What did the President know and when did he know it?

[SADShooter]

That's my understanding from Jennifer Griffin's reporting on FOX News. They violated orders not to act, went on foot to the consulate, rescued some survivors but could not find the ambassador and returned to the annex, to be killed later by mortar fire on the annex. They had laser designators which could have let air assets take out the mortars, but no air assets were deployed because, according to SecDef Panetta "we didn't have enough information."

[longeyes]

If Romney were to go on the attack on this issue, it would set back the image he's trying to portray on foreign policy (especially to women) as being thoughtful, and not rash. It would also remind everyone of the Candy Crowley moment in the first debate.

What could work is having an outside group run ads attacking Obama on this, with no mention of Romney.

An even more effective strategy, but harder to pull off in less than two weeks, would be a nationwide grassroots drive that would force the media to cover this issue in depth. I don't think a petition would cut it (do they ever?). Something like tens of thousands of people in front of the White House would be something that couldn't be ignored. If there were enough conservatives left who subscribed to the NYT, a mass cancellation of subscriptions could force their hand. The media can be forced to cover stories if the right tools are used.

The mass civil rights movement for liberty will come.  It will have to.

[slingshot]

Romney is being very careful about bringing up the Benghazi issue.  I think he's right.  The SuperPacs can handle any political ads that might be deemed beneficial to Romney.  Then he can simply say, I didn't approve that just like Obama did on a number of ads.

I believe approval for outside the country force support had to come from Obama personally.

Obama is stalling until the election day....  after the election, Obama will have a press conference and say that changes are being implemented for the security of our people over seas.  Again, it will be first person on the changes and any comments on the details will be third person... they did this or didn't do that.  He's only in charge of successes.

[longeyes]

Excuse me, careful why exactly?

To not scare suburban liberal housewives with the truth?  To not make Karl Rove get prickly heat?

We are in the Illegitimate Government zone.  Does that matter?  Why is Obama being given wiggle room to escape?

[kgbsquirrel]

Excuse me, careful why exactly?

To not scare suburban liberal housewives with the truth?  To not make Karl Rove get prickly heat?

We are in the Illegitimate Government zone.  Does that matter?  Why is Obama being given wiggle room to escape?

The point he's making is if Romney goes after Obama about this, the MSM and Obama's lackeys (but I repeat myself) will turn the whole thing into a big circus about how Romney is attacking Obama, and the real message about the blatant dereliction of duty and treason will get lost in the storm.

[Frank Castle]

[Perd Hapley]

Excuse me, careful why exactly?

To not scare suburban liberal housewives with the truth?  To not make Karl Rove get prickly heat?

We are in the Illegitimate Government zone.  Does that matter?  Why is Obama being given wiggle room to escape?

I think it's because Romney basically has no foreign policy record, except for that comment he made about Benghazi. By leaving it alone in the debate, he didn't give the Obama anything to criticize him on.

[seeker_two]

Romney doesn't have to attack Obama about this....the super-PACs, talk radio, & the Internet will do that for him.....

....Romney just has to show that he would do better.....

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Romney doesn't have to attack Obama about this....the super-PACs, talk radio, & the Internet will do that for him.....

....Romney just has to show that he would do better.....

yes^^

and short of going over there and shooting those 4 guys themselves anyone could do better.
i'm thinking the micromanaging left no one with gnads to take action.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

if this is true i am at a loss    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/retired-lt-col-my-sources-say-obama-was-in-the-room-watching-benghazi-attack-happen/


unless he was thinking election consequences only     and badly

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

this is kinda a recap  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/28/lack-of-strike-force-impeded-benghazi-response/

[kgbsquirrel]

if this is true i am at a loss    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/retired-lt-col-my-sources-say-obama-was-in-the-room-watching-benghazi-attack-happen/


unless he was thinking election consequences only     and badly

You beat me to it, though I was still digging to see if I could get any other sources for that bit.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

You beat me to it, though I was still digging to see if I could get any other sources for that bit.

you know often in life doing the right thing and then accepting consequences is usually best course. this case might illustrate it very well

[longeyes]

The point he's making is if Romney goes after Obama about this, the MSM and Obama's lackeys (but I repeat myself) will turn the whole thing into a big circus about how Romney is attacking Obama, and the real message about the blatant dereliction of duty and treason will get lost in the storm.

And my point is that the GOP is the ringmaster-in-waiting if they are not part of the clown crew.

OF COURSE Big Media will spin the thing.  But we know that and have known it for years.  What I don't see is a brave strategy to deal with this fell reality head-on.  Big Media are NOT invulnerable on any level, but you'd think they were.  You might also be excused if you suspected that on some level a lot of the GOP hierarchs are in fact complicit.

[longeyes]

I think it's because Romney basically has no foreign policy record, except for that comment he made about Benghazi. By leaving it alone in the debate, he didn't give the Obama anything to criticize him on.

This and other posts assume that people in general know what Benghazi is and means.  Trust me, a LOT don't.  I know smart, educated people--not crazily partisan--who have little or no concept of what went down there or what it signifies.  Ignorance is not bliss in electoral matters--or what follows therefrom.

All this electoral craftiness will, win or lose, hit the wall of reality after the election.  The **** will stay ****.  And no one is going to pull any miracles out of any hat.

[longeyes]

Romney doesn't have to attack Obama about this....the super-PACs, talk radio, & the Internet will do that for him.....

....Romney just has to show that he would do better.....

Romney may win without "Benghazi," but to assume that most people really get it when there is de facto "radio silence" on the matter by Big Media is to me way off the mark.

