Movie 13 Hours will re-open Benghazi discussion

[Jim in CT]

I read the book, I will see the movie. I have seen the 3 security operators (3 of the 5 who are going out in public).

Almost 12 hours had passed from the time the first shots were fired, to the time that the 2 former SEALs were killed back at the CIA annex. 12 hours. In that time, they couldn't get any air assets to Benghazi, other than an unarmed drone?

Not buying it. we had assets in southern Europe and Africa. Christ, an F-16 from Massachusetts could probably get there in 12 hours.

The families of th efallen (families of at least 3 of the 4) say that at the airport, Hilary told them that the filmmaker (an American citizen) was responsible for the attack, and that she was going to have him arrested. She denies saying this. The families insist she is saying it.

She is a serial liar. We know this. We know she lied about coming under sniper fire. we know she lied when she said that the GOP wa sframing Bill to make it look like he was cheating on her. So who do we believe?

I don't claim to be objective, as I truly believe that she is one of the most revolting, self-serving, slimy people in the country. But I hope this film re-opens those wounds for her, because she has it coming.

If she did truly tell the families it was because of the video, and now she's claiming that THEY are lying...there's a special place in hell fo rher.

[Slipknot]

she was a liar 30 years ago and she is still a liar

God help us all

[spence]

I love it, Jim is now getting his facts from Hollywood.

Expect FOX to push this as the breaking story of the century.

[Nebe]

What you fail to realize is Hillary is not going to be the Democratic Party candidate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

It just shows how the military is covering up for her bc they want her to be President. You would think someone would do an investigation and get to the bottom of this.

[wdmso]

12 hrs seems like a long time in Hindsight but I highly doubt that Washington had a clear picture ASAP.. Those men who died defending died doing what they were paid to do they accepted the risk and should be seen as heros .. Not sure how Air support would have changed the outcome The distance from Aviano Air Force Base (AFB) in Italy to Benghazi is 1044 miles again this sounds easy if Aviano had f16s on the runway fueled and armed and even if launched an hour or 2 after the attack started add filght time and time on target danger close on a 500lb bomb is Mk-82 LD 500-lb bomb is 250 425 meters whos talking to the planes and do they know where other friendly forces are many variables ? http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...-23-1/appf.pdf

Ambassador Steven's who one would suspect had the most current intell felt it was safe to be so far from Tripoli "Driving distance from Tripoli to Benghazi is 998 kilometers (620 miles)" yes it was ugly but it seems we dont mention all who were not killed .. and the movie and the book i feel were made to cash in .. not because some moral high ground to set the record straight . kinda of like the 2 seals saying they kill bin laden ... I wasn't there but my comments are formulated by my Combat experiences as in Infantry Plt Sgt in Iraq and how information flows thru the system we call the Armed forces .. its called the fog of war for a reason Black hawk down comes to mind

[spence]

Originally Posted by wdmso

12 hrs seems like a long time in Hindsight but I highly doubt that Washington had a clear picture ASAP.. Those men who died defending died doing what they were paid to do they accepted the risk and should be seen as heros .. Not sure how Air support would have changed the outcome The distance from Aviano Air Force Base (AFB) in Italy to Benghazi is 1044 miles again this sounds easy if Aviano had f16s on the runway fueled and armed and even if launched an hour or 2 after the attack started add filght time and time on target danger close on a 500lb bomb is Mk-82 LD 500-lb bomb is 250 425 meters whos talking to the planes and do they know where other friendly forces are many variables ? http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...-23-1/appf.pdf

Ambassador Steven's who one would suspect had the most current intell felt it was safe to be so far from Tripoli "Driving distance from Tripoli to Benghazi is 998 kilometers (620 miles)" yes it was ugly but it seems we dont mention all who were not killed .. and the movie and the book i feel were made to cash in .. not because some moral high ground to set the record straight . kinda of like the 2 seals saying they kill bin laden ... I wasn't there but my comments are formulated by my Combat experiences as in Infantry Plt Sgt in Iraq and how information flows thru the system we call the Armed forces .. its called the fog of war for a reason

Would you please stop littering this forum with reasoned posts

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

she was a liar 30 years ago and she is still a liar

God help us all

PolitiFact ranks ALL of the Repub. candidates as being more untruthful than her.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

she was a liar 30 years ago and she is still a liar

God help us all

Yes, we should believe the liar in chief rather than those heroes in the action
and the parents of the slain heroes. Pfft-

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Yes, we should believe the liar in chief rather than those heroes in the action
and the parents of the slain heroes. Pfft-

Yes, because the chain of command and military who investigated the entire event know nothing compared to the parents of those killed.

