Home » Election » GOP senators issue Benghazi letter to Panetta

GOP senators issue Benghazi letter to Panetta

By Michael Hoffman Wednesday, October 31st, 2012 5:32 pm
Posted in Election

Senators John McCain of Arizona and Rob Portman of Ohio sent a letter to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta Saturday asking for more details about the Benghazi attack, specifically what military forces could respond for a rescue attempt and what dialogue Panetta had with President Obama.

Republicans have worked hard to insert questions of Obama’s handling of the Benghazi attack into the presidential campaign. Other Republican senators have sent letters to the president as well as national security and State Department leaders to learn more about what was known before and after the attack.

McCain and Portman’s letter focused specifically on the military forces in the region. It has been reported that a special forces unit was on alert in Italy. Questions have also arisen why the U.S. did not send air support to quell the attack that started around 10 p.m. local time.

The letter was sent two days after Panetta explained to the Pentagon press corps why he, Gen. Carter Ham, head of U.S. Africa Command, and Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff chose not to send additional military forces to Benghazi.

“(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Panetta said. “And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

Below are the specific questions asked in the Oct. 27 letter:

- What military forces were available to provide support to U.S. personnel in Libya?

- What military forces were requested to provide support to U.S. personnel in Libya, by whom, and what forces were provided?

- What communication and coordination did you have with the President and other members of the National Security Council regarding possible Defense Department support in Libya?

