(The) basic principle is that you dont deploy forces into harms way without knowing whats going on; without having some real-time information about whats taking place, Panetta told Pentagon reporters. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.
But they did "know what was going on". Knowing "what is going on", maintaining tactical and strategic situational awareness is part and parcel of their jobs. Not knowing is an admission of incompetence, of failure!
It was unmistakenly, a US Embassy take-down. They had more than "real-time information", he had live video INTELLIGENCE feeds amd reporting! Forces have been..."at risk" in Afghanistan and Iraq for decades. It's what soldiers, airmen, and Marines do. The "risk" he was concerned about was not to "forces" but to a man.
At a minimum, Penetta and the generals sensed a reluctant, dithering POTUS and simply provided him the recommendation he needed. The bulk of the mission, reportedly some 30 personnel (the exact figure has still not been released), had been successfully extracted. This would have been celebrated in the situation room. The plan may have been for everyone to EXFIL (exfiltrate) Benghazi on the OGA bird, but the two former SEALS decided to return to search for their boss the Ambassador. This proved their undoing.
The question of why Ambassador Stevens would have traveled to Benghazi on such a potentially dangerous date (9/11) remains unanswered. You may notice that the ribbon cutting ceremony reason for his travel, is no longer mentioned by the press or government officials.
Although the truth has been obstructed by bad weather and a shocking (black and white video) Joseph Stalin era campaign song sung by zombie children, this story is far from over. A far greater storm awaits this administration.
What I find interesting is the theory that they were denied the right to go into Libya by the Libyan government, which is the only thing that makes sense... but the fact that Libya hasn't been thrown under the bus by now confounds me.
I didn't believe the gunwalking theory initially but it's starting to look better and better when no other plausible explanation is forthcoming.
My ignorance in anything about intelligence/combat, etc. is nada, none, zilch I admit.
without having some real-time information about whats taking place
But, if you've got live video feeds while under attach, you got eyes above watching, you got top of the line communications which that CIA station probably has, ("Our eyes got poked out," I recall reading to quote a CIA guy), people whose job it is to put that altogether and you got a SEAL on the ground directing traffic, what more do you need?
In a radio interview with a former CIF operator, he said they had been sent in when sometimes all they had was a piece of paper with coordinates on it -- he said they would then go in, not knowing about the terrain of the location, what kind of building/s, even to not knowing how many people would be involved.
I've heard a bunch of places that the seals on site had painted the mortor that killed them with infrared targetting. Anyone know how we know that? It would seem that the only ones that would know are (a) dead (b) enemies (c) in an aircraft and probably forbidden to speak.
If that fact is true someone was watching and talking.
A surprise to who? Maybe to the Prez who did't attend his daily intelligence briefings prior to the attack. But it surely was not a surprise to Ambassador Stevens who "repeatedly sounded alarms to his superiors in Washington about the intensifying lawlessness and violence in Eastern Libya, where Stevens ultimately died."
It would've been much more better for the Admin to have sent in a rescue team that wasn't needed than to allow the mission to be violently or militarily besieged for nine hours wid US rescue assets only 30 minutes -one hour away.
Lest we fergit, the factionalism widin the post-Ghaddafi transitional govt. is such that Libyan Politicos were calling on the Bammer Admin = USA to assert more effective leadership or influence ala ending the intra-TRNC impasses. NOTHING SAYS "THE US/OBAMA IS HERE" THAN LIBYAN FACTIONS SEEING ARMED COBRAS, APACHES,OR "SPECTRES" FLYING OER THEIR HEADS, + HEAVILY ARMED US MARINES ANDOR SPECOPS ON THE GROUND.
We have not heard much on the MSM-Net or the WH about the Libyan rescue force that allegedly ran into ambush on the way.
As usual, Bing West is spot on:
Our ambassador to Libya was killed in our own consulate in Benghazi on the night of September 11. For the next six weeks, President Obama repeated the same talking point: The morning after the attack, he ordered increased security in our embassies in the region.
Suddenly, on the campaign trail in Denver on October 26, he changed his story. "The minute I found out what was happening . . . I gave the directive," he said, "to make sure we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to do. I guarantee you everybody in the CIA and military knew the number-one priority was making sure our people are safe."
Notice the repeated use of the present tense, implying that he gave the order during the attack. Mr. Obama met with his national-security team, including the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at 5:00 p.m. Washington time. For over an hour, the consulate staff had been constantly reporting that they were under assault by terrorists and Ambassador Chris Stevens was missing in action. In the White House, group-think leads to the mistaken assumption that the attackers are a spontaneous mob.
An hour after the attack has begun, the president orders the CIA and the military to do "whatever we need to do." Yet the CIA and the military do nothing, except send drones overhead to watch the seven-hour battle. A CIA employee and former Navy SEAL, Tyrone Woods, twice calls for military help. He has a laser rangefinder and is pinpointing enemy targets, radioing the coordinates. The military send no aircraft to attack the designated targets. Special Operations forces standing by, 480 miles away -- less than a two-hour plane ride -- are not deployed. Secretary of Defense Panetta later explained that this passivity was in keeping with a rule of warfare. "A basic principle," he said on October 25, "is you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on -- without having some real-time information about what's taking place."
Rarely has a spontaneous mob so thoroughly intimidated our nation. And so much for sending our squads out every day in Afghanistan on patrol, when they don't know what's going on. The next time a platoon is told to take an objective, some corporal will say, "SecDef says we don't have to go into harm's way without knowing what's going on."
Apart from the questionable philosophy of turning battle into a poker game where all cards are face up before anyone places a bet, Mr. Panetta ignored the fact that the former SEAL on the ground was giving real-time information to everyone listening in at least eight operations centers (the embassy in Tripoli, State, White House, Pentagon, CIA, Special Operations Command, Africa Command, and the National Ops Center).
