U.S. troops stationed in Kuwait were reportedly given options to relocate to safer positions in western Saudi Arabia before a deadly Iranian drone strike, but those plans were rejected by the unit’s commanding general despite intelligence warnings of a potential attack, according to multiple sources. About a week before the start of Operation Epic Fury, most American soldiers and Air Force personnel stationed in Kuwait were moved to Jordan and Saudi Arabia—positions beyond the range of Iranian missiles. Two relocation sites were evaluated and presented to the 103rd Sustainment Command: one was Logistical Support Area (LSA) Jenkins, a U.S. military base near the southwest port city of Yanbu, and the other was Prince Sultan Air Force Base, southeast of Riyadh, the Saudi capital. A third option, supported by the unit’s commander, Brig. Gen. Clint Barnes, was to follow a previous relocation strategy used during the 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran in July 2025. At that time, the unit had briefly moved from its base in Kuwait to the Port of Shuaiba, located about 30 miles south of Kuwait City and 65 miles southwest of Iran. Despite intelligence warnings that Port of Shuaiba could be a target, Barnes decided to move the unit there instead of Saudi Arabia. Prince Sultan Air Force Base was also struck by Iranian fire, with pictures showing damage to a large Air Force jet, though there were no reported deaths. In the aftermath, the U.S. Army ordered a Pentagon investigation into the attack at Port of Shuaiba. However, before the probe was completed, a CBS News investigation revealed accounts from survivors describing "strategic failures" in the lead-up to, during, and after the attack. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth initially described the Iranian drone as a "squirter," implying it slipped past defenses, but one injured soldier later refuted that idea, saying the unit was not properly fortified. Survivors of the attack detailed requests to leadership for more resources, including medical personnel and supplies, before the strike. According to Maj. Stephen Ramsbottom, Master Sgt. Nicole Amor might have survived her injuries if there had been a doctor, a fixed aid station, or more ambulances on site. Instead, soldiers used makeshift bandages and tourniquets and relied on civilian vehicles to transport the wounded to local hospitals. The Pentagon has denied claims that the Army downplayed the incident, stating that every possible measure was taken to protect troops and that the site was fortified with 6-foot walls. However, the Army’s investigation into the attack was completed in early July, and officials have yet to release the findings, asking for "patience" and refusing to comment on specific details. As families of the victims await the results of the probe, more than 20 congressional Democrats have urged the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to hold hearings on the attack. A letter sent to GOP committee leaders cited multiple CBS News reports and emphasized the need for answers about the failures that led to the strike and the inadequate care provided to survivors. The letter also called for public hearings to determine why the Department of Defense was unprepared for the attack and why injured service members did not receive the necessary medical attention. The chairmen of the committees did not respond to inquiries from CBS News about the letter. Meanwhile, the Senate rejected a resolution limiting President Trump’s war powers in Iran, though it gained one new Republican supporter.