Join the Conversation

	joe October 31st, 2012 at 5:05 pm “Republicans have worked hard to insert questions of Obama’s handling of the Benghazi attack into the presidential campaign.” This would not be necessary if reporters would actually try to report the news as it is, rather than as how the president wants it reported. Sept 11, 2012 was a dark day for the US, and the media is assisting covering it up.
	tee October 31st, 2012 at 5:23 pm I’d like to know if either of the 2 drones in the air over Benghazi that night were “Armed ” when 2 Democratic Senators on the Senate Armed Services Committee were asked that question last Sunday ” They said No Comment or They Couldn’t Discuss it Right Now ” which leads me to believe that at least “One or both Were ” and Why Wasn’t Used to help those guys and Who gave the Orders one way or the other?
	Lance October 31st, 2012 at 7:34 pm Its all political crap from a Senator McCain who is a great American, but a lousy Senator. With so many “Peaceful protesters” in among the terrorist it may have been impossible for a air strike to avoid civilian death and media attacks. Overall we should never been in crappy Libya in the first place. Spec Ops may have had a place with local friendly militias but a Embassy and ambassador in a country with violence and a confused government is not the right time and place this year. This is all partisan crap for a election in which most Americans (jobless or due to a new hurricane Homeless. Don’t give a crap.
	USNA 63 October 31st, 2012 at 9:00 pm Were Genera Carter Ham and Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette fired or relieved of thier commands because they attempted to send aid to Benghazi? General Ham is still with AfriCom, but not the Commander. Is there a major cover up because President Obama ordered them to stand down from sending aid to Benghazi, they resisted and were then replaced by Obama? lThese are questions not assertions.
	majr0d October 31st, 2012 at 9:27 pm “Republicans have worked hard to insert questions of Obama’s handling of the Benghazi attack into the presidential campaign.” and Democrats, the media and the President have singularly avoided it. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. There’s a lesson there…
	majr0d October 31st, 2012 at 9:31 pm They weren’t. One was flown from a base at Derna. The second came from Sigonella when the first got low on fuel.
	majr0d October 31st, 2012 at 9:36 pm You need to do some research before posting. There were no protestors. http://factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/ http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/0… http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012…
	majr0d October 31st, 2012 at 9:41 pm “(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Uh, they had drone footage showing real time video. E-mail with folks at the consulate, annex and embassy. Telephone conversations with DSS agents and radio contact with former SEALs. It doesn’t get much better that that! BTW, we had enough info to send eight relatively light armed DSS and “others” from Tripoli on a chartered aircraft but we didn’t have enough info to send in heavily armed special operations troops that were at Sigonella?
	torquewrench November 1st, 2012 at 3:42 am “‘(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,’ Panetta said.” Except that in this case there certainly was real-time information available. A drone orbit was established over the consulate, and the drone was feeding digital video of the attack. And there were two SEALs inside the consulate, providing voice comms with their tactical assessments. All of this in real time. Panetta needs to be hauled up before the Senate Armed Services Committee and put under oath. Unfortunately, since this is the Obama administration we’re talking about here, the White House will simply order its minions, including Panetta, to silently stonewall. And arrogantly ignore the Congress. What? What? Can they DO that? Isn’t that a clear breach of the separation of powers? Are department heads appointed by the White House not required to respond to subpoenas from a co-equal branch of government? Well, technically, yes, those department heads are legally supposed to respond promptly and truthfully to Congressional subpoenas. Except that Obama’s department heads do not. Eric Holder, the guy picked to head the Department of Justice by Barack Obama, has been ignoring Congressional subpoenas over the Fast&Furious scandal, and has actually been held in contempt of Congress over it. Did Obama act to rein in Holder? Not in the least. Has Obama moved to fire Holder? Nope. The _San Francisco Chronicle_, one of the most consistently left-wing newspapers in the entire country, has referred to the Obama White House as being “Nixonian” in its obsessive secrecy. Read that again slowly and carefully and consider the source. These are fans and allies of Obama who are specifically likening him to… Richard Nixon. Except that no one died in the Watergate affair. Whereas the deaths at Benghazi were horribly real. As were the deaths resulting from Fast&Furious.