The SecDef and the president have issued contradictory explanations. Either Mr. Obama ordered the Secretary of Defense to "do whatever we need to do," or he didn't. And either the secretary obeyed that order, or he didn't. And he didn't. It is also not clear whether the SecDef countermanded the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, who is the direct military adviser to the president. Did the president as commander-in-chief issue an unequivocal order that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs received but chose not to execute? Or did the chairman reply that he would do nothing?
Yet the general in charge of the Africa region has allegedly said he received no directive from Washington to dispatch military aid. Members of the mutual protective society of generals are offering the bizarre defense that our Africa Command could do nothing because it has no military assets; it's some sort of ghost command. Even if that is true, the most powerful nation in the world has sufficient forces and flexibility to send fighter aircraft over a consulate in flames, or to land some troops at the secure airport east of Benghazi. After all, our embassy in Tripoli, 400 miles away, sent an aircraft with six Americans to fight in Benghazi. But our base in Sigonella, 480 miles away, sent no help.
If General Dempsey had concluded that the U.S. military should do nothing, he would have reported his decision not to act back to his commander-in-chief before the latter went to bed to rest up for his campaign trip to Las Vegas the next day. After all, the ambassador was still missing. And brave Tyrone Woods was to die in a mortar attack five hours later. President Obama would naturally be more than a bit interested in why the military and the CIA did nothing after he explicitly ordered them "to make sure we are securing our personnel."
Surely it is in the president's best interests to release a copy of his order, which the military would have sent to hundreds in the chain of command. And if the president did not direct the NSC "to do whatever we need to do," then who was in charge? When the American ambassador is attacked and remains out of American hands for over seven hours as a battle rages -- and our military sends no aid -- either the crisis-response system inside the White House is incompetent, or top officials are covering up.
"Notice the repeated use of the present tense, implying that he gave the order during the attack."
The minute I found out what was happening . . . I gave the directive, he said, to make sure we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to do. I guarantee you everybody in the CIA and military knew the number-one priority was making sure our people are safe.
Obama also uses the personal pronouns I, me, my and mine more than most--the language of the full blown narcissist.
Obviously the fault lies with the phone system and the millionaires who run it profiting while our troops are in need of fresh information and morale boost from their government during tough times. Reelect me and you can be sure that the phone company involved and everyone deemed to have a phone will be made to pay for this action (or lack of action).
Posted by: The Prez ||
10/30/2012 8:48 Comments ||
The economic toll from the vast storm Sandy on the U.S. East Coast is expected to be massive, with billions of dollars in damages.
One catastrophe assessment company, Eceqat, predicted the toll could hit $20 billion, with perhaps half of that amount covered by insurance. Sandy spawned widespread flooding and wind damage especially in the northeastern state of New Jersey and New York City before moving inland and weakening on Tuesday.
Large industrial manufacturers and oil refiners shut their operations all along the country's eastern seaboard. Hundreds of small businesses are inundated with floodwaters.
The New York Stock Exchange called off trading again on Tuesday, the first time the exchange has been closed for two days in a row because of the weather since 1888. More than 14,000 airline flights have been canceled.
Some analysts said the storm's economic impact could diminish the country's already sluggish economic growth, perhaps subtracting a tenth or two-tenths of a percentage point from the U.S. economy in the last three months of the year. But other economists said the losses would be offset as communities affected by the storm spend large sums to fix their roads and other infrastructure and manufacturers repair their facilities.
While the damage from Sandy is substantial, it pales in comparison to Hurricane Katrina, the monster 2005 storm that hit the southern U.S. shoreline near New Orleans. It caused $108 billion in damage and killed 1,200 people.
I remember back with Hurricane Irene the democrates were quite pleased with the prospect of jobs created to fix the damage which would be created; even NC Gov. Bev "don't need no elections" Perdue had to come out and say, "shaddup."
Retired Adm. James A. Lyons was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.
There is an urgent need for full disclosure of what has become the Benghazi Betrayal and Cover-up. The Obama national security team, including CIA, DNI and the Pentagon, apparently watched and listened to the assault on the U.S. consulate and cries for help but did nothing. If someone had described a fictional situation with a similar scenario and described our leadership ignoring the pleas for help, I would have said it was not realisticnot in my America but I would have been proven wrong.
We now know why Ambassador Christopher Stevens had to be in Benghazi the night of 9/11 to meet a Turkish representative, even though he feared for his safety. According to various reports, one of Stevens main missions in Libya was to facilitate the transfer of much of Gadhafis military equipment, including the deadly SA-7 portable SAMs to Islamists and other al Qaeda-affiliated groups fighting the Assad Regime in Syria. In an excellent article, Aaron Klein states that Stevens routinely used our Benghazi consulate (mission) to coordinate the Turkish, Saudi Arabian and Qatari governments support for insurgencies throughout the Middle East. Further, according to Egyptian security sources, Stevens played a central role in recruiting Islamic jihadists to fight the Assad Regime in Syria.
In another excellent article, Clare Lopez at RadicalIslam.org noted that there were two large warehouse-type buildings associated with our Benghazi mission. During the terrorist attack, the warehouses were probably looted. We do not know what was there and if it was being administrated by our two former Navy SEALs and the CIA operatives who were in Benghazi. Nonetheless, the equipment was going to hardline jihadis.
Once the attack commenced at 10:00 p.m. Libyan time (4:00 p.m. EST), we know the mission security staff immediately contacted Washington and our embassy in Tripoli. It now appears the White House, Pentagon, State Department, CIA, NDI, JCS and various other military commands monitored the entire battle in real time via frantic phone calls from our compound and video from an overhead drone. The cries for help and support went unanswered.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.