Two Marine generals lose their jobs over deadly Taliban attack
September 30th, 2013
06:41 PM ET

Two Marine generals lose their jobs over deadly Taliban attack

By Barbara Starr

In an action unprecedented during 12 years of war in Afghanistan, the commandant of the Marine Corps is firing two top generals for failing to protect troops and their base in southern Afghanistan from a Taliban attack.

Marine Commandant Gen. James Amos, has agreed to a finding that Maj. Gen. Charles M. Gurganus and Maj. Gen. Gregg A. Sturdevant "did not take adequate force protection measures" at Camp Bastion last year, the service said on Monday.

On September 14-15, 2012, Taliban fighters got through an unguarded part of a fence and engaged in a long running gun battle with U.S. and coalition forces.

Two Marines were killed and eight other personnel were wounded. Six aircraft were destroyed by the Taliban, the largest loss of Marine aircraft since the Vietnam War.

There were three investigations of the incident, two of which Gurganus ran, according to a Marine Corps official. But Amos then asked U.S. Central Command for an independent probe. Central Command recommended both generals leave the corps and Amos accepted it.

Amos has recommended to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus that Gurganus's promotion to lieutenant general, currently on hold in the Senate, be rescinded. He also recommended that Sturdevant receive a letter of censure from Mabus.

Both men have been told to submit their retirement letters.

In a statement, the Marines said Amos praised the generals for pursuing the U.S. combat goals, but "concluded that the commanders, in overseeing the camp's force-protection plan, did not exercise the level of judgment expected of general officers."

Amos made a subtle reference to the question of whether the Marines had enough manpower on hand." While I am mindful of the degree of difficulty the Marines in Afghanistan faced in accomplishing a demanding combat mission with a rapidly declining force, my duty requires me to remain true to the timeless axioms relating to command responsibility and accountability," Amos wrote in endorsing the investigation's findings. "Responsibility and accountability are the sacred tenets of commandership."

Amos found Gurganus "made an error in judgment when conducting his risk assessment of the enemy's capabilities and intentions."

He also found Sturdevant, who commanded the aviation unit, failed to protect the airfield properly.

The airfield was operated by British forces but Sturdevant remained responsible for using U.S. Marines who were assigned to protect personnel and aircraft.

Britain's Prince Harry was with his Apache helicopter crew at the time of the attack but was moved to a secure area, officials said at the time.

soundoff (377 Responses)
  1. football betting doubles

    It's an amazing paragraph in favor of all the web visitors;
    they will obtain benefit from it I am sure.

    July 11, 2014 at 1:54 am | Reply
  2. Regina

    Thanks on your marvelous posting! I certainly enjoyed reading it, you will be a great author.I will be sure to bookmark your blog and will eventually come back down the road. I want to encourage continue your great job, have a nice morning!

    February 27, 2014 at 1:35 pm | Reply
  3. david carrero

    hardly a compensation to the parents of the dead marines, finally the higher ups are force to own up!

    October 2, 2013 at 6:46 pm | Reply
  4. Alfred Somerville

    I believe in command responsibility, but the blame goes much higher than the commanders in the field. The Washington morons who forbid aggressive measures to protect our bases out of fear of "offending" the local raghead warlords are equally responsible-not to mention the "Idiot-In-Chief" and his rush to withdraw and leave the grunts in the field hanging. Let's spread the responsibility around a little more evenly.

    October 2, 2013 at 11:41 am | Reply
  5. alice


    October 2, 2013 at 11:29 am | Reply
    • sam



      October 2, 2013 at 3:20 pm | Reply
    • George patton

      Hey alice, did you hear about the new acronym earned by you "beloved" Marines? The USMC is now equal to the UCFA( Urinating Clowns From America)!!! They well earned it in 2011 by urinating on the dead Taliban which was a dastardly gesture which almost all of us saw on that disgusting video. They need to hang their heads low!!!

      October 2, 2013 at 7:32 pm | Reply
      • Jack Hollis

        Thank you, George. You hit the nail on the head over those Marines urinating on those Taliban corpses. That was a very des picable gesture indeed and it almost puts me to shame as an American. Are we losing our moral compass or what?

        October 2, 2013 at 7:42 pm |
  6. alice


    October 2, 2013 at 11:23 am | Reply
  7. alice


    October 2, 2013 at 10:55 am | Reply
  8. alice

    JOHN I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU..................................

    October 2, 2013 at 10:46 am | Reply
  9. tiki jones

    Finally, some accountability! Those generals are getting exactly what they deserve, no promotions, and I don't even think they should get retirement. That money should be used to replace the loss of life and aircraft. However, I am aware that when you retire as a general you lose rank and pay anyway. I have heard that you go back to a one star regardless?

    October 1, 2013 at 11:23 pm | Reply
    • Bangkok Bill

      The Commander In Chief should be fired . What happened to the buck stops here ????

      October 2, 2013 at 7:50 am | Reply
      • Tim

        That's right, Bill "Responsibility and accountability are the sacred tenets of commandership." Let the CIC be judged.

        October 2, 2013 at 11:12 am |
  10. Sgt/ USMC

    Rest in Peace Sgt. Bradley Atwell. You are missed.

    October 1, 2013 at 11:15 pm | Reply
  11. BudW

    How about fire the idiots at the pentagon that make policy that ties the Military in the field's hands

    October 1, 2013 at 9:00 pm | Reply
    • jim

      Why, why, can't we have these results with Sen. & Cong. as well as the executive branch. Talk about bad decisions, how about out & out malfeesens. Intentionaly doing wrong to our country for personal gain. IT GO'S ON EVERY DAY IN WASH. We are losing our Republic.

      October 2, 2013 at 6:48 am | Reply
  12. like

    America and England have always attacked other countries and promote combat and war in other countries.
    England from very beginning had a hostile policy, separated Iran into two countries, Afghanistan and Iran.
    Helped Iraq to fight against Iran, In Saudi Arabia they created Vahabiat or Vahabi to fight against Islam.
    Vahabi, people who chop off heads for heaven and those suicide bombers, first supported by England.
    This immoral, unhumanitarian and ferocious policy caused the world to suffer. The world is in chaos because of policy, human kills human, human rules make some rich and some poor.
    Now in Afghanistan and other countries, America and England are trying to find Uranium, oil, gold, historical monuments and treasures and other Natural Savings, violating many rules, killing many people, and let their ownselves to be killed.

    October 1, 2013 at 4:19 pm | Reply
    • Eddie

      A strange post, almost completely meaningless. I'm not sure you understand that England (or, more correctly, UK) has ever controlled Iran or Afghanistan. There is no way that UK was involved in the Iran/Iraq conflict. If you're going to rant, please research what you're posting.

      October 2, 2013 at 2:00 pm | Reply
  13. John

    Did the Marine Corp issue crystal balls to the generals when they received their respective commands? Probably not? Just another example of politicians looking for a scapegoat. What better scapegoat than someone who has to follow orders and risk losing retirement benefits to defend themselves. What does Semper Fi mean to the upper echeleon brass?

    October 1, 2013 at 2:16 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      Politicians didn't fire them, the Marine commandant and a Marine investigation did. Learn to read.

      October 1, 2013 at 2:35 pm | Reply
      • John

        Mike, you're right! If you use concrete thinking instead of deductive reasoning. Now, hold my hand as I walk you through the chain of command...President-VP-Secretary of Defense-Assistant SOD-Secretary of the Navy-Commandant. I'm sure there are a few others as well, definitely a few well funded lobbyist and politicians that want attention diverted away from their own egregious malfeasance. What better scapegoat, than a career military man, disciplined enough to follow ambiguous orders, and not question or defend himself under duress, with the threat of losing his pension or worse. How does someone become a General in the USMC? Do they give the position away? Apply the Peter Principle to promote them? No, they earn it. If allowed, the military seems to do a fine job of conducting business and policing itself, only when politicians, civilians, lobbyist Mike, when you all get involved, the mission becomes convoluted.

        October 1, 2013 at 5:35 pm |
    • Bull

      John, the Commandant had it right. With commandship, comes forethought, foresight and the safety of everyone/every vehicle (aircraft or land transport) under their command. If you weren't there you should reserve your judgement. I was there and witness some of this lack of commandship myself from Flag officers and senior FGOs. Accountability has its consequences and its rewards. Neither of the O-8s will loose their retirement benefits. And it shouldn't matter about the reitrement benefits. What matters is that the mission was not taken care of adequately, thus the Commandant has acted appropriately.

      October 1, 2013 at 6:08 pm | Reply
      • John

        The last post directed to me seemed reasonable, and I appreciate the point of view. But, I'm feeling argumentative and defensive for some reason. Why wasn't the mayor of New York fired? Did the airline withhold benefits from the pilot's and crew member's families after 9/11? How about the manufacturers of the box cutters, were they held accountable? Now, I realize how ridiculous this sounds, but its just to make a point. And yes, as was stated, the General's retirement/pension shouldn't have anything to do with it, but it does! Just like their freedom! The military is not a democracy?!? Accountability starts at the top, and like its close cousin, flows downhill. The point is, while the soldier's deaths are both sad and a tragedy, how reasonable is it to tie someone's hands, throw them in the water, and expect them to swim? Unless you're a Seal of course. I know from what ...little experience I had in the military, the public in general has no idea how things are done. You get orders, and you follow them with the resources given. Yeah, you could be a conscientious objector, but then you wouldn't be a Marine Corp General. It just rubs me the wrong way, when the masses jump on the bandwagon, ready to blame the military, it reminds me of the Salem Witch trials. And while I don't have first hand knowledge of what actually happened, I'm almost positive no-one posting in a public forum would be allowed to do so, if they did. I'm done, I realize the futility of subjective reasoning. (mine)

        October 1, 2013 at 7:27 pm |
  14. Former Force Protection Officer at Bastion

    Agree, Agree, Agree. For too long FP issues took a back seat at Bastion. I was out of the Marines by the time this happened, but I wasn't surprised by it. I'm glad these guys are out. Good FP requires discipline above all else and that had been lacking at Bastion/Leatherneck for sometime. FOBs are not safe places. This attack was completely preventable.

    October 1, 2013 at 12:50 pm | Reply
    • Picabo

      Thank you for your service!!

      October 1, 2013 at 1:06 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      Former FP,

      While I'm sure the GOs probably attended FP meetings (or one of their subordinates), do the Americans have ANY control over Bastion? Who mans those's not Marines is it?

      October 1, 2013 at 1:20 pm | Reply
    • bobhamiltonchicago

      They would never confirm this, but if the 8 aircraft had not been destroyed and it was just the two dead Marines, the two generals would still be on the job.

      October 1, 2013 at 1:56 pm | Reply
      • Mike

        You could be right, but they were killed on the airfield so it's safe to say that had the aircraft not been the target, than they would not have been killed.

        October 1, 2013 at 2:16 pm |
      • Frenchy

        You make an assumption sound like a fact. Any references for that claim?

