Posted on 10/28/2012 10:53:40 AM PDT by Nachum
The latest hot rumor flying around the internet is that General Ham of Africon, whose departure was announced last week, was actually fired for attempting to buck Obama’s order not to rescue Ambassador Stevens. He’s not exactly leaving early for his type of command, plus, he’s still in command, I have to assume, since his replacement still has to be confirmed by the Senate. Even if it’s an urban legend, it’s such a cool one that it’s kind of a duty to pass it on. Here’s the text most-often seen in emails, message boards and blog posts:
I heard a story today from someone inside the military that I trust entirely. The story was in reference to General Ham that Panetta referenced in the quote below.
quote: “(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 told Pentagon reporters. “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.”
The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.
General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.
(Excerpt) Read more at readability.com ...
Well, it is rather odd that not only in the military, but in positions of authority all over the United States, that LOYAL AMERICANS are being shoved out, and replaced with ‘helpful idiots’.
Unless it had been anticipated.
See my post #20.
And Ham is Houseman? Frankly I’d rather have a Gen. Scott around for a change.
Perhaps Ham and the other high-ranking officers were relieved if command when, hearing how Obama ordered them to stand-down and not save the ambassador and the others, they could no longer contain themselves and overtly started criticizing Obama, maybe to his face, calling him a lying treasonous traitor.
Had I had been in that position, I would have had to exercise severe restraint in keeping my opinion to myself.
google this genius, there are military change of command ceremonies for “long planned” changed of command with parties and ARCOMS or MSMs pinned on etc.
Not having your XO put you under arrest 30 seconds after you have given an order to go rescue the guys under attack in Libya.
You must be an obamambot
“relieved OF command”.
If you want to get more military insight into Benghazi and other military issues, I recommend the radio show on KFI LA AM 640 8-10 Sat and Sunday nights, Brian Suits, A Dark Secret Place.
Yep.
ping
If Team Obama would have shot straigt from the start.. Even if it was from the hip. Then all this wouldn’t lead to all kinds of speculation.
Just like 0bama’s college records. The only one who could have set the story right is 0bama.
Gen Ham was leaving anyway. Hubby read it in the Army Times last week. He was NOT relieved for this incident.
There’s enough reality to be upset about without adding rumor and introspection to the fire.
I think Obama is playing with fire here.
He’s sacrificed 2 SEALs and untold CIA assets, and interfered with longstanding ROEs for diplomatic defense/rescue.
I don’t think that any James Mattoon Scott types would have gotten a third or fourth star in the past 20 years, but I am almost certain that there are more than a few O5s and O6s, as well as some civilian intel badasses and PMCs, who both know the back story and who love the country.
Right now, if I were in their shoes, I’d be leaking and waiting ten days to see if the People have figured it out.
However, if worst comes to worst, it could get interesting.
well miss marie, that is not what I read. they both could be true, but you know as well as I if you are having a change of command, there is a ceremony, you get an award, there is a party. NONE OF THIS HAPPENED. HE WAS RELIEVED IN ADVANCE OF HIS DATE DUE TO CHALLENGING OUR SICKO cinc.
We have enough to deal with both mentally and physically these last few days before election without having to expend our time, energy and Jim's bandwith on a bunch of damn conspiracy theories proliferating like dandelions pushing up in vacant lots in springtime.
Leni
That’s exactly what 25 men tried to do in Afghanistan in 2005 when Michael Murphy called.
Long planned change of command my ass. The timing is WAY TOO COINCIDENTAL to be planned.
Gen Ham is one of the few general officers left with honor and integrity.
General Ham has only been the Commander of Africom since March/2011. For Panetta to say in the DOD report that Ham is being replaced, in part, because he’s 64 years old sounds pretty weak. Why put someone in that position who is 62-63 if 64 is too old?
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.