	jumper November 1st, 2012 at 8:44 am You’re right… it’s Americans like you who don’t give a crap that let things like this happen.
	Flash November 1st, 2012 at 8:54 am The unfortunate fact is we won’t find out what really happened until after the election, thanks to the media.
	straps November 1st, 2012 at 9:06 am Why is it that the generals are so wussy until they get discharged an then they speak up bs say I speak out. The nation is waiting. Theses guys are worse than Nixon ever was. If we had real conservatives in the Senate this crapola would have been stopped at F+F instead they poll and send useless letters impeach this unamerican Holder I asked a congress critter at a recent GOP event why did you not impeach Holder his answer an he is running for re-election was,” We did a poll and the results said it would not be popular” An he is from Florida…I wish he would have stayed in Miami.…..
	Kathy November 1st, 2012 at 9:35 am If Obama get reelected, we will never find out. Executive privilege will be invoked as in Fast and Furious. This man has no respect for this country and it’s citizens.
	Lynnw November 1st, 2012 at 9:38 am I agree. I thought the point of the US Armed Forces is to protect Americans. I don’t remember seeing any “unless it might be dangerous” clause. How much more ‘real-time information’ could the decision-makers have? WE THE PEOPLE want to know what happened and why 4 Americans died.
	zak November 1st, 2012 at 9:52 am Exactly, the response to the situation was pathetic. The ebst you can say for it is that it is consistent with the last 3 years.
	Randall Kelly November 1st, 2012 at 10:00 am You get what you pay for and you pay for what you get. Everyone needs to remember that this coming Tuesday.
	zak November 1st, 2012 at 10:00 am To me the difference between Nixon and Obama is that Nixon performed a premeditated crime and then covered it up while Obama (and the subordinates he’s chosen) are just incompetent and covering up their incompetence. Both are horrible.
	Milburn November 1st, 2012 at 10:23 am Israel recently shot down a dron flying over its territory. Now Iran claims it was their. Could this be the one that Hussan gave them intact? We had the capability to blow it up, but didn’t and why? We certainly could have send an F-16 to have done the job but didn’t Why? I find myself agreeing more and more with Newt Gingrich, that our Pres claim about being a Christian is a untruthful as his story about Benghazi!
	davec0121 November 1st, 2012 at 10:30 am As announced previously, Gen. Ham is retiring. The planning for the transition to the next commander at AfriCom began in July. The admiral in question commanded the Stennis Strike group, which is deployed in the Gulf and the Arabian Sea, a little far away to relevant. My guess is that his relief has something to do with the S-word (sex). It usually is.
	Jerry Bjornstad November 1st, 2012 at 10:32 am The President stated that upon hearing of the attack, he ordered the milittary to take action to protect those under attack. Either the President lied or the senior civilian and uniformed military leaders disobied the President.
	davec0121 November 1st, 2012 at 10:37 am What has been forgotten in all this campaign-driven crap is that Ambassador Stevens’ family has repeatedly requested that his death not be politicized and dragged into the campaign. Yeah, right.
	Jerry Bjornstad November 1st, 2012 at 11:38 am OK, Dave, but what about the father and mother of two of the four victems who say the administration has lied to them and they want answers. Are they lesser people than the Ambassador’s family? Those who do not see there is a cover up are wearing blinders!
	Johnny November 1st, 2012 at 12:55 pm Election year politics mixed with political polarization equals a lot of insignificant BS. Attacks happen. Learn from them and move on.
	SecretSquid November 1st, 2012 at 1:01 pm Lance, this all rests with the Obama foreign policy. We are in Libya, with its confused government, because the President chose to intervene on the side of Libyan rebels to overturn Qaddafi amidst the Arab Spring exuberance about a year and a half ago. Our prostrate 9/11 security posture is a result of the Obama/Clinton worldview that rejects the threat of Islamic extremism in general, and specifically the threat posed by AQIM, the Muslim Brotherhood, and other Salafist groups to the Arab Spring countries.
