Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Political Issues (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=57)
-   -   Gates: Some Benghazi critics have "cartoonish" view of military capability (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1486688)

Flintlocker 05-12-2013 11:22

Gates: Some Benghazi critics have "cartoonish" view of military capability
 
http://www.kbzk.com/news/gates-some-...ry-capability/


"Frankly, had I been in the job at the time, I think my decisions would have been just as theirs were," said Gates, now the chancellor of the College of William and Mary.

"We don't have a ready force standing by in the Middle East, and so getting somebody there in a timely way would have been very difficult, if not impossible." he explained.

Suggestions that we could have flown a fighter jet over the attackers to "scare them with the noise or something," Gates said, ignored the "number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from [former Libyan leader] Qaddafi's arsenals."

"I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances," he said.

Another suggestion posed by some critics of the administration, to, as Gates said, "send some small number of special forces or other troops in without knowing what the environment is, without knowing what the threat is, without having any intelligence in terms of what is actually going on on the ground, would have been very dangerous."


"It's sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces," he said. "The one thing that our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm's way, and there just wasn't time to do that."

DonGlock26 05-12-2013 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20285915)

"We don't have a ready force standing by in the Middle East, and so getting somebody there in a timely way would have been very difficult, if not impossible." he explained.

Suggestions that we could have flown a fighter jet over the attackers to "scare them with the noise or something," Gates said, ignored the "number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from [former Libyan leader] Qaddafi's arsenals."

"I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances," he said.

Another suggestion posed by some critics of the administration, to, as Gates said, "send some small number of special forces or other troops in without knowing what the environment is, without knowing what the threat is, without having any intelligence in terms of what is actually going on on the ground, would have been very dangerous."


"It's sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces," he said. "The one thing that our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm's way, and there just wasn't time to do that."

Addressing the article:

Lie, the ready force was ordered to stand down.

Quote:

FOREIGN EMERGENCY SUPPORT TEAM (FEST)
The Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) is the U.S. government’s only interagency, on-call, short-notice team poised to respond to terrorist incidents worldwide. The FEST deploys to assist and advise the U.S. Chief of Mission in assessing crises and coordinating U.S. government crisis response activities. The FEST includes representatives from the Department of State, Department of Defense, the Intelligence Community, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other appropriate agencies, such as Department of Energy, as circumstances warrant. FEST composition is flexible and tailored to the specific incident and U.S. Embassy needs. The FEST provides specialized crisis response expertise to augment existing U.S. Mission and host government capabilities.

http://www.state.gov/j/ct/programs/index.htm#FEST

We attacked Libya with air power in 2011 and flew planes in and out of Libya as a matter of routine.


Ok, we don't send in any air support because why?


Yeah, that's what rapid response teams do.

You don't always have time to plan raid, when you are responding to a surprise enemy attack. This hack is simply trying to protect the administration.

DonGlock26 05-12-2013 11:42

Quote:

By SHARYL ATTKISSON / CBS NEWS/ November 1, 2012, 6:02 PM

Sources: Key task force not convened during Benghazi consulate attack

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-...sulate-attack/

Game, set, match.

BTW-Attkisson has been harassed by CBS News for being too aggressive at getting to the truth of what happened in Benghazi and the aftermath.

Flintlocker 05-12-2013 11:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonGlock26 (Post 20285947)
Lie, the ready force was ordered to stand down.



One member of the quick reaction force died at the CIA compound.

Try not failing so hard next time you start speaking out of your arse.

DonGlock26 05-12-2013 11:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20285959)
One member of the quick reaction force died at the CIA compound.

Try not failing so hard next time you start speaking out of your arse.

Source?

Barcroft 05-12-2013 11:47

One thing that seems curious to me is that discussions of response seem to center on Aviano, Italy and the forces there.
Did we not have carriers in the Med?
Seems that they would have been a lot closer, if they were indeed there.

Spymaster 05-12-2013 11:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonGlock26 (Post 20285955)
Game, set, match.

BTW-Attkisson has been harassed by CBS News for being too aggressive at getting to the truth of what happened in Benghazi and the aftermath.


That's because Attkissons boss "David," is Obama speechwriter "Ben Rhodes" brother, and the president of CBS!

Spymaster 05-12-2013 11:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20285959)
One member of the quick reaction force died at the CIA compound.

Try not failing so hard next time you start speaking out of your arse.


You want to ante up a source for this tidbit?

DonGlock26 05-12-2013 11:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barcroft (Post 20285969)
One thing that seems curious to me is that discussions of response seem to center on Aviano, Italy and the forces there.
Did we not have carriers in the Med?
Seems that they would have been a lot closer, if they were indeed there.

I have heard no mention of naval assets at all. I'm waiting for that to come out.

I'd also like to know where did the drone come from? Why wasn't to armed? Were armed drones available and ordered to stand down too? If there were armed drones available and they were not used to save American lives, then Obama resignation is assured.

