angry population whose own Military/Police would rather turn a blind eye than live up to their side of the bargain their nation made with the US to have the building there in the first place. Yeah, an embassy is American soil, but only at the pleasure of the host nation.

 

Additionally, think about how many foreign embassies and consulates are in the US. Do you think we would allow them to stage a brigade of Infantry in Downtown NYC or DC?

 

Perhaps other trusted news sources should be polled before posting possible inflammatory and misleading web articles. We have basically policed some forum members who played fast and loose with the truth and have enjoyed a period of succinct and relevant if not controversial postings.

^ This x1000

 

Duppie, I like you. Can we be friends?