KUWAIT — Questions are mounting over the U.S. military’s preparedness and decision making after an Iranian drone strike on a logistics facility in Kuwait killed six American soldiers and wounded dozens more in what became the deadliest known attack on U.S. troops since the war against Iran began.
The attack occurred on March 1 at Port Shuaiba, a working seaport and industrial area south of Kuwait City, one day after President Donald Trump launched the war against Iran.
Among those killed was Chief Warrant Officer 3 Robert Marzan, a veteran who had served in the U.S. military for 36 years. A drone crashed through the roof of the operations center and exploded, sending soldiers and debris flying through the building.
According to soldiers interviewed by The Associated Press, the facility had been considered vulnerable to Iranian drone attacks before the strike. Several officers said commanders had been warned that the port lacked adequate defenses against low flying drones.
Major Billy Key, an operations planner who served under Brig. Gen. Clint Barnes, said proposals to move the logistics headquarters to safer locations outside Kuwait had been rejected.
“Kuwait was just too close,” Key said, arguing that the port was within striking distance of Iranian drones.
Port Shuaiba was about 65 miles, or 104 kilometers, from Iran. Although more than 200 soldiers had previously been working at Camp Arifjan, commanders moved about 75 personnel to the port to establish a temporary logistics headquarters.
Some officers defended the decision, saying the location offered communications advantages and existing infrastructure that could support military operations.
However, other soldiers told the AP that the logistics mission could have been conducted from a safer location as long as secure communications were available.
Warnings over drone threats
Several soldiers said senior officers had been warned that Port Shuaiba was particularly vulnerable because it lacked adequate protection against drones.
The U.S. military had strengthened air defenses at major bases in Kuwait, but the port’s primary protection came from a Patriot system near Camp Arifjan. Soldiers said the system was designed primarily to counter missiles and was not well suited to defending against large numbers of Iranian drones.
In the days before the attack, intelligence officers reportedly warned Major Gen. John Hinson and Brig. Gen. Clint Barnes against moving personnel to the port.
According to officers familiar with the briefing, Hinson asked whether Port Shuaiba was among Iranian targets identified by U.S. intelligence. He was reportedly told that although the port was not on the list of planned targets, it was considered a likely secondary target.
The move nevertheless went ahead.
Lt. Gen. Patrick Frank, who was then leading Army Central, also signed off on the relocation, according to officers cited by the AP.
Drone activity was detected before the strike
The danger became even more apparent on the night before the attack.
At least five quadcopter drones were reportedly seen hovering over the port. Major Key said one came within about 40 feet of him and that he informed senior officers about what he had seen.
The following morning, Capt. Cody Khork, who was responsible for unit safety and had previously opposed the move to the port, reportedly expressed concerns about leaving the bunkers.
Soldiers were receiving alerts about missiles and drones, while some officers feared the radar system being used to issue “all clear” warnings could not detect low flying drones.
Despite those concerns, soldiers were eventually cleared to leave the bunkers so they could resume their logistics duties.
Around 10 a.m., about 20 minutes after the final all clear was issued, an Iranian drone crashed through the roof of the operations center.
The blast killed six soldiers and severely injured many others.
Among the dead were Khork, Master Sgt. Noah L. Tietjens, Maj. Jeffrey R. O’Brien, Master Sgt. Nicole M. Amor, Sgt. Declan J. Coady and Marzan. Several were later promoted posthumously.
Soldiers question medical response
Concerns extended beyond the attack itself.
According to soldiers interviewed by the AP, the Port Shuaiba deployment did not have a comprehensive mass casualty plan in place when the strike occurred.
Some wounded troops reportedly had to use their phones to search for nearby medical facilities. Others said their serious injuries were not treated promptly or adequately in the weeks following the attack.
Some soldiers were treated at a Kuwaiti hospital before being moved to residential accommodation while continued Iranian missile and drone attacks complicated evacuation efforts. They were later flown to Germany.
At Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, some wounded soldiers said they were placed in Army barracks rather than admitted for inpatient care because they had not been properly documented as combat injured troops.
The Pentagon said Landstuhl’s role is to stabilize patients before transferring them to specialized care in the United States, adding that wounded troops are evaluated and admitted according to the severity of their injuries.
Army investigation completed
The U.S. Army completed its investigation into the Port Shuaiba attack in June but has not publicly released the report.
The Army said it would not comment on specific details because the families of the soldiers killed had yet to receive full briefings on the findings.
In July, relatives of the fallen soldiers received a briefing from Frank, who had recently completed his time leading Army Central. Tina Marzan, the widow of Robert Marzan, said the briefing did not include an admission of wrongdoing.
A senior officer also filed a complaint with the Army’s inspector general against Barnes and Hinson. The inspector general later concluded that Barnes had not engaged in misconduct or ignored reliable intelligence based on the limited evidence provided. The complaint against Hinson was later withdrawn, although the officer who filed it disputed that characterization.
For the families of those killed and the soldiers who survived, however, questions remain.
Marzan’s widow, Tina, said the families deserve to know what happened and whether mistakes were made.
“We have the right to know what really happened,” she told the AP.
The attack has become one of the most consequential episodes of the war for U.S. forces, with soldiers and their families continuing to deal with deaths, serious injuries and questions over whether the tragedy could have been prevented.
As one wounded soldier, Lt. Col. Tim Halbur, put it, he remains grateful to be alive despite suffering permanent injuries that have changed his ability to use his right arm and participate in activities with his children.
