Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Signs and people with signs impeach obama this morning
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="uncle money bags" data-source="post: 2269761" data-attributes="member: 8377"><p>Let me address your last para of the initial quote first, so there inst any confusion as to where I stand. First, I have not, and do not, support the impeachment of the president, nor have I called for his impeachment. Second, the state department's request for more money to secure their consulates and embassies is a red herring. There is plenty of money in their budget to do so if only it were used in that manner. This argument has been put forward by those wishing to project the blame for this debacle onto other parties, namely the republicans in congress.</p><p></p><p>Going back to the top, my argument that there were assets in place to react to the developments in Benghazi included civilian and military. I an using the term civilian to mean other government entities outside of the military chain of command. While this includes the CIA and other state department personel, it is not exclusive to them. </p><p></p><p>Taking into account the time line, we see the beginning of the attack occurred at approximately 2140; or 9:40 pm for those not familiar with 24 hr clocks. At that time, Amb. Stevens calls deputy Hicks and informs him that an attack is under way. Doherty and Woods are killed on the annex roof at 0400 during the second wave of the attack. If we only take into account the time from the onset of hostilities and notification of the attack to deputy Hicks to the last two casualties we have a time period of 6 hours and 20 minutes. Any argument that this was a 30 minute to 1 hour long attack is false, unless you are only counting the attack on the consulate (sic).</p><p>Instead of regurgitating the whole timeline I am reposting the link here.</p><p> <a href="http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/05/damning-benghazi-timeline-spreadsheet.html" target="_blank">http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/05/damning-benghazi-timeline-spreadsheet.html</a></p><p></p><p>With the new info that Mr. Ubben was on the roof of the annex with Doherty and Woods when the annex was attacked, being gravely injured himself, and waited for 20 hours before help arrived I think the failure to send help was wrong, and supports my contentions.</p><p></p><p>As I stated before, there was no way to know how long or how widespread the attack would be at the onset, but we did know there was an attack. With the timeline in place, any argument in hind sight that a response would be futile is false. </p><p></p><p>speaking of the military side response. The command of the EUCOM CIF (C-110) was transferred to the control of the AFRICOM commander at some point during the night of the attack. This is a 40 man team whose sole responsibility is the QRF response to situations like this. At the time they were conducting exercises in Croatia, three and a half hours away from Benghazi. According to what I am familiar with; considering muster and upload time, their time on station would have been around 4 to 6 hours. While this may not have allowed enough time in country to plan a successful operation that would have saved Mr. Doherty's and Mr. Wood's life, they certainly could have been there to help the exfil and security. Instead, according to Gen. Dempsy, the team was " <em>told to begin preparations to leave Croatia and to return to their normal operating base” in Germany."</em> </p><p>Further, there were approximately 15 Special Forces troops at the consulate in Tripoli. They were ordered to stand down and remain at Tripoli to guard that facility in case of attack. I think it was the wrong decision.</p><p>Once again, I come back to the unknown of how long the attack would be, and should not have been a factor in deciding to deploy. </p><p>I somewhat agree with the correlation to Mogadishu. Inadequate resources to accomplish the mission, civilian leadership that doesn't understand or care about the threat, supposed allies betraying us, ( guards at Benghazi, Italians at Mog), and then the subsequent clusterf@#$ blamed on the military.</p><p></p><p>As it is, I do not know why these "problem solvers" were not utilized. I suspect it is the same reason assets in Italy were not on a higher alert status that night, including F16s in Avianno, especially considering the date and the threat information the consulate had provided to the state department. At the very least, an increase of security personel in country would have been advised. Our civilian leadership dropped the ball, and have tried to hang our military out to dry for it. Whether they did it out of incompetence or intentionally remains to be seen.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="uncle money bags, post: 2269761, member: 8377"] Let me address your last para of the initial quote first, so there inst any confusion as to where I stand. First, I have not, and do not, support the impeachment of the president, nor have I called for his impeachment. Second, the state department's request for more money to secure their consulates and embassies is a red herring. There is plenty of money in their budget to do so if only it were used in that manner. This argument has been put forward by those wishing to project the blame for this debacle onto other parties, namely the republicans in congress. Going back to the top, my argument that there were assets in place to react to the developments in Benghazi included civilian and military. I an using the term civilian to mean other government entities outside of the military chain of command. While this includes the CIA and other state department personel, it is not exclusive to them. Taking into account the time line, we see the beginning of the attack occurred at approximately 2140; or 9:40 pm for those not familiar with 24 hr clocks. At that time, Amb. Stevens calls deputy Hicks and informs him that an attack is under way. Doherty and Woods are killed on the annex roof at 0400 during the second wave of the attack. If we only take into account the time from the onset of hostilities and notification of the attack to deputy Hicks to the last two casualties we have a time period of 6 hours and 20 minutes. Any argument that this was a 30 minute to 1 hour long attack is false, unless you are only counting the attack on the consulate (sic). Instead of regurgitating the whole timeline I am reposting the link here. [url]http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/05/damning-benghazi-timeline-spreadsheet.html[/url] With the new info that Mr. Ubben was on the roof of the annex with Doherty and Woods when the annex was attacked, being gravely injured himself, and waited for 20 hours before help arrived I think the failure to send help was wrong, and supports my contentions. As I stated before, there was no way to know how long or how widespread the attack would be at the onset, but we did know there was an attack. With the timeline in place, any argument in hind sight that a response would be futile is false. speaking of the military side response. The command of the EUCOM CIF (C-110) was transferred to the control of the AFRICOM commander at some point during the night of the attack. This is a 40 man team whose sole responsibility is the QRF response to situations like this. At the time they were conducting exercises in Croatia, three and a half hours away from Benghazi. According to what I am familiar with; considering muster and upload time, their time on station would have been around 4 to 6 hours. While this may not have allowed enough time in country to plan a successful operation that would have saved Mr. Doherty's and Mr. Wood's life, they certainly could have been there to help the exfil and security. Instead, according to Gen. Dempsy, the team was " [I]told to begin preparations to leave Croatia and to return to their normal operating base” in Germany."[/I] Further, there were approximately 15 Special Forces troops at the consulate in Tripoli. They were ordered to stand down and remain at Tripoli to guard that facility in case of attack. I think it was the wrong decision. Once again, I come back to the unknown of how long the attack would be, and should not have been a factor in deciding to deploy. I somewhat agree with the correlation to Mogadishu. Inadequate resources to accomplish the mission, civilian leadership that doesn't understand or care about the threat, supposed allies betraying us, ( guards at Benghazi, Italians at Mog), and then the subsequent clusterf@#$ blamed on the military. As it is, I do not know why these "problem solvers" were not utilized. I suspect it is the same reason assets in Italy were not on a higher alert status that night, including F16s in Avianno, especially considering the date and the threat information the consulate had provided to the state department. At the very least, an increase of security personel in country would have been advised. Our civilian leadership dropped the ball, and have tried to hang our military out to dry for it. Whether they did it out of incompetence or intentionally remains to be seen. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Signs and people with signs impeach obama this morning
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom