Jump to content

CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say


bengalrick

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351445291' post='1175168']
I wonder what was wrong with the Enterprise that made it important enough to retire it 4 months early.
[/quote]
I don't think it was the case that they pulled the Enterprise off line early; more likely that immediate operational needs were upped such that they wanted 2 carrier groups on station instead of one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351446187' post='1175170']
I don't think it was the case that they pulled the Enterprise off line early; more likely that immediate operational needs were upped such that they wanted 2 carrier groups on station instead of one.
[/quote]

So basically you think it was an early retirement because the ship was too outdated to fulfill the Navy's needs in the gulf? I mean it makes sense if there is new intel that something is going to happen, or just because the huge rise in turmoil in the region.

Weird now that a carrier the U.S.S. Endeavor and the Space shuttle Enterprise are both now retired.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1351444975' post='1175166']
I read yesterday that David Petraeus, now the head of the CIA, said that at no time during that attack did any CIA assets in the field ask for help.
[/quote]

Was this the quote you are talking about, sounds close to what your saying, but not close at all to the meaning:

[url="https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/261936225106132993"]https://twitter.com/...936225106132993[/url]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][i][color=#333333]CIA spox: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate."[/color][/i][/font][/font][/color]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='bengalrick' timestamp='1351451260' post='1175181']
Was this the quote you are talking about, sounds close to what your saying, but not close at all to the meaning:

[url="https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/261936225106132993"]https://twitter.com/...936225106132993[/url]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][i][color=#333333]CIA spox: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate."[/color][/i][/font][/font][/color]
[/quote]

It doesn't make any sense and the government has been putting out statements that are contradicting other statements. If the government had no idea what was going on, how could they know that things were too bad for anyone that it was too dangerous to sent in to help the consulate. Was there anyone that was at the consulate that give a play by play analysis of what occurred?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my own opinion with no basis in facts, but I think that it comes down to military people are not supposed to call out their superiors. The fact that Patraeus is not more specific in saying "this order never happened" is very telling to me. He is saying "we didn't make this order."

They could have just said nothing or just said this is totally false. Both would have stopped this story in its tracks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way this story has lived on, sounds like a game of "telephone." The final result was no where near what it was in the beginning.

Honestly what I said earlier, about sacrificing the lives of a few in order to protect the lives of more. I just find it all ridiculous that something like this happened. The British were able to decide to pull their officials out of Libya a week earlier, but the U.S didn't have have a clue something as bad as this was brewing?

:29:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[url="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/11/general-failure/309148/?single_page=true"]This longish excerpt from Tom Rick's new book is thought-provoking.[/url] Take a few extra moments to read through the comments, too. They are composed (mostly) by folks who have skins in the game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's interesting how hard certain parties are trying to point the finger at Obama over all this. I think those same parties should recall the 1983 Beirut bombing of a Marine Corps barracks under Reagan, and his later re-election despite pulling out US forces & then shelling the Bekaa Valley from the USS New Jersey. I also think it's worth noting the overall success in Libya in general, but that would credit the current administration with doing something right so I'm not holding my breath on that one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are so many things we may or may not ever know. How long did it take for the Iran/Conta scandal to break?

When you take in ALL the factors behind the situation, you'll see who really is at fault.

1. The government contracted out defense of the consulate because they weren't how sure they was going to stay in Libya. The men guarding the base were local men that were hardly trained, and hired by a little know British company known as Blue Mountain. The guards could only use flash lights and batons.

2. The U.S. consulate asks several times for more help in defense of the consulate. Their attempts are overlooked.

3. The British government closed their embassy and left the country 2 weeks before that attack. Things were getting bad in Libya.

4. The attack takes place where 4 Americans are killed. While drones flied over head with the ability to fire into the crowd and possibly help the people inside.

5. It is reported that the lack of action to help the consulate is because they knew things were bad and didn't want to send in more people to possibly die.

