Let’s get the story right, please.

You know I am the first to bust on Obama, and man does this guy provide a target rich environment, but I am going to have to tell people that are focusing on the lack of response in Benghazi that they are wrong to bitch about that. Yes, they had a drone over the area, unarmed from what I hear, and yes, it took 6 hours for the whole debacle to play out, but neither is the problem. People that believe the problem here is that Team Obama failed to act once the shit hit the fan don’t get it. There simply is no rapid reaction force that can be stood up and moved in under 24 hours unless it was pre-positioned and on 24 hour alert.

I have been on several blogs where people have flogged Team Obama for not responding to the attack, and I think this is a serious mistake. Too many people influenced by shows like 24 and CSI, where people figure out stuff that in the real world takes months during a commercial break, or worse, take actions like driving across DC, in seconds, when the actual time due to traffic is several hours. I think this is why so many erroneously think there should have been a response in Benghazi, and that that was the failure by team blue. Even an air strike – by fixed wing aircraft, because rotary aircraft did do not have the range, and the Navy had nothing pre-positioned near Libya – would have take hours to put together. And I think an airstrike would have been the equivalent of using a hammer where a scalpel was needed. I even heard some complain that they could have staged SEALs from Rota, Spain, but that presupposes that these SEALs where on alert and ready to go.

The failure in Benghazi was one of lack of action, well lack of action at the time of the crisis, but one of lack of logistical action. The failure here was to not have pre-positioned forces – they were told this was going to happen long before it did – so you actually could make them do something once you became aware of the threat. If we are going to accuse team Obama of screwing the pooch, let’s do it for the right reason. Once the shit hit the fan in Benghazi they were left with no options because they had failed to heed the warnings and take the anniversary of 9-11 seriously, because they were too busy pushing the political narrative that al Qaeda was dead, at Obama’s hands of all reasons, and that the GWOT was done and over with.

It was a cold and calculated decision by State, pushed by the WH, to not reinforce or secure the compound in Benghazi. The donkeys could not be seen to dance on Osama’s and al Qaeda’s graves during their convention to then have to eat crow and prep for an al Qaeda attack just the week after. That’s what killed Stevens and 3 others. Not the fact that they didn’t respond to the attack. They couldn’t respond even if they wanted to. Not that I am saying they wanted to either. Leftists love France for a reason: they like to surrender to the enemy quickly, just like team Obama does.

Let’s keep that story straight. Especially with Obama coming into his third debate desperate to “reset” the story on Benghazi-gate. Fuck, Nixon got butt raped for far less. Nobody died from that hotel break in like happened in Benghazi.

Comments are closed.

  1. richtaylor365

    I guess I’m reading different blogs, I have not seen any outrage of the lack of response. Logistics being what they are, once the attack started those guys, barring any Libyan help, would be on their own. No, the problems lie in not providing proper security (despite numerous pleas by the participants on the ground, previous attacks on the consulate, and the symbolism of the anniversary),and in the resultant cover up (that the facts surrounding the attack does not jive with the narrative put out, that AQ is a non factor due to Obama kicking it’s ass all around the globe and that since we assisted the rebels in removing the tyrant , the Libyans now love us, know we are on their side, and the country as a whole is a safe friendly lover of democracy just like us).

    Thumb up 2

  2. Poosh

    I agree with Rich? I’ve not seen any anger over the immediate response, only in the clear failings to heed the calls for security, and the obvious and prompt election-cover up.

    Thumb up 2

  3. Poosh

    I don’t know Alex, I did a bit of reading around and came across this post.

    I don’t know why no one seems to be bothered by the other elephant in the room:

    SIX F*CKING HARRIERS. are you kidding me?

    ” Howie, When Pakistan blew up an atomic bomb, and we didn’t know about it, that was an intelligence failure. When 9/11 happened, that was an intelligence failure. When India blew up an atomic bomb and we didn’t know about it, that was an intelligence failure.

    When the Iraqi military lined up on the Kuwaiti border, and we didn’t see it coming – didn’t know they were attacking until they did it, that’s an intelligence failure.