Really?

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

Yes, because the chain of command and military who investigated the entire event know nothing compared to the parents of those killed.

Really?

So you're saying what happened on the ground by those that were there,
and the slain Heroes parents who heard Hillary's video explanation have
something to gain by lying?
Common sense says the only one to gain by
lies is Hillary and past behavior is a good indication of present behavior.
She has lied many times before, and imho lied here trying to blame a video.

I guess when she left the White House broke, she took the furniture
and art work so she could have a yard sale in order to survive. LOL

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Yes, because the chain of command and military who investigated the entire event know nothing compared to the parents of those killed.

Really?

The parents don't have an agenda . The "chain of command's " boss did
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

So you're saying what happened on the ground by those that were there, and the slain Heroes parents who heard Hillary's video explanation have
something to gain by lying?

We've covered this about 100 times already.

There was no stand down order. A local officer telling his guys not to rush into an unknown situation while they rally militia backup is not a stand down order. This has been investigated to death.

When the bodies arrived back in the US the video was still being flagged by the CIA as a primary motivation.

But hey, if it's on the big screen it must be true right?

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

The parents don't have an agenda . The "chain of command's " boss did
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think some of the parents have been shameless exploited by elements of the media.

As for agendas, usually when something stinks you'll figure it out pretty quickly. There still is to my knowledge, other than a few guys frustrated they weren't allowed to rush into an unknown firefight, evidence of any stand down order that would have helped save American lives.

But if a movie studio can make millions exploiting the situation I'm sure you're all for it.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

But if a movie studio can make millions exploiting the situation I'm sure you're all for it.

Spence, the only thing I'm for is the truth and I know we'll never get it
from Hillary. She is a serial liar and I'm sure your Not all for it.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I love it, Jim is now getting his facts from Hollywood.

Expect FOX to push this as the breaking story of the century.

\

(1) Spence, what did I say that is factually incorrect? I'm all ears.

(2) The movie isn't out yet. My facts are from the book, what the surviving operators have said, and what the families of the fallen have said.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

.. Not sure how Air support would have changed the outcome The distance from Aviano Air Force Base (AFB) in Italy to Benghazi is 1044 miles again this sounds easy if Aviano had f16s on the runway fueled and armed and even if launched an hour or 2 after the attack started add filght time and time on target danger close on a 500lb bomb is Mk-82 LD 500-lb bomb is 250 425 meters whos talking to the planes and do they know where other friendly forces are many variables ? http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...-23-1/appf.pdf

Ambassador Steven's who one would suspect had the most current intell felt it was safe to be so far from Tripoli "Driving distance from Tripoli to Benghazi is 998 kilometers (620 miles)" yes it was ugly but it seems we dont mention all who were not killed .. and the movie and the book i feel were made to cash in .. not because some moral high ground to set the record straight . kinda of like the 2 seals saying they kill bin laden ... I wasn't there but my comments are formulated by my Combat experiences as in Infantry Plt Sgt in Iraq and how information flows thru the system we call the Armed forces .. its called the fog of war for a reason Black hawk down comes to mind

"sure how Air support would have changed the outcome "

Due respect, if you don't know that, you don't know what you're talking about. There is a reason why those there were asking for air support. Air support easily could have prevented the rebels from setting up mortars, which is what killed the last two.

This was not the invasion of Normandy in terms of complexity. We have teams all over the world called "quick reaction forces", and in that moniker, the words "quick reaction" mean exactly what they say. Quick. Reaction.

The folks on the ground were telling outside channels what was happening...estimates of enemy strength, what weapons they had, etc. We would not have been going in blind.

"whos talking to the planes "

The people on the ground, former Marines and SEALs, are more than capable of doing that.

"do they know where other friendly forces are many variables ?"

Again, the guys on the ground had strobes and lasers and radios.

This was well within the capabilities of the US military. This is not an overly complicated scenario.

If an air asset sees armed Muslims aiming a mortar at a US compound which is under attack, you don 't need to be Steven Hawking to figure out what's going on.

My hindsight is 20/20, for sure. But this was very do-able.
Ambassador Steven's who one would suspect had the most current intell felt it was safe to be so far from Tripoli "

He repeatedly asked for more security which was denied. The book goes into his many requests, and the specific reasons he made them.


"

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

When the bodies arrived back in the US the video was still being flagged by the CIA as a primary motivation.

?

Oh really? Then WHY IS HILARY DENYING THAT SHE BLAMED THE VIDEO?! Please answer that? Hilary isn't defending her blaming the video. She is denying blaming the video.