6. Obama said he had no idea what was going on.

7. Hillary Clinton came out and said she was unsure on what happened but as The Head of State it was her fault.

8. Days later Obama came out and said it was his fault.

9. News articles come out leaking the killed Ambassador was a sympathizer with the rebels in Afghanistan and Libya.

10. The government has a plan to keep 16,000 people at the U.S. Iraqi Embassy.

I'm not really sure if I missed something. When you take all this information into account, I think it is pretty obvious that Obama, Hillary, and the White House screwed the pooch on this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1351640489' post='1175755']
I think it's interesting how hard certain parties are trying to point the finger at Obama over all this. I think those same parties should recall the 1983 Beirut bombing of a Marine Corps barracks under Reagan, and his later re-election despite pulling out US forces & then shelling the Bekaa Valley from the USS New Jersey. I also think it's worth noting the overall success in Libya in general, but that would credit the current administration with doing something right so I'm not holding my breath on that one.
[/quote]

I remember that sad event well. A few years after the fact, when I was taking a grad course in US history relations with the Middle East, the professor--whom I liked a great deal and who acted as a mentor for me--got all excited and tried to pin the blame on Reagan admin for this in a kind of partisan way. In a way similar to what some of the folks here are doing with this admin and this recent event.

I spoke up and said that while the Reagan admin was responsible, it was in some ways unfair to get hyberbolic about the bombing itself. It wasn't Reagan who thought it was a good idea to stuff all those Marines (and other personnel) in a hotel/barracks in a hard-to-defend position. That was the recommendation (and fault) of the military, IIRC.

In any case, yes, the buck stops at the top. But trying to over-politicize the event is the great sin here. Shit happens. Naturally, any leader wants to prevent stuff like this. Naturally, they aren't always going to be successful. Do a sound "lessons learned" and move on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351645980' post='1175772']

In any case, yes, the buck stops at the top. But trying to over-politicize the event is the great sin here. Shit happens. Naturally, any leader wants to prevent stuff like this. Naturally, they aren't always going to be successful. Do a sound "lessons learned" and move on.
[/quote]

I would say that this was a preventable situation. The red flags were up a long time ago. There were repeatable attempts to get more protection. Things were bad enough that other countries were pulling their diplomats out of the country. It could have been anymore apparent something was going to happen, if one of the aggressors called the White House and told them what was going to happen. Our country turned their backs on citizens of our country. What's the lesson to learn here?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1351655635' post='1175806']
It's just not that simple. We don't willingly leave a citizen behind.
[/quote]

So how then would you describe the quote about their being to many unknown factors to risk sending in more people, that would also become at risk? The only way someone can make this quote, would be if they knew exactly how bad the situation really was. Which would then lead someone to believe that indeed there were drones overhead filming things as it happened, just like what was reported.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Homer, [quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351645980' post='1175772']
I remember that sad event well. A few years after the fact, when I was taking a grad course in US history relations with the Middle East, the professor--whom I liked a great deal and who acted as a mentor for me--got all excited and tried to pin the blame on Reagan admin for this in a kind of partisan way. In a way similar to what some of the folks here are doing with this admin and this recent event.

I spoke up and said that while the Reagan admin was responsible, it was in some ways unfair to get hyberbolic about the bombing itself. It wasn't Reagan who thought it was a good idea to stuff all those Marines (and other personnel) in a hotel/barracks in a hard-to-defend position. That was the recommendation (and fault) of the military, IIRC.

In any case, yes, the buck stops at the top. But trying to over-politicize the event is the great sin here. Shit happens. Naturally, any leader wants to prevent stuff like this. Naturally, they aren't always going to be successful. Do a sound "lessons learned" and move on.
[/quote]

Homer, I don't understand your reasoning here. Don't mistake me, your completely right that this should be a 'lesson learned' type of event if the story was known and fits the original stories coming out. It was clearly not handled right and should be a... well, lesson learned.

The problem though is the almost definite cover-up of the event itself. I don't know what actually happened but like almost everything in politics, its the coverup and not the fuckup that is the problem. The fox news story is starting to gain more traction (finally) and I hope that it is at least debunked by this administration instead of ignored.

