Staff Reports
A Marine involved in a special investigation regarding the tragic suicide bombing in Afghanistan during the U.S. military withdrawal in 2021 has accused the Pentagon of hiding details that could have prevented the attack. Former Sergeant Tyler Vargas-Andrews stated that he had identified a potential suicide bomber near Abbey Gate at the Hamid Karzai International Airport but was not allowed to take action. The Pentagon conducted a new review of the incident in response to his claims but found no evidence to support them.
Vargas-Andrews, who was severely injured in the bombing that claimed the lives of 13 U.S. service members and numerous Afghan civilians, insisted that there was on-the-ground intelligence indicating the threat at the time. Despite the Pentagon’s conclusion that the person they identified as the bomber was not the same individual he spotted, he stood by his testimony. This revelation raises concerns about the transparency and accountability within the military leadership.
‘It’s Bullsh*t’: Marine At Center Of New Afghanistan Probe Accuses Pentagon Of Covering Up Evidence https://t.co/4a0JyfKlxU
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) April 15, 2024
The secondary review suggested that the Marines may have mistaken real-time reports from service members for formal intelligence, leading to confusion about the identity of the bomber. While Vargas-Andrews disagreed with the findings of the investigation, he acknowledged that the person they believed to be the primary threat turned out not to be the bomber. This discrepancy highlights the challenges in accurately assessing threats in a high-stress and rapidly evolving situation.
The disappearance of valuable photos and intelligence during the chaotic evacuation further complicates the understanding of the events leading up to the bombing. Vargas-Andrews expressed frustration over the failure to retrieve crucial photos taken by his team and other units, including images of individuals they deemed suspicious. The lack of concrete evidence and accountability in handling intelligence raises questions about the military’s preparedness and response protocols in such volatile environments.
Despite the discrepancies in the investigation and the Pentagon’s denial of his claims, Vargas-Andrews remains steadfast in his account of the events leading to the bombing. His determination to seek accountability and transparency in the aftermath of the attack highlights the need for a thorough and impartial review of the military’s actions. The tragic loss of life and the lasting impact on individuals like Vargas-Andrews underscore the importance of learning lessons from this devastating incident to prevent similar failures in the future.
