New Disclosures on Benghazi

[RandFan]

Say, the Obama administration should have done a better job communicating to the American Public:

Say that at the end of the day this is just a conflict between the CIA and State? Can you admit that much?

 

[thaiboxerken]

There aren't enough straws for the right wingers to grasp when it comes to Benghazi. Trolls love straw.

 

[RandFan]

"We fully intended for those guys to go," on the plane that was leaving for Benghazi, and you claim you didn't know where they were going. Oh dear.

"Gates: Some Benghazi critics have "cartoonish" view of military capability" Robert Gates.

This was debunked a week ago at least.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

I've explained this a dozen times: they decided to stand down FEST.

FEST functions are:
Seasoned crisis management expertise
Time-sensitive information and intelligence
Planning for contingency operations
Hostage negotiating expertise
Reach-back to Washington agencies

http://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/about/c16664.htm

Since you keep bringing up FEST, please explain which of these functions would have made a difference in Benghazi.

 

[The Big Dog]

FEST functions are:
Seasoned crisis management expertise
Time-sensitive information and intelligence
Planning for contingency operations
Hostage negotiating expertise
Reach-back to Washington agencies

http://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/about/c16664.htm

Since you keep bringing up FEST, please explain which of these functions would have made a difference in Benghazi.

Really? At the time the decision was made not to send them? All of them. The next day? All but hostage negotiating.

The one thing about Benghazi, you would not have wanted time sensitive information and intelligence. rolls eyes

You did reread the CBS article I posted, right?

C'mon guys. This **** aint that difficult. Take the partisan blinders off.

 

[RandFan]

Really? At the time the decision was made not to send them? All of them. The next day? All but hostage negotiating.

The one thing about Benghazi, you would not have wanted time sensitive information and intelligence. rolls eyes

You did reread the CBS article I posted, right?

C'mon guys. This **** aint that difficult. Take the partisan blinders off.

Go look in the mirror. Experts disagree with you.

Some Benghazi critics have "cartoonish" view of military capability" --Robert Gates.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Really? At the time the decision was made not to send them? All of them. The next day? All but hostage negotiating.

The one thing about Benghazi, you would not have wanted time sensitive information and intelligence. rolls eyes

You did reread the CBS article I posted, right?

C'mon guys. This **** aint that difficult. Take the partisan blinders off.

You seriously believe that setting up a management team to start gathering information on what the situation was so that it could begin planning on what resources might be needed and that would have taken at least half a day even to get to Libya would have made any difference? Do you think it's possible to fly in a bunch of FBI agents and within minutes they will have found out who is involved, what their agenda is, what capabilities the have, etc.? Seriously? This isn't quite the same as sending an FBI team to end some hostage situation in the US.

 

[The Big Dog]

You seriously believe that setting up a management team to start gathering information on what the situation was so that it could begin planning on what resources might be needed and that would have taken at least half a day even to get to Libya would have made any difference? Do you think it's possible to fly in a bunch of FBI agents and within minutes they will have found out who is involved, what their agenda is, what capabilities the have, etc.? Seriously? This isn't quite the same as sending an FBI team to end some hostage situation in the US.

Yeah, people "seriously" do! (by the way, arguments from incredulity ROCK!)

Hell, senior officials in the Obama administration seriously do:

Thursday, an administration official who was part of the Benghazi response told CBS News: "I wish we'd sent it."

"In fact, FEST leader Mark Thompson says Benghazi was precisely the sort of crisis to which his team is trained to respond."

"Still, nobody knew at the outset how long the crisis was going to last. And officials familiar with FEST say it could have helped pave the way for the FBI to get into Benghazi much faster than the three weeks it ultimately took."

This was all in the article I linked, in this thread. Seriously.

 

[A'isha]

And you still haven't explained why that admission by some (not all) unnamed administration officials justifies months and months of Congressional hearings.

 

[The Big Dog]

And you still haven't explained why that admission by some (not all) unnamed administration officials justifies months and months of Congressional hearings.

Those admissions were made last week.

By the way, I don't have to justify anything, that is silly.

I understand that you are frustrated by the disclosures that do not reflect well on the Administration. Hell, the whole hearing could have been avoided if the Administration acted transparently and competently, right?