I am going to post another article, this time from the Washington Post after this reply to you, which I hope is a less biased source in most people's eyes than Fox News. FINALLY people are starting to say, well maybe we should address this further. I can't believe the media coverage on the Libyan mess so far. It is crazy that this isn't at least being debunked. It is literally leaking out from every direction and then being straight ignored.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-benghazi-questions-the-administration-must-answer/2012/10/30/02d02538-22e2-11e2-8448-81b1ce7d6978_story.html"]http://www.washingto...6978_story.html[/url]


[b] Lingering questions about Benghazi[/b]


[color=#000000][font=arial][size=2][b]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]The attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi has become a political football in the presidential campaign, with all the grandstanding and misinformation that entails. But Fox News has raised some questions about the attack that deserve a clearer answer from the Obama administration.[/size][/size][/font][/color][size=3]By [color=#666666][url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/david-ignatius/2011/02/17/ABXXcOJ_page.html"]David Ignatius[/url][/color], [color=#6E6E6E]Published: October 30[/color][/size][/b][/size][/font][/color]

[color=#000000]
[size=3][font=Georgia, serif]Fox’s Jennifer Griffin reported Friday that CIA officers in Benghazi had been told to “stand down” when they wanted to deploy from their base at the annex to repel the attack on the consulate, about a mile away. Fox also reported that the CIA officers requested military support when the annex came under fire later that night but that their reque[/font][font=arial]st[/font][/size]
[font=arial][size=2]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]The Benghazi tragedy was amplified by Charles Woods, the father of slain CIA contractor Tyrone Woods. He told Fox’s Sean Hannity that White House officials who didn’t authorize military strikes to save the embattled CIA annex were “cowards” and “are guilty of murdering my son.”[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]The Fox “stand down” story prompted a strong rebuttal from the CIA: “We can say with confidence that the agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]So what did happen in Benghazi on the night of Sept. 11, when Woods, Ambassador Christopher Stevens and two others Americans were killed? The best way to establish the facts would be a detailed, unclassified timeline of events; officials say they are preparing one, and that it may be released later this week. That’s a must, even in the volatile final week of the campaign. In the meantime, here’s a summary of some of the basic issues that need to be clarified.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]First, on the question of whether Woods and others were made to wait when they asked permission to move out immediately to try to rescue those at the consulate. The answer seems to be yes, but not for very long. There was a brief, initial delay — two people said it was about 20 minutes — before Woods was allowed to leave. One official said Woods and at least one other CIA colleague were “in the car revving the engine,” waiting for permission to go. Woods died about six hours later, after he returned to the annex.[/size][/size][/font] [/size][/font][/color]

[color=#000000][font=arial][size=2][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]The main reason for the delay, several sources said, was that CIA officials were making urgent contact with a Libyan militia, known as the February 17 Brigade, which was the closest thing to an organized security force in Benghazi. The United States depends on local security to protect U.S. diplomatic facilities everywhere, and officials wanted to coordinate any response to the consulate attack. After this delay, Woods and his colleague proceeded to the consulate.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]Here’s my question: Was it wise to depend on a Libyan militia that clearly wasn’t up to the job? Could it have made a difference for those under attack at the consulate if Woods had moved out as soon as he was, in one official’s words, “saddled and ready”?[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]Second, why didn’t the United States send armed drones or other air assistance to Benghazi immediately? This one is harder to answer. The CIA did dispatch a quick-reaction force that night from Tripoli, with about eight people, but it had trouble at first reaching the compound. One of its members, Glen Doherty, died along with Woods when a mortar hit the roof of the annex about 4 a.m.[/size][/size][/font] [/size][/font][/color]

