I see your point. Political appointees never lie. Therefore, any statement they make without reasoned support must be true. So when statements are made about insurance going up instead of down that’s just an error in math made by millions of people.
Here’s the interesting thing, Obama doesn’t seem too interest in discussing the details of what when on during the crisis. The only effort put in by the White House was to send Susan Rice out in front of cameras with a deliberate lie. They put more effort into lying about it then to save the people under attack.
Nor do anonymous people on the internets.
[Quote=Magiver]
Therefore, any statement they make without reasoned support must be true. So when statements are made about insurance going up instead of down that’s just an error in math made by millions of people.
[/quote]
I have no interest in your obvious dislike for everything this administration has done, but I will ask if you have anything or anyone supporting your conclusions on the ability of the military to respond or the appropriateness of launching bombs against groups of people outside a compound in Libya? When Gates, Mullen, and Pickering tell me that the military did everything they could and that other responses (like your grenading the crowd theory) were inappropriate, I consider what they say. And I consider what you have said. But to little old me, it seems they have a bit more expertise, experience, and knowledge on the subject than you do. Persuade me with some support for your ideas, rather than just resort to the tired old “Obama lies” crap.
Grenading what crowd? This wasn’t a protest with a few agitators mixed. It was a direct assault on American interests by a group of terrorists. It was left undefended by choice. Somebody made that deliberate choice. It’s a simple matter to disclose what was known, when it was known, and the decisions made based on that information.
It’s pretty clear the administration didn’t want this to happen and instead sent Rice out with a cover story about a movie. They took this ruse so far as to prosecute the director on unrelated charges. It was nothing but a political witch hunt to appear as if they were doing something related to the attack.
It is not odd if you stuck to the part of the discussion being addressed. The initial assault was over at the Consulate. The issue is about the CIA annex wher the last two Americans were killed. They were killed not by a frontal attack observed by drones. They were hit by a lone rocket launched from who knows where. So forget about carpet bombing since you can’t address the point. To save the CIA Annex from that lethal rocket it would be necessary to saturation bomb the entire perimeter killing every living being for several miles.
I gave a reasoned response. The people you cited gave a talking point without being challenged. If I were a reported I would have asked them follow up questions.
Your premise makes no sense. And I can’t forget your carpet bombing rhetoric because it was stupid and needed to be pointed out. The point of sending in special ops forces is the exact opposite of what you said. How do you not understand this? The attack went on for 8 hrs. The situation needed trained people on the ground to deal with it. This did not happen. Nothing happened. They were left there to die. The facility with American intel was left open for ransacking.
Explain how the Rice TV interviews where she blamed the assault on heavily armed extremists for the attack could or would cover up anything. The movie was not blamed for the attack. If it was, show the quote.
The carpet bombing has been revise to saturation bombing so now you have no excuse to declare yourself right about my use of adjectives. You have not explained how your paratroopers could have eliminated the rocket launcher from being fired that killed the last two Americans.
To be clear is it your major argument that there was an eight hour continuous attack under drone surveillance from beginning to end surrounding the Consulate compound with all alive Americans trapped within the compound that could have been saved?
Could you be more specific as to the length of the ongoing battle.
Could you please explain the my premise makes no sense. And with that explanation how would you defend against a line rocket being fired from a residential or commercial area with no knowledge that it exists or where it might be located?
Allow me to remind you, I’m not saying you’re full of shit. SoD Gates is saying that people who make the same argument you are don’t know what they’re talking about.
And you ignore that, because you think your ignorance is more valuable than his knowledge.
Don’t you see a problem with that?
As to why your idea is action movie nonsense: We had no intel about what was happening. Your action movie scenario of sending soldiers in a mile away to slink into an active firefight is cartoonish, because it ignores that we didn’t know what was going on.
What if: It was a local military commander that was in charge of the attack, and they had air defenses and shot down the spec-OP transport?
What if: Shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles shot down the transport because we have no idea what parts of the city are safe?
What if: The landing zone happens to be in the middle of people who support the attackers?
What if: The team infiltrated successfully, and while travelling on foot(!) came across civilians who were armed because of the nearby firefight and was engaged by them?
What if: The team gets there and there are overwhelmed by sheer numbers?
What if: The team gets there and are killed by mortar strikes?
What if: The team gets there and there is a full blown riot going on, and they are spotted by the civilians?
What if: The team is successful, and their exfiltration vehicle is shot down?
What if: The Libyan people are outraged and turn against us because of the number of civilians we killed?
What if: Because of no time to coordinate, the legitimate Libyan air defenses shoot down the team?
Those are the objections I can think of as stream of consciousness. I’m sure a professional in the area of deploying soldiers can think of more. Planning is what intelligent professionals do when facing opponents with military weaponry, including artillery.
The real problem is that you handwave away complexity and think it’s easy. SoD Gates knows much more, and said flat out that people like you have a cartoonish view of military deployment.
He said it, not me. Explain to me why you know better?
Magiver has a serious problem with his entire argument because of the timeline that is well known. The assault on the Consulate began at 9:40 pm and the gunfire was reported over by 10:54 pm. His paratroopers dropped a mile away could not get to the Ambassador in time to save him. All others but one were evacuated by sixty CIA and Libyans that drove the attackers off.
[QUOTE]
10:54 p.m. (4:54 p.m. ET): An alert from the State Dept. Operations Center: “the firing… in Benghazi has stopped. A response team is on site attempting to locate COM personnel.”
If you are actually serious that Special Operators should have parachuted into Benghazi in order to walk a mile through the city in order to come to the rescue of the Americans there, I can only assume that you really haven’t read very much of the accounts of that night.
See pages 24 and 25 of the ARB, the part about the evacuation. It describes hostile armed people at checkpoints, attempted ambushes, and an armored vehicle that just barely made it out in one piece after taking heavy fire.
Now, if you were suggesting in the heat of the moment that an extremely high risk rescue mission should be attempted, I can understand the proposal. But with the benefit of hindsight, surely you realize that having a Special Forces A-Team parachute into a city full of armed loonies, and telling them to walk a mile through that shit with zero means to get the Americans to safety is a fucking monumentally stupid proposal. I mean, seriously, that is a terrible idea that surely would have ended up with several more dead Americans.
How you fail to see that in hindsight simply makes no sense to me.
The person hand waving the situation is Gates. He made a blanket statement that held no meaning. If it was applied to ANY situation nothing would happen. ever.
But I’ll give you a “what if”. What if they did nothing. What if the people trained to deal with such attacks were told to stand down.
What if the people who made that decision tried to hide it by inventing a story to cover it up. Wouldn’t you expect an account of their actions? What did they know, when did they know it and who made the decision?
Come back when you can answer those questions because President Transparency has stonewalled the investigation.
Yes, this is where they meet the pretty owner of a truck, whose father was murdered by islamist extremists. She gives our heroes a ride in the truck and talks them through the checkpoints.
In direct contradiction to Magiver’s posted timeline and storyline that there was an eight hour battle raging where over twenty surrounded Americans were fending off the heavily armed assault by militants in desperate need of reinforcements to save the life of the US Ambassador and one other American I offer you and the readers this:
Ambassador Stevens was overcome with smoke within one hour of the first sign of the attack. The Consulate Compound was cleared of fighting by tens of Libyan militia members and CIA who came immediately to rescue the Americans at the Consulate.
So Magiver’s paratroopers had to be on suited up, on a plane, flown over Benghazi and then dropped right into the compound within probably 30 minutes of first notice of the attack. That is impossible.
And had that occurred, dropping into the midst of firefight where CIA and friendly Lybians were immediately fighting off the attack then this could have turned out even worse…
The CIA and Libyan defenders that rescued most Americans, I believe from reports could have also rescued Stevens had Stevens followed several others who escaped through a bathroom window. Stevens didn’t.
Secretary Gates is absolutely correct. Magiver is absolutely wrong.
You said drop troops “a mile away from the conflict.” Are you suggesting that an armored vehicle would also be air-dropped into a city on short notice?
Also, can I ask where you think these Special Operations troops and, apparently, armored vehicles would be coming from?