    This is a flat leadership problem.

    What happened is that a woman named Lamb, Undersecretary of State for DSS (Department of State Security), 2 days ago, told Issa’s committee that she listened, was talking to, and recorded an almost six hour fight that resulted in the death of four Americans. She was at the State Department’s Operations Center in Foggy Bottom in DC.

    When that happens, there are a bunch of people that get informed. President of the US gets found—- the embassy is being attacked—Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Director of CIA, and on and on.

    What also happens is that their command centers, National Command Center (CIA), White House Situation Room— twelve [Command Centers] that I won’t bore you with. At least twelve separate Command Centers are listening to the same conversation. It went on for six hours. The question I think, besides the fact that Biden is lying about it, is Why didn’t we do anything? Why didn’t the United States government react?

    Here we are, listening to an attack, and we didn’t do a thing. We’ve got aircraft in Europe, aircraft in the in the Gulf, and we have the capability of doing something, and we did nothing. But for the Vice President…My point is everybody, from the moment the attack happened, in our government, and the decision-making capability, knew that it was an attack, that it was organized, that it was violent, and that it had nothing, nothing to do with a riot, an assembly of people, or a film.

    This was not even close to an intelligence failure. This was prescient, actionable information. And this woman testified to it, and everyone’s giving everyone a pass.

    We sat by and watched the Embassy fall, and four Americans died. “

    Thumb up 2

  4. AlexInCT *

    Poosh, at no point do I say that Team Obama didn’t fail. The point is that their failure was NOT to prepare for the coming attack – for purely political reasons since doing so would look bad for their election campaigning – because once it started, since nobody was ready to go or there, there was no viable response. They were certainly not going to bomb the crowd either, because even the LSM would not be able to protect them from that fall out.

    Yes, Sigonella in Sicily was the closest airbase hist_ed, but the issue is that as I point out, there is time needed to plan and stage any attack kind of attack you want to be successful and not result in collateral damage and loss of assets. They could not have scrambled either their attack aircraft or any ground troops on transports, on a long trip into hostile territory that would have likely required some sanitizing, without same major preparations and the necessary support elements, which at a minimum, when you are unprepared, would have taken 24 hours. Even if the order had been given for someone to do something, as soon as the attack had occurred, without any troops in theater or on alert, ready to go at the drop of a hat, they would not have been on time to make a difference.

    The failure here was not to take the threat seriously and prepare to deal with it. After the attack started, there was little they could do that would be in time. They f-ed up, but their f-up is the political decision not to take the threat seriously, and hence, getting caught with their pants around their ankles. Not the fact that they did nothing as these people got killed. If we remain focused on the fact they did nothing, they can use the fact that there was no time, to try and squirm out of the dually deserved trouble they are in.

    Thumb up 0

  5. Poosh

    Hey just saying “don’t know”, I mean some people are saying, actually, something could have been done. But I don’t know, just throwing some balls in the air. Not disagreeing with your overall point, they said no when asked for better security. But it is worth noting that clearly everyone was getting a live feed to the “event” where people easily discerned this was a premeditated attack, there and then. There is no excuse for Obama’s “negative movie review” theory. Does this not add to the weight that this is Obama covering up the fact that on his watch an ambassador was assassinated.

    Thumb up 0

  6. CM

    The point is that their failure was NOT to prepare for the coming attack – for purely political reasons since doing so would look bad for their election campaigning – because once it started, since nobody was ready to go or there, there was no viable response.

    Is there evidence it even got to that level (the WH, where a politicial decision was made)?
    I thought the whole point is that these kinds of requests and responses are routinue and handled down the food chain.

    Thumb up 0

  7. Kimpost

    Poosh, at no point do I say that Team Obama didn’t fail. The point is that their failure was NOT to prepare for the coming attack – for purely political reasons since doing so would look bad for their election campaigning

    Obama stopping a terrorist attack would look bad, how exactly?

    Thumb up 0

  8. Poosh

    Obama stopping a terrorist attack would look bad, how exactly?