 

[RandFan]

"Still, nobody knew at the outset how long the crisis was going to last. And officials familiar with FEST say it could have helped pave the way for the FBI to get into Benghazi much faster than the three weeks it ultimately took."

It's nice when you answer your own questions. Unlike morning back quarterbacks (AKA idiots) those who have to make these decisions are responsible for people's lives.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda, hindsight is 20/20 and refusal to admit the obvious is blatant dishonesty.

 

[RandFan]

Prediction:

Stick a fork in it, it's done. Only the CT folks can keep it alive now. The serious and responsible have moved on. Just look at this thread. Only one person who thinks there is any substance is still here. This thread will die in the not too distant future or be moved to CT. That's my prediction.

 

[A'isha]

Those admissions were made last week.

Then what's the point of all the Congressional hearings? And what do you think is so important about what those administration officials said? A team that wasn't really intended to go into an active combat zone wasn't sent into that active combat zone, and actual combat units were deployed instead?

By the way, I don't have to justify anything, that is silly.

You've shown a distinct reluctance to even explain what you think about all this.

I understand that you are frustrated by the disclosures that do not reflect well on the Administration. Hell, the whole hearing could have been avoided if the Administration acted transparently and competently, right?

No, because Issa isn't actually interested in what happened in Benghazi, and the hearings have nothing whatsoever to do with how the administration acted, because how the administration acted and the bureaucratic infighting both before and after the attacks are nothing scandalous or deserving of Congressional hearings.

Or, at least, no more scandalous or deserving of Congressional hearings than the Bush administration's actions before and after the 9/11 attacks.

 

[The Big Dog]

Or, at least, no more scandalous or deserving of Congressional hearings than the Bush administration's actions before and after the 9/11 attacks.

Well then, what are you arguing about?

Anyway, I've seen some mentions of Gates' irresponsible comment about cartoonish views on the Military capability. He should take it up with Lt. Col. Gibson:

Lt. Col. Gibson was a commander assigned to the embassy in Tripoli from Special Operations Command Africa (SOCAFRICA). Gibson and the special forces team were "furious" at being ordered not to help the diplomats in Benghazi, Hicks testified. Hicks quoted Gibson as saying, "This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than somebody in the military."

 

[A'isha]

Anyway, I've seen some mentions of Gates' irresponsible comment about cartoonish views on the Military capability. He should take it up with Lt. Col. Gibson:

Lt. Col. Gibson was a commander assigned to the embassy in Tripoli from Special Operations Command Africa (SOCAFRICA). Gibson and the special forces team were "furious" at being ordered not to help the diplomats in Benghazi, Hicks testified. Hicks quoted Gibson as saying, "This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than somebody in the military."

Again, this was a group armed with pistols on a noncombat mission, whose immediate superiors (not the Obama administration) did not authorize their deployment to go along with plane being sent from Tripoli for the evacuation of Benghazi (not to "help the diplomats in Benghazi).

 

[RandFan]

Well then, what are you arguing about?

Anyway, I've seen some mentions of Gates' irresponsible comment about cartoonish views on the Military capability. He should take it up with Lt. Col. Gibson:

Lt. Col. Gibson was a commander assigned to the embassy in Tripoli from Special Operations Command Africa (SOCAFRICA). Gibson and the special forces team were "furious" at being ordered not to help the diplomats in Benghazi, Hicks testified. Hicks quoted Gibson as saying, "This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than somebody in the military."

Your argument is ad hominem poisoning the well. And of course an appeal to emotion which you are quite fond of.

The decision was made by military leaders for a number or reasons. Many subordinates disagreed with Patton, McCarthur and even Eisenhower. Lt. Col. Gibson doesn't trump those who made the decision. His job is to follow orders. There is zero evidence that they could have helped and you know that. It's been documented here over and over.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testifies on the attack on U.S facilities in Benghazi, Libya before the Senate Armed Services Committee Feb. 7, 2013 in Washington, D.C.:

"Panetta explained that “armed UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones), AC-130 gunships, or fixed-wing fighters with the associated tanking – you’ve got to provide air re-fueling-- armaments – you’ve got to arm all the weapons before you put the on the planes” -- were not in the vicinity of Libya.

He said that even if he had been able to deploy F-16 fighters or AC-130 gunships over Benghazi in time, “the mission still depends on accurate information about what targets they’re supposed to hit. And we had no forward air controllers there” and no communications with US personnel on the ground.

