Benghazi story getting interesting

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby cartervj » Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:09 pm

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/12/report-new-navy-map-shows-u-s-had-multitude-of-forces-in-region-surrounding-libya-during-benghazi-attack/


Government watchdog group Judicial Watch published a U.S. Navy map on Wednesday showing the locations of ships in the region surrounding Libya on the night of the deadly Benghazi Attack.

The unclassified map was obtained by Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Randall R. Schmidt via a Freedom of Information of Act (FOIA) request. Schmidt is reportedly investigating the U.S. military’s response to the Benghazi attack and provided a copy of the map to the group.

“The U.S. military had a multitude of forces in the region surrounding Libya when terrorists attacked the Special Mission in Benghazi and murdered four Americans,” Judicial Watch writes.
11.png


“Destroyers could have responded to the attack,” Schmidt said.

He also said the military had “rapid reaction forces” and “armed predators” in the region. So far, the Department of Defense has refused to provide him records on the air fleet on Sept. 11, 2012.

“The point is there were enough forces to respond,” Schmidt added.

Judicial Watch breaks down the locations of various military fleets:

Dozens of vessels were stationed in the region on that day, including two aircraft carriers (Dwight D. Eisenhower and Enterprise), four amphibious ships, 13 destroyers, three cruisers and more than a dozen other smaller Navy boats as well as a command ship. Carriers are warships, the powerhouse of the naval fleet with a full-length flight deck for aircraft operations. During the Benghazi attack, two carriers were based to the east in the Arabian Sea, the Navy map shows.

Two amphibious assault ships (Iwo Jima and Gunston Hill) were situated to the east in the Gulf of Oman and one (New York) was in the Gulf of Aden, the map shows. A fourth (Fort McHenry) was located on the west side of the African continent in the Atlantic Ocean. Amphibious ships resemble small aircraft carriers and have air-craft strips for vertical and short take-offs and landings. The destroyers are scattered throughout the region, but the closest appear to be four (Cole, Forrest Sherman, Jason Dunham and Aboon) in the Mediterranean Sea north of Libya. The rest of the fleet includes cruisers, minesweepers, patrols and a command ship.

[…]

In a letter attached to the map, the Navy writes that the Iwo Jima was the closest large amphibious ship to Benghazi on that day, but fails to mention the exact distance. The letter does mention that the USS Enterprise, the aircraft carrier that appears on the map to be the closest to Libya, was located approximately 3,350 nautical miles from Benghazi. “Assuming a 20 knot transit speed and no Suez Canal delays, the transit would take approximately 168 hours or seven days,” the Navy says in the letter to Schmidt. The USS Dwight D. Eisenhower “would require additional transit time from its position in the Arabian Gulf,” the letter further states.


As CBS News’ Sharyl Attkisson points out, the State Department Accountability Review Board determined that nothing else could have been done in terms of military assistance. The Obama administration has been consistent in its claim that it had no military assets in the area available to respond to the attack.

The map isn’t definite prove that the Obama administration didn’t do enough to respond to the assault in Benghazi. Clearly more information is needed to determine if any of these fleets were actually prepared tactically to respond to such an attack or could have made it to Benghazi in a reasonable amount of time. We will monitor any breaking updates on this story.

The Senate Intelligence Committee concluded last month that the attack in Benghazi was “preventable.” Further, The Republican-led House Armed Services Committee earlier this week concluded that no official “stand down” order was given on the night of Sept. 11, 2012.
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7336
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL


Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby Andy W » Thu Feb 13, 2014 6:11 am

I see a "What Difference At This Point Does It Make" coming.
Andy W
hunter
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:30 am
Location: KY

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby ScaupHunter » Thu Feb 13, 2014 10:10 am

Anyone who has dealt with military actions knows full well that there were plenty of US and British military personell who could have responded to that attack. We have a Brigade of Rangers in Italy that have two battalions on standby at any point in time. They could have been loaded on planes in 20 minutes and dropped in by air outside the fight. I have buddies that are presently in that unit and brothers in law that served in it at one point or another.
Last edited by ScaupHunter on Thu Feb 13, 2014 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6654
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby Airborne28 » Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:54 pm

ScaupHunter wrote: We have a Brigade of Rangers in Italy that have two battalions on standby at any point in time. .


