Dempsey: State Department never asked us to respond to Benghazi
posted at 12:41 pm on February 7, 2013 by Ed Morrissey
Via Daniel Halper, John McCain extracted some significant testimony from a clearly reluctant chair of the Joint Chiefs in an Armed Services Committee hearing on Benghazi today. Appearing with outgoing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, both tried arguing that there are too many threats and places requiring defending to have the American military act as “a global 911 service,” in Panetta’s words:
“The United States military is not and should not be a global 911 service capable of arriving on the scene within minutes to every possible contingency around the world,” Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
That testimony, combined with Army Gen. Martin Dempsey’s argument that the military did what its location allowed, angered Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who accused the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman of peddling falsehoods.
“For you to testify that our posture did not allow a rapid response, did not take into account threats to our consulate … is simply false,” McCain told Dempsey. McCain contended that the military’s capability allowed armed forces to intervene in short order.
McCain didn’t bother to restrain his disgust in this exchange, either:
“Why didn’t you put forces in place to be ready to respond?,” Senator John McCain asked the general.
Dempsey started, “Because we never received a request to do so, number one. And number two, we –”
McCain interrupted, “You never heard of Ambassador Stevens’s repeated warnings?”
“I had, through General Ham,” responded Dempsey, referring to the commander of AFRICOM. “But we never received a request for support from the State Department, which would have allowed us to put forces–”
“So it’s the State Department’s fault?”
“I’m not blaming the State Department,” Dempsey responded.
This is an absurd argument. No one would have questioned a lack of preparation at our Geneva embassy on May 14th, for instance. But this wasn’t May 14th, and it wasn’t Geneva. It was 9/11 — the eleventh anniversary of the attacks on Washington and New York City, which as anyone who hasn’t been in a coma for the last dozen years knows, al-Qaeda has highlighted for more attack attempts. Furthermore, it took place in Benghazi, which has been overrun by AQ-affiliated and other Islamist terrorist groups ever since the US and NATO left a huge power vacuum in eastern Libya by decapitating the Qaddafi regime the previous year. And finally, as McCain points out, the late Ambassador Chris Stevens was trying to point all of this out for months to the State Department, to no avail.
So it wasn’t a question of having a “global 911 service,” as Panetta scoffed. The problem is an ignorance bordering on the willfully incompetent about the risks in Benghazi and shrugging off preparations to provide support in case something happened. Dempsey and Panetta are dodging that question of responsibility for the lack of interest at State and the White House in military readiness for a terrorist attack that Stevens saw coming months in advance, and that practically anyone could have predicted after the transformation of eastern Libya into a failed state.
Update: And then there’s this:
Graham: Was one single asset military asset deployed anywhere in the world to help these people before the attack ended? Dempsey: no–
— Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) February 7, 2013
–because the attack ended before we got off the ground. Graham: but you didn’t know how long the attack was going to last.
— Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) February 7, 2013
And why weren’t there assets moved closer prior to the 11th anniversary of 9/11, especially given Stevens’ warnings?
Related Posts:
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Out in the peoples woods there is some real bad shit going down.
Out at the tip of the spear the visual tells the story and action is taken.
Communication back to local Gen., forward to say CenCom.
Up to higher ups.
“Bad shit going down, any way you cut it once it breaks in the press we are in a world of shit.”
“Want to call the Pres.”
Some one in the group,, “Remember when we called him about telling the truth on Fast and Furious and he told us to stone wall it and blame the gun store owners”
No way he will just screw this up worse than it alreay is.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM
Well, we don’t know why, exactly, General Ham stepped down. But yeah, clearly we either did or should have (with the amount of $$ we spend on our military) had assets within an hour or two flight away.
To claim that our military can’t respond to a situation with an ambassador in a militarized known terrorist hot spot within 12 hours… I mean, if that’s true, I’m done with these multi billion dollar military budgets. If our military is no more capable than Frances, where in the hell is all of that money going?
On the other hand, I think we all know that it is not true, and it’s laughable that the closest US asset was 2 hours away. In fact, if I recall correctly, the Brits had people nearby, but we never asked for help.
Clearly, the order was “stand down” and that order came from the top. There is no doubt in my mind that NO ONE except for Obama could / would make that decision. Standing orders are to always attempt to rescue US personel in a situation like that.
Timin203 on February 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM
Code Pink..?
d1carter on February 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM
Here we go….another opportunity for the Ds to say how mean the Rs are when they question the nominee or panels.