DonGlock26 05-12-2013 11:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spymaster (Post 20285970)
That's because Attkissons boss "David," is Obama speechwriter "Ben Rhodes" brother, and the president of CBS!

Incest between the media and the political elite is rampant in Washington.

Flintlocker 05-12-2013 11:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonGlock26 (Post 20285963)
Source?

This is common knowledge and can be found from numerous credible sources, but probably not the disinformation factories that you pay attention to: His name was Glen Doherty.

Quote:

Various web sites that aggregated the Fox report on Oct. 26 bear witness to the difference in the story. The upshot: When Fox originally published its exclusive on Benghazi, it put Glen Doherty, a former Navy SEAL who was assisting with security in Libya, at the CIA annex as part of the team that mounted the initial response to the attack.


Gigantic problem with that assertion: Doherty was nowhere near Benghazi at the time that the attackers first assailed the dipolomatic mission. He was in Tripoli, more than 600 miles away, and would reach the CIA annex many hours later, just in time to participate in the pre-dawn battle that claimed his life.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...5445_blog.html

Flintlocker 05-12-2013 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spymaster (Post 20285971)
You want to ante up a source for this tidbit?

I guess it's no surprise that this is news to the wingnuts out there. Right wing news and blogs have no interest in the truth... they make their money by winding you up and sending you off on emotional tirades.

DonGlock26 05-12-2013 12:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20285983)
This is common knowledge and can be found from numerous credible sources, but probably not the disinformation factories that you pay attention to: His name was Glen Doherty.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...5445_blog.html

You seem to have painted yourself into a corner.




Your OP source made this claim:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20285915)

"We don't have a ready force standing by in the Middle East, and so getting somebody there in a timely way would have been very difficult, if not impossible." he explained.

Yet, you claimed this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20285959)
One member of the quick reaction force died at the CIA compound.

.

So which is it? You can't both be telling the truth.

Flintlocker 05-12-2013 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonGlock26 (Post 20285998)
You seem to have painted yourself into a corner.




Your OP source made this claim:



Yet, you claimed this:



So which is it? You can't both be telling the truth.

Good lord, you can't be this dumb, can you?

So after you start calling out your hallucinations of lies and doing your little victory dance, you're going to try to make it a matter of semantics? Yeah, I guess you're that dumb.

Perhaps you should go read a timeline of events in Benghazi and inform yourself of what happened.

No matter how you try to skirt the issue, a quick reaction force was sent from Tripoli, more than 400 miles away from Benghazi. One of them died at the CIA compound. These are the facts. Just because you didn't, or don't, comprehend them has no bearing on the truth.

evlbruce 05-12-2013 12:22

Got to love when Bush-haters defend Glorious Leader with Bushies and Bush equivocation.

nursetim 05-12-2013 12:23

I don't believe fl is lying. I believe has has been so indoctrinated in the cult of HWSNBN, that s/he can no longer differentiate between truth and propaganda.

Barring that, s/he is duplicitous in perpetuating the coverup of the murder of our citizens. Maybe s/he agrees with the, they were going to die one day anyway, what's the big deal? Theory that the extreme liberals (democrats) seem to favor.

Flintlocker 05-12-2013 12:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by nursetim (Post 20286030)
I don't believe fl is lying. I believe has has been so indoctrinated in the cult of HWSNBN, that s/he can no longer differentiate between truth and propaganda.

Barring that, s/he is duplicitous in perpetuating the coverup of the murder of our citizens. Maybe s/he agrees with the, they were going to die one day anyway, what's the big deal? Theory that the extreme liberals (democrats) seem to favor.

Propaganda? Here I go explaining what actually happened in Libya to people that largely seem unconcerned with the truth and it's propaganda... That's rich.

Here's another word for ya. Hypocrites. They're the kind of people that barely batted an eyelash after the President ignores months worth of intelligence warnings, one of which was entitled "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" and spend months hyperventilating over Benghazi. They're the kind of people that ignore the more than half dozen attacks on US diplomatic facilities that resulted in dozen of deaths during the previous administration and make Benghazi the biggest foreign policy disaster in the last 100 years. They're the kind of people that yawn when an administration has the Secretary of State present a series of provable lies about mobile weapons labs with the direct intent of starting the most expensive and unnecessary war in the history of the world and sit opining on their computers about how Obama's and Clinton's action in Benghazi amount to treason. Hypocrites.

Zombie Surgeon 05-12-2013 12:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20285915)
http://www.kbzk.com/news/gates-some-...ry-capability/


"Frankly, had I been in the job at the time, I think my decisions would have been just as theirs were," said Gates, now the chancellor of the College of William and Mary.

"We don't have a ready force standing by in the Middle East, and so getting somebody there in a timely way would have been very difficult, if not impossible." he explained.