FALSE
Airborne28
hunter
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:38 pm

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby ScaupHunter » Thu Feb 13, 2014 1:07 pm

Really,

So exactly when did the Mediteranean and African theater commanders dismantle the Ranger group that was the quick reaction force there? And... How do you know it no longer exists?

Careful now, my brother in law that served in that unit for 5 years is presently working as a DOD contractor supporting it. Sucks living in Italy and all that. He gloats about it all the time.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6654
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby vincentpa » Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:17 pm

Response is not the issue. I doubt any response could've been effective. The military isn't going to send in troops without knowing the situation on the ground only to have them wiped out because the military didn't know the size if the enemy and their positions. Our military is great but this isn't a Hollywood movie. The scandal is the cover up. The secondary scandal is the failure to recognize the threat, which goes straight to liberal foolishness.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7725
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby ctdeathfrombelow » Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:02 pm

vincentpa wrote:Response is not the issue. I doubt any response could've been effective. The military isn't going to send in troops without knowing the situation on the ground only to have them wiped out because the military didn't know the size if the enemy and their positions. Our military is great but this isn't a Hollywood movie. The scandal is the cover up. The secondary scandal is the failure to recognize the threat, which goes straight to liberal foolishness.

You do know those @****** in the Capitol were watching the events play out in real time via footage from a predator drone above the embassy, right? It even had time to refuel and return to watch more shtf.
User avatar
ctdeathfrombelow
hunter
 
Posts: 1515
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: Connecticut: The Confiscation State

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby ctdeathfrombelow » Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:07 pm

Also for operators, knowing what kind of crap they're about to step in is a luxury afforded to them by local intelligence, and is NOT guaranteed. They're always ready regardless of the sit rep.
User avatar
ctdeathfrombelow
hunter
 
Posts: 1515
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: Connecticut: The Confiscation State

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby SpinnerMan » Fri Feb 14, 2014 7:47 am

vincentpa wrote:Response is not the issue. I doubt any response could've been effective. The military isn't going to send in troops without knowing the situation on the ground only to have them wiped out because the military didn't know the size if the enemy and their positions. Our military is great but this isn't a Hollywood movie. The scandal is the cover up. The secondary scandal is the failure to recognize the threat, which goes straight to liberal foolishness.

While I agree that that was the mindset in the White House, I don't agree it is a fact. Men did EXACTLY what you suggest because that is what our military does. What do you think the people at the CIA annex did? They went on rescue missions into the fighting. You are paralyzed if you have to wait to rescue your fellow Americans that are under active attack until you know the size of the enemy force and their position. Can you ever save anyone in time?

I'm sure you have heard of these studies.

http://boingboing.net/2010/04/27/who-can-build-the-ta.html
Wujec says that very young kids usually build taller and more interesting structures than most adults, because they build a lot of prototypes in the 18 minutes each group is allotted, while adults spend a lot of time planning, then have no time to correct their mistakes.

When time is a constraint, you cannot plan and plan and plan and build the most elegant and optimum solution. When fellow Americans are under attack, it is extremely time sensitive, sure caution is in order, but the simple fact is that sometimes you are going to fail, but if you never act, you will fail 100% of the time. Whether it is firemen, police officers, or the military, when speed is of the essence, sometimes they are going to run straight into disaster. It is an unavoidable risk of the job that they don't always have time to do a detailed assessment of the situation, create a plan, have it reviewed and approved, get the right skills and right gear, and proceed with caution. People are dying right now, how many is unknown, but there is no time to wait. Either try to save them or hope too many do not die. There are nothing but bad choices, but choosing to fail by inaction should not be the default position.