It's possible the parents have an agenda, maybe they don't want her to be President. But we know Hilary is a serial liar, especially when her career is at stake, so why believe her?

Spence, why did she keep flip-flopping between blaming the video, and declaring that it was a terrorist attack? If it's fog of war, why not say "we are getting conflicting intel, we are looking into it"?

You cannot win this one. It doesn't pass the common sense smell test.

And instead of making fun of my Hollywood sources (even though the movie isn't out yet), can't you just tell me one thing I said that's wrong?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"sure how Air support would have changed the outcome "

Due respect, if you don't know that, you don't know what you're talking about. There is a reason why those there were asking for air support. Air support easily could have prevented the rebels from setting up mortars, which is what killed the last two.

This was not the invasion of Normandy in terms of complexity. We have teams all over the world called "quick reaction forces", and in that moniker, the words "quick reaction" mean exactly what they say. Quick. Reaction.

The folks on the ground were telling outside channels what was happening...estimates of enemy strength, what weapons they had, etc. We would not have been going in blind.

"whos talking to the planes "

The people on the ground, former Marines and SEALs, are more than capable of doing that.

"do they know where other friendly forces are many variables ?"

Again, the guys on the ground had strobes and lasers and radios.

This was well within the capabilities of the US military. This is not an overly complicated scenario.

If an air asset sees armed Muslims aiming a mortar at a US compound which is under attack, you don 't need to be Steven Hawking to figure out what's going on.

My hindsight is 20/20, for sure. But this was very do-able.
Ambassador Steven's who one would suspect had the most current intell felt it was safe to be so far from Tripoli "

He repeatedly asked for more security which was denied. The book goes into his many requests, and the specific reasons he made them.


"

As for not knowing what one is talking about .. the Air power angle is just Monday morning quarterbacking when an F16 can pick out a mortar Crew from 20,000.00 feet with out eyes on with out the ground telling them where it is in a city is pure fantasy.. and oddly enough my MOS was 81mm Mortar Gunner and we could set up fire leave before the 1st round impacted the target

"quick reaction" another fantasy re enforced by the Movies .. yes we have them but they are That quick to travel thousands of miles in 12 hrs and please dont suggest the could have Jumped in or drove or landed near the site

He repeatedly asked for more security which was denied. as was many other Ambassadors request where .. but again he felt it was safe to be in Benghazi He's the Boss

The people on the ground, former Marines and SEALs, are more than capable of doing that. Yes they are but that doesn't translate into instant success

What makes the death of theses men so different then the men who have died in Iraq or Afghanistan.. why the outrage from the right I know the Answer it about Hillary .. and thats just wrong not for her but for all our fallen men nad women .. Because wheres the outrage for them no one ever ask where their Air cover was or why was there an IED in the road or why didn't we stop that rocket from landing on the Base .. its comes with the Job we accepted that when we signed up as did they .. Let it go already

[buckman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

What makes the death of theses men so different then the men who have died in Iraq or Afghanistan.. why the outrage from the right I know the Answer it about Hillary .. and thats just wrong not for her but for all our fallen men nad women .. Because wheres the outrage for them no one ever ask where their Air cover was or why was there an IED in the road or why didn't we stop that rocket from landing on the Base .. its comes with the Job we accepted that when we signed up as did they .. Let it go already

This is a pathetic comment . You clearly only respect the left half of the country , as you are ready to take any cheap shot you can at conservatives.
If you think Hillary will make a good President , than you are one of a very few in the military that thinks so , Why do you think that is ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

As for not knowing what one is talking about .. the Air power angle is just Monday morning quarterbacking when an F16 can pick out a mortar Crew from 20,000.00 feet with out eyes on with out the ground telling them where it is in a city is pure fantasy.. and oddly enough my MOS was 81mm Mortar Gunner and we could set up fire leave before the 1st round impacted the target

"quick reaction" another fantasy re enforced by the Movies .. yes we have them but they are That quick to travel thousands of miles in 12 hrs and please dont suggest the could have Jumped in or drove or landed near the site

He repeatedly asked for more security which was denied. as was many other Ambassadors request where .. but again he felt it was safe to be in Benghazi He's the Boss

The people on the ground, former Marines and SEALs, are more than capable of doing that. Yes they are but that doesn't translate into instant success

What makes the death of theses men so different then the men who have died in Iraq or Afghanistan.. why the outrage from the right I know the Answer it about Hillary .. and thats just wrong not for her but for all our fallen men nad women .. Because wheres the outrage for them no one ever ask where their Air cover was or why was there an IED in the road or why didn't we stop that rocket from landing on the Base .. its comes with the Job we accepted that when we signed up as did they .. Let it go already

An F-16 would have a tough time target a mortar crew. But what it can do, is make the enemy too scared to set up a mortar crew. And there are other planes that can easily target a mortar crew, and I promise you that we had some within a 12 hour flight of Benghazi. If not, then Obama should be impeached.