Starts off with a woman protester with a sign…about killing with drones!
CoffeeLover on February 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM
#2 protestor…
CoffeeLover on February 7, 2013 at 2:49 PM
I’m always sort of surprised when I see people admit that they’ve never held a position of responsibility at any time in their lives.
Heck, even a manufacturing facility’s graveyard-shift wastewater operator without much more than a GED will get called on the carpet and questioned by offsite officials with microphones if something goes wrong enough.
So yes, I expect the same from the Secretary of Defense.
rogerb on February 7, 2013 at 2:49 PM
#3 protestor being escorted out.
CoffeeLover on February 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM
When did any ground forces arrive in Sig? It is my understanding that they arrived much later.
Also, what was the plan to get these forces to the “consulate” in Benghazi? How would you have done it?
Why are you claiming that it was a SpecOps response team. I read that it was EUCOM’s in-extremis force.
This doesn’t seem true. General Carter Ham was still officially AFRICOM weeks after the incident. If he was relieved after the incident, then he was reinstated for over a month afterwards.
I have more questions for you if you answer these.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 2:51 PM
The benefit of being “Present”
Jabberwock on February 7, 2013 at 2:52 PM
#4 protester. Feinstein asking for room to be cleared and people allowed back in one by one.
#5 protester also interrupting hearing.
CoffeeLover on February 7, 2013 at 2:52 PM
Hearing recessed to clear the room.
novaculus on February 7, 2013 at 2:52 PM
Seems as if there are more Code Pinkers in the audience than regulars…
Feinstein is clearing the room and will not allow Code Pink return…hearing is in recess.
d1carter on February 7, 2013 at 2:52 PM
Can’t wait to see the undercover Code Pinkers when they come back in…
d1carter on February 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM
IOW…
How could Comrade O and his National Security Team have possibly foreseen an attack on a US consulate and ambassador, in the midst of a lawless Arab country heavily infiltrated by al Qaeda and armed Islamist jihadists, on the anniversary of the 9/11, when the ambassador himself in the months before that repeatedly expressed his real and palpable fear and concern for his own safety, and that of other diplomatic personnel, as did others responsible for his safety? These things happen and no one is to blame for not being prepared for such an attack.
BS.
farsighted on February 7, 2013 at 2:55 PM
Shorter IOW: You break it, you own it.
monalisa on February 7, 2013 at 2:59 PM
d1carter on February 7, 2013 at 3:02 PM
Sorry to break it to you, but responding to embassy evacuations is well known to take more than 24 hours. Look at the ones we’ve done in the past and see how long it took. Some took days.
Our military is much more capable than France’s.
If you want to know how the military is prioritizing it’s capabilities, then feel free to read the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR).
If you have recommended changes, then be sure to let us know. Maybe Hot Air can help get the military to reprioritize based on your recommendations.
I’ve spent hours pouring over the information that’s been available, and I don’t think that capable assets were 2 hours away.
And based on what I know about military resources and embassy evacuations in this theater, it doesn’t make sense to assume that anything was 2 hours away at the start of the attacks.
What capabilities did the Brits have and where?
This is most certainly not clear.
No, there is no such standing order. Obviously, we would hope that our commanders and civilian decision makers would be extremely aggressive in this respect, but most still would seek authorization before attempting anything risky – and anything thrown together would indeed be risky.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 3:02 PM
No it is not. The military doesn’t arbitrarily go into harm’s way on it’s own – it is TASKED by outside agencies, and McCain knows it. If a city is staging an event and they fail to ask their own police department to provide security, it’s not the cops’ fault if the event turns into a riot and people get hurt. Durring hurricane Sandy, both governors from NY and NJ tasked their National Guard commanders accordingly – the guard didn’t go out there on their own.
But, I agree that Panetta’s comment was a bit out of line.
RMCS_USN on February 7, 2013 at 3:03 PM
So Dempsey just had way too many things to worry about…all at the same time…Is that his answer?
workingclass artist on February 7, 2013 at 3:05 PM
The ABSOLUET lie to all this is supplied to us by the State Department ITSELF – who were watching everything unfold in realtime FROM AN ON-SITE DRONE!!!
If an unarmed drone can be there in time, guess what? SO CAN AN ARMED ONE!
PJ Emeritus on February 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM
Yawn. Benghazi yada yada yada. Wake me up when the GOP has the balls to do something about it. This story broke two months before a major election and months later the GOP is still yapping about but it. What do call a pathetic group of folks who is all bark and no bite?