Action should be the first reaction, and you are correct, this is not the movies, often, but not always, that will be the wrong decision in hindsight. However, it sends a clear message, if you attack us, you better be prepared for hell's fury to come down upon you because that is the default reaction and not make it quick and get out and we will never hunt you down and kill you.

1. No black hawk down no matter how many die in Bengazi - this totally paralyzed them to any response and just watching

2. No political fallout before the election for the President - this is why the false narrative about the video and protests and why we still have no clue what the President was doing during this attack that came in two waves over a long period of time.

BTW, this is basically Obama Iraq and Afghanistan policy. It doesn't matter how many die, he wants out, but he has to minimize the political fall out. His only strategic objective seems political. If failure was an acceptable option, meaning the U.S. has no major concern if the country fails after we leave, why did Obama not order the troops home ASAP and save all those lives?
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16199
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby ScaupHunter » Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:31 am

Vince,

Military groups respond with little to no intel all the time. You get everything you can and often get updates while on the way to the scene. Lets take it all the way down to a Battalion level in Iraq. That would be 5 companies of troops. Each company having 4 or 5 platoons of 27 men. Out of a full battalion you will have at least 3 line companies in a combat battalion. There is always a Quick Reaction Force on duty at all times in a combat zone.

Our battalion handled a lot of call outs for roadside bombs and ambush responses on HWY 1 in Iraq. About half of the tour we were stationed near a little town called Ad Dajyl. The gate guard included the QRF force. When a radio call came in on an attack or a roadside bomb, VBIED, etc.... We would be rolling inside two minutes. We usually had a coordinate good to 300 meters on the reported location and that was it. No time to wait, no time to sit around for better intel. Americans were either under attack, or we had to get rid of a bomb to keep people from being killed. We would usually get updated intel as we were just heading out or on the way to the scene. If not we got close checked things out and then handled whatever it was.

Now take SOCOM with all of their technological equipment and access to everything. Add in multiple units in country at the time. We know CIA, NSA, Spec Ops, and the Brits were all there and all nearby. We know they had armed drones in the air. We know they had planes and other military strike equipment available. We also know that intial steps were taken to rescue the people. Admirals and Generals were fired for it since they violated orders to do so. That fact alone makes it clear a rescue was feasible.

Reality is we could have put the hurt on the terrorist dirt bags in Benghazi. We might not have saved the Americans under attack, but we would have given them a fighting chance. 6 to 8 men fought for well over two hours. They held off what has been called 2,000 or more insurgents for that time. I don't think we will even know the truth on this one in full.

I am not a huge conspiracy theorist, but this one stinks to high heaven!
Last edited by ScaupHunter on Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6654
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby assateague » Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:42 am

vincentpa wrote:Response is not the issue. I doubt any response could've been effective. The military isn't going to send in troops without knowing the situation on the ground only to have them wiped out because the military didn't know the size if the enemy and their positions. Our military is great but this isn't a Hollywood movie. The scandal is the cover up. The secondary scandal is the failure to recognize the threat, which goes straight to liberal foolishness.



Nonsense.


There were numerous options which did not involve a bunch of guys fast-roping into a shitstorm. Could've had Apaches or a Spooky there in an hour. It was all about politics. That's the one and only reason that those guys were hung out and left to die. When you're on the ground, taking fire and calling for help, knowing that there are people moving heaven and earth to get you help is what gets you through. And now far too many people doubt that, and rightly so.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby SpinnerMan » Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:48 am

ScaupHunter wrote:I am not a huge conspiracy theorist, but this one stinks to high heaven!

It's not a complex conspiracy. It's a very simple one. Obama is never wrong. He never lies. He's never responsible. And no matter how clueless and incompetent he looks, it's not his fault. All mistakes, all possible negative stories will be covered up by lies. The people do NOT have the right to now. It is none of their damned business because they are too stupid to understand the complexity of the situation and cannot be trusted to come to the conclusion the Obama and his administration demand that they do.