	SecretSquid November 1st, 2012 at 1:05 pm “With so many peaceful protesters…” Lance, you really should do your homework before you vomit this baloney on a site frequented by informed readers. First, there’s no evidence there ever were any “peaceful protesters” in this clearly pre-planned terrorist attack. Second, this was a 7-hour firefight. By the time any air support could have arrived, any peaceful protesters or other civilans would have been long gone.
	SecretSquid November 1st, 2012 at 1:09 pm It’s the Panetta Doctrine, Lynn. Under SECDEF Panetta, US forces apparently won’t be permitted to engage enemies who might shoot back. AMCITS overseas are expendable, especially in US diplomatic facilities, which now have large targets painted on them.
	SecretSquid November 1st, 2012 at 1:17 pm Attacks happen. But we don’t have to invite them. And US civilians and military officers in command do not have to ignore warnings from intelligence and diplomatic sources of a growing threat. They don’t have to leave our diplomatic posts vulnerable by denying requests for additional security forces. This was not an unforseeable act…it was a consequence of bad US policy coupled with a willing self-deception about the threat environment and the nature of the situation.
	Lance November 1st, 2012 at 3:39 pm You never know there where so called protesters in with this. Overall you never get that we shouldn’t be in Libya none militarily since Libya is not in control and the new Government is oppressive and is turning Islamist fast. Overall dingbat Mitt Romney wouldn’t have done different. I know you want him to get us in two new wars in Iran, and policing for the Islamist Libya. And Syria fighting for the Al Qaeda backed terrorist toppling the government there. His foreign policy like Bush’s got us into a quagmire in the Middle East for nothing. You hate Obama so much you fail to see the Republicans dont offer solutions either just more of the same of no victory in a war in the middle east. PS I got my facts about that day from CBS news, Politico is a pro-republican publication.
	SecretSquid November 1st, 2012 at 3:58 pm Lance, the more you write, the more ill-informed you appear. BTW, Politico leans pretty far leftwards. It’s not surprising that you are so poorly informed on Benghazi; neither CBS News nor Politico have been exactly on top of this story. The best reporting on Benghazi to date has been done by FoxNews and the Daily Beast (which is, in case you’re looking for a news outlet to balance Fox, a reliably left-leaning website). CBS, CNN, ABC, NBC, NYT, WashPost…all other mainstream outlets have been sleeping through this story.
	SecretSquid November 1st, 2012 at 4:08 pm Dave, the President of the United States is accountable to the people for his actions (and inaction) in defending this country. Holding him accountable ought not to be dismissed as “politicization.” To do so is to fall for the self-serving, disingenuous, crocodile-teary excuses of a desperate politician seeking to avoid responsibility for his failures. The Benghazi attack is much bigger than just Ma and Pa Stevens. The Administration’s failure to secure and defend the Benghazi compound, and the subsequent signals of weakness and hand-wringing by the SECDEF and others threatens all US citizens abroad, as well as our allies. Likewise, consider not just the wishes of Ambassador Stevens’ family, but also the wishes of the families of the fallen Navy SEALS, who have called for answers.
	Alpha November 1st, 2012 at 4:33 pm We had plenty of attacks against Americans prior to Benghazi that we learned plenty from, but still there was inadequate security… Why???
	blight_ November 1st, 2012 at 4:44 pm I suppose the bigger question is why FAST teams went to Tripoli to reinforce the embassy and what was Stevens doing in Benghazi. You’d think that the better way to do business would be to consolidate everyone on the 11th and take the day off. I thought we learned from Iraq that the only way to operate is to operate behind a Green Zone with lots of PMC support. It would be nice to start dissecting the matter immediately. In the old days stuff like this wasn’t beaten and flogged before an audience hungry for political theater, but times have changed…
	sniper6 November 1st, 2012 at 6:37 pm SEC DEF/DEMPSEY/PATERAUS = RESIGN IN SHAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PATERAUS = CIA„ ALSO IS A SOLDIER„ AND IT WAS HIS GUYS„ = DEAD!!!!!!!!! ADD CLINTON„ = TRASH„ VOTE TUESDAY = FLUSH THE TOILET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WW.
	blight_ November 1st, 2012 at 7:16 pm Does that necessarily preclude them from being armed? Most of the hay is coming from the fact that allegedly a GLD was in play, which would’ve implied something was in the air but was not authorized to fire. I remain of the position that the Libyans would’ve accepted firing of weapons if they accepted the presence of American aircraft in the first place…?
	blight_ November 1st, 2012 at 7:21 pm Carlton Meyer was always suspicious of Petraeus, and felt that his reputation was a little overhyped. But Meyer is marginalized. SecDef Panetta came from the CIA, and perhaps to the CIA letting men die is normal… As for Petraeus, I wonder if he quietly released his men from annex defense to check on the consulate, and reinforced from CIA reserves. Who would know? If the allegations about AFRICOM’s QRF are true, the big question is Why? It’s election year. There is almost zero gain to not throwing down Hellfires in Libya. We do it in Pakistan almost with aplomb, so it’s not like we have trouble killing Muslims before our midnight milk and cookies. Something is very, very fishy and it’s too bad nobody is talking about it.
	SecretSquid November 1st, 2012 at 7:33 pm Leon Panetta was never a CIA insider…he was a former Clinton Administration political functionary who could spell foreign policy and was appointed by Obama as first D/CIA and then SECDEF. Petraeus is a career soldier, and judging by the public record so far, he appears to have kept his integrity through this incident. Time will tell.
	retired462 November 1st, 2012 at 7:37 pm The secretaries of defense and state ought to resign IMMEDIATELY! The are both liars and are in way over their heads!
	majr0d November 1st, 2012 at 7:48 pm I’m pretty sure they could have been armed though I did read in ONE story we didn’t have “permission” to have armed aircraft in Libyan skies (I know, screw that!) I’ve read the same reports on a GLD. Waiting for confirmation. Too easy for reporters to confuse a laser pointer that’s commonly mounted on a rifle with a laser designator (though we use laser pointers to “paint” targets if that’s all we have).
	Curly November 1st, 2012 at 8:08 pm What else did you expect? Most of the main media outlets are in the democrats pockets and this has been especially true with the “first black president” (after Bill Clinton) which is a historical and they want him reelected. It would not do to have Obama, the first black president, fail by not getting reelected.
	tmb2 November 1st, 2012 at 8:45 pm “without knowing what’s going on…” There were warnings, live footage, real-time reports of shots fired and casualties. You need less than half that info to put planes in the air. When it comes to available aircraft, Italy might as well be across the street from Libya. Was there not enough intel to insert a relief force? Possibly, but you can guarantee there were troops in Italy saying “send us anyways, we’ll figure it out when we get there.” Putting ourselves in harm’s way to protect other Americans is the reason we signed up. Regardless, nothing should have precluded burning up some jet fuel and waking the neighbors at a bare minimum.
	anders21 November 1st, 2012 at 10:46 pm With the republicancans long history of trading with the enemy nobody would be surprised to find them funding attacks on us embassies for political advantage. They have sold out America before.
	Slick November 2nd, 2012 at 12:19 am There wasn’t no civilians there were only islamist militants and sickos who like watch things burn and blow up. They would have been worth the collateral damage to save those four americans.
	majr0d November 2nd, 2012 at 4:13 am Squid — I agree Lance — Keep writing. Joe Biden needs new material.
	Pete Robert November 2nd, 2012 at 10:38 am Typical Romney disrespect. Mr. Flip Flop Bullshitter will say and do anything to try and gain political points
	SecretSquid November 2nd, 2012 at 1:24 pm Great point, Alpha. This is a failure to apply basic I&W and Force Protection principles. If there’s any “learning” being done here it’s an indicator that the folks in charge were amateurs who had no business at the helm of our nation’s defense to begin with.
	majr0d November 2nd, 2012 at 2:30 pm “Attacks happen. Learn from them and move on.” True. Attacks are never “optimal” and often leave “bumps in the road”.
	majr0d November 2nd, 2012 at 2:37 pm Yeah! Reminds me of closing Gitmo, releasing more Abu Ghraib pictures, trying terrorists in NYC, most tranparent gov’t (Fast and Furious and this incident that left Americans dead come to mind), unilaterally attacking a country without congressional advice or consent and that’s off the top of my head. That’s several beach seasons worth of flip flops…
	Lance November 2nd, 2012 at 3:20 pm Keep being the idiot republican who will kill the US defense industry for Europe. Strange today’s report rebuff your Mitt Romney crap you keep spewing.
	Jen November 2nd, 2012 at 5:12 pm Knowing the US attack September11th has been used as a critical calendar for terrorisism and extremists around the world I find it amazing that we did not over staff of special and security forces for our US Embassy staff especiaaly Benghazi.Knowing weeks in advance that other nations Embassy closed or pulled out because of the reports and intelligence from their own embassy staff. Our US staff in Benghazi deaths are a shameful example that our President (commander in Chief and current cabinet have politics set as precedence. The loss of lives of honorable people serving the US in foreign countries was senseless. Makes me wonder who is Commander in Chief while he flies city to city asking for a vote!!! Disgusting example of politics in America 2012