Reminds me of the noise during Hagel confirmation, we got the threats, only to discover they don’t have the guts to filibuster.
Tired off the phoney outrages, if the GOP is serious about Obama’s incompetent group of thugs then they have to start matching their rhetoric with action. Otherwise the GOP sounds like a bitter spouse.
celticdefender on February 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM
seemed that way as well as he was never ASKED to move.
CoffeeLover on February 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM
Seems we are being told that what came from the top was more like…
“Don’t bother me with that. I’m busy and have other more important plans and things to do right now.”
farsighted on February 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM
And the State response will be:
Defense never told us that they were ready, willing, and able to come to Benghazi’s defense – or anyone else’s.
It’s a circle-jerk of butt-covering.
Another Drew on February 7, 2013 at 3:11 PM
You do recall correctly. British sources on the ground in Benghazi said they were extremely frustrated by the attack and are still wondering why they weren’t called for help. “We have more people on the ground here than the Americans and I just don’t know why we didn’t get the call?” one said. Fox News
And the military capabilities of our allies in Turkey were also called into question. They were a short flight away as well.
lynncgb on February 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM
You mean, obama, hillary and panetta?
Ok. That’d be a good start.
Solaratov on February 7, 2013 at 3:17 PM
Brennan starts off by dodging questions on documentation requested by Congress…he fits Dear Leader’s model perfectly. State run media agrees.
d1carter on February 7, 2013 at 3:18 PM
I’m thinking he’d rather take the AWOL hit because he was responsible for the “stand-down” order(s). And he gave the stand-down orders because, as Christien put it, “Dead men tell no tales.”
Whatever was going on at Benghazi was something the regime did not want exposed. Something, for example, like gun running to Al-Qaeda forces in Syria.
At the hearing, did anyone ask about the stand-down order, who had authority to give it, who gave it?
petefrt on February 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM
In order to protect American sovereign territory, diplomats and Citizens you are.
If not, then I guess you guys really don’t need all the money you keep saying you need year after year. Wasting millions of it anyway.
Dr. ZhivBlago on February 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM
So…
Panetta admits after the 30 min. pre-scheduled with Preezy Obama…He never spoke to Preezy Voting Present again, nor did Preezy call during the later annex attack & that both Dempsey and Panetta never talked to the Secretary of the “What Difference Does it make?” Department?
Aaaand because Secretary “What Difference Does it Make” never asked for military assets to go to Bengahzi even though we had Preezy’s favorite toy a drone beaming video, and tweets about a possible attack happening from the embassy…a mysterious somebody told special forces to stand down even though Panetta says “We didn’t know what was going on”
WTF do these amoral incompetents think the American People are smokin’
workingclass artist on February 7, 2013 at 3:24 PM
Hard to save your soul while at the same time lying.
Amjean on February 7, 2013 at 3:27 PM
So, it HAD to be Panetta who gave the “Stand down” order.
It was Panetta who ordered Gen. Ham to NOT send the ‘In Extremis Force’ to Benghazi.
It was Panetta who ordered the Delta/SF contingent at Sigonella to remain on the ground.
It was Panetta who denied the air assets to the SEALs fighting the islamists………
And just watched and did nothing…
…according to his master’s wishes.
Solaratov on February 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM
Sorry, not sure. I only caught the end of the live feed, but that’s one of the big questions, if not the biggest.
Christien on February 7, 2013 at 3:32 PM
petefrt on February 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM
I didn’t catch it all but from what I watched I don’t recall anyone using “stand-down order.” Graham did use the “no man left behind” lingo but I didn’t hear/see his 2nd round of questions due to Cspan using their 10 minute break to go to something else and then go into the Brennan hearing.
Hoping Cspan runs it again later tonight.
CoffeeLover on February 7, 2013 at 3:36 PM
Dems consider lying to anyone and everyone to prevent Republicans from exposing unpleasant truths the moral equivalent of lying to the Gestapo about not hiding Jews in your house when you are.