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/198296-before-o-care-debacle-sebelius-made-many-trips-to-white-house
While Sebelius has said the president was not aware of HealthCare.gov’s problems, more than 750 pages of documents obtained by The Hill through a Freedom of Information Act request show she made scores of visits to the White House.

The documents reveal that Sebelius met with or attended calls and events with Obama at least 18 times between Oct. 27, 2012, and Oct. 6, 2013, including at least seven instances in which the two were scheduled to discuss the new healthcare law, according to the secretary’s draft schedules.


Image
Image
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16199
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby Rat Creek » Fri Feb 14, 2014 1:41 pm

I have one thing to say about this which should put everything to rest.



See, it doesn't matter whether it was to protect Obama, if it were jihadist out for a walk of if it was a video that no one had seen. We just need to learn from it. That is all. Now back to your miserable little lives. :fingerpt:
Rat Creek
Rat Creek
hunter
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby ScaupHunter » Fri Feb 14, 2014 1:43 pm

She should still be in jail for Whitewater Gate. Then we could all say what difference does it make that she is not in power.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6654
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby SpinnerMan » Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:02 pm

ScaupHunter wrote:She should still be in jail for Whitewater Gate.
She's not a crook. She was and is just totally clueless of everything. That is, was, and always will be her story and she will never stop sticking to it.

Just what we need in a President. Someone that is always left in the dark whenever anything important is happening.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16199
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby ScaupHunter » Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:25 pm

SpinnerMan wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:She should still be in jail for Whitewater Gate.
She's not a crook. She was and is just totally clueless of everything. That is, was, and always will be her story and she will never stop sticking to it.

Just what we need in a President. Someone that is always left in the dark whenever anything important is happening.



Is it just me, or did anyone elses parents smack the crap out of them when they tried that as a kid? I am guessing mommy and daddy did not set very many limits for her as a child.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6654
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby vincentpa » Sun Feb 16, 2014 8:42 am

ScaupHunter wrote:Vince,

Military groups respond with little to no intel all the time. You get everything you can and often get updates while on the way to the scene. Lets take it all the way down to a Battalion level in Iraq. That would be 5 companies of troops. Each company having 4 or 5 platoons of 27 men. Out of a full battalion you will have at least 3 line companies in a combat battalion. There is always a Quick Reaction Force on duty at all times in a combat zone.

Our battalion handled a lot of call outs for roadside bombs and ambush responses on HWY 1 in Iraq. About half of the tour we were stationed near a little town called Ad Dajyl. The gate guard included the QRF force. When a radio call came in on an attack or a roadside bomb, VBIED, etc.... We would be rolling inside two minutes. We usually had a coordinate good to 300 meters on the reported location and that was it. No time to wait, no time to sit around for better intel. Americans were either under attack, or we had to get rid of a bomb to keep people from being killed. We would usually get updated intel as we were just heading out or on the way to the scene. If not we got close checked things out and then handled whatever it was.

Now take SOCOM with all of their technological equipment and access to everything. Add in multiple units in country at the time. We know CIA, NSA, Spec Ops, and the Brits were all there and all nearby. We know they had armed drones in the air. We know they had planes and other military strike equipment available. We also know that intial steps were taken to rescue the people. Admirals and Generals were fired for it since they violated orders to do so. That fact alone makes it clear a rescue was feasible.

Reality is we could have put the hurt on the terrorist dirt bags in Benghazi. We might not have saved the Americans under attack, but we would have given them a fighting chance. 6 to 8 men fought for well over two hours. They held off what has been called 2,000 or more insurgents for that time. I don't think we will even know the truth on this one in full.

I am not a huge conspiracy theorist, but this one stinks to high heaven!


You were part of an occupying army with more than enough assets to respond rapidly and send in the Calvary should the rescue force get into trouble. Apples and oranges.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7725
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby vincentpa » Sun Feb 16, 2014 8:47 am

assateague wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Response is not the issue. I doubt any response could've been effective. The military isn't going to send in troops without knowing the situation on the ground only to have them wiped out because the military didn't know the size if the enemy and their positions. Our military is great but this isn't a Hollywood movie. The scandal is the cover up. The secondary scandal is the failure to recognize the threat, which goes straight to liberal foolishness.