	majr0d November 2nd, 2012 at 10:09 pm There you go! I know I can always count on you to come up with something Joe Biden would say.
	Lance November 3rd, 2012 at 12:34 am So your about the same as a cranky Sen McCain who wishes to keep us in a war we can never win in the middle east there you go.
	Mattius November 3rd, 2012 at 9:15 am Squid, your sentax is off. English is probably not your first language. I smell a troll.
	PolicyWonk November 3rd, 2012 at 10:34 am I would advise all interested in what transpired in Benghazi to read the latest article at the Lexingtoninstitute.com website. It pretty well says it all.
	PolicyWonk November 3rd, 2012 at 10:40 am One should be a trifle more circumspect: compare the consequences of THIS event to those of 9/11, where there were TONS of warnings — yet the POTUS decided to go on vacation instead of overseeing the efforts of all 16 of our national intelligence agencies to protect the nation. That cost us over 3000 lives — and then what followed started events that created the worst string of foreign policy and national security disasters in US history — and further served as an omen w/r/t what would happen to our economy, financial system, and real estate sectors lots of warnings — year after year — and all the USA got from the republican leadership was nary a single step to avert any of these severe problems facing our nation. UNtil the entire roof caved in, and nearly brought down the entire western world — who had invested so heavily in the USA (counting on competent management of national systems and assets). The republicans have yet to won up to the disasters on so many levels they visited upon this nation — and the same clown posse that helped cause these problems are leading what passes for the republican party today. Pretty sad.
	SMSgt Mac November 3rd, 2012 at 12:03 pm Just another opinion piece that has always made Loren Thompson’s work suspect. the only way a guy can alternate between being right and wrong that frequently is if his motives are rooted in politics an where he fits into the DC machine. I frickin’ despise McCain for the same reason. BTW: it is Lexingtoninstitute dot org. Dot com however, is available if you want to buy it.
	majr0d November 3rd, 2012 at 1:20 pm You do know Bush wasn’t on vacation? He was actually visiting a school. Passing the buck for four years of “hope and change” is so 2008.
	majr0d November 3rd, 2012 at 1:25 pm Not a squid. It’s “syntax” not “sentax”. Take a bath, the smell will get better. :)
	Dorgnnr November 5th, 2012 at 2:18 am As I recall, the same thing happened to HITLER, he never listened to his commanders on the ground, lucky for us he was our ENEMY. or was he? coinsidence? He took his country down with his ideals. I see the same thing happening to our nation today.
	Old391 November 5th, 2012 at 8:27 am One noted black person an actor said, Obama is not the first Black president he is the first president of MIXED RACE. The DeomCRATS are using that small % to call him Black
	blight_ November 5th, 2012 at 1:52 pm Many black/African Americans have some degree of mixed race, but are lumped together with non-mixed race all the same. Then again, the term African American is pretty broad and should technically include new immigrants from Africa, not just the assimilated descendants of Africans brought to the New World as indentured servants and freed slaves.
	Tiffany November 5th, 2012 at 8:41 pm Please sign the petition to get the Benghazi testimonies of Gen. Ham and Adm. Gaouette: http://www.change.org/petitions/mr-speaker-of-the…
	SecretSquid November 6th, 2012 at 10:17 am That’s small ball, 391. America spends far too much time and energy slicing and dicing ourselves based on ethnic heritage. Just try to convince the 97% of black voters that will vote for Obama that he’s not black. Don’t quibble. After four years as president, squandering his political capital to force on the American people a massively unpopular government takeover of the health care industry, squandering $T’s on big government boondoggles that burdened the struggling private economy and deepened and extended the recession, the best accomplishment Obama can claim is to have been the first black president, I’m willing to grant him that.
	SecretSquid November 6th, 2012 at 10:35 am Funny, Anders…judging by the facts emerging in this story, it’s looking like the Benghazi situation was an Obama Administration op to covertly route weapons from Libya to arm Syrian rebels. Are you confident that the Libyan “freedom fighters” we armed didn’t include any LIFG or AQIM? Are you confident that the “free Syrian” forces don’t include any AQ or Hezb cells? I’m not.