    Because Obama has got terrorism under control and is destroying global jihad with drones. He’s a winner, bringing peace to the world. If like a terrorist shoots up an army base on American soil, or they have to run around beefing up security for an ambassador in newly freed Libya, that doesn’t look like things are under control, or the war on terror is coming to an end.

    Thumb up 1

  9. Kimpost

    Because Obama has got terrorism under control and is destroying global jihad with drones. He’s a winner, bringing peace to the world. If like a terrorist shoots up an army base on American soil, or they have to run around beefing up security for an ambassador in newly freed Libya, that doesn’t look like things are under control, or the war on terror is coming to an end.

    Ok, got it, but…

    …wouldn’t dead US bodies appear a liiiittle bit worse than admitting to not having control over every terrorist cell out there? :)

    Thumb up 0

  10. AlexInCT *

    Obama stopping a terrorist attack would look bad, how exactly?

    Obama stopping a terrorist attack would be an awesome thing, Kimpost. I know Poosh already answered this question with this:

    Because Obama has got terrorism under control and is destroying global jihad with drones. He’s a winner, bringing peace to the world. If like a terrorist shoots up an army base on American soil, or they have to run around beefing up security for an ambassador in newly freed Libya, that doesn’t look like things are under control, or the war on terror is coming to an end.

    But I think I reason wasn’t just that they had been claiming the GWoT was done and over, because Obama was kicking their ass, but something far worse. I am well aware of the monumental task stopping terror attacks entails. After all, our forces need to get it right every single time, while the bad guys need to get lucky only once to score a hit. Even if Obama was doing everything right there was no guarantee they would stop all attacks.

    Yes, the very people that told us they would stop doing all the things that were evil when Boosh was doing them doubled down on the policies, and thus, the terrorists were kept at bay. But these morons also declared the GWoT over and done with. For political reasons. If the GWoT was over, they would not have to explain why more of the things that were evil when done by Boosh suddenly were also their policy. After our troops killed bin Laden, this WH all but declared al Qaeda dead and done for. They spent their convention, a week before the attack in Benghazi, dancing on bin Laden’s grave, and spiking the ball. Obama was the great warrior, because he got bin Laden while Boosh didn’t. Ding-dong the witch is dead, and the GWoT is over and done with – for real now.

    I do not doubt that sooner than later we will find out that the WH damn well knew about the request for security in Libya. It was a calculated and political motivated move not to do anything. If they had reacted to the warning and taken any kind of precaution, the political implications of that coming out and being used against them, trumped logic.

    Basically, the political capital of being able to thwart a terrorist attack was trumped by the risk of taking any kind of action, even if said action would stop an attack and be a great boost for team Obama, because having team Romney point out how hypocritical the al Qaeda grave dance at the convention was, was deemed too damaging this close to the election. They gambled that this was just more bluffing by al Qaeda, after all, they killed bin Laden and thus al Qaeda, or that nothing would come from it. Political expediency was put ahead of security, and that is what in the end was criminal and vile. Four people paid with their lives so team Obama wouldn’t have to risk a team Romney commercial showing how hypocritical and stupid the “bin Laden & al Qaeda dead, GM alive” stupid slogan was.

    Thumb up 0

  11. CM

    ….how hypocritical and stupid the “bin Laden & al Qaeda dead, GM alive” stupid slogan was.

    I agree Alex, it is a stupid slogan. It’s the perfect example of reducing complex matters to a soundbyte. I cringe everytime I hear it.

    Thumb up 0

  12. Iconoclast

    …wouldn’t dead US bodies appear a liiiittle bit worse than admitting to not having control over every terrorist cell out there? :)

    Umm, yeah, which is probably why they stuck with the “It Was A Protest Against A Vile Anti-Islam Video That Got Out Of Hand” song and dance for so long.

    Thumb up 0

  13. Poosh

    I think the issue is a terrorist attack foiled minis dead bodies is better than what happened. Alex argues above that it is a political calculation. I think Obama’s goons are simply *that* stupid. But either way you have to wonder … I mean, this WAS covered up really well. The media have towed the line. They’ve got away with it.

    Thumb up 0