Most Americans think America should be “AMERICA” – the world’s only super-power, a beacon of freedom and liberty, the shining city on a hill, speaking quietly but carrying one huge freaking stick! So, you F with America and you get the be all and end all of F jobs in return.

Obama thinks that America is an arrogant nation with no reason to believe that it is special in any way. That America needs to be “reigned in” and take its place as merely one more nation amongst many nations, with nothing special to offer the world. And if America would only realize these things, apologize for its arrogance, display a couple of decades of humility to make up for our exploitation of the rest of the world, THEN we can all be “friends”.

I wish Obama would understand the meaning of:

“Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she

With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

And then realize just what this nation managed to make of that “wretched refuse” – yeah, America is “nothing special”

President Obama’s claim that “The minute I found out what was happening . . . I gave the directive to make sure we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to do. I guarantee you everybody in the CIA and military knew the number-one priority was making sure our people are safe.”

DeathtotheSwiss on October 31, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Which minute was that, Dear Leader? The minute you learned it was a spontaneous protest? Or the minute you learned it was a terrorist attack? And when, exactly, was that minute?

Further, if you knew enough about :what was happening” to issue a “directive” why is such a long silent behind closed doors internal investigation necessary? What, exactly, did you find out was happening? Why won’t you tell the American people exactly what it is you “found out” that led you to issue that “directive”?

DeathtotheSwiss

BS from Paul Wolfowitz. Aviano birds were on alert and ready to go…

It is hard to understand why Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, in discussing the US response to the attacks on two US facilities in Benghazi, Libya, offered this novel principle as a guide for US action – or inaction – during that crisis: “A basic principle is you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on.”

Of course, no such “basic principle” governs the conduct of US military personnel in Afghanistan and elsewhere, who regularly go “into harm’s way” without “knowing what’s going on,” particularly when they know that American lives are in danger.

Panetta’s comment made it inevitable that people would question – as I did myself – President Obama’s claim that “The minute I found out what was happening . . . I gave the directive to make sure we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to do. I guarantee you everybody in the CIA and military knew the number-one priority was making sure our people are safe.” If that was true, did Panetta’s comment mean that the military was disregarding a clear instruction from the president?

From what I can determine from talking with someone who has spoken directly with key general officers and others involved in the US response to the Benghazi attacks, it would appear that – contrary to Panetta’s “basic principle” – the US did almost everything possible to protect our people once the attacks had started, though not in advance:

The Consulate was overrun in a matter of minutes, before any help was possible.

A team that appears to have been CIA personnel deployed quickly (and bravely) from the Annex to the Consulate and rescued everyone they found alive there. (It’s not clear whether Ambassador Stevens had already been taken by Libyans to the hospital or whether they simply failed to find him.)

A mainly CIA response force deployed quickly from Tripoli to reinforce the Annex and facilitate its successful evacuation.

Decision makers in Washington appear to have been leaning forward, as they should have been. The military’s most capable rescue force, based on the East Coast, was deployed immediately (something that is very rarely done), but – given the distances involved – arrived at Sigonella only after the crisis was over.

Also, the European command (EUCOM) deployed its number one counter terrorism force, which was training in central Europe, as quickly as possible, but it arrived in Sigonella after the evacuation of the Annex was complete.

Other special forces deployed to Sigonella but arrived on the 12th after it was too late to make a difference in Benghazi.

There was no AC-130 gunship in the region.

The only drone available in Libya was an unarmed surveillance drone which was quickly moved from Darna to Benghazi, but the field of view of these drones is limited and, in any case, this one was not armed.

The only other assets immediately available were F-16 fighter jets based at Aviano, Italy. These aircraft might have reached Benghazi while the fight at the Annex was still going on, but they would have had difficulty pinpointing hostile mortar positions or distinguishing between friendly and hostile militias in the midst of a confused firefight in a densely populated residential area where there would have been a high likelihood of civilian casualties. While two more Americans were tragically killed by a mortar strike on the Annex, it’s not clear that deploying F-16’s would have prevented that. In any case, the decision not to do so was made by the tactical commander, General Ham, as it should have been.

I’m not sure what to think, honestly. Someone run with it.

Could they have been armed? Were they drones that had that capability?

And if so, why wasn’t at least one of them armed? We fly them armed all over Pakistan. Why not at least one over Benghazi, Libya?

Why was Woods painting a target with a laser designator if there was nothing armed overhead and no reason to expect anything armed would be overhead anytime soon, if ever?

farsighted on October 31, 2012 at 9:53 AM

I have an extremely hard time believing that one of those drones wasn’t armed.