	SecretSquid November 6th, 2012 at 12:02 pm Wonk, Thompson subscribes to a revisionist history of 2001. No new facts opr insights in this post. Just a rehashing of 2006 lib-Dem talking points retrospectively un-inventing the flawed bipartisan (and international) consensus about the 9/10/2012 AQ threat perception and warning failure and the flawed intel on Iraq’s WMD program. None of it justifies the baffling, mind-boggling failure to protect our Benghazi consulate a year after our Libya intervention and after months of warnings by our folks on the ground. If anything, Thompson’s logic should dictate floggings for Republicans (and Democrats, too) who stand idly by while the Obama national security team repeats the failures of the past.
	SecretSquid November 6th, 2012 at 12:03 pm “Tons of warnings” for 9/11/2001? Wonk, you should be ashamed of yourself for this revisionist history.
	majr0d November 6th, 2012 at 1:20 pm “ashamed”, “revisionist history”? You haven’t read a lot of his stuff. This is the same guy who said Congress has said the military is at its least prepared since Vietnam, McCrystal said Bush almost lost in Afghanistan and Fox is outlawed in Canada. He’s never been able to document his lies and frankly isn’t interested.
	Donna November 7th, 2012 at 6:03 pm I believe it should be an assertion!
	Archives Reader November 7th, 2012 at 6:09 pm Sen. McCain, a real hero. NO. Before he was POW, he launched a missle on board an aircraft carrier. Hence the USS FOrest Fire. Next the flight he was with only had a 2% shot down, after POW 86% Shoot down. I think others need to d more research on the man. He has vot to shut down the VA and to remove Veterans from the VA. He has cut money from the VA Budget and has refused to help any veterans while he has been in office. So, I don’t put much worth into anyting McCain has to say or write!
	Donna November 7th, 2012 at 6:12 pm Can anyone tell me why MILITARY active duty or retired would support Obama! Please, someone make me understand! Can anyone tell me why we STILL have problems with absentee ballots from the active military getting to the election polls and being counted? Seems to me this should have been fixed years ago. Shouldn’t our congressional committees in Washington have set this as a priority??
	Shane November 7th, 2012 at 6:35 pm I believe the back story is the ambassador and the others at the mission were there to try to buy-back American ordnance that was “gun-runned” by the US administration into Libya., in order for the administration to not end up with a black eye. This was a secret operation that went bad. The administration hung the ambassador out to dry, and didn’t want to raise eyebrows by defending the mission with military force. The ambassador was sacrificed to save the administration’s face.
	Jimmy Dean November 7th, 2012 at 11:30 pm I don’t know about the absentee ballots, but I do know about the active and retired military. Military folks are subject to the “Uniform Code of Military Justice”, the UCMJ, which does not permit negative speech about officers over you. The Commander-in-Chief goes with the job of President of the United States. He is the top officer. Anyone who talks negatively about him is subject to some nasty punishments. Do you remember the serviceman who was a disc jockey (DJ) and radio announcer on his off duty hours, that bad mouthed Obama publicly on the air? Well, he was given a dishonorable discharge, which usually provides NO VETERANS BENEFITS. Some pay back, eh? That Veteran’s life is ruined.… for telling the truth. I do not know any millitary member that deep-down-inside wants to support Obama, but they must. An old saying in the military: Yours is not to question why, yours is to do or die.
	Mark November 8th, 2012 at 1:39 am Yeah I think you are right. I seem to recall something about Repbulicans ummmm and drug sales and arms to the Nicaraguan contras. Ummmm .….……
	Drew November 8th, 2012 at 4:35 pm I concur. To those of you interested in Bengahazi, why don’t you look up the media attention that was given to the U.S.S. Cole. Terrorist attacks on military and government over seas are not really that big a deal as far as media attention goes. I could also list Kohbar Towers, but due to the #‘s it was significant, and the coordinated strikes on the Tanzanian and Kenyan embassies, but due to the reprisal strikes on Sudan and Afghanistan, these were media significant as well. If it wasn’t for the recent elections, this would never have made more than two days worth of news. Personnel at an embassy within a country that just went through a civil war knew they were placing themselves in harms way, and they knew of the risks.
