Report: Obama Watched Benghazi Attack From 'Situation Room'

[Jim in Anchorage]

You have a good point. I know I've spent a fair amount of time on this issue and know as much as anyone else here about it. Dipschits like Ducky just get in the way. You are probably the better shot but it does have a rather large "reserve".

I prefer a M-14. But I guess I would be alright with a mouse gun.

[B-Man]

FTA:

 

Normally it would be the job of the U.S. ambassador on location to request a military response. But Stevens likely died in the first two hours of the attack. The responsibility for requesting military backup would then have fallen to the deputy chief of mission at Benghazi or officials at the State Department in Washington.

 

“The State Department is responsible for assessing security at its diplomatic installations and for requesting support from other government agencies if they need it,” a senior U.S. Defense official said. “There was no request from the Department of State to intervene militarily on the night of the attack.”

 

The last paragraph is key. It is State’s responsibility to make the request. It’s their mission, their people, their winds of affairs. But no one did. Ambassador Stephens was likely dead very early. The deputy chief of mission at Benghazi clearly did not (perhaps could not) make the request for assistance. And now we’re back to Washington and a groupthink pandemic that paralyzes those who, as decision makers, simply can not become so. But fear of mistakes – or, if you prefer, fear of offending or ruffling a host nation’s representatives and leaders – can immobilize the minds of those who must be quick, agile thinkers and react decisively. Lives often depend on it.

 

So no one else in the State Department in Washington could make the call to send in forces to stop the bleeding in a situation that could – and did – get out of hand if left alone to fester.

Now, read the next paragraph. Again, carefully.

The president, however, would have the final say as to whether or not to send in the military. By 11 p.m. Benghazi time, 90 minutes after the assault began on the U.S. mission, Obama met with the National Security Council to discuss the attack. NSC spokesman Tommy Vietor said the president “ordered Secretary Panetta and Chairman Dempsey to begin moving assets into the region to prepare for a range of contingencies” at that meeting.

While no one at State made the request, Obama had the final say. And we now know that he was aware of events as they were unfolding, including live drone camera video. What did Obama do? Apparently, he gave orders to “begin moving assets into the region to prepare for a range of contingencies.”

 

Translation: Re-arrange the deck chairs, be busy, but don’t actually do anything. While I was referring to State directly in the debilitating “groupthink pandemic” in Washington, this is another sure sign – certainly so in hindsight. The groupthink pandemic cost the lives of 2 former Navy SEALs who were, on their own initiative and in defiance of orders to “stand down,” saving the lives of 30 American consulate staff. And they got no assistance. From anyone. No decisions in Washington did anything to save a life in Benghazi.

 

 

Again, when Eli Lake reports citing “senior U.S. Defense officials,” listen carefully.

 

For, as much as it doesn’t matter (in the elections) about New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez and his unpaid Dominican hookers, this does matter.

 

 

http://riehlworldview.com/2012/11/does-matter-state-department-never-requested-military-backup-the-night-of-benghazi-attack.html

[Jim in Anchorage]

Easy way to fix that, though....stop switching gears.

Not me. I never responded to him but to call him a ass. And I will quit doing that. It seems to encourage his look at me posts.

[OCinBuffalo]

We could always ask for a parallel moderated sub-forum where trolling and general dickery brought down the ban-hammer.

You have no idea what you are asking for. This idea is fine in brainstorming. But, it should die right after.

 

Not me. I never responded to him but to call him a ass. And I will quit doing that. It seems to encourage his look at me posts.

Now, you've stated it.

 

See what I did in my thread? I told him "this has nothing to do with anything"...and then just reinforced my point.

 

You don't have to completely ignore him, just swat him like the fly that he is, and move on.

[Jim in Anchorage]

You have no idea what you are asking for. This idea is fine in brainstorming. But, it should die right after.

 

 

Now, you've stated it.

 

See what I did in my thread? I told him "this has nothing to do with anything"...and then just reinforced my point.

 

You don't have to completely ignore him, just swat him like the fly that he is, and move on.

Fine but others will continue to feed him. Guess who went to Daffys aid today on erynthered's thread? Conner. Now that will cause a wave of responses to both Conner and Daffy. What a pair.

[TakeYouToTasker]

You have no idea what you are asking for. This idea is fine in brainstorming. But, it should die right after.

I disagree. I moderate such a subforum on another board I frequent. It has a bit less traffic than our version of PPP has, and expect that would be the case here as well. Most of the better posters frequent both versions, the PPP version is still filled with the same bull **** it always was, but a good deal of the substance has migrated to our... let's call it our PPP VIP section where we've had no shortage of fantastic conversations an debates. It's institution also had the desirable effect of bringing back into the fray some of our more grizzled vets who had left the prior forum in disgust. It wound up being a huge win for the community. I'll post my rule-set below.

 

The rules here are simple:

 

1) I am here acting as a benevolent dictator. My word is final, do not cross me.

2) I am here acting as a benevolent dictator. My word is final, do not cross me.

3) Don't be an ass. This is intentionally vague enough to give you a bit of leeway, but most of you aren't fools, and know exactly what I mean. Please keep "rules 1 and 2" in mind.

4) Do not spam: i.e. creating multiple threads on the same topic, or posting the same garbage in multiple threads for the purpose of being a dick.

5) Do not post graphic pictures (porn etc.).