[color=#000000][font=arial][size=2][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]What more could have been done? A Joint Special Operations Command team was moved that night to Sigonella air base in Sicily, for quick deployment to Benghazi or any of the other U.S. facilities in danger that night across North Africa. Armed drones could also have been sent. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta summarized last Thursday the administration’s decision to opt for caution: “You don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on.”[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]Looking back, it may indeed have been wise not to bomb targets in Libya that night. Given the uproar in the Arab world, this might have been the equivalent of pouring gasoline on a burning fire. But the anguish of Woods’s father is understandable: His son’s life might have been saved by a more aggressive response. The Obama administration needs to level with the country about why it made its decisions.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3]A final, obvious point: The “fog of battle” that night was dense not just in Benghazi but in Cairo, Tunis and elsewhere. U.S. officials needed better intelligence. That’s the toughest problem to address, but the most important.[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=3][b][i][email="davidignatius@washpost.com"]davidignatius@washpost.com[/email][/i][/b][/size][/size][/font][/size][/font][/color]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I certainly agree that this admin has to level with the country as to just what happened. And, I think that this admin downplayed (even if it did acknowledge) the planned attack aspect of all this. After all, it was 9-11. Perhaps I don't feel the same specific outrage that some of you all feel because my general outlook towards a significant part of US strategy and foreign policy is in a permanent stage of anger and disapproval. Not to minimize all this, but to me, this is simply another flea riding a disease-ridden dog. What did we expect?

There's lots to question here as a matter of politics: This admin's response; why do we now contract out a lot of the security for these facilities; why the House of Reps voted to reduce security funding for these facilities on the order of a couple of hundred million, etc...

But as a matter of military/defense posture, there is a fog of war, you don't send folks into harm's way without at least some intel, etc... And sometimes people make mistakes. The question then becomes "what are the nature of those mistakes?" That's what I mean by "lessons learned" which is the general military catchphrase for after-action reports and analysis.

Bottom line for me is this: As much as I disapprove of US foreign policy in general and by that I mean the set of premises which is accepted by both parties and most of the elites in this country, I do think that this admin is doing a better job on the foreign policy front that the previous one. God forbid the neo-con crowd gets the reins again. We'll all regret that no matter what our party preferences.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351701048' post='1175897']
Well, I certainly agree that this admin has to level with the country as to just what happened. And, I think that this admin downplayed (even if it did acknowledge) the planned attack aspect of all this. After all, it was 9-11. [b]Perhaps I don't feel the same specific outrage that some of you all feel because my general outlook towards a significant part of US strategy and foreign policy is in a permanent stage of anger and disapproval. Not to minimize all this, but to me, this is simply another flea riding a disease-ridden dog. What did we expect?[/b]
[/quote]

This is exactly how I feel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351701048' post='1175897']
Well, I certainly agree that this admin has to level with the country as to just what happened. And, I think that this admin downplayed (even if it did acknowledge) the planned attack aspect of all this. After all, it was 9-11. Perhaps I don't feel the same specific outrage that some of you all feel because my general outlook towards a significant part of US strategy and foreign policy is in a permanent stage of anger and disapproval. Not to minimize all this, but to me, this is simply another flea riding a disease-ridden dog. What did we expect?

There's lots to question here as a matter of politics: This admin's response; why do we now contract out a lot of the security for these facilities; why the House of Reps voted to reduce security funding for these facilities on the order of a couple of hundred million, etc...

But as a matter of military/defense posture, there is a fog of war, you don't send folks into harm's way without at least some intel, etc... And sometimes people make mistakes. The question then becomes "what are the nature of those mistakes?" That's what I mean by "lessons learned" which is the general military catchphrase for after-action reports and analysis.

Bottom line for me is this: As much as I disapprove of US foreign policy in general and by that I mean the set of premises which is accepted by both parties and most of the elites in this country, I do think that this admin is doing a better job on the foreign policy front that the previous one. God forbid the neo-con crowd gets the reins again. We'll all regret that no matter what our party preferences.
[/quote]

Come on now, you aren't going to say that these people's sacrifice was for the greater good of the United States are you? If you were the father of one of the people killed there would you think the same? Like someone else posted here, it has been a very long time since a statesman has been killed. When Obama was first running for election, many questioned his experience in foreign policy. This event would only highlight that. When reading your post, it came across that you are one of those, "Ends justifies the means," type of guys.Once again, would you changed your point of view if they were one of your sons?

