Posted on 10/26/2012 2:09:31 PM PDT by Usagi_yo
Broken Arrow ? more like Limp Wrist.
You forgot #1. Where were the Marine Guards that were assigned to guard American Soil and who authorized their movement! This is the first hanging that needs to take place.
IBTZ
“Why was there no diplomatic version of “Broken Arrow” called?”
C’mon. THERE WAS. Sat phones. Text messages.
It’s treason.
ALL of your questions have been more than amply answered on pages of this forum today. Go read - your answers are all there.
One tough heartless decision they made that I agree with:
I think it was a mistake for ANYONE at the annex to drive over to the Consulate and get involved in the gun battle, there.
Brave, yep..! But smart? Nope —the stuff going on at the annex was FAR more sensitive than the biz typically being done at the consulate, and annex/Consulate traffic would LEAD ATTACKERS TO THE ANNEX.
After they did that, the attack count went from one to two, the KIA went from two to four, and we lost a whole CIA base. And it’s likely that ALL Libyans helping us to recover MANPADS in Libya now fear their names were compromised and now they won’t work with us.
Uh...the SEALS were brave as heck but in fact that was a bad decision, from an intel perspective.
The huge political error was just sitting around and sending NO AIR SUPPORT —they were afraid of a Blackhawk Down/Desert One right before a Prez election.
Yes there was one. There was a code worded message flashed to the White House where they either countermanded an automatic standing-order to respond to the Benghazi emergency, or they just ignored the calls and denied all requests for help.
I think it was a mistake for ANYONE at the annex to drive over to the Consulate and get involved in the gun battle, there."
I agree and I would include any other additional forces that had no overwhelming ability.
That is not an accusation, just an observation.
Speculative fact? Is there a source for this? Because I've read this but it always seems speculative.
Hmmm not 1 but 2 armed drones overhead and oh yea, one these also
(New) AC-130U Gunship was On-Scene in Benghazi, Obama Admin Refused to Let It Fire
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2950634/posts
Seals had lasers on the terrorists and asked to bring the rain. DC said stand down. let ‘em die.
Broken Arrow. Isn’t that the code name for some nuclear bomb incident?
You loose. USN 1978-1982 ... Honorable discharge at E-5.
“Uh...the SEALS were brave as heck but in fact that was a bad decision, from an intel perspective.”
Not when SOP is to get them suport ASAP and they knew that. Obama needs to be IMPEACHED!
to my knowledge “Broken Arrow” American forces being over run.
You’re thinking of “Kent Runner”. But the codes are probably different between generations.
I’ll admit I thought broken arrow meant Nuke missile down, but in the movie “We were soldiers” it was used to american forces over run.
The public has a mistaken impression about the subject of the Marines seerving at diplomatic posts. The Marines are not stationed at an embassy for the purpose of serving as a bodyguard for an Ambassador or at a consulate to serve as a bodyguard for a consul. The Marines are assigned to an embassy to protect the intelligence asstets, communications assets, and other sensitive property of the U.S. Government.
In the special case of the benghazi facility, the State Department elected to use an unusual contractor to hire unarmed security personnel as the security detail for the facility.They were armed with some sort of batons and/or other equipment which were not firearms.
The question of whether or not the Benghazi facility should have been assigned Marines is going to be a highly controversial issue into the future. Discussions of this issue will be hampered by the maintenance of at least some confidentiality about the diplomatic relations with the Islamic militias purportedly allied with the U.S. and Ambassador Stevens’ covert mission/s.
Nonetheless, the consequences of the Obama Administration’s choices and inactions in Benghazi and elsewhere will focus on the question of why a competent and effective contingency plan was not made and/or executed for just such an eventuality when there was so much evidence in the prior months, weeks, and days prior to the terrorist attacks.
It also remains to be seen why the Obama Administration deliberately misled the families of the dead Americans and the U.S. voters in the days before the election by falsely claiming the attacks were provoked by an Internet video clip posted months earlier and made by Islamic jihadists with connections to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood while masquerading under false identities as Israeli-American Jews. Who prompted Secretary of State Hillary Clinto and UN Ambassador Rice to blame the false flag video made by Islamic jihadists pretending to be Israeli-american Jews?
They were ex-seals working for the CIA and no, SOP doesn't apply because SOP may have had a hand in exacerbating the situation. Lets just concentrate on getting him not re-elected. If not,then we get to revisit impeachment.
Is SOP written down somewhere? The only things I know about CIA operations comes from spy novels and Hollywood. it seems like spies and contractors have different procedures than do military teams.
This was a fubar. They should have been helped. But no one in charge could think their way out of the fubar. And then they lied and lied and lied. Why? Why did the ambassador have so little security and need CIA contractors to come to his aid? Did they want the ambassador to be killed or kidnapped?
That the top of the administration was “afraid” does not square with their prior actions.
They sent men into harms way for the UBL kill.
Also, it makes no sense because the team and Ambassador would be facing only one of two outcomes: dying or being taken hostage if nothing was done to save them. Both of these outcomes would be just as bad as trying to save them and failing. Actually, it would be infinitely better from every perspective to be able to say every attempt was made to save them as opposed to sayig no attempt was made.
There is no excuse possible for not trying to save them, since the situation was already one of a dying team. Doing something offered a chance of success, doing nothing offered only death or hostage crisis.
Never would a rational administration say, well, let them die or be taken hostage, we don’t want to risk losing more people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.