Hillary

[spence]

Wow...

CNN exclusive: White House email contradicts Benghazi leaks – The Lead with Jake Tapper - CNN.com Blogs

and more wow...

Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say | McClatchy

-spence

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by spence

Wow...

CNN exclusive: White House email contradicts Benghazi leaks – The Lead with Jake Tapper - CNN.com Blogs

and more wow...

Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say | McClatchy

-spence

Love it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Wow...

CNN exclusive: White House email contradicts Benghazi leaks – The Lead with Jake Tapper - CNN.com Blogs

and more wow...

Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say | McClatchy

-spence

great source ... two unnamed "government officials"..."said".... hope they got the right draft of the memo

[Jim in CT]

Spence -

Now, you're saying that since there wasn't an armed garrison in Libya, there was no cavalry to send.

Spence, in these situations, you don't need an entire airborne division. A few special-forces types make all the difference. And for some reason, we didn't move any of those assets, full steaam, towards Benghazi. It's my understanding that there was some kind of force in Tripoli that was ordered not to go to Benghazi. If that's true, I want to know who gave that order, and why.

You also said that the fighting was over before the Libyans could have flown some forces in. Here's what you don't get...when the fight was going on, no one knew when it was going to be over. The commanders aren't supposed to say "well, this guy is fighting for his life and begging for help, but he'll probably be dead before we get there, so I'll stay put".

The fact that the fight ended before some assets could have gone there, is not a valid excuse for not sending in those assets.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Now, you're saying that since there wasn't an armed garrison in Libya, there was no cavalry to send.

Spence, in these situations, you don't need an entire airborne division. A few special-forces types make all the difference. And for some reason, we didn't move any of those assets, full steaam, towards Benghazi. It's my understanding that there was some kind of force in Tripoli that was ordered not to go to Benghazi. If that's true, I want to know who gave that order, and why.

We know all this. The order to stay put was given by the head of Special Ops Command Africa because they weren't armed for combat and they were concerned about threats to the embassy in Tripoli.

The Military stated this just recently and it was also confirmed by Hick's testimony.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

We know all this. The order to stay put was given by the head of Special Ops Command Africa because they (special forces) weren't armed for combat
-spence

Can you show me support for that? you said before that they weren't sent in due to the fact that they weren't armed (after you said they weren't sent in because they didn't exist).

How is an active-duty, forward-serving special forces team, not prepared for combat? Hard to believe that could be the case. Their body armor and light weapons are never far away, their very mission ststement is to go off on little notice. They couldn't be ready within an hour? I don't think so...was all of Delta Force and all of the Seals having a costume party at the time? All of them?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Wow...

CNN exclusive: White House email contradicts Benghazi leaks – The Lead with Jake Tapper - CNN.com Blogs

and more wow...

Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say | McClatchy

-spence

(1) Stevens may have declined military help weeks before the attack. But he asked the State Department for extra security before the attack. Not only was this request denied, his security force was reduced.

(2) During the firefight, the former Seals repeatedly asked that the cavalry be sent in to destroy the mortar positioned that they had lit up with a laser sight.

Therefore, I can't see mich relevence in your post, in which it is alleged that Stevens declined extra military security. Perhaps he assumed he'd get the security he needed from his superiors at the State Department.

no one can know, and I can't see how it matters.

You post something that's off topic, and offer no explanation on how it ties to incompetence and a cover-up at the State Dept and the White House, all you can say is "wow".

Wow.

[Jim in CT]

Were there Marines at the embassy in Tripoli? If so, I wonder what they wanted to do, and what they were told...

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

(2) During the firefight, the former Seals repeatedly asked that the cavalry be sent in to destroy the mortar positioned that they had lit up with a laser sight.

.

This is what should have destroyed" the movie mob cause" reason for the attack from the getgo.
Like crowds of movie goers are carrying mortars around with them to or after the show. What a farce.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

This is what should have destroyed" the movie mob cause" reason for the attack from the getgo.
Like crowds of movie goers are carrying mortars around with them to or after the show. What a farce.

The idea that armed extremists were involved in the attack has been present in every narrative I've heard.

I'd wager that militants do indeed drive around with RPG's mortars at their disposal. How long does a mortar take to set up if you're in a hurry and don't care as much about accuracy? I'm sure Jim can give us a good estimate.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

The idea that armed extremists were involved in the attack has been present in every narrative I've heard.

I'd wager that militants do indeed drive around with RPG's mortars at their disposal. How long does a mortar take to set up if you're in a hurry and don't care as much about accuracy? I'm sure Jim can give us a good estimate.

-spence

It's certainly possible that if this started out as an anti-video protest, that hours later, it morphed into a military asault.

So the use of mortars, hours later, doesn't necessarily mean it couldn't have started as a protest. However, from the testimony I have seen, it appears that there was very little reason to assume it started as a protest, and overwhelming reason to assume it was an assault.

In the Rose Garden the next morning, Obaba said terrorist acts would not be tolerated. Stands to reason he was talking about the Benghazi assault. That's why I van't understand why someone very high up, told Rice to go on TV day slater, and play the anti-video protest card.

If Obama called it what it clearly was, there is no way Republicans can allege cover-up. But the feds changed their story, Rice's comments on TV were baffling, as was Hilary's disgraceful performance at the hearings, when she claimed it didn't matter how it started. What she is saying is, don't hold this administration for the validity of what they say.

This was easily avoidable, but Obama/Hilary brought this onm themselves.