US Marines ordered to surrender weapons…..

21 Responses to US Marines ordered to surrender weapons…..

1. mawm says:

   February 12, 2015 at 16:48

   Obama trying to give more hardware to his mates.
2. Michael in Nelson says:

   February 12, 2015 at 17:09

   Since when did the USA become France?
   • Yokel says:

     February 12, 2015 at 23:56

     Since Obama started stating proudly that France was their first ally.
3. KG says:

   February 12, 2015 at 17:42

   I don’t know why anybody would join the Army or Marines nowadays.
4. ExRM says:

   February 12, 2015 at 17:44

   These Marines were prepared in advance for destruction of those that could not be destroyed in place and in case they had to board a Commercial flight. They surrendered nothing.

   http://www.marines.mil/News/PressReleases/PressReleaseDisplay/tabid/13274/Article/565968/clarity-on-marine-security-force-departure-from-yemen.aspx
   • Darin says:

     February 12, 2015 at 19:11

     The story has changed no fewer than five times since the news broke.This is now supposedly “an operation that was planned weeks ago”so why wasn’t a military flight used for the evac?Optics,this was a show and not for our benefit simple as that.
5. Oswald Bastable says:

   February 12, 2015 at 19:00

   Not hard to jack up an M9 so that it blows up in your hand. In fact, you just have to keep using it…

   http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/true_story_m9.htm
   • Darin says:

     February 12, 2015 at 19:31

     IMHO if it must shoot 9mm I would rather have a Glock,but I am no fan of 9mm so for me it doesn’t matter.
     • Wombat says:

       February 12, 2015 at 20:53

       Much harsher than the old .45 but without the stopping power. To me the subsonic .45ACP is a real pussycat to shoot, and if both are suppressed there’s really no competition at all.
       • Oswald Bastable says:

         February 12, 2015 at 21:08

         True, I shoot my 1911 much better than the 9mm CZ.
6. mistress mara says:

   February 12, 2015 at 19:02

   Yep, but they will come home with a really bad attitude to a Government which does not trust them with arms. What could possibly go wrong with this Obama directive?
7. Ronbo says:

   February 13, 2015 at 03:45

   I hope the Regime understands their repeated shows of APPEASEMENT, WEAKNESS and COWARDICE has been noted not only by insurgents overseas.

   I refer to the domestic enemies of the Regime – the well armed American patriots – who have noticed their enemy in the White House is a surrender monkey.

   I say the Regime is a rotten house and when we patriots finally have had enough and kick in the door, the entire structure comes crashing down like the old Soviet Union in 1991.
   • Wombat says:

     February 13, 2015 at 10:23

     Bundy Ranch might have been more telling than we’d hoped.

     Still, there’s a trillion dollar military apparatus filled with co-conspirators at every level, and history tells us that amicable divorces are rare.
     • Ronbo says:

       February 13, 2015 at 13:55

       “A trillion dollar military apparatus filled with WEAKLING co-conspirators, who will drop their weapons and run like the Iraqi Army when faced with ISIS,” you mean.

       History is full of examples where a few resolute men fighting for a cause put to flight a legion of heavily armed men who believe in nothing but a paycheck.

       Also, you assume that considerable number of the federal military and para military would not change sides and join the rebels in the event of civil war.

       The proof of what I say is in actions of the American Left –

       When faced with resolute patriot militiamen in Nevada at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada, who let it be known that if fired upon they would return fire, the Regime beat feet.
       • Wombat says:

         February 13, 2015 at 19:09

         I’m a Bracken-ist more than anything. To my mind his novels are the most compelling in terms of believable outcomes.

         That is to say, in short order there will be no more USA, although many of the states will survive and retain much of their original character. Meanwhile, others will devolve into hellish social experiments the likes of North Korea or simply go feral depending on whether other nations have the means to weather the economic collapse and move in (assuming they even have a reason to be there at all).

         That, for me, is a best case scenario. That makes Bracken an optimist by my account.

         The alternative is simple. All first world civilisational structures sputter during the coming economic collapse and then disintegrate under the weight of their complexity, and we start eating each other by the first winter.
         • Ronbo says:

           February 13, 2015 at 23:30

           Wombat:

           There is a Global Economic Meltdown in the cards soon (notice I put caps on that) because all the major economies of the world are linked under the questionable idea that together the planetary economy is “Too big to fail.”

           We saw that canard exposed in 2008, when the “Too big to fail” American economy almost went belly up and was saved only by a massive government and foreign intervention.

           I think such a large scale intervention would be impossible when you have bank failures in Asia, Europe and America ALL SAME TIME.

           The intervention is a one trick pony and the ship of state(s) sails into the iceberg on a cold night.

           Then things get really interesting: nation killing civil war, race war and world war are all possible at the same time.

           But one thing is certain: the various ruling classes in our nations get the hemp rope for their massive failure.
           • Wombat says:

             February 14, 2015 at 02:00

             A man could live out his days a modern pirate, seeking out the island havens and super-yachts 0f these elitist bastards and setting upon them with his merry band of rogues.

             
           • The Gantt Guy says:

             February 14, 2015 at 08:22

             “…the “Too big to fail” American economy almost went belly up and was saved only by a massive government and foreign intervention.”

             The reason the US economy almost went belly up was because they deemed certain institutions “too big to fail” and spent taxpayer money trying to rescue them. Had they let AIA, the banks and GM die the way they should have, the US economy would have been OK. Of course, the whole mess is traced back to the Community Reinvestment Act any, so the government caused the crisis in the first place.

             But, if there hadn’t been an economic crisis, there would never have been an excuse for so much redistribution. I’d argue that had there not been an economic crisis, there wouldn’t have been a Barack Obama.
             • Darin says:

               February 14, 2015 at 12:27

               “I’d argue that had there not been an economic crisis, there wouldn’t have been a Barack Obama.”

               The economic crisis was engineered precisely so we would have Obama.

               There will be another global economic collapse,only this time it will be much worse than the last.The massive global debt bubble has only gotten bigger since last time.
             • Wombat says:

               February 14, 2015 at 12:44

               Big banks fail and the stock market fails along with the 401ks.

               I don’t believe that the U.S. would have survived the 2008 crash without the bailouts, nor would most of the world’s economies. Not under the weight of trillions of dollars in derivatives.

               The bailout bought time. Nothing else.
8. Mathew says:

   February 14, 2015 at 11:13

   Apparently the marines destroyed their weapons before abandoning them, no word about the vehicles they used, but I wouldn’t be surprised if one of those rebels suddenly finds his foot just sinking into a useless brake pedal when going down a steep hill.