Help support TMP


POLL: The Pueblo Surrender


195 votes were cast.


Back to POLLS home page


Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP In the TMP Dawghouse writes:

It was suppose to be a spy ship so having protection tends to put a hamper on it mission.

But there should have been available either from a Navy Task Force or South Korea. This was not put into place.

Also they should have been further off the coast then were they where.


Back to the Homepage



1,492 hits since 5 Apr 2009
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

If you were a member of this website, you could participate in website polls. Would you like a free membership?

VOTING RESULTS
AnswerVotes%Chart
yes
57
29%
bar of chart
no
73
37%
bar of chart
don't know
65
33%
bar of chart
POLL IS CLOSED
POLL DESCRIPTION

In the current issue of Naval History magazine, Paul Stillwell reminds us of the Pueblo incident 40 years ago:

...North Korean gunboats captured the 900-ton U.S. intelligence ship Pueblo (AGER-2) in international waters. The skipper of the Pueblo, Commander Lloyd M. Bucher, was wounded by gunfire. He surrendered the ship without the crew firing a shot and without disabling the engines. His decision was to protect the crew against the casualties that might have resulted from resistance....

Did Bucher make the right decision?