	Drew November 8th, 2012 at 4:35 pm In addition… As far as not deploying forces without enough enformation, I can tell you this happens a lot as well. As a Marine deployed with the 22nd MEU in the late 90’s I can tell you I’ve been to deployed in countries for missions that no one has ever heard of, not that they were classified, but because no one in comfy america could care less about embassy evacuations in Western Africa (Sierra Leone and Liberia), and it seemed like it took forever for us to deploy in these situations due to information requirements necessary to perform out mission. AND these were precautionary, preemptive evacuations where the governments of the countries were allowing us in to evacuate.
	Steve Cross November 9th, 2012 at 12:33 pm If the mainstream media are not covering this “properly” then I guess you are all getting your info from FOX and Rush. There are no credible sources as yet that say anything improper happened on the ground as far as response. Congress is concerned more about things done before the attack. You won’t see any prominent Republican quoting this supposed facts because they aren’t true.
	Iwasthere November 10th, 2012 at 7:16 pm You do understand you are somehow criticizing Bush for telling the American people something Congress had determined to be the status of the standing military at that time. No, you probably don’t. But even given that you do believe Bush is today the cause of all that is negative in America, do you at least agree that at the time these statments were made — they were true? The U.S. has “lost” every conflict since WWII except the Granada event and the arrest of Noriega — if you can call that a “conflict.” We may have celebrated like victors after a short period of armed conflict in Iraq, but we gained nothing but debt and disdain for our efforts. We simply do not have the will to “defeat” anyone any more after the bombs of WWII. Ever since those decisive efforts to force an enemy nation into surrender, our focus is on one identified bad guy at a time — never the society from which they come and to which they could be forced to answer.
	majr0d November 10th, 2012 at 8:09 pm “somehow criticizing Bush for telling the American people something Congress had determined to be the status of the standing military at that time.” No I am not though I have no problem criticizing Bush. I fyou want to hand your hat on what some nut in Congress has to say knock yourself out. Wasn’t long ago that a democrat was concerned about Guam sinking if we put too many troops on it. I wouldn’t characterize Korea as a loss. Ask the S. Koreans. Same for Panama and the Kuwaits. Nam is obvios and the rest are still pending but I’m sure revisionsit historians see it different.
	Jason Cloninger November 12th, 2012 at 1:12 pm So, you think that the peaceful protesters actually stuck around to protest when all of the gunfire started? All peaceful people, protesters or not, got the heck out of dodge as soon as the first shot was fired — as fast as their two legs could carry them. If anyone hung around — armed or not — while this attack was underway, it was either to support the slaying of the “infidels” or so that they could claim innocent unarmed casualties. Non-combatants run from combat. Combatants remain at or run to combat. It’s that simple. As for our ability to try to save American lives that day, the firefight was over 6 hours long! We had ample time to have local CIA operative teams to begin a fire-support and rescue mission while remote reconnaisance and combat assets were mobilized by AFRICOM or SOCOM. It was a United States embassy, also referred to as soverign U.S. territory. An attack against it, temporary embassy or not, is considered an act of war. Our inability to defend it showed a lack of patriotism and weakness, both of which are not respected in the Muslim world.
	Jason Cloninger November 12th, 2012 at 1:12 pm We had a moral and patriotic obligation to attempt to rescue our embassador and his team. Failure to act, when action is both necessary and capable, equates to accepting responsibility for the outcome of your failure. I hate to quote Jim Lee, but “with great power comes great responsibility”. We, as a nation, need to stop deciding our future based upon our politics, and instead act upon our issues with the very ideals which made our poliitical process possible — Patriotism, Honor, Commitment, and Courage. We will all be judged in God’s eyes upon our death. However, I would rather be a man who knows that he will be judged favorably by God throughout his life than spend the rest of my days atoning for sins too great for me to vanquish.

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

GOP senators issue Benghazi letter to Panetta

Join the Conversation

Military.com Daily News

Recent Comments

GOP senators issue Benghazi letter to Panetta

Join the Conversation

Military​.com Daily News

Most Read

Recent Comments

Military.com Daily News