Posted on 01/12/2005 4:55:46 AM PST by 1 spark
ABOARD THE USS BONHOMME RICHARD -- Cpl. Sean Foley looks around the ship's main armory and takes a quick inventory. The room is overflowing with guns. Pistols, sniper rifles, machine guns, grenade launchers.
But for the time being, it's all staying right here.
In an effort to ease the fears of local officials, Marines participating in the humanitarian mission to help Indonesia recover from the earthquake and tsunami that have killed more than 100,000 people on the island of Sumatra have agreed to leave their weapons behind whenever they go ashore.
For many Marines, that's tantamount to traveling naked.
"They didn't even want us to have protection like helmets and body armor, let alone weapons, because it might look threatening," said Foley, of Erie, Pa. "That's crazy."
His concern isn't unfounded.
Though the nearly 2,000 Marines on this ship and another nearby have only just begun to trickle ashore, and are generally returning to the ship each night, the area in which they are operating presents some significant security threats.
Rebels have long been active in this region, so much so that the Indonesian government had largely restricted it from foreigners. Though a lull followed the Dec. 26 disaster, firefights near the provincial capital of Banda Aceh have been reported recently.
"We are concerned," said Col. Tom Greenwood, commanding officer of the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which was diverted from duty in Iraq to join in the humanitarian operation. "The Indonesian government is taking it very seriously."
But Indonesian officials have also been reluctant to let the Marines come ashore with their weapons because of the image that might project.
"We are very concerned about force protection," Greenwood said. "But if you go in there and look like an invading force instead of a humanitarian force, that could be just as detrimental as having no security whatsoever. So you have to balance it."
In the devastated city of Meulaboh, where the Marines are expected to do much of their work and unload the bulk of their relief supplies, heavily armed Indonesian soldiers provide security.
In an exception to the no-weapons orders, Marine helicopter pilots have been allowed to carry their standard protection. Marines have also been careful to maintain close communications with their ship.
Officials stressed, however, that security was in the Indonesians' hands.
"We have full confidence in their ability to provide adequate force protection," said Gunnery Sgt. Robert Knoll, a spokesman for the Marines.
"We won't be using any of these," Cpl. Jeff Austin, of Salt Lake City, Utah, said as he set up a .50 caliber sniper rifle in the armory. "I guess the no weapons rule is understandable, since this is a humanitarian thing. But it's quite a switch for us. Usually, we never leave home without them."
I like the way you think.
bump for later discussion
Posted by TheForceOfOne:
"...A soldier should never be without his loaded weapon, also policemen and pilots fit this list..."
You might also want to amend the list to include all law-abiding American citizens who wish to carry a weapon.
~ Blue Jays ~
I don't think it's the people we're helping that worries us.
It's the armed "rebels" (read terrorists) in the area that might attack our troops that worry us.
Nope.
Spitballs.
Some folks tend to forget things so I will refresh your memory, 9/11. It's a completely different world we live in now, and to assume that the "local police" do not have any Muslims who who hate Americans is sheer stupidity. I sure hope it's not your contention that we can now, all of a sudden, trust Muslims.
Absolute RAGE ping..
Bump for later read. I'm assuming most freepers are as unhappy with this development as we are?
No need to refresh my memory. Check out my "profile" page for a brief resume on my activities.
Do I detect a little arrogance here?
Just because we haven't got all of your vast experience "in the field" doesn't mean we can't have common sense. Possession of guns shouldn't threaten anyone - just those who would possibly perpetrate aggessions. I suppose you're a gun-control advocate too.
I stand corrected.
1 shot-1 kill is adequate gun control.
Your main page tells me absolutely nothing about why you think we should allow a "Muslim dominated" police force to guard our Marines and remove all weapons and armor from our Marines going ashore.The idiot(s) who made this decision should never have been in a position to make it.
So, in hindsight, would you have disarmed the sailors on the USS Cole?
I would strongly advise all of you armchair commanders who have never been on a humanitarian mission to crawl back into your holes. You listen to the propoganda spewed by the government and you haven't a flaming idea of what you are talking about!!!
Your main page tells me absolutely nothing about why you think we should allow a "Muslim dominated" police force to guard our Marines and remove all weapons and armor from our Marines going ashore.
It's not supposed to.
The idiot(s) who made this decision should never have been in a position to make it.
And you are?.......What are your qualifications to determine exactly what the personnel on the ground need? None, I presume.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.