OT: Unarmed US Marines stop terrorist attack on French Train

Submitted by Vengeful Barbarian on

Pretty amazing story here, proud of our boys in uniform. 

 

Three people have been hurt after a heavily armed man opened fire on a train in northern France, before being overpowered by two American passengers.

The incident happened on the high-speed Thalys service near Arras, and the attacker was arrested at Arras station.

The interior minister praised the Americans, one of whom was seriously injured, as was another passenger.

The man arrested was a 26-year-old Moroccan. Anti-terrorist officers have taken over the case.

The weapons were said to include a Kalashnikov, a knife, an automatic pistol and cartridges.

One of the two people seriously hurt had a gunshot wound, the other a knife wound.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34023361

 

caliblue

August 22nd, 2015 at 1:52 AM ^

 The Eastern front  had far more fighting and  casulties with far larger numbers of troops involved and tied down far more Germans than we did in the west. Likewise far more Japanese troops were tied down in China than in all other areas combined. One could easily say that China and Russia fought the war for us. We wrote the history, however.                                                                  

Blue4U

August 21st, 2015 at 6:26 PM ^

Weapons Company, 1st Battalion, 7th Marines in 29 Palms.  General Mattis was my Battalion Commander during the 1st Gulf war.  Then my Regimental Commander later.  He reenlisted me.  He has some great stories.  Especially about Norman Schwarzkopf.

Blue4U

August 21st, 2015 at 10:06 PM ^

to be the CMC but he was too blunt too often with his assessment of the administrations middle east policy.  I watched a congressional hearing on the affects of the sequestration  and the funding of the State Department.  General Mattis told congress "If you cut State Department funding you'll need to buy me more ammo."  General Mattis has always been good for a quote.    

Blue4U

August 21st, 2015 at 10:40 PM ^

Stormin Norman had a Division Command Briefing with all the field grade commanders.  The objective was to assess our troop strength and defensive capabilities.  We were still in the troop build up phase (Shield) therefore we were vulnerable if Saddam launched an offensive.  This was a major concern amongst the top brass even though it was never reported in the aftermath of the war.  

At the end of the briefing Schwarzkopf asked each unit commander how much ammo/ordnance their respective units had.  As it turned out, when the majority of the Army  units deployed, they failed to embark their ammo thinking they would get supplied in country.  When the Marine Corps deploys, we take everything.  Schwarzkopf then tells the Marine Commanders  they need to split the ammo with the Army units because what  they have is insufficient.  LtCol Mattis tells Schwarzkopf "With all due respect General, that ain't happening.  Now if that's all there is, I need to get back to my marines."  No marine units gave up ammo.  That is a no sh*t true story   

Hail Harbo

August 22nd, 2015 at 12:35 AM ^

The Army did loan the USMC a battalion of brand spanking new M1A1s.  Indeed, while the US Army was going to war with their own clapped out M1s (1st Infantry Divsion had two battalions with old M1s) and M1A1s (1st Armored Division had the oldest M1A1s in theater), a US Army battalion set of M1A1s was loaned, and then given, to Marines.  And that would have included 120mm tank gun ammunition.  That is a no sh*t true story as well.

Blue4U

August 22nd, 2015 at 1:31 PM ^

During the intial phases of operational planning Schwarzkopf made it a priority to get armor in country asap.    Because of the shear size and capability of the Army's Armored Divisions vs Marine Corps Tank Battalions, it became a priority to get the Army's Armored Divisions in first.  Schwarzkopf had even stated this in numerous interviews after the war.  Marine Armor flowed in during the later stages of the buildup.  Obviously the Army has a significant size advantage over the Marine Corps, especially when it comes to armor.  I mean come on, would you rather have a tank battalion or an armored division.  And what would your priority be on getting those assets in country.  

Let me add this.  Marine brass wasn't happy with this at all.  That's why the Marine Corps has had an MPF in theater ever since.  This situation is also why, during the second Gulf War, the Marines AO was western Iraq, Army AO northern Iraq, Great Britain AO southern Iraq.  Coincidently, the Commanding General of 1st MARDIV (all Marines in theater) was General Mattis.  Because of his experiences in the 1st Gulf War, he pushed for seperate AO's so the Marine Corps can have autonomy.   

My point being, when marine tankers deployed without tanks, that was part of the operational deployment (intended plan).  When Army infantry units deployed to a warzone without bullets, that was a f*** up.  So what your stating is true, to a certain degree.  But if you're gonna tell a story, tell the whole story

xtramelanin

August 21st, 2015 at 5:51 PM ^

mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty

they need to add this epic action to the definition.

 

 

jmblue

August 21st, 2015 at 6:05 PM ^

The man boarded the train in Brussels.  Security forces must have missed an AK-47-shaped lump in his duffel bag?  Sheesh.

 

 

Everyone Murders

August 21st, 2015 at 6:05 PM ^

Now those guys are legitimate heroes.  That term gets watered down at times, but holy shit, these U.S. Marines are heroes.  Full fucking stop.

I hope their injuries heal quickly along with the passengers', and the Moroccan's capture leads to rooting out some significant part of the terrorist network with whom he is presumably affiliated.

oriental andrew

August 21st, 2015 at 6:19 PM ^

Per one report, it's not clear that they are Marines:

"French media reported that U.S. Marines overpowered the man. U.S. Marine spokesman in Germany Capt. Richard Ulsh told CBS News that "they can confirm that Americans subdued the gunmen" but he would not confirm whether they were Marines."

Not saying that they aren't Marines or that it is any less courageous, because it absolutely it is, regardless of who they are. It's also possible that the USMC is playing it close to the vest so as not to raise tensions and make their men even more of a target globally.

Oy, no politics. Had to edit my post to delete my stream-of-consciousness that surely would have run afoul of board rules..

GoBlueBill

August 21st, 2015 at 6:28 PM ^

How badass would this make the USMC look? Most of us know they are badass already . Taking down a heavily armed individual without being armed themselves. Most impressive .

 

Regardless of if they were marines or not,  their actions were very brave and selfless . I hope the wounded survive.