"we could set up fire leave before the 1st round impacted the target "

I'll wager that sh*tkicking bandits aren't as well trained.

You're missing the point. We didn't even try. They fought for 12 hours, and they got exactly zip in terms of support from us. That doesn't anger you? Not at all? When we send people into harm's way, we don't owe them better than that?

We sat on our hands while these guys fought for their lives, for 12 hours. If large numbers of Americans aren't bothered by that, then what in God's name have we become?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

What makes the death of theses men so different then the men who have died in Iraq or Afghanistan..

Can you point out an example of men and women who died in Iraq or Afghanistan, who called for help for 12 hours, and were ignored? Because that's what bothers people.

People die in war. These deaths were likely preventable.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

I love it, Jim is now getting his facts from Hollywood.

Expect FOX to push this as the breaking story of the century.

Read the book. I have not seen the movie so I cannot comment on that. The book is very interesting and brings you along in a very methodical way.

Originally Posted by Nebe

What you fail to realize is Hillary is not going to be the Democratic Party candidate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Felon or Communist - I cannot decide.

Originally Posted by wdmso

12 hrs seems like a long time in Hindsight but I highly doubt that Washington had a clear picture ASAP.. Those men who died defending died doing what they were paid to do they accepted the risk and should be seen as heros .. Not sure how Air support would have changed the outcome The distance from Aviano Air Force Base (AFB) in Italy to Benghazi is 1044 miles again this sounds easy if Aviano had f16s on the runway fueled and armed and even if launched an hour or 2 after the attack started add filght time and time on target danger close on a 500lb bomb is Mk-82 LD 500-lb bomb is 250 425 meters whos talking to the planes and do they know where other friendly forces are many variables ? http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...-23-1/appf.pdf

Ambassador Steven's who one would suspect had the most current intell felt it was safe to be so far from Tripoli "Driving distance from Tripoli to Benghazi is 998 kilometers (620 miles)" yes it was ugly but it seems we dont mention all who were not killed .. and the movie and the book i feel were made to cash in .. not because some moral high ground to set the record straight . kinda of like the 2 seals saying they kill bin laden ... I wasn't there but my comments are formulated by my Combat experiences as in Infantry Plt Sgt in Iraq and how information flows thru the system we call the Armed forces .. its called the fog of war for a reason Black hawk down comes to mind

"Supposedly" there were AC130s on the ramp at Sigonella in Sicily (450mi, 2 hour flight time - 3 hours on station assuming 1 hour). I do not know if that is true or not. F16s out of Aviano were in range , 2 hours flight time, F16s from Bitburg 3 hours flight, F15e out of Incirlik 2 hours, all possible, all within reason. There are B1s at Qatar that are 4 hours flight time. And yes, all could have reasons why they were not available. However, if none of these were available with a one hour alert than there is an institutional problem and we are beyond merely atrophy.

SGT in Iraq - I owe you a beer

Originally Posted by spence

We've covered this about 100 times already.

There was no stand down order. A local officer telling his guys not to rush into an unknown situation while they rally militia backup is not a stand down order. This has been investigated to death.

Perhaps, perhaps not

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Can you point out an example of men and women who died in Iraq or Afghanistan, who called for help for 12 hours, and were ignored? Because that's what bothers people.

Call for help for 12 hours and ignored? Happens a lot doesn't it? Maybe not ignored, but deciding not to blow stuff up due to collateral damage happens all the time, no?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

There was no stand down order. A local officer telling his guys not to rush into an unknown situation while they rally militia backup is not a stand down order. This has been investigated to death.

?

The conversation in question invoilved the CIA station chief, and the 4 security officers who were present. All 4 security officers claim that the station chief ordered them not to go to the State Dept compound. All 4. They have testified to that. The CIA station chief denies it.

Spence, in all sincerity (I'm not being sarcastic), what proof is there, that the 4 security guys are lying? For sure, we know they didn't leave the CIA annex right away, we know that for a fact. Some time had passed before they left. Was there a tape recording or something?

The local militia that we relied on there? They ignored repeated calls to help. Hopefully we learned the lesson that we cannot rely on them.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Read the book. I have not seen the movie so I cannot comment on that. The book is very interesting and brings you along in a very methodical way.



Felon or Communist - I cannot decide.