6) Do not advertise.

7) Don't flame. We are all mature enough to know what flaming is, just don't do it. It's simple.

8) The flip side to flaming. Don't intentionally bait someone to flame you. This includes trolling.

9) Each thread should exist in a vacuum. What this means is that you can't carry over anger from a debate in another thread into a new discussion.

10) Any poster that deliberately ignores or disrespects a post made by a Moderator posting in that capacity will receive a warning or worse. This is not to say you are not allowed to disagree or discuss moderation- just don't directly ignore it, and be polite and civil while doing it. This includes re-starting locked threads. If a Moderator locks a thread, and you re-start it, that is directly ignoring moderation.

11) If something needs to be done about a post or thread, send a PM to a mod, or use the report option. Deciding to tell the poster or posters that what they are doing is wrong yourself invariable leads to a situation that is less salvageable than the original was.

 

Feel free to post about controversial topics here but you need to keep yourselves in check. Posting here means you agree to be on your best behavior. If you dont, the bouncers kick you out. If you feel that this is too restrictive for you, head over to PPP and fling your crap around with the rest of the savages.

 

I have spoken, and my word is law.

Edited November 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker

[OCinBuffalo]

I disagree. I moderate such a subforum on another board I frequent. It has a bit less traffic than our version of PPP has, and expect that would be the case here as well. Most of the better posters frequent both versions, the PPP version is still filled with the same bull **** it always was, but a good deal of the substance has migrated to our... let's call it our PPP VIP section where we've had no shortage of fantastic conversations an debates. It's institution also had the desirable effect of bringing back into the fray some of our more grizzled vets who had left the prior forum in disgust. It wound up being a huge win for the community. I'll post my rule-set below.

Dude...no.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Dude...no.

Edit: see my response to your PM.

Edited November 2, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker

[Nanker]

The ghost of Richard Nixon looks down at the Benghazi Obama fiasco and asks himself, "Why the !@#$ did I ever resign from The Presidency?"

[Gary M]

The ghost of Richard Nixon looks down at the Benghazi Obama fiasco and asks himself, "Why the !@#$ did I ever resign from The Presidency?"

 

Because he had a sense of Honor and decency.

[B-Man]

[TheMadCap]

 

are those journalists or some other poitical types I don't recognize?

[B-Man]

are those journalists or some other poitical types I don't recognize?

 

Helpful media.

[wnyguy]

And now it seems that there were no orders to "stand down" and everyone acted responsibly and above board.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/detailed-account-benghazi-attack-notes-cias-quick-response-020906681--abc-news-politics.html

 

 

And if you believe this, that goes against all prior information, you'll believe anything.

[Nanker]

So was the CIA really running a fast and furious Iran/Contra scam that the Ambassador was being a useful idiot for?

Damn that movie maker in LA only had a trailer up on YouTube. Imagine what's in the rest of the movie and the trouble it could cause/hide.

And here we were told that Abu Ghriab was a great scandal on the order of Hitler's holocaust.

[BillsFanM.D.]

If they acted in good faith the administration should just come out and say it. If they 'did the right things' then there is nothing to hide. You can still investigate for areas of improvement while stating a simple fact. I'm tired of 'we need to do a more thorough investigation.' I'm still trying to maintain benefit of the doubt but this story stinks more every day....and changes way too often. It was a movie....we never said it was a movie....this wasn't terrorism....I've always said it was terrorism....and on and on.

 

Ironically, this could have been Obama's shining moment. Even if a counter attack became like Carter's failed hostage rescue....he could have still looked every American in the eye and said "I don't leave Americans behind." He'd probably have a double digit lead right now if he had.

[Doc]

The most corrupt administration ever.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

If they acted in good faith the administration should just come out and say it. If they 'did the right things' then there is nothing to hide. You can still investigate for areas of improvement while stating a simple fact. I'm tired of 'we need to do a more thorough investigation.' I'm still trying to maintain benefit of the doubt but this story stinks more every day....and changes way too often. It was a movie....we never said it was a movie....this wasn't terrorism....I've always said it was terrorism....and on and on.

 

Ironically, this could have been Obama's shining moment. Even if a counter attack became like Carter's failed hostage rescue....he could have still looked every American in the eye and said "I don't leave Americans behind." He'd probably have a double digit lead right now if he had.

 

Yes he could be ahead of romney...had he in fact acted like a real president protecting Americans as you said.

 

But the problem with that concept, is that obama is an empty suit of a fraud. He does not view America the way we view our country. He views us with contempt and is all to quick to blame us and apologize to terrorists for the American way of life. In the heat of the moment he showed who he was. He cared more about calculating his re election odds than about doing his job.

 

Sure you can argue he web after bin laden, but he had months to contemplate it and from reports, it took considerable convincing and pressure from his generals and advisors to go after bin laden.

 

Obama is who he is.

[Doc]

What's more troubling to me than Barry lying/covering things up is the media being complicit. This country is going down the tubes fast.

[B-Man]

What's more troubling to me than Barry lying/covering things up is the media being complicit. This country is going down the tubes fast.

 

ABSOLUTE MORAL AUTHORITY, THEN AND NOW:

 

Rand Simberg on the ubiquity of Cindy Sheehan in 2005, versus the crickets that Tyrone Woods’ father has received from all but one television network.

 

 

.