Suggestions that we could have flown a fighter jet over the attackers to "scare them with the noise or something," Gates said, ignored the "number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from [former Libyan leader] Qaddafi's arsenals."

"I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances," he said.

Another suggestion posed by some critics of the administration, to, as Gates said, "send some small number of special forces or other troops in without knowing what the environment is, without knowing what the threat is, without having any intelligence in terms of what is actually going on on the ground, would have been very dangerous."


"It's sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces," he said. "The one thing that our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm's way, and there just wasn't time to do that."

http://pictures.funnyforum.org/wp-co...IT-BURNS-2.jpg

Zombie Surgeon 05-12-2013 12:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20285915)
http://www.kbzk.com/news/gates-some-...ry-capability/



Suggestions that we could have flown a fighter jet over the attackers to "scare them with the noise or something," Gates said, ignored the "number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from [former Libyan leader] Qaddafi's arsenals."

Yeah, because the AAA and ground to air missile defensive capacity of a bunch of AlQuaeda morons if far superior to that of the entire regiments of specialized units who were defending Baghdad during the first days of the US invasion in Iraq.
:rofl:

http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/ph...92-rtr8d7k.jpg

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/i...zBrjoRoVXJCr_g
http://glocktalk.com/forums/data:ima...DLze9KlSoN/9k=

Flintlocker 05-12-2013 12:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zombie Surgeon (Post 20286071)

Hmm, who do I trust more? USAF officer, 26 year veteran of the CIA and NSC, Director of the CIA under GHWB and Secretary of Defense under GWB. Or some confused keyboard commandos trying to undermine a President they despise. It's a tough decision...

Zombie Surgeon 05-12-2013 13:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20286085)
Hmm, who do I trust more? USAF officer, 26 year veteran of the CIA and NSC, Director of the CIA under GHWB and Secretary of Defense under GWB. Or some confused keyboard commandos trying to undermine a President they despise. It's a tough decision...

I trust William G. Boykin, former commander of Delta Force.
He declared in an recent interview that at the time of his command ('92-'94) the US military could have had a jet flying overhead within 2-3 hours and boots on the ground within 4-5 hours after the attack started in Benghazi. That would have saved the lives of at least 2 victims killed in the second attack.
He also mentioned that considering our presence in the region is far greater and the military hardware far better now than it was in the 90's, it is very plausible the time could have been considerable shorter today, possibly 3 hours or less for boots on the ground.
One more point Boykin made: spec opserators are training for years and years to be able to deploy and fight in very dangerous battles in hostile territory where the enemy is greatly outnumbering them. This is their main line of business and this is what they sign for when they apply for the job. Anybody who says "we couldn't send them because it was too dangerous" is one of the following: an idiot; a liar; or somebody who's addicted to sucking Obama. Or all of the above.
Which one are you?

countrygun 05-12-2013 13:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20286005)
Good lord, you can't be this dumb, can you?

So after you start calling out your hallucinations of lies and doing your little victory dance, you're going to try to make it a matter of semantics? Yeah, I guess you're that dumb.

Perhaps you should go read a timeline of events in Benghazi and inform yourself of what happened.

No matter how you try to skirt the issue, a quick reaction force was sent from Tripoli, more than 400 miles away from Benghazi. One of them died at the CIA compound. These are the facts. Just because you didn't, or don't, comprehend them has no bearing on the truth.

Typical liberal, get caught in a contradiction (holding two opposing opinions as both being true) and they start calling names. They claim to understand better how two opposite sets of facts can both be true and everyone else is dumb because they don't think like that.

evlbruce 05-12-2013 13:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20286085)
Hmm, who do I trust more? USAF officer, 26 year veteran of the CIA and NSC, Director of the CIA under GHWB and Secretary of Defense under GWB. Or some confused keyboard commandos trying to undermine a President they despise. It's a tough decision...

Given the current state of Iraq and Afghanistan, I'd go commando.

Sam Spade 05-12-2013 13:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flintlocker (Post 20286056)
Propaganda? Here I go explaining what actually happened in Libya to people that largely seem unconcerned with the truth and it's propaganda... That's rich.

Here's another word for ya. Hypocrites. They're the kind of people that barely batted an eyelash after the President ignores months worth of intelligence warnings, one of which was entitled "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" and spend months hyperventilating over Benghazi. Hypocrites.

You forget; that happened a long time ago. Dear Leader's very own mouthpiece said so.

Spymaster 05-12-2013 13:31

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spymaster http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/imag...s/viewpost.gif
You want to ante up a source for this tidbit?

Originally posted by flintlocker:
I guess it's no surprise that this is news to the wingnuts out there. Right wing news and blogs have no interest in the truth... they make their money by winding you up and sending you off on emotional tirades.
"Uhh" you might try breaking the little anti-depressants in half...I asked you to cite a source, your response is quoted for posterity, and its entertainment value, which is considerable...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:05.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.