To take it even further those guys just couldn't sit back and let fellow Americans, potentially friends be massacred while they sat back and did nothing. That they didn't get the support they asked for from a drone is heartbreaking. They fought their asses off and gave up their position for help from a drone and died. This isn't politics. This is American heroes left out to dry when at least part of the help would have been and unmanned mission. I don't get it at all.

The drone question is a fair one.

 

I get what you're saying about defying orders. However, if we let any solider/SEAL/Marine defy orders when he/she thought it was "a good cause" we wouldn't have a functioning military. It's simply not set up to handle anyone defying orders.

 

Doesn't make the SEAL any less brave or heroic. It is just a very slippery slope.

 

I understand your point. However military people are still human. No matter what it's bothersome to think about.

 

Is the story still that they were told to not go offer assistance but they did anyway? I haven't heard any follow upon that and I haven't heard any of the higher ups give that as an "excuse". I can't find much about it right now.

To take it even further those guys just couldn't sit back and let fellow Americans, potentially friends be massacred while they sat back and did nothing. That they didn't get the support they asked for from a drone is heartbreaking. They fought their asses off and gave up their position for help from a drone and died. This isn't politics. This is American heroes left out to dry when at least part of the help would have been and unmanned mission. I don't get it at all.

 

So how do you teach military members which orders they can follow and which ones they can ignore?

 

I think we all get and understand the "why" of what they did. Taking the emotion out of it should tell us it simply cannot happen.

 

Still doesn't answer all of the questions yet but IMO it cannot be ignored completely.

You certainly have my respect for your service.

 

You are a jackball if you believe for one second that I do not have respect for those involved. I have so much that I'm not going to make accusations without full information.

 

That doesn't mean any of my questions lack validity.

 

So you're saying that troops are always sent in to battle without having intelligence before they are sent? Seems hard to believe.

 

I never said any of your questions lacked validity. What I am saying is I don't feel any explanation will ever suit you. If you are waiting for the smoking gun to come out, you will be waiting years. Just like Watergate, Iran-Contra, etc.

 

Obama is the Commander in Chief. It is his responsibility and duty to give, first and foremost, the families of these Americans an explanation on everything. Tyrone Woods dad basically said the administration was full of it. I understand he is grieving, but a strong statement nonetheless.

 

I still say and will continue to say, if Obama is going to take credit for bin Laden, he has to take responsibility for Benghazi.

Bottom line: Obama and his staff flat out lied to the American public for at least two weeks about the attack. No one can defend the the WH on that..

So how do you teach military members which orders they can follow and which ones they can ignore?

 

I think we all get and understand the "why" of what they did. Taking the emotion out of it should tell us it simply cannot happen.

 

Still doesn't answer all of the questions yet but IMO it cannot be ignored completely.

 

Ok, I just read the report again. They weren't killed where Stevens was killed. They disobeyed orders, but they were able to help get all of the people out of the Embassy and back to the CIA safehouse. They were killed at the CIA safehouse where they were originally told to stay some 7 hours later. The questions remain the same. Why were they not given help? Why not at least the unmanned gunship they requested?

 

Also it looks like they were no longer SEALS. Who did they work for? Looks like CIA and they were executed in a CIA building. My guess is the CIA has a similar Chain of Command as military, but I don't know that.

Bottom line too is they tried to make it look like it was because of the movie. And they go out of their way to blame the movie and try to appease the Muslims and while back in America they try to make sure Christianity gets no special favors.

 

Our Administration should be standing up for free speech instead of criticizing it. How about Egypt arresting the newspaper editor for criticizing Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. Oh wait, is that ok since we allowed him to take over and create a volitile Egypt? Or is it another failed foreign screwup by Obama?

Edited October 30, 201213 yr by mountain ref
spell

Ok, I just read the report again. They weren't killed where Stevens was killed. They disobeyed orders, but they were able to help get all of the people out of the Embassy and back to the CIA safehouse. They were killed at the CIA safehouse where they were originally told to stay some 7 hours later. The questions remain the same. Why were they not given help? Why not at least the unmanned gunship they requested?

 

Also it looks like they were no longer SEALS. Who did they work for? Looks like CIA and they were executed in a CIA building. My guess is the CIA has a similar Chain of Command as military, but I don't know that.

 

I found out similar things and have a lot of the same questions. It's hard for me to question or understand anything about any of it at the moment.

The CIA is a civilian agency. It reports to the Director of National Intellegence (DNI) - a position created in 2005 to better coordinate intelligence after the first 9/11.

 

It is headed by James Clapper. The current head of the CIA is David Petraeus.

 

Leon Penneta was Petraeus predecessor and was in charge of CIA during the bin Ladin raid.

 

CIA operatives often use State Department positions as cover. Remember the flap concerning Joe Wilson's wife?

 

The CIA has its own assets - drones, aircraft, etc. - that are not attached to a specific military branch. The CIA obviously has linkages - though not official - to military command points.

 

 

It would look like the CIA and/or logoed military assets were on station above Benghazi not long into the battle. Certainly anyone in the military chain and likely CIA decision makers wanted to engage. They would not do so without specific clearance from the political functions - State Department and WH (likely Jarrett as key representative).

 

Maybe there was hope that this was a 'small attack' and it would not last as long as it did. Certainly a formal counter attack in any form was going to be a political mess. Of that there is no doubt.

The last POTHUS that threw the CIA under the bus this bad was JFK.

Oh wait, is that ok since we allowed him to take over and create a volitile Egypt? Or is it another failed foreign screwup by Obama?

Part of what I took out you mentioned standing up for free speech, but I guess for you that doesn't carry over into free elections and the will of the people? Why would you think we have the right to force our views on others? This is the main reason people hate our government, we act like we own everything on Earth!

 

Also, you must look at who was behind, sending mass amount of money to get rid of the past government, I actually agreed with the too. Why do you think we should tell people in other countries who will be their heads if state?

 

If you remember from last week, Gov Romney agreed with Pres Obama on almost all things concerning foreign policy.

Part of what I took out you mentioned standing up for free speech, but I guess for you that doesn't carry over into free elections and the will of the people? Why would you think we have the right to force our views on others? This is the main reason people hate our government, we act like we own everything on Earth!

 

Also, you must look at who was behind, sending mass amount of money to get rid of the past government, I actually agreed with the too. Why do you think we should tell people in other countries who will be their heads if state?

 

If you remember from last week, Gov Romney agreed with Pres Obama on almost all things concerning foreign policy.

 

IDC about Romney or Obama.

We basicaly did tell Egypt who their HOS would be when we supported the overthrow of Mubarac. Look what that has become, no free speech and bad news for Israel.

 

Fair/Free elections, I doubt Egypt had fair elections, Iraq had free elections but Hussein always won.

The last POTHUS that threw the CIA under the bus this bad was JFK.

 

Did President Bush "throw them under the bus" re: bad intelligence?

Did President Bush "throw them under the bus" re: bad intelligence?

 

It can go both ways there, Clyde.

 

It would seem that our new gov't policy is that when something goes wrong then blame the CIA. Whether it be right or wrong, it seems its the way to go when whatever side has an outcome that they do not like.

It can go both ways there, Clyde.

 

It would seem that our new gov't policy is that when something goes wrong then blame the CIA. Whether it be right or wrong, it seems its the way to go when whatever side has an outcome that they do not like.

 

I guess the intelligence world just has to realize they are going to be scapegoats at times.