        October 1, 2013 at 9:25 pm |
    • Been there done that

      Former FPO, I too was at Leatherneck when we first stood it up in '09. I did a year in Helmand. I have to ask based on your billet, what did you do to educate the command on their vulnerabilities in reference to the threat posed? Commanders make decisions based on information provided by their staffs and the FPO is responsible for identifying vulnerabilities to the commands physical security and make pertinent recommendations to mitigate those risks. If security and FP was as lacks as you imply then you as the FPO had a responsibility to speak up and make solid recommendations to General Gurganus or whomever was the CG at the time, it had to be either Nicholson, Mills, Toolan or Gurganus. I recently retired as an 0210 with 32 years and am intimately familiar with the roles and responsibilities of the FPO, G2, G3 and all who had a part in this. I agree that ultimately it is the CG's responsibility to ensure the safety and security of his Marines but if the FP posture is as bad as you claim during your deployment and you were the FPO then you had a responsibility to speak up and be heard. Now, I don't want to point the finger at you, maybe you did speak up and maybe you did identify to the command those vulnerabilities and they chose to ignore them but this failure goes beyond one or two General Officers, others in the CoC had a responsibility and failed the command and those Marines killed and wounded in this attack. With that said, I believe the punishment metered out to both Generals was fitting and deserved.

      October 1, 2013 at 4:38 pm | Reply
  15. RangerDOS

    With Prince Harry in harms way a very high someone had to take the blame, maybe a couple. What a shame of resources, those Generals virtually take a life time to produce. Prince Harry should have never been in the war zone and this would have been not even honorable mention on a report. Sacrificial lambs to appease and overseas defunct monarchy.

    October 1, 2013 at 12:28 pm | Reply
  16. wade moran

    The State Department should take a lesson from the Marine Corps. This is what accountability looks like, not get promoted to the next higher govt appointed position

    October 1, 2013 at 12:18 pm | Reply
    • max

      oorah brother

      October 1, 2013 at 12:22 pm | Reply
    • Person of Interest

      Amen to that. My best friend was killed at Korengal a few years back by friendly fire. The CO and LT were both promoted but the specialist that was following orders had to go in front of a court martial (he was found not guilty thankfully). People that have a direct and major impact on situations should be held responsible for them. Regardless of rank.

      October 1, 2013 at 1:20 pm | Reply
  17. Ana Marine Mom

    I'm on the fence about this story, my main concern would be for the loss of life! We can make more air crafts, we can't do so with people. The Marines are expected to the impossible with few bodies, and they do their job well, but we need to stop cutting the budget for our armed forces in order to prevent this from happening. The Generals have a tough job and I respect them, but it seems to me that is, that they lose their jobs due to politics. At the same time, I would hope that they did their best to safe guard our valued Marines. Semper Fi.

    October 1, 2013 at 12:18 pm | Reply
  18. Preston

    Wow, this is unbelievable. People attack in wars. People are attacked in wars. People are wounded in wars. People die in wars. I mean really. That's why the armed forces issue, well, weapons....its a warzone.

    October 1, 2013 at 11:34 am | Reply
    • rbtroj

      It's undoubtedly due to the loss of aircraft.

      October 1, 2013 at 11:55 am | Reply
  19. Ykuos

    Neither Rice or Clinton were fired over their gross negligence and blatant cover-up of Bengazi and now Clinton has the balls to make a bid for president! The Corp is bound to Honor and Duty, sadly the garbage currently running our country is not.

    October 1, 2013 at 11:27 am | Reply
    • George patton

      You're quite right about the "garbage" currently running this country, Ykuos. This is why they keep on getting us into all these useless and unnecessary wars as they meekly carry out orders from the M.I.C. in Washington. However, I disagree about the USMC always being as honorable as you claim. Did you see that disgusting video about those Marines urinating on that dead Taliban about a year and a half ago? I did and I found that less than honorable and a national disgrace!

      October 1, 2013 at 11:34 am | Reply
      • Chief B

        So they peed on a few dead Taliban. Big deal ! If the Marines were allowed to do what they were trained to do, kill them... we would all be a little safer. And the enemy would lose their will to fight. I say pee on all of them, then cover them with Pig blood and broadcast it around the world..... Nuke Mecca.... Nuke Medina..... Drop pig bombs on all of them and tell them to kiss our behinds

        October 1, 2013 at 2:24 pm |
    • USA #0

      There is also some previous garbage that got you in this mess. Or have you forgotten that?

      Oh BTW, I hate the repubs as much as the dems. They all a piece of trash...The only diff is that they get thrown out on different days.

      October 1, 2013 at 11:37 am | Reply
    • Terence

      Hey, President Cheney and his puppet george werent arrested for war crimes, so whats your point?

      October 1, 2013 at 12:09 pm | Reply
  20. marcusporcius

    If one were to use "the Google" one would find that an unusual number of highly-decorated commanding officers, particularly in the Marine Corps, have been fired since Obama took office. This appears to have accelerated since gays have been allowed to serve openly. It makes one wonder if we suddenly have a rash of incompetent officers or if there is an agenda being executed and some officers are not playing along and so must be removed to allow that agenda unfettered progress.

    Libs, call me a liar...then look it up for yourselves.

    Marcus Porcius
    The Conservative Review

    October 1, 2013 at 11:21 am | Reply
    • oognok

      Even if true, correlation does not imply causation.

      October 1, 2013 at 1:52 pm | Reply
      • Mike

        It does if you're signing things "Conservative Review" and you're trying to make a statement against a Democratic president.

        October 1, 2013 at 2:37 pm |
  21. jibaro54

    what both CNN and MSNBC fail to report is that Gen Garganus repeatedly asked for more troops to guard the airfield and was denied those troops. inconvenient facts like that somehow never make it into CNN and MSNBC reporting; ever wonder why readers?

    October 1, 2013 at 11:12 am | Reply
    • marcusporcius

      That would be so the same guy who labeled the Fort Hood shooting "workplace violence" so he couldn't be linked to a terrorist attack won't get blamed. But he did personally find and kill Bin Laden, you between holes at the nearest golf course.

      October 1, 2013 at 11:24 am | Reply
    • Mike

      Though the general had previously requested, and was denied, additional guards for the towers, one month before the attack, Gurganus approved a reduction in perimeter patrols outside Leatherneck and Bastion. That is why he is being held accountable. Would be nice if you included all of the information rather than attempting to pick and choose to make some lame ass political statement.

      October 1, 2013 at 1:26 pm | Reply
  22. Name*Jo Se

    If the standard is what is claimed, who is being fired for Ft. Hood; DC Naval; World Trade Center; Pentagon; Etc.?

    October 1, 2013 at 11:01 am | Reply
  23. APO_AE_09173

    I find it ironic that we fire Marine Generals but NOT one leader or responsible person lost thier job over Benghazi and the hundreds of US weapons that made it into the hands of terrorists in that attack.

    ONLY the Pentagon takes reaponsibility whilts the rest of this LOUSY, CORRUPT administration avoid any sort of responsibiity and try to rewrite history as it unfolds.

    What a joke this has become.

    October 1, 2013 at 10:39 am | Reply
    • Fuzz Ball

      I find it ironic that you had a thought.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:46 am | Reply
    • asdrel

      How many people in the Reagan Administration lost thier jobs after a suicide truck bomber killed over 200 Marines in Beirut, a known war zone?

      October 1, 2013 at 10:48 am | Reply
      • jrzydvl

        The marines in Lebanon did not have loaded weapons. Whose birght idea was that ?

        October 1, 2013 at 11:41 am |
    • ken

      House Republicans voted to cut nearly $300 million from the U.S. embassy security budget. When asked if he voted to cut the funds this morning on CNN, Chaffetz said, “Absolutely“:

      October 1, 2013 at 10:50 am | Reply
      • marcusporcius

        And that explains why we had more security in London than in Benghazi...yep, you got us alright. Besides which, those "cuts" were from Obama's budget "request"..not from the previous year's budget...which went up. Oh, and when Democrats had Congress in 2010...they "cut" over $140 million from embassy security too.

        October 1, 2013 at 11:29 am |
      • Mike

        Actually Ken, there was more than $1.2 billion of unused funds available for security in the State Department that no one wanted to use. Money or lack of it had nothing to do with the security failures at Benghazi.

        October 1, 2013 at 12:11 pm |
      • Frenchy

        to Marcuspork, The reason London had, and has, more security than ANY temporary diplomatic facility (of which Benghazi was one) should be obvious to the all but the most casual observer. 7/11 ring any bells?

        BTW, the late Amb Stevens bears much responsibility for his own death and the 3 others at Benghazi.

        First, he choose to travel to a very lightly-defended temp facility in a country which had virtually no central government, much less security, on the anniversary of 9/11.
        Secondly, the "local forces" contracted to escort him to the facility were on strike due to a wage dispute and were therefore absent from the security forces. Yet, he still traveled to the temp facility.
        Third, assuming the Amb was even peripherally aware of the overall lack of security in the country, he must have known how tenuous the situation in Benghazi was due to reports from our own forces of recent, direct attacks on the Benghazi compound in addition to reports from the UK mission of attacks on their diplomats and upon the international school in the area.
        Lastly, the local police, who where supposed to provide a security force on that day (which took off minutes prior to the attack), were also known to be completely compromised.
        This tragedy had nothing to do with a lack of security. NONE of our non-embassy facilities are manned, or planned to be manned, to withstand an attack by 50+ aggressors. The real reason for the attack was hubris....again.
        Ironically, exactly the same attack occurred at Benghazi 50 years earlier, except then the fire was not set and no one died...all else exactly the same. I would think the Amb would have known that.

        October 1, 2013 at 9:22 pm |
    • Fact Check Please!

      ummmm...the Secretary of State was forced to resign after that. Yeah, remember her? Fan or not, I'd say that's a pretty big deal.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:56 am | Reply
      • i12bphil

        She wasn't forced. Not officially, anyway.

        October 1, 2013 at 11:14 am |
      • marcusporcius

        If one were to use "the Google" one would find that an unusual number of highly-decorated commanding officers, particularly in the Marine Corps, have been fired since Obama took office. This appears to have accelerated since gays have been allowed to serve openly. It makes one wonder if we suddenly have a rash of incompetent officers or if there is an agenda being executed and some officers are not playing along and so must be removed to allow that agenda unfettered progress.

        Libs, call me a liar...then look it up for yourselves.

        Marcus Porcius
        The Conservative Review

        October 1, 2013 at 11:20 am |
    • Scott Cisney

      Maybe the difference is Afghanistan is an active combat zone, with US military forces deployed against KNOWN hostiles. Libya had no US deployment of forces, just civilians caught in a gun battle. In one case hostilities are KNOWN to occur and our uniformed troops ARE THE TARGET. Failure to adequately protect them is a derilection of duty. I only know what I read, and that is apparently what happened.

      October 1, 2013 at 11:23 am | Reply
    • Everett

      We expect more of Marine Generals than we do of those in charge of security in Benghazi. Why should this be surprising?

      October 2, 2013 at 10:49 am | Reply
  24. Brendan USMC

    can't speak bad myself about the General because I am an active Duty Marine but they did get what they deserved for not protecting the base good enough and underestimating the enemy.

    October 1, 2013 at 10:33 am | Reply
    • The Other Bob

      As the father of an active duty Marine, I say they got off easy. Thank you for your service.

      October 1, 2013 at 11:13 am | Reply
    • john racine

      Brendan, as a former Marine, I agree and disagree. One needs to know the situation on the ground. The FACT that the generals had requested more resources (more marines) in able to adequately defend the area, and it was denied, does not make it the Generals fault. They, like many time before, were put in a position to fail by the leadership in Washington. Lets not also forget that it wasn't the loss of life that caused the actions of dismissal, but the loss of the aircraft. Washington does not care about 2 dead warriors, but the destruction of aircraft costing millions. THAT is the disgusting fact.

      October 1, 2013 at 12:19 pm | Reply
      • Picabo

        Thank you for your service!!!