Nonsense.


There were numerous options which did not involve a bunch of guys fast-roping into a shitstorm. Could've had Apaches or a Spooky there in an hour. It was all about politics. That's the one and only reason that those guys were hung out and left to die. When you're on the ground, taking fire and calling for help, knowing that there are people moving heaven and earth to get you help is what gets you through. And now far too many people doubt that, and rightly so.


Explain Mogadishu.

The compound under attack was located in a civilian neighborhood. Should they have used a spooky there? Who would've directed the fire of either the apache or the spooky?
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7725
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby ctdeathfrombelow » Sun Feb 16, 2014 9:30 am

vincentpa wrote:
assateague wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Response is not the issue. I doubt any response could've been effective. The military isn't going to send in troops without knowing the situation on the ground only to have them wiped out because the military didn't know the size if the enemy and their positions. Our military is great but this isn't a Hollywood movie. The scandal is the cover up. The secondary scandal is the failure to recognize the threat, which goes straight to liberal foolishness.



Nonsense.


There were numerous options which did not involve a bunch of guys fast-roping into a shitstorm. Could've had Apaches or a Spooky there in an hour. It was all about politics. That's the one and only reason that those guys were hung out and left to die. When you're on the ground, taking fire and calling for help, knowing that there are people moving heaven and earth to get you help is what gets you through. And now far too many people doubt that, and rightly so.


Explain Mogadishu.

The compound under attack was located in a civilian neighborhood. Should they have used a spooky there? Who would've directed the fire of either the apache or the spooky?

Close proximity of too many friendlies on the ground for an ac130 in Mogadishu.
User avatar
ctdeathfrombelow
hunter
 
Posts: 1515
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: Connecticut: The Confiscation State

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby assateague » Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:41 pm

vincentpa wrote:
assateague wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Response is not the issue. I doubt any response could've been effective. The military isn't going to send in troops without knowing the situation on the ground only to have them wiped out because the military didn't know the size if the enemy and their positions. Our military is great but this isn't a Hollywood movie. The scandal is the cover up. The secondary scandal is the failure to recognize the threat, which goes straight to liberal foolishness.



Nonsense.


There were numerous options which did not involve a bunch of guys fast-roping into a shitstorm. Could've had Apaches or a Spooky there in an hour. It was all about politics. That's the one and only reason that those guys were hung out and left to die. When you're on the ground, taking fire and calling for help, knowing that there are people moving heaven and earth to get you help is what gets you through. And now far too many people doubt that, and rightly so.


Explain Mogadishu.

The compound under attack was located in a civilian neighborhood. Should they have used a spooky there? Who would've directed the fire of either the apache or the spooky?



Which is why I said it was politics which dictated that nothing be done, and not a lack of forces available.

As for directing the fire, the guys on the roof calling for help. They had almost 5 hours, before they were finally killed, because no help came. And an area ceases to be a civilian neighborhood when it is full of hundreds of bad guts shooting RPGs, same as Mogadishu. Either you commit to seeing your guys through until they get brought out, or you don't. And politics has decided that you don't, which is bullshit.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby assateague » Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:46 pm

And for the record, helicopters were the only thing which kept several areas from being overrun, all night long.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby vincentpa » Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:55 pm

assateague wrote:
vincentpa wrote:
assateague wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Response is not the issue. I doubt any response could've been effective. The military isn't going to send in troops without knowing the situation on the ground only to have them wiped out because the military didn't know the size if the enemy and their positions. Our military is great but this isn't a Hollywood movie. The scandal is the cover up. The secondary scandal is the failure to recognize the threat, which goes straight to liberal foolishness.



Nonsense.