The MSM has the same attitude and rationalization. That’s why they have aided and abetted Dear Leader’s stonewalling on Benghazi. And they will continue to do so. I expect nothing to come of these hearings, though I’d love to be wrong about that. However, this has been going on for over four years. No reason to think it will stop now.
farsighted on February 7, 2013 at 3:39 PM
Does anybody really think there will be any hard questions asked???? Or any consistent line of questioning to get to an answer???? This is all show for the sheeple. If in fact there was a real press any more, this would have come out before the election,or Romney would have brought it up[oh, that would be racist].
retiredeagle on February 7, 2013 at 3:39 PM
No doubt, something highly illegal. Something that would have
to get him impeached, even offending the a$$kissers on the leftie side.
Amjean on February 7, 2013 at 3:39 PM
Not giving the order to execute is NOT the same as giving a stand down order.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 3:41 PM
This is another shot across the bow for anyone who has any ideas of crossing the regime, whistleblowing, or any other disclosure of info that slows the agenda. The intimidation, blackmail, etc that is going on is nothing considering you count the bodies starting from Chicago to shut up the down low gang. This the Chicago Democrat Mafia operating on a national and international level. Welcome to the brave new world order.
retiredeagle on February 7, 2013 at 3:44 PM
They both get the same result….in this case, dead Americans.
Amjean on February 7, 2013 at 3:45 PM
Well I will be rude.
When we took off our dog tags, put on off the shelf (not American) uniforms, selected the non American issue guns to take etal, my “former Korean Marine body guards” then “Philco-Ford” of Canada tech. hires (“”") would not allow me or my next in line in the command our lz cordinates to be known by any one but the helo pilots. Once out in the peopls woods due to how well these S. Korean’s knew of remf’s Generals and such, they said,,”If it gets bad they will not send any help, they will deny us, we will be on our on and have to fight our way out even if it takes weeks. Once it took 5 days.
Nothing has changed regard Gen.’s and such covering their ass.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 3:53 PM
Don’t think he is worried about being impeached, but pissing off his base, or another constituent, may be of his concern.
The CinC removed himself from an attack on American personel. He was not kept in the dark, he removed himself from involvement.
Do we really want a CinC who abdicates his responsibility in a crisis ?
To admit to this is simply staggering. Can he be trusted in a future crisis ?
It will not happen, but that could be grounds for impeachment, right there. The alternative to this must be pretty bad.
Jabberwock on February 7, 2013 at 3:56 PM
affenhauer on February 7, 2013 at 3:56 PM
Top 10 Things I Learned From Democrat Testimony On Benghazi:
1. Nothing could have been done.
2. It was the Republican Congress’s fault that nothing could be done to do nothing.
3. Obama knew nothing right away and did nothing about it.
4. Hillary–what difference at this point does it make?
5. You are legally protected from being fired from State, but not from being fired on.
6. Nobody blamed it on a youtube video made by a guy who was arrested in the middle of the night for no reason by some guys out for a walk and jailed.
7. Nobody survived.
8. America can only intervene in Libya to save Libyan lives.
9. Dialing 911 from overseas does not work.
10. The victims and families will never get justice, but what matters most is protecting Obama, Hillary, and the Democrats, which is the outcome so it’s all good.
Christien on February 7, 2013 at 4:00 PM
OK, then.
Put youselves in say Panetta, Clinton’s, CIA boss, or the Chair of the Joint Chief’s place.
You know what a jerk off know nothing college prof Obama is and you know how bad his judgement has been during other problems.
If you had to make the call, would you even consider calling in this dufus? Bet they all just played it out and never took it to him. Hell it is even possible the standing order from Obama is do not get me envolved.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Brian Terry and Amb. Stevens are brothers in death.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 4:04 PM
Ok, this might get my bumb rushed by 1/2 of HA but the truth is -
The time to make this an issue was during the debates. Romney, Bohner and Cantor own this. It was thier responsibility( as the opposition) to follow up on this in the weeks afterwards. Because they failed(didn’t even try) the story is now ancient history to the LIV. It’s too late. I wish it wasn’t. I wish they’d have pinned this on Obama and Clintoln and made them twist in the wind. But they didn’t and who knows why? A back room deal?
Mcain and Graham always come with the hard , right questions when it comes to national security —- months too late. Why wasn’t Mcain pounding his pulpit every day after Benghazi? Why are they on fire now?
Here’s how it works-
Scandal happens
Schedule protracted hearings months after.
Get incredulous after 90% of the voters have forgotten the issue.
BoxHead1 on February 7, 2013 at 4:06 PM
me not my
BoxHead1 on February 7, 2013 at 4:06 PM
No hindsight necessary. The first Ambassador since 1979 was missing and an attack was ongoing when Obama went to bed. That Ambassador became the first to be murdered since Carter, which is fitting since he was as inept at foreign policy as Obama.