[Jamisjockey]

There is also the matter of "legacy".  Should Romney pull this off, Benghazi should not go away.  Not trying to find a way to help the Ambassador: cowardice.  The ensuing cover up during an election cycle: Treasonous. 
An example should be made of President Obama so that future Presidents think about how they respond to the aftermath of simliar crisis.

[Perd Hapley]

This and other posts assume that people in general know what Benghazi is and means.  Trust me, a LOT don't.  I know smart, educated people--not crazily partisan--who have little or no concept of what went down there or what it signifies.  Ignorance is not bliss in electoral matters--or what follows therefrom.

Do you think the people who don't know about Benghazi are the same people that watch debates?

Also, your comment assumes that I am defending Romney's strategy. That would be incorrect.

[Ben]

Do you think the people who don't know about Benghazi are the same people that watch debates?

I do. There are plenty of people that are going to make their voting decision based on the debates alone, or else along with whatever sound bites they pick up here and there on the MSM. Too few people actually read and research before they vote.

Also, side note, Geraldo Rivera is an idiot. I saw him three different times this weekend on Fox News trying to "debunk the uproar" over Benghazi. He even found some dumbass General to interview that said that the Administration did everything they could, and there's no way they could have responded based on the "limited information" they had, because too many innocent civilians could have been hurt. Apparently he thought the only possible response would be some big air strike or something that would take out half the block. Rivera fell all over himself thanking the General for his "common sense". Those are the kind of sound bites the uninformed use when they vote.

[roo_ster]

The funny thing is, BHO could have bombed the block around the embassy & CIA safehouse into churned up rubble and the attackers into chum...and been awarded accolades up and down the political spectrum.  BHO's opponents would praise supporting Americans in peril and his supporters would praise him for taking a morning constitutional breathing on his own.

"I determined that I must protect American lives, defend our lawful ambassador, defend American territory, and uphold the longstanding international accords regarding ambassadorial status."  Even a non-interventionist can support that.

Instead, he chose to abandon the men and lie about it.

One last thing.  All this talk about "Former SEAL" and such.  Yes, that is true.  Thing is, when he was killed after trying to rescue the ambassador and the other staff, he as a contractor.  It is almost as if he didn't shed his fundamental character when he went to work in the private sector.  Oh, we know that civvie gov't elected/appointed/hired types(1) can do so, but you'd think ex-military folks turn into raving child-raping UN mercenaries after they process out the way they are spoken of in the MSM.



(1) Pass legislation or write regulations, leave gov't, get hired by the industry you regulated to help navigate the new legal/regulatory waters.  Or, get a sinecure at Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac as a reward after doing yeoman's work as a political appointee for one's party.  Next time the Dems come to power, you'll be tanned, rested, ready, and RICH and ready to serve your party again.  Without being called a mercenary.

[Ron]

On my way to ride some trails this afternoon I allowed myself the guilty pleasure of listening to Rush. Half the time I listen to him he boors me, the other half of the time he is discussing something worthy.

Today he was talking about reports that one of the killed SEALs was painting the source of the mortar attack with a laser. This allowed the bad guys to in turn dial in his location and eventually kill him.

The interesting point here is Rush was informed that the only time a laser designator is used is if there are already assets in place ready to fire missile(s). That would indicate someone refused to order a strike or gave a command to stand down.

Thoughts on this line of reasoning/facts?

  

[kgbsquirrel]

On my way to ride some trails this afternoon I allowed myself the guilty pleasure of listening to Rush. Half the time I listen to him he boors me, the other half of the time he is discussing something worthy.

Today he was talking about reports that one of the killed SEALs was painting the source of the mortar attack with a laser. This allowed the bad guys to in turn dial in his location and eventually kill him.

The interesting point here is Rush was informed that the only time a laser designator is used is if there are already assets in place ready to fire missile(s). That would indicate someone refused to order a strike or gave a command to stand down.

Thoughts on this line of reasoning/facts?

  

Aren't GLD's typically IR spectrum? (ie. only NVG's could see it)


Edit:
http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/solutions/gltdiii/assets/gltdiii.pdf

1.064 micrometer wavelength, so near-IR. As an example, my IR laser designator I built is 904 nanometers, and that's considered the upper edge for Gen-3 NVG's and out of band for Gen 1 or 2.

[Ben]

I'd heard about the laser painting as well, which would refute Geraldo's General, as that would indicate the ability for a precision strike. I'm sure the administration will just say that no one in the Intel community told them about the target being painted.

[MechAg94]

I heard heard over the weekend someone say there was an AC130 gun ship in the area ready to go in for support, but was not allowed.  I don't know who said it or how accurate that is.

[MechAg94]

The funny thing is, BHO could have bombed the block around the embassy & CIA safehouse into churned up rubble and the attackers into chum...and been awarded accolades up and down the political spectrum.  BHO's opponents would praise supporting Americans in peril and his supporters would praise him for taking a morning constitutional breathing on his own.

"I determined that I must protect American lives, defend our lawful ambassador, defend American territory, and uphold the longstanding international accords regarding ambassadorial status."  Even a non-interventionist can support that.

Instead, he chose to abandon the men and lie about it.

I agree with this.  Even if he would have overreacted and flattened the hell out of the entire area, I doubt I would actually be complaining a whole lot.  Doing nothing and allowing bad things to happen due to inaction sucks.  I feel like we saw some of this when they took out Osama.  The Democrats tried to brag about it and play it up to show how strong and tough Obama was.  They KNOW what the American people want them to do.  

Also, I think it would nearly always be wise to err on the side of overreaction when dealing with many of these majority Muslim nations.  The leadership of these nations seem to respect strength more than being nice.