Check These Out: Buddy Finder | Videos | SpouseBUZZ | My Friend Network | News | Military Equipment


Military.com    Military.com Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Army Discussions  Hop To Forums  U.S. Army History    Did the Army land at Tripoli in the 1700's
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
-star Rating Rate It!  Login/Join 
suspended
TMC_SW_RET
Posted
I thought I read/heard/watch something that said when the US troops went ashore at Tripoli to put down the pirates that an Army Captain lead the way and that the Marines where established after this.

How far off am I?
 
Posts: 877 | Registered: Wed 07 February 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of mplcs
Posted Hide Post
The ARmy CPT was the Ambassadore so he was NO Longer and Army CPT, The Marines led the way on that one.
 
Posts: 940 | Registered: Fri 25 May 2001Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of GeorgeRGarcia
Posted Hide Post
No American troops Army or Marines landed in Tripoli in the 1700s, it was in the early 1800s.
 
Posts: 1049 | Registered: Sat 15 March 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of mj101inf
Posted Hide Post
Didn't you know that Tripoli was exclusively a Marine battle fought without the Army's help. Just like Belleau Wood, Guadalcanal, Chosin Reservoir, Hue City, and Fallujah. Nope, the US Army had absolutely no participation in any of those - according to most Marines. Okay, honestly I don't know anything about Tripoli.
 
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Sat 06 January 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
Posted Hide Post
There was no Army involvment in the Barbary Wars.
 
Posts: 3515 | Registered: Fri 27 September 2002Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of XAbnInf
Posted Hide Post
It was eight Marines with a mercenary army of about 300-500 Arabs, Greeks and Europeans. And they never made it to Tripoli (not in battle anyway) - the fight was at Derna.

US Army Captain William Eaton was a consular, but appointed himself General In Command of the combined Marine/mercenary force for the attack on Derna.
 
Posts: 439 | Registered: Sun 07 March 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Basic Training
Posted Hide Post
Interesting...fascinating time in history, in a fascinating place...

John
Former USAF
www.realmilitaryflix.com


quote:
Originally posted by XAbnInf:
It was eight Marines with a mercenary army of about 300-500 Arabs, Greeks and Europeans. And they never made it to Tripoli (not in battle anyway) - the fight was at Derna.

US Army Captain William Eaton was a consular, but appointed himself General In Command of the combined Marine/mercenary force for the attack on Derna.
 
Posts: 30 | Registered: Fri 18 January 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of BronzeGoat
Posted Hide Post
He was an Army officer before his appointment as consul, but was he still an Army officer when he was appointed as "agent of the Navy?" I've seen several references to him as a general, but I couldn't find anything referring to his appointment or promotion, other than the aforementioned self-appointment as "general and commander-in-chief" of the expedition.

He had an interesting life, regardless. He was considered something of a hero in his time for the capture of Derna. It's a shame he doesn't get a mention in that line of the USMC song.... Smile
 
Posts: 383 | Registered: Sun 02 April 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Basic Training
Picture of Compston
Posted Hide Post
I served in the USMC from 1978-1981, but have served since in the U.S. Army, Ohio Army National Guard and now U.S. Army Reserve since 1981-Present. I will always cherish my days with the Corps, but they continue to leave out anything to do with the U.S. Army according to their history. Especially WWII in the Pacific. An Army Officer also which I am, may have appointed himself CONSUL in that time, but still was an Army Officer until the Presdient either revoked his appointment or he resigned his Commission as an Officer in the United States Army. Neither which we have in the historical accords. So for all my former and fellow Letherneck Brothers, sorry he was still an Army Officer. Looks like our Great Army took the lead in your USMC expedition, huh.
 
Posts: 15 | Registered: Tue 25 April 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
ARMY FORUMS MODERATOR

Picture of ErichG2
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Compston:
I served in the USMC from 1978-1981, but have served since in the U.S. Army, Ohio Army National Guard and now U.S. Army Reserve since 1981-Present. I will always cherish my days with the Corps, but they continue to leave out anything to do with the U.S. Army according to their history. Especially WWII in the Pacific. An Army Officer also which I am, may have appointed himself CONSUL in that time, but still was an Army Officer until the Presdient either revoked his appointment or he resigned his Commission as an Officer in the United States Army. Neither which we have in the historical accords. So for all my former and fellow Letherneck Brothers, sorry he was still an Army Officer. Looks like our Great Army took the lead in your USMC expedition, huh.


Sorry to interject here but it's kind of rare now that I run across someone that shared the 2AD (FWD) experience when I did.

What unit in Garlstedt, Germany?

There are two more of us on here, I believe.
 
Posts: 5961 | Registered: Wed 02 August 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community  
 

Military.com    Military.com Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Army Discussions  Hop To Forums  U.S. Army History    Did the Army land at Tripoli in the 1700's

© 2008 Military Advantage, Inc.