If you want to be “Commander-in-Chief,” you do not go to bed when one of your country’s embassies is under prolonged attack and the Ambassador, who begged your administration for help on numerous occasions, including 4 hours before his death, is missing.
Your “What difference, at this point, does it make?” type of reaction is definitely NOT awesome.
Resist We Much on February 7, 2013 at 4:08 PM
Understand what you are saying. And it very well could be the case. But, the phones work in both directions.
What I cannot understand is that Obama, knowing the attack was going down, did not bother to call Panetta or anyone else.
Absolutely no interest, on his part, to know what was going on.
Jabberwock on February 7, 2013 at 4:10 PM
A difference without a moral distinction, unless it is to add cowardice to dereliction of duty.
novaculus on February 7, 2013 at 4:11 PM
Obama is a failed President and is real poor at international gun running operations.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 4:13 PM
So,
If an Army private who goes to sleep on guard duty in a war zone and get people killed is subject to the rules of the Uniform Code of Justice for the U.S. ARmey etal.
Does it follow that the Commander in Chief who is the over all commander of all the U.S. Armed Forces too, sleeps when he should be on duty,, well is above or subject to the rules of the Uniform Code of Justice for the U.S. Army etal.
Courts Marshal/Captins Mast his ass.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM
So…axelrod lied about this…………..
Lying sacks of sh!t! All of them! They left those people (37Americans)to die…in order to hide the truth about their arms-running deals with the jihadis.
They should all burn in Hell.
Solaratov on February 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM
Isn’t it obvious at this point that blink works for this administration in some capacity? Most likely sitting in the 5 sided hell hole in VA. I mean he seems to show up on almost every thread having to do Benghazi since it all happened and he always has the canned defensive answers for each and every scenario posted. Interesting to say the least. I’ll take off my tinfoil hat now.
4 dead Americans deserve answers not denials.
D-fusit on February 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM
The getalifes are in charge. Have been since January of 2009.
Del Dolemonte on February 7, 2013 at 4:32 PM
Can’t be-Cindy Sheehan is too busy debriefing Dante.
Or maybe she’s busy giving him an Atomic Wedge?
Del Dolemonte on February 7, 2013 at 4:37 PM
No. The President is a civilian. As are the Vice President and Secretary of Defense. They are subject to the U.S. Criminal Code.
Mitoch55 on February 7, 2013 at 4:41 PM
Ding Ding Ding!
petefrt on February 7, 2013 at 4:43 PM
Oh, good! blink is here to educate all of us and explain – in great detail and at great length – why it was absolutely impossible to move any assets to Benghazi and help the defenders…
…and to offer his ongoing defense of lil barry d’ohbama and his regime.
Solaratov on February 7, 2013 at 4:46 PM
While we all know this is not true, Axelrod is nasty enough to say the the 5:00 meeting with Dempsey and Panetta was what he was referencing.
You know he’d say that.
Jabberwock on February 7, 2013 at 4:49 PM
Yeah, probably that’s what he’d say. But I’d sure like to see them get caught up in their own lies. The stuff is really deep with this one.
petefrt on February 7, 2013 at 5:09 PM
Outrageous to be sure but let me be clear, NO ONE will be held accountable.
Not by this Administration, not by the media and not by far too many of our fellow citizens. If accountability were taken seriously, the election would’ve gone far differently.
Yakko77 on February 7, 2013 at 5:12 PM
There is no rule of law in the goode olde USA.
It’s Obammunism bishes.
50.8% voted for throwing out the rule of law, so it is time to quit whining and enjoy being a nation of outlaws and cronies.
tom daschle concerned on February 7, 2013 at 5:18 PM
.
Ambassador Stevens was deliberately sacrificed by the Obama Administration, until you can PROVE otherwise.
No other valid, legitimate, justifiable explanation for ALL AUTHORITIES INVOLVED being simultaneously “indisposed”, or “out-of-the-loop”, or beyond any attempt to reach by communication. Period.
listens2glenn on February 7, 2013 at 5:24 PM
Generals who display their cowardice by LYING for the White House to Congress after Americans on the front lines have been murdered …
Deserve to burn in hell. There is no honor in a general like that. He does not deserve his position – he does not deserve the loyal following and obedience of good soldiers.