There were numerous options which did not involve a bunch of guys fast-roping into a shitstorm. Could've had Apaches or a Spooky there in an hour. It was all about politics. That's the one and only reason that those guys were hung out and left to die. When you're on the ground, taking fire and calling for help, knowing that there are people moving heaven and earth to get you help is what gets you through. And now far too many people doubt that, and rightly so.


Explain Mogadishu.

The compound under attack was located in a civilian neighborhood. Should they have used a spooky there? Who would've directed the fire of either the apache or the spooky?



Which is why I said it was politics which dictated that nothing be done, and not a lack of forces available.

As for directing the fire, the guys on the roof calling for help. They had almost 5 hours, before they were finally killed, because no help came. And an area ceases to be a civilian neighborhood when it is full of hundreds of bad guts shooting RPGs, same as Mogadishu. Either you commit to seeing your guys through until they get brought out, or you don't. And politics has decided that you don't, which is bullshit.


We can agree or disagree over whether something could've been done. I don't think it was possible without tremendous risk to a greater number of people. I think the decision while difficult was justified considering the ramifications of significant casualties. Generals and even presidents are responsible for the would-be rescuers as well. They have to make rational decisions based on knowns and likely unknowns and possible unlikely unknowns. In war, some lives are sacrificed. There have been many incidents where evac was possible for soldiers and the officers in charge denied it based on risk. Everyone is expendable. That's the sad truth. If you don't reconcile yourself to that reality when you are contemplating going into a high risk post, then you shouldn't be there.

Presidents make mistakes. So do Secretaries of State and so do Ambassadors. I'm not absolving the last three of their mistakes in this tragedy. I find them appalling. I find them naïve. foolish and typically liberal. I also remember a bombing of an U.S. Embassy in Beirut in the 80's. An ambassador ignored recommendations to fortify and install radio controls to detonate car bombs. He refused. I think 16 or more Americans lost their lives for his foolishness.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7725
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby vincentpa » Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:59 pm

assateague wrote:And for the record, helicopters were the only thing which kept several areas from being overrun, all night long.


I completely understand why the Rangers and Delta guys weren't overrun during the night. They had "almost" direct communication with little birds providing them close air support. The helicopters were involved in the fight from the beginning. The ground force was substantial enough and well armed enough to defend themselves with help from helicopters. This was not the case in Libya. The group in Libya needed rescued, not assisted.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7725
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby Airborne28 » Sun Feb 16, 2014 6:10 pm

ScaupHunter wrote:Really,

So exactly when did the Mediteranean and African theater commanders dismantle the Ranger group that was the quick reaction force there? And... How do you know it no longer exists?

Careful now, my brother in law that served in that unit for 5 years is presently working as a DOD contractor supporting it. Sucks living in Italy and all that. He gloats about it all the time.


Since. Have been in (11 years) there has never been any "ranger" unit there. Besides, there are no ranger "brigades", only ranger regiment. Perhaps you are confusing ranger school with the actual ranger regiment? Just cause you pass ranger school does not make you a ranger anymore than passing sniper school makes you a sniper. Ranger regiment has a selection process, and guys in regiment need ranger school, but people from big mother army that pass ranger school are NOT rangers.

The 173rd is in italy.

Careful now, everyone hates the infantry and barely anyone goes to any SOF selections, but everyone tries to pass themselves off as a pipe hitter.
Airborne28
hunter
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:38 pm

Re: Benghazi story getting interesting

Postby Airborne28 » Sun Feb 16, 2014 6:15 pm

vincentpa wrote:
assateague wrote:And for the record, helicopters were the only thing which kept several areas from being overrun, all night long.


I completely understand why the Rangers and Delta guys weren't overrun during the night. They had "almost" direct communication with little birds providing them close air support. The helicopters were involved in the fight from the beginning. The ground force was substantial enough and well armed enough to defend themselves with help from helicopters. This was not the case in Libya. The group in Libya needed rescued, not assisted.


Very true, but if the somalis were capable of mustering a sizable force to action onto the strong points the birds would not have mattered. The somalis had little if any COMMS.
Airborne28
hunter
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:38 pm

Next

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests