Page 19 of 41 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 405

Thread: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

  1. #181
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post

    Whats your source? Hell whats your argument? You're just stating it as if its a matter of fact, and you aren't even defining what you exactly mean by response. A UAV was over head, in response, to the attack but I doubt that's what you mean by response. So could you please define your argument a little better? And being an "intelligence officer" you should know that there's more to response than time, there's the degree of the desired response, obviously larger responses take more time, and there's the location of assets and personnel desired for the response to consider as well. Something I think even a 2nd rate intelligence officer should know.
    Are you unaware of the story? Al Quada attacked a consulate in Benghazi, Libya. They used small arms fire supported by heavy machine guns, rocket propelled grenades and mortars to over run the consulate. They set fire to the buildings. This alarmed the consulate staff who set up both open phone lines and encrypted lines to beg for help.

    A while later Al Qaeda forces engaged four CIA operators who arrived, rounded up the survivors, recovered Smith's body and left to return to the CIA Annex. They continued to engage them all the way back to the annex.

    The embassy in Tripoli sent a small aircraft to Benghazi with a few people on board. They had so little force they were unable to leave the airport in any reasonable amount of time to assist the Americans.

    Africom, who had UAVs watching chemical agent storage areas, diverted an unarmed UAV about an hour into the battle.

    There were forces in the region capable of responding (and rendering aid) but were not launched in response.

    Al Qaeda attacked the CIA Annex killing two defenders.

    The president attended a fund raiser.

    You want to know what a response to an armed attack is? A response is sending assets--people, aircraft, armed UAVs, capable of shooting back to aid in the defense of our people and property. It is not answering the phone, offering a prayer, notifying next of kin, or lying to the American people for the next three weeks.

    I hope that clears up what a response is.

    It's a military operation that crosses a border, what more do you want?
    I shall be more careful in explaining the obvious to you in the future. A cross border operation where we are intending to engage in combat operations on another nation's territory, when we are not at war with that nation, is not something a local commander can approve.

    We are talking about US forces coming to Benghazi to kill people and break things. We are not talking about unarmed planes landing to pick up the bodies and fly home.

    Also you keep talking as if there is one rule for all cross border operations, in fact ROE changes all over the world, to cross one border is not the same as crossing any other border. The fact that you haven't talked about crossing the Libyan border, and instead just borders in general, makes me think you don't know this fact.
    I was here to discus Obama's Benghazi Massacre and the Abandoned Four. What were you discussing?

    'm sorry did you not read my quotes from the State Department investigation? Military forces did CROSS THE BORDER and did so WITHOUT Presidential authorization, its a pure and simple fact that cannot be denied.
    Not to conduct combat operations. The only response was by a force already in the country. I no longer remember whether they were armed or not. From memory I believe even the unarmed UAVs were already in Libya.

    And your suggestion is to have the CJCS move military assets? You clearly, CLEARLY, do not know that the CJCS is NOT a commander, and has NO command authority in the United States military. The highest levels of military command in the world are currently the Unified Combatant Command Commanders, ie the Commanders of AFRICOM, CENTCOM, etc who report directly to the SECDEF NOT to the President. Your suggestion is completely off base and shows your ignorance of how command works at that level.
    The Chairman acts as the president's principal military advisor. I believe he was with the SECDEF when Benghazi was discussed. The White House Situation room has plenty of capability to pass the president's orders to the combatant commanders. Given that the SECDEF was already at the White House doesn't it make sense to you to use the White House Communications capabilities to discuss, coordinate and issue orders?

    I think you intentionally misunderstand. No biggie. Some people are like that.

    And do you have a source about these aircraft? Do you know that they could have been launched in 5 to 15 minutes? What if they were not fully armed or fueled, you don't know that, you're just assuming and making guesses. Again, something a decent intelligence officer would not be doing? And a decent intelligence officer would have a source, not personal anecdotes and opinions.
    It is possible under this president that no military forces anywhere in the world are ready to respond to surprise situations.

    When I was on active duty we had ready forces all over the world including alert forces that could be aloft in a very few minutes. The first aircraft launched most likely would not have had the right weapons on board to successfully engage the Al Qaeda forces in Benghazi. But their presence overhead would have changed the attack dynamics.

    The second flight would have had time to change stores to something more appropriate to support ground operations.

    Everything you've posted is an opinion. Facts have sources, facts are undeniable, facts are backed.

    SHOW ME A SOURCE
    If you don't already know everything I have mentioned it is because you choose to remain in the dark.

  2. #182
    Don't Give a Rat's Ass
    SMTA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    21,814

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Jon Stewart skewered John McCain and the GOP Benghazi BS last night.