HondaV65 on February 7, 2013 at 5:26 PM
Does Dempsey look like someone to fear? Thought so. That is why he was appointed to that position, to project weakness, along with H. Clinton, Panetta, Hagel, etc.
Tripwhipper on February 7, 2013 at 5:29 PM
Walking Dead Democrats Vote Like Dead People Do.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 5:34 PM
avagreen on February 7, 2013 at 5:36 PM
We now witness great evil.
We can feel it.
We know it is near.
We have a long gene code that tells us these things.
We must pay attention to our instincts.
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 5:38 PM
Put another way.
“Do Not Blink.”
APACHEWHOKNOWS on February 7, 2013 at 5:40 PM
Don’t be an idiot.
I’ve been incredibly critical of this administration for 4 years. I was blasting them about causing Benghazi because of the need to make Libya seem like a safe, happy place.
Real criticism of this administration about Benghazi is lacking because of people screwing up the actual facts about what happened.
The facts about what actually happened are not difficult to find. Stating the actual facts is not a canned defense.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 6:09 PM
Many of you need help understanding what actually happened. It’s not difficult to do, but people like you are too stupid to understand it on your own.
I never claimed that it was impossible. I’m just conveying what actually happened. As it turns out, the assets were taking too long to get into place – which isn’t a surprise to me given my experience with these types of situations.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 6:13 PM
Do you also claim that NASA faked the moon landing until someone can PROVE otherwise??
Be sure to explain what the DoD was supposed to do once the attacks started?
While I don’t agree that Stevens was deliberately sacrificed, I do believe that the Obama administration was excessively lax about protecting him because of their own agenda.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 6:15 PM
.
To (expletive) with Panetta. SOMEONE told the team members at the CIA Annex to “Stand down.” If not Panetta, then WHO ?
.
listens2glenn on February 7, 2013 at 6:28 PM
.
(EXPLETIVE)! Re-posting the last part of my 5:24 PM comment:
.
It was ALL done by calculation and deliberation.
We’ve got enough evidence of a “deliberately orchestrated act”, ON THE PART OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION to kill Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
No way that ALL persons with the authority to order a rescue attempt would “accidentally” be unavailable to make the decision.
listens2glenn on February 7, 2013 at 6:42 PM
That’s if you believe they actually were ‘out of the loop’. The other chance is they, or at least one of them, was in the lop, and now they’re lying about it for cover.
Either way, it’s incredulous. Either way, it stinks on ice.
petefrt on February 7, 2013 at 6:52 PM
Oh, BULL!! You have NO idea what “actually happened”. Any more than anyone else not there.
And, I sincerely doubt the depth of your “experience with these types of situations”. What you’d like people to think…and what the truth is…seem more and more dissimilar.
But you are a great apologist for the regime and for your pResident.
Solaratov on February 7, 2013 at 7:20 PM
And he rarely (if ever) shows up on any other thread that doesn’t mention Benghazi. He did show up on the QOTD open thread one night a couple of months ago – after someone mentioned Benghazi.
Always after a Benghazi reference.
Hmmm.
Solaratov on February 7, 2013 at 7:27 PM
Mr. President, former Madam Sec. of State, everyone in the “situation” room on 9/11/12… Please report to and pick up the white courtesy phone to get your appointed treason hearing…. This is a result of not picking up the red phone when it rang for 5 damn months….
Tilly on February 7, 2013 at 7:29 PM
Someone beneath Panetta for many, many possible reasons?
blink on February 7, 2013 at 8:03 PM
All that coordination and effort just to kill one guy? Why not just have one person kill him?
Do you also believe that NASA faked he moon landing?
blink on February 7, 2013 at 8:05 PM
Well, at least I’m accurately conveying the official statements that have been made about the issue.
Idiots like you have been repeating the early, unsubstantiated rumors over and over and over again.
It’s incredibly irresponsible of you.
Doubt it if you wish, but I helped plan and supported NEOs in this theater. I was very familiar with the location and capability of EUCOMs assets in that area.
Anyone that reads my comments on Hot Air knows this isn’t true.
I’m just trying to prevent idiots like you from ruining the credibility of Hot Air with your non-sense.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 8:10 PM
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
You really are an idiot, and apparently you’re too stupid to use Google to check my Hot Air posts.
Would you like to bet that I have more comments on Hot Air than you do?
Btw, you’re an idiot.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 8:12 PM
Dempsey is a stooge. I have children serving under this half wit.One day these as$hats will have to deal with ordinary people. That day is coming and right soon.