What I find the most disheartening is reading these threads and seeing people say that the Republicans need to let this Libyan action go, the administration made a mistake, but it's not a big deal, move on. Then remembering how much a big deal Democrats made over Big Bird and PBS. The next time Big Bird or any of the Sesame Street clan murder some U.S. citizens, let me know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351801431' post='1176262']


Come on now, you aren't going to say that these people's sacrifice was for the greater good of the United States are you? If you were the father of one of the people killed there would you think the same? Like someone else posted here, it has been a very long time since a statesman has been killed. When Obama was first running for election, many questioned his experience in foreign policy. This event would only highlight that. When reading your post, it came across that you are one of those, "Ends justifies the means," type of guys.Once again, would you changed your point of view if they were one of your sons?

What I find the most disheartening is reading these threads and seeing people say that the Republicans need to let this Libyan action go, the administration made a mistake, but it's not a big deal, move on. Then remembering how much a big deal Democrats made over Big Bird and PBS. The next time Big Bird or any of the Sesame Street clan murder some U.S. citizens, let me know.
[/quote]

If that's what you got out of his post then I suggest you work on your reading comprehension skills because what I got out of it is that yes this is something to be upset about but in the grand scheme of our foreign policy it's a pimple on the ass of b*******
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351801431' post='1176262']
Come on now, you aren't going to say that these people's sacrifice was for the greater good of the United States are you? If you were the father of one of the people killed there would you think the same?
<snip>
Once again, would you changed your point of view if they were one of your sons?
[/quote]

Sadly, Lew one of the great regrets of my life is that I have no children. However, I did jerk off occasionally during those long cruises when I was in the Navy. That sperm is dead. Does that count?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1351804099' post='1176288']
If that's what you got out of his post then I suggest you work on your reading comprehension skills because what I got out of it is that yes this is something to be upset about but in the grand scheme of our foreign policy it's a pimple on the ass of b*******
[/quote]

I don't know how you can read that, and not see it for what it is. So maybe Obama and the White House screwed up, as long as they come clean about it, it's all forgiven and forgotten. It's not about the massacre of 4 people in Libya, its about learning from our mistakes and moving on. Jamie I thought you were even the one to ask how long it had been since a statesman has been murdered. This incident was created by an Obama Presidency that poorly decided to cut corners.

Jamie, Homer, or any of you tell me, would you feel safe being in Libya guarded by Libyan citizens carrying batons and flashlights? I wish you guys would interject yourselves into more of these circumstances. If you would or wouldn't do something, why would you expect someone else to?

I'm just so tired of people laughing and prodding Romney over FEMA comments and Big Bird, then throwing their hands up in the air when people attack Obama over the situation in Libya. It's just unreal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351804561' post='1176295']
Sadly, Lew one of the great regrets of my life is that I have no children. However, I did jerk off occasionally during those long cruises when I was in the Navy. That sperm is dead. Does that count?
[/quote]

Once again you skirt the question. Is admitting something that the Democrats did wrong going to weaken the person you are? It's a great thing for people to serve their country, and that's all I'll say about that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351805788' post='1176308']
Once again you skirt the question. Is admitting something that the Democrats did wrong going to weaken the person you are? It's a great thing for people to serve their country, and that's all I'll say about that.
[/quote]

Well, I did give the sperm that died in service to this country a 21 inch salute. Had to beat off 7 more times, though. On the negative side, that started a horrible cycle of whack-a-doo which left me exhausted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351805628' post='1176306']


I don't know how you can read that, and not see it for what it is. So maybe Obama and the White House screwed up, as long as they come clean about it, it's all forgiven and forgotten. It's not about the massacre of 4 people in Libya, its about learning from our mistakes and moving on. Jamie I thought you were even the one to ask how long it had been since a statesman has been murdered. This incident was created by an Obama Presidency that poorly decided to cut corners.

Jamie, Homer, or any of you tell me, would you feel safe being in Libya guarded by Libyan citizens carrying batons and flashlights? I wish you guys would interject yourselves into more of these circumstances. If you would or wouldn't do something, why would you expect someone else to?

I'm just so tired of people laughing and prodding Romney over FEMA comments and Big Bird, then throwing their hands up in the air when people attack Obama over the situation in Libya. It's just unreal.
[/quote]

I took it for what he meant it I think you didn't I don't know what else to say about that
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...