Stephen Ramsbottom
Role at the time: U.S. Army major with the Army Reserve's 103rd Sustainment Command, wounded in the March 1 strike
Response to this claim
Officers told the Associated Press that the generals who moved the unit to Port Shuaiba knew it lacked defenses against drones, and that intelligence officers had warned them it was a likely secondary target for Iran.
“There was nothing that was going to intercept a threat coming at us other than ballistic missiles”
Associated Press investigation based on interviews with 13 soldiers, primarily officers, several on the record and others anonymously, plus Gold Star families. It includes the Army's statement declining to comment on specific details before families are briefed, and a statement that the Pentagon also declined to comment. The AP page lists an update on October 6, 2026; the wording we quote matched an AP member copy published October 5.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Why we used this label
The reference point is whether the military failed the soldiers at Port Shuaiba in protecting them or in caring for the wounded. Ramsbottom says the post had no defense against drones, and in the same AP account he calls the excuse that commanders did not expect a drone attack "preposterous," which asserts a failure of protection. The closest competing label is Challenged the characterization, but he goes beyond disputing a description and criticizes the preparation itself. Evidence: direct quotations in an Associated Press report.