"Supposedly" there were AC130s on the ramp at Sigonella in Sicily (450mi, 2 hour flight time - 3 hours on station assuming 1 hour). I do not know if that is true or not. F16s out of Aviano were in range , 2 hours flight time, F16s from Bitburg 3 hours flight, F15e out of Incirlik 2 hours, all possible, all within reason. There are B1s at Qatar that are 4 hours flight time. And yes, all could have reasons why they were not available. However, if none of these were available with a one hour alert than there is an institutional problem and we are beyond merely atrophy.

SGT in Iraq - I owe you a beer



Perhaps, perhaps not



Call for help for 12 hours and ignored? Happens a lot doesn't it? Maybe not ignored, but deciding not to blow stuff up due to collateral damage happens all the time, no?

A thoughtful, fair post. Except your last point, IMHO. It's common to dither while worrying about collateral damage, but when Americans are literally fighting for their lives? i don't think that happens every day.

But we didn't even try. If we got F-16s there, and they said they couldn't do anything because of the proximity of the annex to civilians, or because they couldn't tell friend from foe, that's one thing. But we didn't do anything, as far as I can tell. 12 hours is a long, long time.

When we worry about collateral damage, it's usually when we are trying to see if we can kill a specific terrorist from the air, in what is more or less a passive target at the time. In that case, you can make a compelling argument that collateral damage mnight not be worth the objective. I don't know that moral calculus holds when you are talking about supporting Americans on the ground who are about to be overrun. We don't typically worry so much about collateral damage in that situation.

In any event, collateral damage was never a consideration in this case, because despite the fact we had 12 hours, we never got that far to assess what the collateral damage might have been. There were no assets on the scene, even after 12 hours. It blows my mind. That's what I cannot understand. Nor can I understand why so many people don't feel that frustration.

I don't claim to be politically neutral in this. But when it took the feds 3 days to get water to the victims of hurricane Katrina, I was very, very critical of Bush, because he absolutely deserved it. I'm capable of criticizing Republicans who are incompetent. I don't see some of the hard-core libs here showing that ability, no matter what Hilary or Obama do. It's something to see.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

As for not knowing what one is talking about .. the Air power angle is just Monday morning quarterbacking when an F16 can pick out a mortar Crew from 20,000.00 feet with out eyes on with out the ground telling them where it is in a city is pure fantasy.. and oddly enough my MOS was 81mm Mortar Gunner and we could set up fire leave before the 1st round impacted the target

"quick reaction" another fantasy re enforced by the Movies .. yes we have them but they are That quick to travel thousands of miles in 12 hrs and please dont suggest the could have Jumped in or drove or landed near the site

He repeatedly asked for more security which was denied. as was many other Ambassadors request where .. but again he felt it was safe to be in Benghazi He's the Boss

The people on the ground, former Marines and SEALs, are more than capable of doing that. Yes they are but that doesn't translate into instant success

What makes the death of theses men so different then the men who have died in Iraq or Afghanistan.. why the outrage from the right I know the Answer it about Hillary .. and thats just wrong not for her but for all our fallen men nad women .. Because wheres the outrage for them no one ever ask where their Air cover was or why was there an IED in the road or why didn't we stop that rocket from landing on the Base .. its comes with the Job we accepted that when we signed up as did they .. Let it go already

That was a reasoned post, with some good points. Sorry for saying you don't know what you're talking about, obviously you do, and I had no business saying that.

[wdmso]

It's all about Obama I get it.. seems another topic were logic and reason need not apply. Answer this where was support going to land to engage? How did everyone else get out? And using your logic if a soldier gets killed in Afghanistan at the start of an attack it's diffrent if they get killed 12 hrs into a fight. you feel the were abandoned. Because. Our aircraft can time warp from mission to mission and never miss
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

It's all about Obama I get it.. seems another topic were logic and reason need not apply.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

not much logic or reason in that statement...I thought this was about Hillary?

maybe it's my conservative lack of logic and reason and probably other things but I don't think I see O mentioned anywhere in the thread...oh wait...here's one "Hilary or Obama do"

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

What you fail to realize is Hillary is not going to be the Democratic Party candidate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

nice....correct again...you're on a roll buddy....she can blame the vast right wing conspiracy for this one

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

This was not the invasion of Normandy in terms of complexity. We have teams all over the world called "quick reaction forces", and in that moniker, the words "quick reaction" mean exactly what they say. Quick. Reaction.






"

This is what is so frustrating to me. It was poor planning as to where
these "quick reaction forces" were placed on that day, the anniversary of 9/11 when the threat level was so high and Ambassador Stevens had told Hillary of the serious dangers at his compound. Poor strategic planning and poor judgement if they needed more than 12 hours to reach "hot spots".