Thicklugdonkey on February 7, 2013 at 8:34 PM
I wonder if there were any 6th Fleet CTF’s in the area, and if there was one, whether the carrier had a couple of F-18′s on deck in and alert status (alert 5 and alert 10). If so, they should have been in the air immediately (well, within 5 and 10 minutes respectively) fully fueled and fully armed, receiving intel updates on the way. In that case, it wouldn’t have taken 12 hours for one or both to have reached the area under attack that night. Of course, I haven’t deployed to the Med in over 30 years(I was deployed on the Forrestal during the Iranian hostage crisis), and maybe 6th Fleet doctrine has changed since then.
Moose Drool on February 7, 2013 at 8:35 PM
One interesting note about that deployment: the current SACEUR, Admiral James Stavridis, was a LT (JG) assigned to B Division. After the deployment ended, he moved to E Division, made O-3, and became my last Electrical Officer before I was assigned to shore duty. Just a little “WFC?” note.
Moose Drool on February 7, 2013 at 8:55 PM
Typical leftist. Starts shouting ad hominems whenever it’s challenged.
It never fails. All leftists are the same.
Solaratov on February 7, 2013 at 9:19 PM
The official reports have stated that no carrier and no arg/marg was in COMSIXFLEET’s AOR.
6th Fleet now goes for long periods of time without a carrier and/or arg/marg.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 9:49 PM
Only an idiot would attempt to claim that I’m a leftist. You are an idiot.
You’re hurting our side and making Hot Air commenters look stupid with your uninformed nonsense.
blink on February 7, 2013 at 9:51 PM
He was reluctant, because he was being asked to dissemble to protect his political superiors. The problem with lying to cover your bosses’ butts is that when the lie gets pierced — and it usually does — it’s not just the bosses who will get the blame. But your bosses are far more likely to be able to walk away from the blame.
This is one of those cases where a military person should refuse to lie for a superior, even if that superior is the Commander in Chief. There’s just no way to cover up disastrous mismanagement like Benghazi.
tom on February 7, 2013 at 10:20 PM
what kind of horse manure is this?
losarkos on February 7, 2013 at 10:38 PM
Moose Drool on February 7, 2013 at 10:48 PM
.
If so, that person would have been marched forward PRONTO, to take the heat off of the White House.
I stand by my previous statement.
.
.
All that coordination and effort to kill
one guyANYONE who “knows too much.”Plus, using (actually, just getting out of the way of) Al Qaeda to do the killing, “laundered” it. Who’s going to suspect the White House of using Al Qaeda to kill one of our ambassadors? The fact that the White House meme immediately became; “It was all a reaction to that damned “youtube” movie”, is more transparent than some of Kim Kardasian’s clothing.
Having a single assassin kill Christopher Stevens would have created too much suspicion. I’m of the mind that Obama threw them (Al Qaeda) a bone, to give them something to cheer about.
Kills two birds (no pun intended) with one stone, and no one (he thinks) can trace it back to him.
(BTW, yes. I believe the moon landing REALLY happened)
listens2glenn on February 8, 2013 at 12:07 AM
Panetta: Obama Absent Night of Benghazi.
justltl on February 8, 2013 at 12:27 AM
We have fewer aircraft carriers now so there aren’t enough to go around.
Feel free to read through the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and let us know how you would reprioritize the defense budget.
blink on February 8, 2013 at 12:32 AM
That is called “dereliction of duty”.
Obama should be impeached.
justltl on February 8, 2013 at 12:33 AM
What did he supposedly know, and why was he the only one that knew it?
Is this about purchasing weapons from Libyan islamists and shipping them to Syrian islamists via Turkey?
Yes, who’s going to suspect that the White House would attempt to do something that would require the involvement of so many people and have such a high probability of failure?
Yes, who would suspect that the White House would select such a stupid option for keeping someone quiet?
Less suspicion than was created by all this. Islamists assassinate people all the time. Nobody would get suspicious if an American Ambassador was assassinated in Libya.
Well your brain is obviously susceptible to conspiracy theories. Let us know what conspiracies you subscribe to.
blink on February 8, 2013 at 12:54 AM
.
“Dereliction”, at the very least. I’m still of the mind that Ambassador Stevens was murdered, to cover-up something.
.
Either way, Obama should be impeached.
listens2glenn on February 8, 2013 at 12:55 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »