Retired Marine Generals Attempt to Include Beirut Bombing Victims in Legislation

| November 17, 2022

The explosion of the Marine Corps building in Beirut, Lebanon, created a large cloud of smoke that was visible from miles away.

Kudos to seven Marine generals who are urging to have those affected by the 1983 Marine Barracks Bombing be included in legislation to compensate victims of terrorism.

Retired Marine generals call on Schumer to compensate Beirut bombing victims

BY LAURA KELLY – 11/15/22

Seven retired four-star generals from the U.S. Marine Corps are urging Senate leaders to include victims and the families of victims from the 1983 Beirut attack on the U.S. Marine Corps barracks in legislation delivering $3 billion to 9/11 families.

The generals are calling for the Fairness for 9/11 Families Act to be amended to include the families of victims of the Beirut terrorist attack.

“None of us object to further helping 9/11 families, but we do object to inadvertently leaving the Beirut families behind,” the military leaders wrote in the letter, sent last week and obtained exclusively by The Hill.

The letter is addressed to Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Signatories include General James L. Jones, who served as national security adviser to former President Obama; General Joseph F. Dunford, who served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Obama and Trump administrations; and General James N. Mattis, who served as secretary of Defense under former President Trump.

The Fairness for 9/11 Families Act, which passed the House in late September, would rescind and redirect $2.7 billion in unused funds from COVID-19 pandemic relief and direct those payments to immediate family members of 9/11 victims.

Lawmakers who sponsored the bill, including Schumer, praised its passage in the House as providing a “catch-up” payment for thousands of 9/11 victims, spouses and dependents who were “unfairly” excluded from the U.S. Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund (USVSST) when it was established in 2015.

But the Marine generals say the Beirut bombing victims and the 9/11 victims were both intentionally excluded from the USVSST because they were pursuing or had received compensation from other areas.

If you are inclined and support this initiative, please contact your senator and urge them to support this inclusion.

Category: Beirut, Lebanon, Marines, Politics, Terror War

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

What events are currently covered under the current legislation.

Does the USS Cole fall under it?

Only Army Mom

As I understand it, no. Nor does it cover Khobar or Mogadishu.


Does this mean the Iranian EFP that I was hit with in 2008 is included? I bet the check is already in the mail. In fairness though I wasn’t wounded.

USMC Steve

But, were you terrorized at the time?


I nearly shit my pants when it went off but after that was mostly angry if that counts.


From my experience, VA’s rating compensation for O-ring damage is limited to a hearty handshake and yearly offer of a free coffee or fountain soda at the canteen.



Not even a laurel and hearty handshake?

Only Army Mom

Those killed in Beirut are included on one memorial, the Middle East Conflicts Memorial Wall in a little river town, Marseilles, Illinois. If you have never been there, it’s not far from I-80, and worth the trip.

Like those who died in Mogadishu and on the USS Cole, they were casualties in a war that our side has failed to recognize has been a millennia-long conflict. Recognition of this fact is more impactful to our society as a whole than the inclusion in a benefits program.

This may be a nice, well-meaning gesture but inversely serves the greater good, i.e., recognition of this existential conflict.

Only Army Mom

Also – rename the “Fairness for 9/11 Families Act”, “Fairness for MiddleEast Conflicts Act” or something similar. While I whole-heartedly support recognizing and making eligible these and other families, including them dilutes the meaning of 9/11. Another example of inversely serving the greater good.


I believe this conflict has been going on, with the US that is, since the Barbary Pirates. They just laid low until they could hurt us again.


Lt. Stephan Decatur approves this message.

“Nuke the site from orbit…it’s the only way to be sure.”

Wonder how far the billions of $s that The JEF sent to his buddies would have gone in funding these efforts.

USMC Steve

This trend started with Shrub the Second, wherein we decided to reward victimhood. Da Gov started handing out tons of cash to the families of the dead, and everything I read indicated that it helped very little in making the survivors any happier. Now, if the funds were stripped from the offending governments or entities, then I am all for that, but handing out our tax money to give to someone else because one of their relatives died, in this case in the performance of their duties, just does not make sense. I get the sense it is just another socialist democrat spending scheme to buy votes down the road.


A principled opinion I can get behind with one-ish correction: “…socialist democrat [Uniparty] spending scheme to buy votes down the road [and fund mechanisms antithetical to Liberty, chiefly Public Sector ‘Worker’ Unions]”.

President Elect Toxic Deplorable Racist SAH Neande

Pretty article, I’d change ONE LITTLE thing, “Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R “D”-Ky).

Cocaine Mitch and his FTX/Ukraine kickbacks would like a word with you, Tox.

Just make sure it’s in public with overwatch.


How many phonies will crawl out of the sewer to claim them some of this gubment money?


Not only that, but like the Camp Lejeune compensation, will most of it end up going to the lawyers?

Only Army Mom

Thankfully no. These are administered through specific programs exclusively.

If someone hires a lawyer to get their “share”, they weren’t eligible. So, a scum bag lawyer wastes their time. Win.

Only Army Mom

Actually, the number of those committing “Stolen Grief” officially is pretty small. Unlike everything else, there needs to be actual documentation of the relationship to the deceased. As long as someone follows the rules. But there will be plenty saying they have been wrongly excluded, conspiracy, etc.