Whether one of them was or not, it paints a bad picture for 0dumba’s administration.

“The Wolves are at the Door” MAF Freedom PAC :60 Ad

Gulfport, Florida — While the country still waits for answers about last month’s attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, it’s become personal for a Bay area father.

Raymond Smith’s son, Sean Smith, was among those killed.

The Gulfport man was watching flag-draped coffins returning to the U.S. on the news when they flashed photos of the victims.

And there among them was his son.

“He was murdered. He was murdered,” said Raymond Smith.

They haven’t done anything. My son and them dialed 911 for help and they wouldn’t help them,” added Smith. “I want whoever did this, whoever didn’t answer their phone, I want them brought to justice too.”

For now, Ray Smith has only a nylon flag and a small plaque dropped at his doorstep to recognize his son’s sacrifice, working for the State Department in Benghazi.

Raymond Smith grieves for son Sean Smith, killed in Benghazi, Libya attack

And Ignatius is apparently quite right that the drones they sent to the consulate during the attack weren’t armed.

Could they have been armed? Were they drones that had that capability?

And if so, why wasn’t at least one of them armed? We fly them armed all over Pakistan. Why not at least one over Benghazi, Libya?

Why was Woods painting a target with a laser designator if there was nothing armed overhead and no reason to expect anything armed would be overhead anytime soon, if ever?

I try not to hate….hate is a useless emotion. It really does eat the soul….

That said, as a mother of a son – with a friend in the Marines…..as a military wife, the seething white hot RAGE that I felt when I heard this comment yesterday was at times overwhelming.

LL

Lady Logician on October 31, 2012 at 9:04 AM

I disagree that hate is useless. It’s only a problem when it’s denied or misdirected – pointing it at people who callously treat others like chess pieces is healthy.

That said, as a mother of a son – with a friend in the Marines…..as a military wife, the seething white hot RAGE that I felt when I heard this comment yesterday was at times overwhelming.

LL

How is it, per Panetta, that we can’t send armed troops into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on but we could send an unarmed diplomat and his staff?

The unknown is what the Delta Forces train for, isn’t it?

Looking back, it may indeed have been wise not to bomb targets in Libya that night.

We only needed to bomb one target, which also happened to be our consulate. There is no wiggle room in Benghazi.

“OBAMA: Still risk of flooding and high winds”

“OBAMA: Listen to your state and local officials”

Obama’s use of “we leave no one behind” is simply a continued use of the phrase as it relates to “social justice”. What he means is he will use this catastrophe as an opportunity for further redistribution of the wealth. It’s “code” to those that await the next government handout to “listen up” because we’ll soon be telling you where the you can line up to “get yours”.

To our more pointed issue, he would say that he didn’t leave anyone behind in Benghazi. The four bodies were brought home. That makes him linguistically correct in his mind.

Carnac on October 31, 2012 at 8:17 AM

I was sure he wasn’t talking about “Leave No One Behind” as the Rangers creed.

So, yeah, context is everything. He’s going to be sure everyone gets the help they need.

Leon Panetta summarized last Thursday the administration’s decision to opt for caution: “You don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on.”

You think Eisenhower, FDR knew what was going to happen on June 6 when we invaded Normandy?

To our more pointed issue, he would say that he didn’t leave anyone behind in Benghazi. The four bodies were brought home. That makes him linguistically correct in his mind.

What a fraud this guy is…….. Worse than a hoax……
“we leave no one behind” ??

Who would say that in this context anyway ?- he’s an idiot. – This statement is so misplaced he thinks people who hear it have a 7th grade math intelligence level. and hey, maybe I didn’t want to evacuate anyway.

So he equates a storm response………to a retreating military force from a battlefield.

This commander in chief has my vote. NOT.

Remember Benghazi!

profitsbeard on October 31, 2012 at 3:05 AM

That 0dumba’s administration has been constantly lying to us about Benghazi isn’t surprising nor newsworthy to a weak-minded socialist dope like Typhonsentra, thus, to her, there’s no real story to cover!

Waaah waaah, why won’t the media cover our fake Benghazi story!?!

Typhonsentra on October 31, 2012 at 2:11 AM

The ambassador faked his death?

Now there’s a scoop.

Of what I won’t say.

Ben-Ghanzi!
Tell the truth!
Ben-Ghazi!
Tell the truth!
Ben-Ghazi!
Tell the truth!

For half an hour.

Then bow their heads in a silent prayer for a minute … and leave.

The media studiously wouldn’t notice but the general public would.