        October 1, 2013 at 1:10 pm |
      • Mike

        Though the general had previously requested, and was denied, additional guards for the towers, one month before the attack, Gurganus himself approved a reduction in perimeter patrols outside Leatherneck and Bastion. That is why he is being held accountable. Might want to include all of the FACTS. The request for the additional troops occured at the end of March after Gurganus arrived and was denied. 4 months later Gurganus, himself, authorized the reduction in guards and on the night of the attack the tower closest to the Taliban point of entry was unmanned per Gurganus's reduction in personel requirements. These accounts are directly from the official transcripts of the investigation rather than some politically motivated news source.

        October 1, 2013 at 1:32 pm |
      • M from germany

        The true story was being answered conrrectly! They don't about the dead military.

        October 2, 2013 at 7:32 am |
    • Picabo

      Thank you for your service!!!

      October 1, 2013 at 1:09 pm | Reply
  25. fxlozano

    why was no one fired over attack on consulate in benghazi where our ambassador was murdered?

    October 1, 2013 at 10:32 am | Reply
    • USA #0

      Because no jets were lost there....

      October 1, 2013 at 10:36 am | Reply
      • i12bphil

        Hey, let me try that!

        Uh, uh, because, uh (searching for something stupid to say)...

        October 1, 2013 at 11:16 am |
    • Christopher

      Because most Americans see the Banghazi story as nothing more than a desperate attempt by Republicans to use dead Americans to score political points.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:41 am | Reply
      • Dave

        Tell that to the families of those murdered, I doubt they will agree with you.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:52 am |
      • The Other Bob

        @Dave: Tel that to Issa, who despite his best efforts, wasn't able to find reasonable evidence to fire anyone. Maybe the dopes who voted to cut the budget for protecting our diplomatic corps, perhaps?

        October 1, 2013 at 11:17 am |
    • Dave

      Because the obama administration never takes responsibility for it's failures.....

      October 1, 2013 at 10:50 am | Reply
  26. HeyThere HighSpeed

    The military has to follow the orders of the's not like they have a choice, other than mutiny, which is reprehensible.. Learn some facts before you make moronic statements like that.

    October 1, 2013 at 10:26 am | Reply
    • Brendan USMC

      Exactly. Esspecially us United States Marines. We are under direct control from the United States President, he can use us within a 24 hour window to do what must be done around the world. He is our commander in Chief. At least the military still gets paid with the government shutdown thank god to the bill that got passed yesterday

      October 1, 2013 at 10:31 am | Reply
      • Jose

        Active troops will always be paid, regardless of what passed failed yesterday. Troops are considered essential.

        October 1, 2013 at 12:04 pm |
      • tlr

        It is great our troops are going to get paid. However, I remember back in the early 80's during the Reagan admin. government shutdown, We still got our military checks, however no bank nor check cashing place would honor those checks. Until the govt. stepped in a few days too late for some whom missed paying some bills on time. Who runs the banks the big an rich republicans.

        October 1, 2013 at 12:06 pm |
  27. USA #0

    Taliban must be gloating.....

    October 1, 2013 at 10:25 am | Reply
  28. USA #0

    Are these Taliban, sandal-wearing and cave-dwelling, really humans or super-humans. How can they take on the most "advanced" military and give them a bloody nose?

    October 1, 2013 at 10:23 am | Reply
    • Chris

      Because sooner or later you eventually throw enough bodies into the meatgrinder that it starts to clog.

      In 12 years of War we've lost less than 10,000 military personnel.

      Compare that to Vietnam, or even to Korea or World War 2.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:25 am | Reply
      • USA #0

        Dude, let's put it in perspective. How much are you spending on your military per year? Close to a trillion $ (750 BIllion to be exact) and what is the Taliban's budget... Insignificant compared to the USA's. So who's really winning this war?

        October 1, 2013 at 10:30 am |
      • SeeThruIt2

        To USA #0: Put it in perspective yourself.

        The DoD budget (as you said near $750 B) goes to far more than just Afghanistan or fighting the taliban. They maintain a presence all around the world. They have multiple carrier task forces constantly positioned to allow the President to order a strike just about anywhere within a day or two. They have at least one battalion task force ready to depart within a few hours notice to jump anywhere in the world on the President's order. And their R&D contracts and constant training & re-evaluation of tactics has prepare a fighting force capable of wiping out the 4th largest army in the world within just 3 weeks.

        Today's U.S. combat hardened military is the very reason the Chinese have decided to invest so much in technology. They've realized that even their large numbers are no match for the U.S. military.

        That doesn't come cheaply.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:54 am |
    • Brendan USMC

      Being a Marine I can tell you one thing. These are hard men, they know what they are doing and they can do it with little or no technology.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:28 am | Reply
      • USA #0

        I beg to differ. The US army is so dependant on their gadgets that they would run from the field if it was taken away from them.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:33 am |
      • Brendan USMC

        And the Marine Corps wouldn't, even though we have just as advanced technology these days as the army and even better vehicles, we don't run. We fight. We have a reputation to uphold and you come at us, we'll come at you. Running isn't the Marine way.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:35 am |
      • Brendan USMC

        By the way I was talking about how the Taliban are hard men when they fight us with little or no technology btw, just FYI

        October 1, 2013 at 10:36 am |
      • USA #0

        Thanks for the clarification but I still say that US forces would run from the field if all their gadgets were taken away. The Taliban have conviction that the US forces do not have. They are willing to die for their cause unlike US forces who will run from the field if they feel they are overpowered.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:57 am |
      • SeeThruIt2

        To USA #0: I beg to differ.

        The U.S. military never refuses an order just because they don't have the equipment. They assess what they do have, and prepare their plans to work with whatever they're given.

        You obviously haven't served in the military.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:58 am |
      • i12bphil

        I think its self evident that USA#0 is a tool.

        No, I take that back. Tools are useful and serve a purpose.

        October 1, 2013 at 11:19 am |
      • The Other Bob

        Brendan USMC

        ... Running isn't the Marine way.
        Funny, my son told me he did a LOT of running at Parris Island! Thanks again for your service, young man.

        October 1, 2013 at 11:21 am |
    • Racshamar

      I think that goes hand in hand with UNDERESTIMATING the enemy. With extensive funding from the drug trade and other illicit activities and support from Iran and others the Taliban isn't just a bunch of "goat hearders". They are actually a semi-sophisticated criminal group. It seems to work for them to attack and then hide in the population. Only criminals can survive doing that.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:48 am | Reply
    • Jose

      When you think Taliban/terrorist, you think of some cavemen trying to learn to make fire. What you don't imagine is anarchist that can even code, encrypt and create programs that allow you to send send messages avoiding "monitored" sites.

      October 1, 2013 at 12:08 pm | Reply
  29. Al

    Well so they are getting fired, does it matter, will the families of those that were under his protection and got killed going to be able to take him to court and collect money from his retirement? No they will not, but he will still collect his retirement from the government, so it goes to show that you can kill someone so long as you have some star power and you can get away with it.

    October 1, 2013 at 10:13 am | Reply
    • Brendan USMC

      You don't understand one bit on how the military works, the commanders didn't protect the compound good enough yes and the Taliban got through but the families have already colleged 400,000$ from the SGLI after the death of their loved ones so no, Retirement Pay should not be alloted to the families. Not to mention, I am a United States Marine, been on active duty for the past 8 years. We all take risks and know that death is a possibility. Commanders and Non-Commisioned officers take charge in making sure everyone is secured and comes home safely, but sometimes things don't go according to planned. Your a civilian so I wouldn't expect you would understand.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:27 am | Reply
      • NorCal Vet

        I fought in Desert Storm, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq. I retired two summers ago after over 21 years of active duty service. To say the families got the $400,000 and shouldn’t be allotted retirement pay is kind of crass. All that have served understand the risks and voluntarily accept them, however in this post Desert Storm zero casualty world, no of us plan on dying on a deployment. When an incident happens, somebody must be held responsible, from the Air Force General that got hammered for Kohbar Towers, to the Navy Captain for the USS Cole, to these two Marines. While your comments are correct, think about how you phrase them, because it might be somebody else saying that your family, or your child, that they got the $400K and need to move on.

        October 1, 2013 at 11:05 am |
    • Racshamar

      I guess you think that the CEO of BP was directly responsible for the Gulf Oil spill. There are a lot of decision makers on the ground who made decisions that led to the events. The Commander is ultimately responsible for EVERYTHING that happens. Even though he made not have made that decision directly that allowed this evernt to occur.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:52 am | Reply
  30. J.Mehoff

    "Britain's Prince Harry was with his Apache helicopter crew at the time of the attack but was moved to a secure area, officials said at the time."

    The two US Marines we lost didn't share Harry's luxury. Pretty certain he's on record saying he wants to join in the fight. The real fight, as it's always been, Harry, is on the ground. Where were you???!!!

    October 1, 2013 at 9:59 am | Reply
    • stephen

      Not only was the royal brat wisked off to safety he probably had a platoon around him for security. A total waste of manpower....

      October 1, 2013 at 10:13 am | Reply
    • Chris

      He's a pilot, bro. Pilots as a general rule are used to greatest effect when.. piloting aircraft.

      Would you pitch a fit if a United States Air Force pilot rushed to get airborne and join a fight utilizing the expertise and skillset the military trained him in.. or would you demand he picked up a rifle instead?

      October 1, 2013 at 10:23 am | Reply
  31. cdub2k

    When 6 aircraft get destroyed due to a security breach somebody is going to get fired.

    October 1, 2013 at 9:35 am | Reply
  32. Dusty2701

    The two generals we're probably ordered not to comment on the issue. They may have requested additional security forces for the base and aircraft, but it was denied by the pentagon brass or even the Secretary of Defense himself...we'll never know for sure. In exchange for their silence, they were offered retirement. Happends all the time. Enlisted personnel serve at the pleasure of the officer corps. When they screw up they're court martialed and sent to prison or dismissed from the military under less than honorable conditions. In my opinon, it's just another screw up like Syria that got four top officials killed. The abassador requested extra security personnel a month before the attack, but it was denied by Secretary of State Clinton, although she denies it; afterall, she wants to be President and carry on the Clinton public service dynasty that made them rich.

    October 1, 2013 at 9:29 am | Reply
    • Joel Ramsey

      Dusty, I assume that you are referring to Libya, not Syria, where 6 Americans died.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:45 am | Reply
    • Brendan USMC

      They are getting retirement with honorable discharge and no court martial, FYI

      Not to mention, the Commandant has the right to fire them because they General's had the resources to make sure the base was secured and MORE then enough Marines to protect that base. I know this to be a fact, being a Marine myself. The Generals got COMPLACENT and thought well.... the Taliban aren't going to attack the base, so this area should be good.

      Thats why we say in the Marine Corps, Complacency Kills

      October 1, 2013 at 10:40 am | Reply
      • Racshamar

        I think that you're making comments beyond your pay grade. You don't know or understand how leardership at that level works or what the Generals were being told by thier subordinates as to how things were being handled. So your comments on that are probably baseless. You should stick to what you know.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:57 am |
    • amisc1970

      You make totally baseless assertions like "They may have requested additional security forces for the base and aircraft, but it was denied by the pentagon brass or even the Secretary of Defense himself...we'll never know for sure."

      Equally baseless would be that they were offered additional security forces but declined because they didn't think it was necessary.

      It's one thing to have an opinion about something; it's something else to essentially make accusations against people such as the pentagon brass or SecDef by pulling something out of thin air; I suppose you agree with Cruz's equally baseless assertion that Hagel might have received money from North Korea.

      October 1, 2013 at 10:46 am | Reply
  33. jody alt

    I believe the RAF was partially responsible for perimeter security at this location. It is also being reported that Major General Gurganus reduced the number of Marines patrolling the perimeter from 325 to 100 one month before the attack. This reduction of security personnel sounds somewhat like the situation leading up to the Benghazi attack.

    October 1, 2013 at 9:23 am | Reply
    • Will

      And yet our government is unable to hold someone accountable for Benghazi.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:32 am | Reply
      • stephen

        there is a big difference between unable and does not want to. it is the latter in that case

        October 1, 2013 at 10:19 am |
      • Jean Sartre

        I believe that issue has been settled; sorry if you didn't get the memo... Al Qaeda and a totally messed up "secret" – that the entire world knew about – mission by the CIA were held responsible and accountable. Darrell Issa was the mastermind of the entire FUBAR!

        October 1, 2013 at 10:21 am |
  34. The Big Question

    So, just what the hell were those two doing if not their job up there???!

    October 1, 2013 at 8:40 am | Reply
    • J

      Probably voting republican.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:21 am | Reply
      • stephen

        spoken like a true democrat that would have had the peace corps patrolling the perimeter. stand watch or sit down

        October 1, 2013 at 10:17 am |
      • bobbaft

        That doesn't make any sense....if they voted Republican, then they'd be getting the job done.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:23 am |
      • 062014


        October 1, 2013 at 11:26 am |
  35. jorge washinsen

    We should not even be in that swamp now.We have suit cased enough American dollars over there.We have no friend there that money can't buy.

    October 1, 2013 at 8:37 am | Reply
  36. Willie,SSG

    No disrespect to your rank Mike E8(Retired), you are out of order.You should never wish that the President's daughter be put in harms way.You are retired,he is still your Commander-in-Chief.Why don't you send your daughter or maybe your wife to fight on the front line?

    October 1, 2013 at 8:37 am | Reply
    • The Other Bob

      I think you missed the man's point, Willie. I read it as it was foolish to have Prince Harry on the front lines due to the security riisks by basically painting a big target on the whole operation. It doesn't sound like he's aqdvocating putting Obama's daughter. His final sentence puts it all together:

      "the true problem is "Prince Henry" should not have been there to begin with. Why not just put Obama's daughter in there? Because the political ramifications and "VIP" treatment and security cost too much energy and time."

      October 1, 2013 at 9:06 am | Reply
  37. bdby

    It begs the question though. What about the rest of the chain of command? Why are they not gone too? A second lieutenant or a private for that matter could have discovered this hole. They probably did report it up the chain but was ignored. As a result Marines got killed.

    Not enough people got fired for this one, especially the lower brass "on the ground".

    October 1, 2013 at 8:31 am | Reply
  38. bearitstrong

    "Taliban fighters got through an unguarded part of a fence "

    That's the issue. Who is ultimately responsible? Please... no "Obama haters" on this.

    October 1, 2013 at 8:14 am | Reply
    • Shutup

      Bush's Fault. For invading in the first place.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:06 am | Reply
  39. Arnold

    No deals with Muslim terrorists. These generals were too soft and did not hit the Muslim terrorists hard enough.

    October 1, 2013 at 8:09 am | Reply
  40. Dallas

    There are no real American generals

    October 1, 2013 at 8:04 am | Reply
  41. TrueThought

    Let's be real here...Soldiers and Sailors have been dying in that wars for years behind dumb mistakes from top brass...this is only as big of an issue that it is because the loss of those aircraft. Sad...but true.

    October 1, 2013 at 8:01 am | Reply

    WE HAVE AN UGLY PATTERN GOING ON HERE- this is no coincidence. We have a tyrannical angry white hating American hating militant in the white house, that is purging his political rivals (military leadership), And the media, doing everything it can to trivialize it- first McChrystal then Petraius- then other now this- . WHO IS GOING TO REPLACE these leaders- Id like to see some focus on this. I GUARANTEE the replacement will be politically motivated, and be a left wing Obama yes man – guaranteed. Read up on Stalin military purge – to eliminates his rivals. This scary stuff going, on especially, since there seems to be no political will, to confront it.

    October 1, 2013 at 7:50 am | Reply
    • Rick

      You need serious therapy dude, and a much better tin foil hat.

      October 1, 2013 at 8:30 am | Reply
      • NorCal Vet

        LMAO – That's how he tunes in Ancient Aliens.

        October 1, 2013 at 11:14 am |
    • bigsarge


      October 1, 2013 at 8:36 am | Reply
      • HeyThere HighSpeed

        Stop yelling.

        October 1, 2013 at 10:23 am |
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      The replacements can ONLY come from the ranks below. NO POLITICAL APPOINTMENT POSSIBLE at that level. Get some better facts.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:02 am | Reply

      I hate to make it sound personal against the commander in chief, but it is a valid point, and the credibility of our country is more important. Even if it was time, for these generals to go, I could have been done via reassignment, or otherwise quietly- I doubt anyone really believe this is about military discipline. Also when reading about Stalin's purge, don't forget the chapter about how any disagreement with communists, lead to labeling as crazy and sent off to ' insane asylums' (Siberia)- don't forget to read that part.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:06 am | Reply
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        Stick you book about Stalin up you a_.

        October 1, 2013 at 9:25 am |
      • Deirdre

        Why should this be done quietly? The two generals are being held accountable for their actions, or inaction, in this case. Unless it is clear that there are consequences of their actions, how does doing this quietly help? Everyone in the military should understand that this is what happens when you don't do your duty.

        As for reassignment, why on Earth would they choose that option? If they are ineffective and not qualified for their current positions, they should no longer have the job...anywhere. Their mistakes cost lives and was beneficial to the enemy.

        October 1, 2013 at 9:33 am |
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        Right on, Dierdre. You go girl.

        October 1, 2013 at 9:49 am |
      • pattern

        If we fired generals everytime, an incident happened in WWII, Korea or Vietnam – we would be a defenseless country. This sacking of general after general after general in unprecedented. This is appears to be the first time, in history we have a Commander in Chief hostile to the US Military- and if you care about the USA (I am sure that is a big IF)- you should be very very concerned.

        October 1, 2013 at 5:19 pm |
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      The replacements can ONLY come from the ranks below. NO POLITICAL APPOINTMENT POSSIBLE at that level.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:27 am | Reply
    • pattern

      You can shriek and throw your tantrums all you want- this is not an isolated incident. It's a pattern, of dismantling the military- general after general after genera getting tossed out. It's not a coincidence or situation based on it's merits, in my opinion. It's a power struggle between, a tyrannical egomaniac and the traditional establishment, Same as Stalin, Hitler- all of them- this is the same scenario playing out before our eyes.

      October 1, 2013 at 5:05 pm | Reply
  43. Mark, E8 Retired

    ""made an error in judgment when conducting his risk assessment of the enemy's capabilities and intentions.""
    Complacency kills.

    Why is it officers are told to resign but enlisted get busted down and serve time in Leavenworth, ultimately ending up with a felony conviction? The officer? Retires, takes a pension, gets an overpaying job.

    Same old military I put up with for 27 yrs. Protect the officers at the expense of enlisted and morale, use the enlisted at all costs.

    October 1, 2013 at 7:48 am | Reply
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      Same in the corporate world. CEO runs a company into the ground, so to speak, and he gets lucrative retirement or severance package.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:04 am | Reply
      • HighPowerGuy

        You have made many good points there ChickenHawk. It just tore my mind up, when all those CEO's who ran their companies into the ground, stole from the American public, and...received BONUSES!!! PURE BS!!! We are forever reading about stuff in the military, and comments like " IF THAT WAS DONE IN THE CIVILIAN WORLD THEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN FIRED!!" hahahahaha well, not always. During the BUSH & OBAMA administrations they handed those A S _ H _ _ E S bonuses!!
        And I think it was you who made the point of it being such a big deal due to the aircraft being lost, RIGHT ABOUT THAT TOO. How many screw ups, bases over run ( Wanat ) and other missteps have taken place, with NO forced retirement, but, lose $50,000,000+ in aircraft, and HEY...SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE!! hahahahah funny how that works isn't it.........well, not really 🙂

        October 1, 2013 at 11:35 am |
  44. dan


    October 1, 2013 at 6:39 am | Reply
  45. Karen

    And the last sentence is the most important, the key to the whole puzzle. The Corps was embarrassed that Prince Harry's life was put in danger. It's impossible to predict with 100% certainty what any enemy will do & attacks like this one are not uncommon. I'd be willing to be a steak dinner these two men were scapegoats.

    October 1, 2013 at 6:18 am | Reply
    • lerianis

      Agreed, these men are the epitome of scapegoats to cover the butts of people higher up in the military. You cannot predict everything that a enemy might do nor can you protect every single place.

      October 1, 2013 at 6:58 am | Reply
      • Karen

        Bless Harry for wanting to be there, it speaks very highly of his character, but the fact is he was a target.

        October 1, 2013 at 7:02 am |
      • MarkD

        It may be "unfair" but they lost men and aircraft in their charge, and the investigation showed it ws due to linadequate security. I've no respect for General Amos, he forfeited that with some blatant command interference int the courts martial of those Marines charged with urinating on a Taliban corpse, but here he is right. You cannot ask Marines to put themselves in harm's way and not hold their superiors accountable. This is way overdue.

        Next, we need a way to get rid of the politicians holding flag rank.

        October 1, 2013 at 7:39 am |
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        So you are saying that the military cannot predict an attack from the enemy in a war zone?

        October 1, 2013 at 9:06 am |
    • Mark, E8 Retired

      the true problem is "Prince Henry" should not have been there to begin with. Why not just put Obama's daughter in there? Because the political ramifications and "VIP" treatment and security cost too much energy and time.

      October 1, 2013 at 7:50 am | Reply
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      Whoah. Karen, you say that "attacks like this are not uncommon". Then such an attack was completely predictable, and any complete maroon could see that the base needed to be protected better than it was.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:09 am | Reply
  46. Ted Striker

    Why do we have our Marines doing this "nation-building" nonsense anyway? Every Marine I have met has been a super nice guy, but let's face it, they love fighting, and they are good at it. What a waste to put them into these bases and pretend to be out there peacekeeping. Sorry, they aren't built for it, no offense Marines but it's not your job to walk around and hand out candy. Send them in and let them wreck the place and then get them the f out. They are a fighting machine not a police force, and shouldn't have been setup to be hit like this in the first place. God bless the warriors out there protecting all of us.

    October 1, 2013 at 4:51 am | Reply
    • lerianis

      Protecting us? I hate to tell you but is the military who are making us LESS safe and LESS protected today by allowing the President to send them overseas to countries with no direct connections to the attacks against us and killing innocent people over there.

      We should have focused on assassinating Al-Qaeda people or capturing them, with the latter situation being the gold standard.

      October 1, 2013 at 7:07 am | Reply
      • Leff

        "Allowing the president?"
        Like the military has a choice over what the COMMANDER IN CHIEF says, idiot.

        October 1, 2013 at 7:20 am |
      • bob

        The military follow order from the President on down, no service member of any branch want war. why? Because while your at the mall shopping their on the battlefield fighting. You have no clue what they go through for you. If you don't know what your talking about you should not post nonsense. You should be proud of what our service member are doing, not only the one in combat area but all over the world for you can sit at home, safe and secure.

        October 1, 2013 at 7:39 am |
      • HighPowerGuy

        Unfortunately, you have a very limited understanding of how things work. The military does not ALLOW anything. They take their "ORDERS" and follow them out! Plain and simple, as they have no choice. If they were ASKED for an opinion, which..hahahahah 99% of the time they are NOT, then they may have some input. But, for the most part, it is not a democratic process in the military, you take your orders and follow them out. As for the GOLD STANDARD, well, AGAIN, have you every heard of GUANTANOMO BAY!! Who wants to capture these knuckleheads, and then FEED, CLOTHE, HOUSE and gie them MEDICAL services for the rest of their lives. Why be stuck with them, screw that. The GOLD STADARD is to get rid of the problem. Unlike in the civilian world, where we have perpetrators who are not able to be rehabilitated ( i.e. serial killers, child molesters, ), the military does have a few options, and for one, I think that capturing most of them, is NOT the solution to the problem! 🙂 That is...IMHO of course.

        October 1, 2013 at 11:45 am |
    • lburwell

      What nation building? This was a camp of Marines in a war. No nation building here. Please stick to the topic.

      October 1, 2013 at 7:46 am | Reply
      • Ted Striker

        Well I thought the objective was to capture and kill Osama Bin Laden. That was done a long time ago so why again are our people there running patrols and trying to win over the locals?

        October 1, 2013 at 1:22 pm |
    • Mike

      Tell'em Ted

      October 1, 2013 at 8:04 am | Reply
  47. Paul Martin

    As a former navy Commander I agree with the USMC Commandant,s decision, the bigger they are the harder they fall ! There are NO excuses for incompetency and that is exactly what it was !

    October 1, 2013 at 4:50 am | Reply
    • Concerned Netizen

      Well then, you sir, appear to be in the minority on this. Most intelligent comments on this board show compassion for good men doing difficult work. Some even accuse the Commandant's of scapegoating. which i personally believe may have played a hand as well...

      The tone of people who "agree" with you, seems to be more the like of namecalling and just "agreemnent without investigation"."

      Given the two types, I have had mixed luck with the latter... but just plain bad luck with the former.

      October 1, 2013 at 7:29 am | Reply
  48. mork

    Are you kidding me? Retirement is the punishment? They retain all benefits of their rank until they die..."Hey, you screwed up big time". Here, let's stop you from working and pay you $10,000 a month with full benefits". If a Corporal screws up, he goes to jail. If a general screws up, he's retired.

    October 1, 2013 at 4:37 am | Reply
    • lerianis

      They probably know something about the attacks that they have agreed not to 'make public' and therefore that is why they are getting this sweet deal.

      October 1, 2013 at 7:08 am | Reply
  49. Anthony

    Was anyone besides Prince Henry, moved to a "secure area"? Is anyone else offended by this b.s.?

    October 1, 2013 at 3:12 am | Reply
    • Jim

      When an American head of state has a kid in a warzone you yanks will have some credibility on this subject. Until then shut up.

      October 1, 2013 at 4:05 am | Reply
      • ShiverMeTimbers

        Ooooooh the prince was put in a secure location? What a warrior. 🙂

        October 1, 2013 at 4:18 am |
      • loflier

        Well played, Mate.

        October 1, 2013 at 5:41 am |
      • Paul Martin

        Our Vice President, Joe Biden, has a son named Beau who was deployed to Iraq in 2008-2009.

        October 1, 2013 at 6:18 am |
  50. TheBob

    Can somebody tell me why the F* we're still in Afghanistan after 12 years?

    October 1, 2013 at 2:23 am | Reply
    • John


      October 1, 2013 at 2:41 am | Reply
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        You, da man.

        October 1, 2013 at 9:00 am |
    • hubert39

      Why are we in Afghanistan? The Military Industrial Complex makes billions of dollars every week we are at was or a conflict. Money rules in the USA.

      October 1, 2013 at 6:32 am | Reply
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      The Taliban will return to power and then support state sponsored terrorism. Any other questions?

      October 1, 2013 at 8:59 am | Reply
    • Shutup

      War is a big money maker for certain people and industries.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:08 am | Reply
  51. Chris

    Okay, Now lets get down to business concerning the Benghazi attack. Their is the same arrogance circling that attack that needs attention now. Get these lazy clowns representing our country exposed and out of the way. There is no excuse for such losses of life due to derelict of duty.
    God bless America

    October 1, 2013 at 2:05 am | Reply
  52. Mark

    The downfall of the US military is going to be that it's personnel and supporters are full of themselves. They're so proud after a firefight with rag tag militias who don't have anywhere near matching capabilities as the US military. They think theyre so awesome for being able to call in airsupport against a bunch of villagers running around in sandals. They think their battles are like those of WW2.

    October 1, 2013 at 1:15 am | Reply
    • Pilgrim

      Just what is your record of service in the United States Marine Corp? I'm sure that with your expertise you could correct their problems on the ground, right?

      October 1, 2013 at 1:33 am | Reply
    • Proudly Served & Better Equipped to Comment than Mark

      The truth is, Mark, that you have neither the guts or emotional stability to honorably serve your country. Billy Joel wrote a delightful song about guys like you ("Angry Young Man"), and every time I read a ridiculous post like yours, I am chuckle at the obvious lack of courage, overdose of self-importance, and the poor attempt to smear the names of those whose jocks you could not carry. Semper Fi. PS – please don't post now that you "have served" haven't.

      October 1, 2013 at 2:22 am | Reply
      • Rich

        I am chuckle, too.

        October 1, 2013 at 3:38 am |
    • slickrick31705

      your comnment COMPLETELY IGNORANT!!! Your ignorant tail wouldnt be saying all that if you were over here in the middle of this mess.

      October 1, 2013 at 4:12 am | Reply
    • loflier

      You really don't have a cue, do you?

      October 1, 2013 at 5:42 am | Reply
      • loflier

        You really don't have a clue, do you?

        October 1, 2013 at 5:43 am |
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      Mark, sorry, I don't see no "downfall" possible. You seem to have a problem with the US forces being superior and arrogant. Since when is that ever a problem? Do you believe that we should be inferior?

      October 1, 2013 at 8:57 am | Reply
    • Keypinitreel

      Mark, be careful with what you say about these things. While not being a Marine (Greatest Respect) I did serve a US Army Field Artillery man/ Infantry in Iraq, Sunni Triangle, 2003-04. I assure you, bullets, mortars, rpg's and bombs dont care how well you are equipped or un equipped. I cant speak for other wars, but I can tell you that I do know why a fire fight is called an engagement, and thats because engagements usually end up in a manner described as till death do us part. Congratulations to all of us who survived, prayers for the loved ones of all who didnt...and mercy for those that dont know or understand with hope that they never do.

      October 1, 2013 at 12:05 pm | Reply
  53. rex edie

    incompetence is usually the result of overconfidence.....and the unwillingness to humble ones important making sure the situation is secure...... as in oh yeah we have it all under control.... right... !!!!

    October 1, 2013 at 12:31 am | Reply
    • Pilgrim

      All of these military genius tribunals are getting a bit sick. But because the military is holding the gun to defend your right to give it, you can say whatever pointless statements you want; go right ahead. Maybe even try something constructive rather than, "I'm o.k. because they're worse than I am." I'm certain that you would crumble under the pressure that I platoon sergeant faces, let alone a major general.

      October 1, 2013 at 1:41 am | Reply
  54. Brian Smith

    Does this mean they were not dishonorably discharged? so they can work at Wal-Mart now?

    September 30, 2013 at 11:29 pm | Reply
    • zbert

      Officers are not discharged because they are not enlisted. They are resigned or relieved because they are appointed to their positions. The letter of censure and the forced resignation will have the same result as any other than honorable discharge.

      October 1, 2013 at 1:05 am | Reply
      • jjj

        Thank you! Somebody knows what they are talking about!

        October 1, 2013 at 2:54 am |
    • U.S.M.C. 1371

      If you read you will see the line "they were told to submit a letter of retirement" any questions?

      October 1, 2013 at 4:29 am | Reply
  55. Mom Marine

    Congratulations Amos – you must be fighting for the Taliban – because you just took out more Americans this month from the Corps than the enemy has. Amos needs to go – his illegal actions in tampering with the justice system alone should have had him booted. Then he wastes all those funds on the F-35 with gross mismanagement – and that was the whole reason hew as put in place as a fly-boy running the Marine Corps. He is tanking a Major's career and potential freedom because that Major dared to report Amos illegal actions. And no press or congressman or senator gives a darn. PLEASE – keep your son or daughter out of the Marine Corps – it is far too dangerous to be in while the enemy is running it.

    September 30, 2013 at 11:07 pm | Reply
    • Krivka

      The site of the base that was attacked was situated in a valley surrounded by mountains where the bad guys could see EVERYTHING happening on the base. It was clearly a tactical error deserving of punishment. Even the Marines KNEW it was against all military doctrine. It is about time the worthless brass, NOT ALL BRASS, but those who are unable to plan and execute basic military doctrine are dealt with in such a manner. They get full pay, over 12k a month, plus will sign up with GE or Lockheed Martin. Don't feel bad for them.

      September 30, 2013 at 11:30 pm | Reply
      • WhiteSites

        Interesting they are just being forced to retire, rather than dishonorably discharged. Now they get to live out the rest of their lives playing golf on the tax payers dime.

        September 30, 2013 at 11:48 pm |
      • Josh


        They did nothing deserving of a dishonorable discharge. They just didn't live up to their rank. To get a dishonorable discharge, someone must commit a felony. They are being allowed to retire instead of being kicked out because they have a life of service. A Marine officer must be one of the best in order to achieve the rank that these two men achieved. Their failures are enough to end their career, but not enough to completely erase the service they have given to the country and thrown in jail.

        October 1, 2013 at 12:09 am |
      • Chris

        Too many people think that dishonorable discharge just means "thrown out for doing something bad." A dishonorable discharge is only used in the worst violations, like murder, rape, kidnapping, etc. Also, a dishonorable discharge only applies to enlisted men and women, not officers like these generals. The equivalent would be a "dismissal," and like a dishonorable discharge, would only be for some serious, felonious breach of duty, not a mistake.

        October 1, 2013 at 12:40 am |
      • Pilgrim

        Thank you Josh for a clear and accurate summation.

        October 1, 2013 at 1:44 am |
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        Gotta agree with @josh. Well said. Career military don't deserve dismissal for establishing insufficient security levels if the security they establish are within the span of their duties.

        October 1, 2013 at 9:30 am |
    • Concerned Netizen

      This punishment does seem rather harsh. War is hard and sometimes stuff happens. I think the whole area is best left alone.

      September 30, 2013 at 11:32 pm | Reply
    • 1stSgt-TopKick

      One of the reasons that it's a tough sell to get women into combat ranks is the type of emotional, non-factual, unspecific diatribes that you offer against the USMC Commandant. Every time a woman goes off on a rant like the one posted, combat soldiers (wrongly) get the notion that this is the same level of the lack of coolheaded thinking that will be brought onto the battlefield, endangering the lives of American troops and the mission. It would be well to remember what TV detective Joe Friday used to say: "Just the facts, ma'am."

      October 1, 2013 at 1:29 am | Reply
      • t wright

        Good comment 1st Sgt...

        October 1, 2013 at 1:45 pm |
  56. Dav.....

    Seems like our president provided the example (Syria, Russia, Iran) that they followed.......

    September 30, 2013 at 10:59 pm | Reply
    • Dav.....

      "Amos found Gurganus "made an error in judgment when conducting his risk assessment of the enemy's capabilities and intentions."

      September 30, 2013 at 11:01 pm | Reply
    • Krivka

      Gee, you are really dense.

      September 30, 2013 at 11:31 pm | Reply
    • Al

      You do realize the attack on this base was prior to Syria and Russia? Just saying...

      October 1, 2013 at 1:41 am | Reply
    • Pilgrim

      Each offense that the last two presidents in particular have exercised to send our military to war without the benefit of Congressional review are impeachable. However the sheeple have spoken.

      October 1, 2013 at 1:48 am | Reply
      • Kenweil

        Neither president did anything impeachable. Bush had congressional approval and Clinton never took us to war. He can do a certain level with the military without approval.

        October 1, 2013 at 3:03 am |
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        Pilgrim thinks he has intelligent conclusions whenever he includes the words, "sheeple" and "impeachable offense". Sheeple, sheeple, impeachable offense, impeachable offense. Afghanistan and Iraq Wars BOTH had Congressional approval. Remember? Hilliary Clinton's vote in the Senate to approve damaged her in the 2008 Dem Pres primary. Get better facts, dude, seriously.

        October 1, 2013 at 9:16 am |
  57. Good Richard

    About time...

    September 30, 2013 at 10:40 pm | Reply
  58. C

    This is the one thing in the military that has always really bothered me. These two men have been found responsible for a lapse in protection that cost two servicemen their lives and maimed 8 others. WHY do they get to retire rather than be put before a general court martial and put into the brig like enlisted personnel would have? It is an existing double standard that should not exist. Rank has its privileges but also its responsibilities. The higher up you are, the more damning the charges.

    September 30, 2013 at 10:34 pm | Reply
    • Chris

      Who says enlisted personnel would be brought before a court martial for a mistake like this? An enlistee would probably only receive an administrative discharge at the worst, not jail time. There is no "double standard" at play here. We don't throw military personnel into "the brig" for mistakes, even when they cost peoples' lives. It's 2013, not 1913.

      October 1, 2013 at 12:44 am | Reply
  59. American

    Just popped in to see if Tea Partiers are predictably analogizing this occasion to Benghazi. Yep, they sure are. Imagine that.

    September 30, 2013 at 10:09 pm | Reply
    • Richard

      IS there a rug big enough for you democrats to sweep Benghazi under?

      September 30, 2013 at 11:08 pm | Reply
  60. Big John

    Tea Baggers: Worthy of a drone. Light'em up.

    September 30, 2013 at 10:07 pm | Reply
    • t2vodka

      I don't like tea party either but they are still our American brothers and sisters. People like you are pure trash.

      October 1, 2013 at 12:51 am | Reply
  61. Prefer not to say

    Seems like a huge over reaction and waste of two valuable personnel to me.

    September 30, 2013 at 10:05 pm | Reply
    • Jon

      2 Soldiers killed...millions in tax dollars destroyed...yeah your right probably not worth the typing to make the article. Force Protection is no joke and its about time Generals be held accountable for their subordinate bases in Afghanistan and not just the ones they reside at.

      September 30, 2013 at 10:25 pm | Reply
      • Richard

        Both of these Generals did live on the base attacked. Obviously you know nothing about what you are talking about. Maj Gen Guganus was an outstanding leader that was doing exactly what he was supposed to do. Sometimes Soldiers and Marines die in war. That's reality. Its not pretty and I dont like it but its true. There are a lot of politics and national caveats involved on a British base that has US servicemembers on it.

        October 1, 2013 at 8:36 am |
    • T. Lee

      That's why you are not in charge of anything @Prefer Not To Say – you can't distinguish dealing with a failure of leadership from an 'overeaction'.

      September 30, 2013 at 10:59 pm | Reply
  62. WallyMC

    The fault lies with the folks that decided to draw sown the forces before the battle filed was won. Troops in the mist of battle have little chance of success given the reality of the political situation in the USA. We should all be ashamed that we allowed this to happen.

    September 30, 2013 at 9:56 pm | Reply
    • Bob

      The battlefield cannot be won without killing millions of Afghans. Are you okay with that? Time to leave. Fool.

      September 30, 2013 at 10:21 pm | Reply
      • C

        I am OK with that.

        September 30, 2013 at 10:32 pm |
      • Richard

        They should have done that in 2002. The U.S. should a standing policy; you attack us, we nuke you.

        September 30, 2013 at 11:12 pm |
      • U.S.M.C. 1371

        Should have enforced that policy from day one.

        October 1, 2013 at 5:35 am |
  63. Veritas

    Is this about the Afghan Taliban or the Tea Party Taliban here in the US?

    September 30, 2013 at 9:55 pm | Reply
    • Dover

      Well, because they actually got something done, it is clearly the Afghanistan Taliban.

      September 30, 2013 at 10:34 pm | Reply
  64. Greg Miech

    While the generals are subsequently responsible I am sure this was delegated to others and they were the ones responsible. The Marines just do not seem suited to guard a post. Loss at US Embassy, Benghazi, Iran, Beirut Bombing (No commander was relieved over that).

    September 30, 2013 at 9:52 pm | Reply
    • USMC

      The Marines are not suited to guard a post? Do your homework before making such stupid statements, incidents happen regardless of who's guarding what. I know that by making such a statement you are not in the military. So either shut up, or sign up!

      September 30, 2013 at 11:05 pm | Reply
      • FDHGDHGFD55







        September 30, 2013 at 11:30 pm |
    • Craig

      Clearly you weren't in the military, specifically the Navy or the Marines. It is a long-standing tradition that the commander is ultimately responsible for his command. If the brand new ensign runs the ship aground while the Captain is sleeping it's still his ship and his responsibility. The ensign will likely be nailed too...a Letter of Admonishment (which means no more promotions) and such. In this case, the situation was well known to everybody in the chain of command but the Generals didn't act to fix it. That allowed the attack to succeed. That's different than a situation where an outpost, suitably manned and protected was overwhelmed by a much superior force...say a couple dozen Marines facing a 1000 Taliban. Other than extraction there's really not much that can stop the outcome in that situation.

      October 1, 2013 at 12:07 am | Reply
  65. Navy Guy

    Ms Starr – This story seems to fail on the basic who/what/when/where/how. One has to wait until the 3rd from last paragraph to find out the position of one of the two generals (aviation commander of some sort), and the position of the second is never mentioned. Pretty amazing. Given that they were fired for HOW they did their jobs, the need to tell the reader – pretty early in the story, preferably – WHAT jobs they held should be pretty obvious.

    September 30, 2013 at 9:48 pm | Reply
  66. RICK

    And just think, we have a muslim president.....

    September 30, 2013 at 9:47 pm | Reply
    • milchuck

      You're an idiot..

      September 30, 2013 at 9:51 pm | Reply
    • Dover

      What country are you hailing from? The US has a Christian capitalist President. Look up the definitions of both of those descriptions, because you are just showing why your side is more and more unelectable by the day.

      September 30, 2013 at 10:37 pm | Reply
      • jamessavik

        Obama bin Laden went to a Madrassa as a child and has a Muslim styled name.

        He'll negotiate with Iran and Syria but not republicans.

        What are we supposed to think?

        October 1, 2013 at 1:14 am |
      • Dawn Kieballs

        James Savik, hmm that sounds like a Russian styled name. Are you communist symp? You people are idiots. On a separate topic, ever wonder how Ted Cruz can talk for 20+ hours without a bathroom break? I'm guessing it was during the Dr. Seuss reading that he was filling out his depends.

        October 1, 2013 at 2:25 am |
  67. Josh

    Good. These generals were becoming too soft on Muslim terrorist in Pakistan. Need to send a clear message to the Military leadership that there needs to be a zero tolerance policy. Shoot Taliban first and then ask questions.

    September 30, 2013 at 9:36 pm | Reply
    • RICK

      Agreed.... Wish we could could do that in the U.S.

      September 30, 2013 at 9:50 pm | Reply
    • Investigate 9/11

      "We should shoot people."

      "We should not worry about gathering intelligence from them."

      That's basically what you just said. You aren't much of a thinker, are you?

      October 1, 2013 at 12:17 am | Reply
  68. Ben Ghazi

    well well well....who got fired for getting Chris Stevens and his team killed?

    September 30, 2013 at 9:25 pm | Reply
    • ED4

      Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Duh.

      September 30, 2013 at 9:47 pm | Reply
    • Dover

      Q: Who got fired foe the 60 US consulate deaths during the Bush administration? A: No one. It is OK for republicans to drop the ball (Bin Laden, the economy, the environment, unemployment, the stock market.....)

      September 30, 2013 at 10:40 pm | Reply
  69. jake

    You are all retarded if you can't say anything smart then shut up

    September 30, 2013 at 9:10 pm | Reply
    • RICK

      Blow me.......

      September 30, 2013 at 9:41 pm | Reply
      • BillyBob

        Hey dick rick-–you are indeed one pathetic person-–please adult up

        September 30, 2013 at 9:58 pm |
    • Dover

      Let me fix that for you:

      You are all retarded. If you can't say anything smart, then shut up.


      September 30, 2013 at 10:41 pm | Reply
  70. Investigate 9/11

    so some military personnel dies, two generals get fired.

    why was this notable?

    Prince Harry was present during an attack.

    i'm i drawing hasty conclusions here? how many times in the past have generals been fired for an attack? what the F, it's a warzone, why would royalty be there? i thought they were busy making money off of wartime profits. oh well.

    September 30, 2013 at 9:07 pm | Reply
    • MPawesome-o

      I think it has more to do with the loss of millions of dollars of assets than it does with the loss of life. Perhaps, The Princes safety has something to do with it.

      September 30, 2013 at 10:32 pm | Reply
    • Dover

      All of that is answered in the article. Read it.

      September 30, 2013 at 10:42 pm | Reply
      • Investigate 9/11

        I think you missed the point i was trying to make.

        Was anyone fired after the attack at CAMP HOLLOWAY in 1962. Is that what the article refers to? The article says largest loss of marine aircraft since Vietnam. If no one was fired, then why is anyone being fired now if the mistake was so much smaller resulting in less damage than Camp Holloway?

        What, the equipment was more expensive due to inflation so it's worth mentioning?

        October 1, 2013 at 12:00 am |
      • Investigate 9/11

        Furthermore, the articles mention the Prince by name, not the two people who died from it. Don't you think the entire point is to draw attention to the fascist prince being in the military for people to fawn over?

        October 1, 2013 at 12:02 am |
  71. George patton

    Give them opportunity to take revenge on Taliban.

    September 30, 2013 at 8:38 pm | Reply
    • Tim

      Marines are better at the offence than the defence.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:58 pm | Reply
      • sparky

        you're a twit

        September 30, 2013 at 9:06 pm |
  72. Palaniappan Rajaram

    "Britain's Prince Harry was with his Apache helicopter crew at the time of the attack but was moved to a secure area, officials said at the time."

    Were other Apache pilots moved to a secure area as well? Or, was it just Prince Harry?

    September 30, 2013 at 8:38 pm | Reply
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      I certainly don't think that they just sat in their aircraft waiting to be shot, do you?

      October 1, 2013 at 9:24 am | Reply
  73. RobK

    Wonder if this has anything to do with Gen Amos trying to cover up his illegal influence regarding Maj. Weirick and Lt. Gen. Thomas D. Waldhauser?

    September 30, 2013 at 8:32 pm | Reply
  74. DJ102

    The GQ had a great article on this event: The Untold Story of Battle of Bastion

    September 30, 2013 at 8:32 pm | Reply
  75. keywestdan

    Who really cares about the generals? Big deal. They have to retire, oh boo hoo, with big fat pensions. They messed up and needed to go. Makes some room at the top for others to be promoted. It is refreshing to see anyone high up in government fired for incompetence, as it happens so seldom. It certainly doesn't happen in civil service very often and there are lots of people who need to be fired. There are also way too many people with computers and time on their hands.

    September 30, 2013 at 8:22 pm | Reply
  76. Lewy

    When something goes wrong, it always has to be someone's fault.

    September 30, 2013 at 8:14 pm | Reply
    • Dan

      Not so in Benghazi....

      September 30, 2013 at 8:20 pm | Reply
      • Dennis

        Well Dan,when it comes to the GOP it is always their fault.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:58 pm |
  77. Colonel Buckley

    Why was the Secretary of State and the President (Commander in Chief) not also held liable?

    September 30, 2013 at 8:08 pm | Reply
    • Kyle

      Why would the Secretary of State be held responsible? This was on a military post, not a diplomatic one.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:13 pm | Reply
    • keywestdan

      How exactly would they be held liable? Do you have any idea how stupid your statement is? There is an big chain of command between the embassy and the Secretary, plus a chain of command for the guards. In any case, all U.S. embassies and those of other countries are dependent upon the security services of the host country. Have you EVER EVER heard of U.S. Marine guards or anyone else actually opening fire to protect an embassy? Even in Saigon, the SV security forces were obligated to protect the embassy, never mind that they were cowards and ran away. Did the guards open fire when the U.S. Embassy in Tehran was over-run? Where were they then? Did you ever hear of one Iranian killed in the takeover of our embassy from U.S. forces there? Who was punished for that? NOBODY you moron.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:30 pm | Reply
    • Willie

      Because neither the Secretary of State and the President (Commander in Chief) were in charge of the base camp force protection measures, and just to think you are a "Colonel."??????...................SMH

      September 30, 2013 at 8:47 pm | Reply
      • MSgt Scott Roberts

        I'm guessing he's not a real Colonel .Just a guess, BX warrior.

        September 30, 2013 at 9:00 pm |
    • Dennis

      For the same reasons that Bush and Cheney weren't held responsible.

      September 30, 2013 at 9:00 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      It's already been stated, but why would you think the Secretary of State, a diplomat, would be remotely responsible for force protection on a military base? You're doing a disservice to the real Colonels in our military.

      September 30, 2013 at 9:20 pm | Reply
    • annier

      You're more like Colonel Sanders, right??

      September 30, 2013 at 9:31 pm | Reply
    • ShiverMeTimbers


      October 1, 2013 at 4:48 am | Reply
  78. doug

    i'm so happy the Prince was taken care of

    September 30, 2013 at 8:02 pm | Reply
    • George Patton-2

      Are you talking about Prince Harry, doug? He shamed England by bragging about his killing people while he was in Afghanistan. If I were English, I'd hang my head in pure shame!!!

      September 30, 2013 at 8:07 pm | Reply
      • doug

        i was being sarcastic-why should he be secured?

        September 30, 2013 at 8:22 pm |
      • Oerald G'Hare

        fake George, but you're a muslim, and they don't believe in shame.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:36 pm |
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      Score one for good sarcasm.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:34 am | Reply
  79. BookCadillac

    there are really cracking down on leaders after the MALL attack bye the Taliban!

    September 30, 2013 at 8:02 pm | Reply
    • DEAN

      I hope English isn't your first language.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:15 pm | Reply
  80. Ryan


    September 30, 2013 at 7:51 pm | Reply
  81. Joe Blow

    The only reason they were fired is because of the destruction of aircraft. The DOD could care less about Marines dying just the expensive cost of replacing six Harriers.

    September 30, 2013 at 7:49 pm | Reply
    • Danram

      Utterly stupid post.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:55 pm | Reply
    • Joseph McCarthy

      Quite true Joe Blow, quite true! No matter how you slice it, we're spending way too much on the military and this needs to stop big time!!!

      September 30, 2013 at 8:00 pm | Reply
    • Joe's a Blowhard

      What a stupid and heartless comment Joe. If you feel that way, maybe you can go ask the Taliban for protection

      September 30, 2013 at 8:10 pm | Reply
    • ADAM4X4

      Any serious breach of security, loss of life, or substantial loss of materiel will normally result in disciplinary action. You may be right that the equipment loss was the greatest factor in the final determination.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:20 pm | Reply
  82. Pete/Ark

    I do wish this site had up or down vote buttons ...easier to critique the ignorant that way ... CNN , please consider this...

    September 30, 2013 at 7:48 pm | Reply
  83. BudW

    Tie their hands then expect them to do the job F the pentagon and politicians

    September 30, 2013 at 7:45 pm | Reply
    • Joseph McCarthy

      Please BudW, do skip the filthy Tea Party lingo. It has no place here. In fact, those two generals should never have been sent to Afghanistan in the first place as we have absolutely no right to be there! Let's put the blame exactly where it belongs and that's on George W. Bush and his henchmen!

      September 30, 2013 at 7:50 pm | Reply
      • JosephisAMoron

        You're an idgit.

        September 30, 2013 at 7:57 pm |
      • northerstar

        It was their responsibility to defend their post regardless of where it is. They failed and where held accountable. Can't we hold professional soldiers with stars on their shoulders responsible for doing their jobs and not blame Bush for everything ! The rank and file soldier deserve better.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:36 pm |
  84. Ron

    In WWII these guys would have just been canned immediately, not a year later. General Officers are accountable for results, good or bad. No excuses. You either get the job done or they will find someone that can or will. After Marshall left after WWII the General Officer corps of the military devolved slowly into a bunch of manager and politicos. It is shameful that with thousands of lives in their hands, the one thing they couldn't do was guard some fence in the middle of nowhere. With US Marines available to you? Really? Pathetic that anyone would express anything other than anger that this did not happen a year ago.

    September 30, 2013 at 7:41 pm | Reply
  85. Pete/Ark

    The Corps protects its' own when needed , and disciplines its' own when necessary ...

    September 30, 2013 at 7:38 pm | Reply
  86. mrl

    Gen Amos is the one who needs to go – he is dismantling the Corps like crazy – and breaking laws to CRUSH Marines (his words). How our President allows this illegal Gen Amos to keep operating is beyond me. One of his own prosecutors turned him in for breaking the law – and below is the article out today on what the General's henchmen are doing to that poor guy. WAKE UP America! Your kids are not safe with this General in command!


    September 30, 2013 at 7:31 pm | Reply
    • Pete/Ark

      do troll on ...

      September 30, 2013 at 7:40 pm | Reply
    • alf564

      Because the president is really wanting to disband the better officers and men in the military service of the USA.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:48 pm | Reply
  87. Amarjeet

    It is shameful for those who failed to protect & plan anti forces attack defense of US troops in Afghanistan. It needs to be investigated, planed and strategy obtained for similar surprise attacks on US forces. No commander or General deserves for failures to protect forces in foreign deployment more so against terrorists. It is a humiliation of uniform and rank they hold.

    September 30, 2013 at 7:28 pm | Reply
    • ADAM4X4

      you need an interpreter.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:24 pm | Reply
  88. Steve S

    Time to bring the troops home ASAP.
    Azzcrackistan serves NO useful purpose, except as a killing ground for American soldiers.

    September 30, 2013 at 7:24 pm | Reply
    • Palaniappan Rajaram

      It is this line of thinking after the Soviet withdrawal which gave rise to Taliban and OBL. So, think before you recommend.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:55 pm | Reply
      • ADAM4X4

        It is American interference that gave rise to the Taliban and OBL.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:26 pm |
      • Palaniappan Rajaram

        It is American interference that gave rise to the Taliban and OBL."

        Yes, you had to grow 2 snakes to kill the enemy. Once that was accomplished, you should have stayed to properly dispose of the snakes. Instead, by leaving, you created a snake breeding ground.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:33 pm |
      • ADAM4X4

        Palaniappan Rajaram: I didn't do anything. I don't have to do anything. Why are you trying to blame ME?!

        September 30, 2013 at 9:15 pm |
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        I agree with you logic and facts, but after the CIA operations in Afghanistan expelled the Soviets, what legal basis did the U.S. have to operate there?

        October 1, 2013 at 8:53 am |
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      Hilarious, the apparent foreigner, Pallaipi Rami, whatshisname, knows more about this than the American, Adamboy. Soviets invaded Azzcrackistan. Azzi nationals and patriots assembled guerrilla forces to expel Soviets. Charlie the crack smoking Congressman organized a CIA secret war supporting the Azzi nationals against the Soviets. Osama Bin Laden was among the Azzi nationals and received training in military tactics including long rang artillery and radio communications. Soviets retreated from Azzistan after they couldn't fly aircraft past the missiles Charlie the crack smoking Congressman provide to OBL et al. Power and security vacuum created by Soviet retreat. Taliban rose to power in Azzistan. OBL provide a safe haven to operate in Azziland. OBL attacked NYC.

      October 1, 2013 at 8:49 am | Reply
  89. Ted

    doesn't it seem odd? Fewer lives lost, yet who retired because of Beghazi?

    September 30, 2013 at 7:21 pm | Reply
    • tony

      We weren't occupying Libya. Diplomatic mission defense is usually the responsibility of the host nation. And the risk is understood.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:24 pm | Reply
      • MIke

        Yet knew the embassy was under attack, disreguarded a cry for help, then lied to the American People with a phoney story. Shame on Hillary and Obama

        September 30, 2013 at 7:37 pm |
      • Vad

        Wait, what did you say? Our all volunteer armed forces don't understand the danger but a civilian ambassador and a few security personnel need to rely on the Libyans for security? I have never heard of an Embassy without their own Countries troops protecting it.

        September 30, 2013 at 7:45 pm |
      • ADAM4X4

        Vad: Those Marines are there as security guards more or less. Besides that Benghazi was essentially a CIA operation. The White House and Hillary tried to keep it as hush-hush as possible because of the inherent secrecy. Unfortunately, it was even more a political decision.
        Do I want to hang Obama or Hillary for it? No, these things happen. I'm sure they are more pained about it then you or I . War sucks. Politics sucks. I am extremely grateful that there are people strong enough to deal with these things even when it makes them look like liars who don't care about the fallen.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:35 pm |
    • Palaniappan Rajaram

      Lives are lives.. marines or Foreign Service .. everyone is the same. However, one is political/diplomatic and the other one is HUGELY strategic. The attack on the base, a place from which offensive operations take place, is far more serious. It degrades the ability to take the fight to the enemies, which is probably why 3 investigations were conducted and 2 heads had to roll.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:29 pm | Reply
    • Dennis

      Tell us Ted,tell us.

      September 30, 2013 at 9:09 pm | Reply
    • ChickenHawkCivi

      Ted, two top career officials that testified before a Republican Congressional hearing for the purpose of discrediting the President, stated and provided written testimony that in their opinions security levels were adequate in Benghazi. Get some better facts.

      October 1, 2013 at 8:40 am | Reply
  90. tony

    Almost as good a tax-payer given retirement as those government hating Tea Party Congressmen will get after a just a few weeks spouting in The Capitol.

    September 30, 2013 at 7:19 pm | Reply
    • tcp

      You truly have no clue, do you?

      September 30, 2013 at 8:32 pm | Reply
  91. Andre Smith

    Now, what about the idiots who gave us Combat Outpost Keating? If that's not the height of incompetence, I don't know what is.

    September 30, 2013 at 7:17 pm | Reply
    • Bud

      Interesting Wikipedia read on this; thanks Andre for the reference to Combat Outpost Keating.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:21 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      The Marines expect more from their General Officers than the Army does. Combat Outpost Keating was to be closed before the attack but the Army then delayed it due to higher priorities elsewhere. Any finding against a senior Army Officer would have served to highlight poor planning of Army HQ, which obviously can't happen. Instead, the Army gets two more live Medal of Honor winners, one of whom almost immediately left the Army and the other with PTSD – great recruiting material.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:26 pm | Reply
    • ADAM4X4

      As shockiing as the story of Combat Outpost Keating is, I fear it's not an isolated case. Basically, they set our guys up as sitting ducks and then try to kill their attackers. This was done many times in many ways in Iraq and Vietnam. Good to see somebody high up get called up on it. Years ago I met a Vietnam combat vet who told me he shot his battalion commander's helicopter down while the CO was using a bull horn to order them into sure slaughter. I thought he was full of it but then I read his paperwork asking for an upgrade of his discharge. Not only did he shoot that copter down but at his initial disciplinary hearing he showed up with two live grenades, pulled the pins, set them on the tables in the front of the hearing and left. His charges included attempted murder on X individuals and the destruction of a helicopter, tent, various chairs, tables, filing cabinets, typewriters, etc.. He was for real. Years later, he was convicted of killing a Vietnamese neighbor who wouldn't shut his mouth. My buddy couldn't stand hearing somebody speak Vietnamese. He warned the guy repeatedly but he ran his mouth anyway. Some people think my buddy was nuts, etc.. To me he was a hero who didn't take any crap. He's the kind of guy that we expect to fight these wars. God bless him and his family.

      September 30, 2013 at 9:01 pm | Reply
    • Dennis

      Is it even comparable to the battle of Hill 937(Hamburger Hill,1969 S.Vietnam) resulting in the deaths of 72 Americans? I doubt any officers were relieved of command after that strategic blunder.

      September 30, 2013 at 9:17 pm | Reply
  92. Telling it like it is

    thanks GW Bush for your wars that destroyed so many and your useless war of lies and deceit regarding Iraq – THE BUSH LEGACY LIVES ON!

    September 30, 2013 at 7:17 pm | Reply
    • nw93kn1

      Umm if you learned how to read instead of just bashing a person that you don't like you would see the story isn't about Iraq.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:49 pm | Reply
      • Mike

        You do realize he got us into Afghanistan also, right?

        October 1, 2013 at 1:38 pm |
    • TellingitisAMoron called. They want their village idgit back.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:59 pm | Reply
    • ShiverMeTimbers

      Dude, President Obama is more of a war monger than G. Bush and Cheney combined; and this man earned a PEACE PRIZE, no less.

      October 1, 2013 at 4:24 am | Reply
  93. Vietnam Vet

    A commander did need to be held accountable. Several lower ranking soldiers paid a far higher price for the generals' errors.

    September 30, 2013 at 7:15 pm | Reply
    • ShiverMeTimbers

      Why stop there? Why not jail all the congressmen and senators who supported these demented wars?

      October 1, 2013 at 4:23 am | Reply
  94. jody alt

    Question; Does the USMC have a dedicated full time force that's primary mission is to provide airfield security and resource protection, similar to the USAF Security Forces?

    September 30, 2013 at 7:12 pm | Reply
    • Grunt

      No. Every Marine is trained to be a rifleman. There may have been a security force, but most likely it was augmented by Afgahns.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:22 pm | Reply
      • Sgt

        Marines train to be riflemen but that is a distance from the training of an 0300 MOS group. A couple weeks in ITR surely doesn't qualify a "Marine" to be a "good Grunt".

        That statement is a little misleading.

        Sgt USMC 03xx
        RVN 68-69

        September 30, 2013 at 7:52 pm |
      • jody alt

        I would think that personnel assigned to a USMC aviation unit would have other full time jobs and the concept of everyone being a rifleman may not be good enough. It sounds like in the USMC airfield security is an additional duty at best. I would think the USMC would want full time, dedicated, and trained folks performing airfield security. Maybe this security weakness in the way the USMC defends airfields is why they were targeted.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:29 pm |
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        jody alt, astute observation. Just as in the Libya embassy security situation. Those in charge have to be ready for any possibility. How many men can the enemy muster?. What kinds of weapons are available to them? I think an 8th grade kid could have made that assessment accurately. Regarding Marines and their capabilities to be riflemen or airfield security, isn't Marine basic training, including marksmanship, above that of the others? Here's your weapon, there is the perimeter, those are the other guys working with you, that is your perimeter security technology. Piece of cake, unless force levels are low, security technology is weak, the fence line has holes in it. Management screws up more than front line, almost every time.

        October 1, 2013 at 8:17 am |
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        Sgt, I went online to Marines website. 0300 IS Marines fighting forces, 0311 rifleman, 0331 machine gunner, etc. Further, "Infantry Marines are able to secure and defend self and vital terrain by repelling the enemy's assault by fire, maneuver, and close combat". I don't see any reason why Marines couldn't defend an airbase, unless physical and electronic security was lacking as was probably the case here.

        October 1, 2013 at 8:33 am |
    • airbornevet187

      They do have to guard their own outpost which may include an airfield just as any regular army or special operations unit would. They may have all been trained as riflemen, but that is also part of a rifleman's job.
      Even the elite special operations have to guard their outposts and they are trained as riflemen too.

      I have been there when they have been fully dedicated to it. After the Rangers jumped into Kandahar in 2001 and seized the airport and surrounding areas, a few days later, the Marines came in and held it so the Rangers and other spec ops could focus on combat operations.

      May not be the grunts main job, but combat is a grunts main job and the true reality of combat is not fighting 24hrs a day 7 days a week. Everyone would be shell shocked, some of that time is dedicated to guarding your post which is apart of the primary job of combat.

      September 30, 2013 at 8:23 pm | Reply
      • ADAM4X4

        It was a British post with some troops from Denmark.

        September 30, 2013 at 9:06 pm |
      • Kim

        Mr Airbornevet187.. So well explained. To bad these know-it-all people still do not understand. I'm sure that they have so studied the military. So much they could run a base/post! Lol

        October 1, 2013 at 5:22 am |
  95. Finley

    The link to this is misleading. Two generals "fired" is NOT the same thing as two generals "force to hand in retirement papers"

    September 30, 2013 at 7:10 pm | Reply
    • tom

      Finley are you really that dense?

      September 30, 2013 at 7:13 pm | Reply
    • tony

      With all the golden rewards implied

      September 30, 2013 at 7:15 pm | Reply
    • Aaron

      Generals cannot be fired like a civilian can or understands. Resignation is the way they're dismissed. In your small mind you may find this unfair or without retribution, but I'd personally rather be fired than remembered in the history books and taught to all future officers as a failure for all time to remember.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:18 pm | Reply
    • Sean

      You obviously haven't served. Forced retirement is getting fired in military; just the way it is. Additionally, neither of them will get their lucrative post-military positions. As Marines they will carry the shame of their failure and those that died due to their negligence will haunt them for the rest of their lives.

      Very few non-military/non-service jobs carry that kind of lifelong responsibility.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:26 pm | Reply
      • Pete/Ark

        BRAVO ... and Semper Fi ...

        September 30, 2013 at 7:42 pm |
      • theDude

        Nope. Theyll be getting their pensions. No court martial was involved.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:20 pm |
      • G-Money

        Well said Sean, well said.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:22 pm |
  96. Buddy

    My guess is they want to put a couple of gays in charge.

    September 30, 2013 at 7:07 pm | Reply
    • burnz

      The perimeter defence would have been fabulous.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:12 pm | Reply
    • Josh

      Wow, that was an intelligent comment.

      September 30, 2013 at 7:34 pm | Reply
    • Pete/Ark

      do troll on kid ...

      September 30, 2013 at 7:43 pm | Reply
    • ADAM4X4

      They could put on a burlesque show and the Taliban would probably drop their weapons, shave their beards, and pubic areas and apply for jobs on the post.

      September 30, 2013 at 9:21 pm | Reply
    • Dennis

      Which two,Buddy? Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham?

      September 30, 2013 at 9:26 pm | Reply
      • Mike

        I'm figuring Buddy and his boy friend would do.

        October 1, 2013 at 1:36 pm |
  97. fsfdadafsfas

    they were outplayed so they needed heads to roll. sounds good to me i guess.

    September 30, 2013 at 6:59 pm | Reply
    • XSherH

      ........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
      .........."...\.......... _.·´

      September 30, 2013 at 7:06 pm | Reply
      • Josh

        Anger management issues, bro.

        September 30, 2013 at 7:12 pm |
      • tom

        same to you XSherH

        September 30, 2013 at 7:13 pm |
      • Telling it like it is

        A sign of immaturity no doubt.

        September 30, 2013 at 7:20 pm |
      • Pete/Ark

        young children are SOOOO creative ....

        September 30, 2013 at 7:44 pm |
      • George Patton-2

        Good grief XSherH, you must be a Tea Partier by posting that kind of salute!!! I too am angry about us being in Afghanistan and say that we need to vacate that country as soon as possible!

        September 30, 2013 at 8:04 pm |
      • Viet Vet

        What do we have like 20 names do we.........???? I've seen this childish crap all over the blogs and it just shows your brain capacity is not very high...... I guess they have a couple of people coming to see you about this actually. Quite a number of people have complained.

        September 30, 2013 at 8:37 pm |
      • ADAM4X4

        Viet Vet: What are you saying? No one has a clue.

        September 30, 2013 at 9:23 pm |
      • George Patton-2

        Here's this jerk Phunnie boy again, doing his best to tear down Gen. George Patton's good name by posting his nonsense under it for his own personal amusement! Kick Taliban's back and break the teeth in their mouths.

        September 30, 2013 at 9:59 pm |
      • ShiverMeTimbers

        Yooooo, that is pretty cool. How do you do that?

        October 1, 2013 at 4:21 am |
      • ChickenHawkCivi

        XSherH is dreaming of his appointment to see the proctologist.

        October 1, 2013 at 9:37 am |
      • Preston

        that is awesome use of seen that..i might copy your work!

        October 1, 2013 at 11:37 am |
    • The Other Bob

      Way back when, heads would have rolled in the literal sense.

      October 1, 2013 at 9:09 am | Reply
      • like

        America and England have always attacked other countries and promote combat and war in other countries.
        England from very beginning had a hostile policy, separated Iran into two countries, Afghanistan and Iran.
        Helped Iraq to fight against Iran, In Saudi Arabia they created Vahabiat or Vahabi to fight against Islam.
        Vahabi, people who chop off heads for heaven and those suicide bombers, first supported by England.
        This immoral, unhumanitarian and ferocious policy caused the world to suffer. The world is in chaos because of policy, human kills human, human rules make some rich and some poor.
        Now in Afghanistan and other countries, America and England are trying to find Uranium, oil, gold, historical monuments and treasures and other Natural Savings, violating many rules, killing many people, and let their ownselves to be killed.

        October 1, 2013 at 4:22 pm |
1 2

Post a comment


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.