He said, “because of the distance, it would have taken at least 9 to 12 hours, if not more, to deploy these forces to Benghazi. This was, pure and simple, -- in the absence as I said of any kind of advance warning -- a problem of distance and time.”

He explained that “unfortunately there were no specific indications of an imminent attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi. Without adequate warning, there was not enough time given the speed of the attack for armed military assets to respond.”

He said there were two short-duration attacks that occurred six hours apart. “We were not dealing with a prolonged or continuous assault which could have been brought to an end by a U.S. military response,” Panetta said"

Now, those are the facts. They may be inconvenient for you. You might not like them but they are the facts.

 

[The Big Dog]

Again, this was a group armed with pistols on a noncombat mission, whose immediate superiors (not the Obama administration) did not authorize their deployment to go along with plane being sent from Tripoli for the evacuation of Benghazi (not to "help the diplomats in Benghazi).

Yeah, I've heard that "pistol" excuse that was leaked by "unnamed sources" in the White House (Nasty bit of politics there leaking that for no other purpose than to lay a mattress for the Administration), LT Col Gibson said they were locked and ready to go, and to rely on their training to adapt, improvise and over come.

Funny story, the CIA team that rallied from the annex (and that you questioned yesterday) confronted Libyan militia in attempt to commandeer two 50 cal machine guns. Hell, with Hicks with them, I'm pretty sure that the Libyans would have found a spare or two for the Special Forces with Lt. Col Gibson..

Not sure how assisting the evacuation isn't helping the diplomats, but as I recall you think that Greg Hicks is an idiot anyway, right?

/good to see we are on the same page now as the hearings.

 

[RandFan]

Yeah, I've heard that "pistol" excuse that was leaked by "unnamed sources" in the White House (Nasty bit of politics there leaking that for no other purpose than to lay a mattress for the Administration), LT Col Gibson said they were locked and ready to go, and to rely on their training to adapt, improvise and over come.

Funny story, the CIA team that rallied from the annex (and that you questioned yesterday) confronted Libyan militia in attempt to commandeer two 50 cal machine guns. Hell, with Hicks with them, I'm pretty sure that the Libyans would have found a spare or two for the Special Forces with Lt. Col Gibson..

Not sure how assisting the evacuation isn't helping the diplomats, but as I recall you think that Greg Hicks is an idiot anyway, right?

/good to see we are on the same page now as the hearings.

You didn't address the substance of ANTPogo's post. You simply used it as a convenient reason to intersect speculation and irrelevant minute. ANTPogo apologized for impolitic remark. That you are bringing it up is very bad form.

 

[A'isha]

Yeah, I've heard that "pistol" excuse that was leaked by "unnamed sources" in the White House (Nasty bit of politics there leaking that for no other purpose than to lay a mattress for the Administration),

No, for the purpose of explaining why the "stand down order" was nonsense, since the unit that was not given authorization to go was not a combat unit and wasn't told anything by anyone outside the military command structure, much less by anyone in the administration.

LT Col Gibson said they were locked and ready to go, and to rely on their training to adapt, improvise and over come.

And, as even Hicks was forced to admit, they would be accompanying the evacuation plane, so there was no reason for them to "adapt, improvise and over come" anything.

The military isn't stupid, 16.5, and no matter how gung ho these guys say they were, their superior officers knew what their capabilities were and knew that they might be needed as a last resort in Tripoli (where the security situation was unstable).

Funny story, the CIA team that rallied from the annex (and that you questioned yesterday) confronted Libyan militia in attempt to commandeer two 50 cal machine guns. Hell, with Hicks with them, I'm pretty sure that the Libyans would have found a spare or two for the Special Forces with Lt. Col Gibson.

"They could have used their 9mm pistols to seize heavy weapons from the heavily armed enemy that massively outnumbered them when they got there" would be pretty much exact kind of cartoonish view of military capability that Gates was talking about.

Not sure how assisting the evacuation isn't helping the diplomats,

Because by that point the only diplomatic staff was not only dead, but known to be dead. What was left was two technical support people, four security personnel, and a few dozen CIA agents, and all of them were in the process of leaving Benghazi.

/good to see we are on the same page now as the hearings.

What page would that be?

 

[elbe]

What page would that be?

Page 1?