    McCain is shown to be the pathetic hypocrite that he truly is.

    Greatness lies not in being strong, but in the right use of strength - Henry Ward Beecher
    Baby sister, I was born game and I intend to go out that way - Rooster Cogburn

  3. #183
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:31 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,460

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    I do not believe we have ever had an eight hour battle before. One American, the Information Officer Smith was killed in the initial attack. Woods and Doherty bled out as they continued to fight more than seven hours later.

    Panetta says he had a fifteen minute conversation with Obama at the beginning of the battle. Then Obama went missing and did not turn up for another eight hours after the Abandoned Four had all been murdered by Obama's new found Islamofascist buddies.
    Why is Obama wrecking America while helping the Islamofascists in the Middle East and Africa?
    You're deliberatly being dishonest because it wasn't a continuous 8 hour battle and Obama wasn't made notified of the attacks until after the first attack was over....and after meeting with Panetta he gave a direct order to do everything possible to save the remaining personel at the compound. So who are you going to blame now?



    "Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says the U.S. military did not intervene during the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya last month because it was over before the U.S. has sufficient information on which to act...."
    Panetta: Unclear early info slowed Benghazi response - CBS News


    "Panetta noted that Congress, too, plays a role in the security of the nation's diplomatic missions, and that the Department of Defense faces the prospect of sequestration -- which would result in billions of dollars of cutbacks to the Defense budget -- on March 1. "If Congress fails to act, sequestration is triggered," he said...."
    Panetta, Dempsey defend U.S. response to Benghazi attack - CNN.com

    After March 1 it will be the fault of congress for not providing enough funding for security at US embassys...oh wait, they didn't provide enough funding for Bengazi's security either. Republicans are real keen on fighting unfunded wars and like everything else wrong with this country the congress is just going to make it worse, not better.
    Last edited by Moot; 02-21-13 at 06:01 PM.

  4. #184
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Mustachio View Post
    So have you not read the official report of what happened, or do you simply not care what the truth is?
    I have read a great deal.

    You have 150 militants attacking with RPGs.
    More likely there was an assault platoon armed with rifles, light machine guns and grenades. They were supported by a heavy weapons platoon with heavy machine guns (truck mounted), Rocket propelled grenades, and mortars. There was an intelligence exploitation section. I believe there were at least two squad-sized blocking positions. There was a command and control section to coordinate the activities.

    I do not believe I read this anywhere. But I did listen to the initial reports about the nature of the attack and saw evidence for this organizational structure.

    A simple helicopter will take them out?
    Who argued that? My plan of action included UAVs, high performance aircraft, a quick response team of up to ten men dropped in, followed by a larger force prepared to drop in (based on the reports from the first force) all backed up by a reinforced company - to a battalion minus airlifted into the airport to gain control of all US assets in Benghazi upon their arrival.

    Come on, man, I'm glad you're not in command, because you don't seem to have any concept of reality.
    Maybe I do. Maybe I don't. I believe I do.

    Our embassy was attacked -- that's terrible, but you have to understand that it isn't a military base. We are not prepared to bring massive amounts of firepower anywhere in the world at any second. We were able to get men in there to defend the CIA annex and we had soldiers who went to help Mr. Stevens and the other two men with him.
    The president could have done a great deal but chose to do nothing.

    I think we could have had continuous air cover over Benghazi beginning around hour two of the eight hour battle. Instead we did nothing. There were naval assets available. I saw evidence of a destroyer off the coast of Libya. We had UAVs monitoring chemical weapons sites in the Libyan desert. We monitored the battle using diverted UAVs.

    I think we could have dropped in a rapid response team (by whatever name they go by today) around hour three or four. Backed by airpower we could have won that battle.

    Obama needs to answer the questions as to why the security was so lax and how we'll prevent another instance of loss of life like this one. Should he answer as to why he didn't just get in there and kick ass instantly? No, because he shouldn't care what people who are living in a fantasy world think.
    He must account for where he was and why he was not engaged while Americans were fighting Islamofascists to their deaths in his Massacre.

    He must be held accountable for his disastrous foreign policy.

  5. #185
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    You're deliberatly being dishonest because it wasn't a continuous 8 hour battle and Obama wasn't made notified of the attacks until after the first attack was over....and after meeting with Panetta he gave a direct order to do everything possible to save the remaining personel at the compound. So who are you going to blame now?
    No battle is continuous. They ebb and flow.

    I believe it is a lie that the the president did not know until after the battle was over. Based on when the SECDEF was meeting with Obama he most likely knew the consulate was under attack around the half hour mark. The battle lasted nearly eight hours.

    If Obama really gave the orders he is claiming to have made then why did Panetta keep his job? He should have been fired the very next day. Perhaps the president wad daydreaming about flying to a fundraiser the next day. He was detached, disinterested, cold to the murders of Americans. At the time he was told his Ambassador was missing. He didn't care. He went missing for the next eight hours.

    "Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says the U.S. military did not intervene during the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya last month because it was over before the U.S. has sufficient information on which to act...."
    Panetta: Unclear early info slowed Benghazi response - CBS News
    I understand the cover up. I understand the lies. I understand the politics. The president did not want to be involved just in case it did not go well. So he abandoned four Americans to their deaths so his chances of re-election would remain strong.

    "Panetta noted that Congress, too, plays a role in the security of the nation's diplomatic missions, and that the Department of Defense faces the prospect of sequestration -- which would result in billions of dollars of cutbacks to the Defense budget -- on March 1. "If Congress fails to act, sequestration is triggered," he said...."
    Panetta, Dempsey defend U.S. response to Benghazi attack - CNN.com
    I do not understand why you would repeat their lies. Obama's failure to render defense aid to Americans in battle is unrelated to the very timy cuts coming on March first unless the incredibly feckless Boehner capitulates once again.

    After March 1 it will be the fault of congress for not providing enough funding for security at US embassys...oh wait, they didn't provide enough funding for Bengazi's security either. Like everything else wrong with this country the Republican congress is just going to make it worse, not better.
    I even understand why the weak-minded and gullible fall for the fear mongering.
    Last edited by Misterveritis; 02-21-13 at 06:13 PM.

  6. #186
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,884

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post

    He must account for where he was and why he was not engaged while Americans were fighting Islamofascists to their deaths in his Massacre.

    He must be held accountable for his disastrous foreign policy.
    Some Presidents are more hands-on while others prefer to delegate. No war-room staged pic of the President being Presidential as there was with bin Laden.

    Where was Secretary of State Clinton? This was her watch, and her Congressional testimony--her exasperated "What difference does it make?" --makes her unfit, at least in my mind, to EVER serve as the Commander in Chief. She screwed up, participated in all the deliberate obfuscation (I surely would like to hear what the survivors of the massacre have to say), and then tried in that testimony to trivialize what happened.

    If I were the GOP, my first commercial in 2016 would that that one sound byte, followed by the voiceover of "She just doesn't get it."

  7. #187
    Sidewalk Inspector
    Utility Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,099

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    “Why were the vice president and a group of oilmen poring over maps of Iraq long before there was any pretext to invade the country? Iraq’s oil was technically embargoed and under UN control—why make plans for divvying up oil reserves?”



    US Environmental Record: Cheney Energy Task Force



    Poor guy, look at what his party has done to him.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    There were, by most estimates, 500 Nazis in Charlottesville. One of them went homicidal. Not all Nazis are violent extremists. You are trying to rationalize your hatred and it's simply not rational.
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    as I noted, its better that 10 nutjobs get guns than one good person be wrongly disarmed.

  8. #188
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by SMTA View Post
    Jon Stewart skewered John McCain and the GOP Benghazi BS last night.

    McCain is shown to be the pathetic hypocrite that he truly is.

    I think we should obstruct everything Obama does. Let's try getting a bit of transparency into this Executive branch.

  9. #189
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    Some Presidents are more hands-on while others prefer to delegate. No war-room staged pic of the President being Presidential as there was with bin Laden.
    Delegation is fine for many things. I do not think it is ever acceptable to have one brief conversation about this battle and then move on to prepare for a fund raiser.

    Where was Secretary of State Clinton? This was her watch, and her Congressional testimony--her exasperated "What difference does it make?" --makes her unfit, at least in my mind, to EVER serve as the Commander in Chief. She screwed up, participated in all the deliberate obfuscation (I surely would like to hear what the survivors of the massacre have to say), and then tried in that testimony to trivialize what happened.

    If I were the GOP, my first commercial in 2016 would that that one sound byte, followed by the voiceover of "She just doesn't get it."
    We may not make it to 2016.

    The fight belongs to the States now.

  10. #190
    Don't Give a Rat's Ass
    SMTA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    21,814

    Re: McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    I think we should obstruct everything Obama does. Let's try getting a bit of transparency into this Executive branch.
    There is an adult tactic that works so well.

    McCain has no business calling foul on anything in DC given his pathetic record.

    If you want transparency, you need to look at those 535 fools in Congress who can do nothing constructive.

    McCain can go first.
    Greatness lies not in being strong, but in the right use of strength - Henry Ward Beecher
    Baby sister, I was born game and I intend to go out that way - Rooster Cogburn

Page 19 of 41 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •