Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wallace Hits Stonewall on Benghazi: Were Drones Above City Armed? (video at source)
NRO ^ | Eliana Johnson

Posted on 10/28/2012 11:39:49 AM PDT by RoosterRedux

Chris Wallace this morning pressed Virginia Senator Mark Warner, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, on whether the American drones monitoring the Benghazi attack were armed. Wallace challenged Warner’s assertion that disclosing this information would give up valuable intelligence:

I can understand how it would be politically embarrassing for the administration if it turns out those drones were armed and the weapons were not fired when those men, the Americans, were under attack for 7 hours. I can’t understand how it would give up valuable intelligence. Can you tell me directly, were the drones armed or not that were flying over Benghazi and were recording it in real time?

(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: benghazi; benghazicoverup; benghazidrones; benghazirescue; libya
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 last
To: Josephat
Didn't know that, thanks.
Seems reasonable to me that they would arm the second one up.
This mess will unravel big time, too, too much to cover up.
41 posted on 10/28/2012 1:03:32 PM PDT by The Cajun (Sarah Palin, Mark Levin......Nuff said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: The Cajun
No mystery at all with that answer, the drones WERE armed.

That is my take as well. A good friend taught me about that technique from the Soviet Union. You can learn a great deal about what is going on by figuring out what the state controlled media are not saying.

42 posted on 10/28/2012 1:05:47 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
You can learn a great deal about what is going on by figuring out what the state controlled media are not saying.

The prime example of that is the crime reporting that goes on. When the perp or perps' race is not mentioned, we all know what that means.

43 posted on 10/28/2012 1:18:57 PM PDT by Disambiguator (Re-electing Obama is not optimal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
And the question is “why would a security officer be painting the mortar installation firing on him with a laser if he didn’t expect there was someone who could act on it.”

I have seen credible reports from experts that insist the Target Aquisition Laser FIRST syncs up with a weapons platform THEN paints the target.

44 posted on 10/28/2012 1:27:29 PM PDT by houeto (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator
When the perp or perps' race is not mentioned, we all know what that means.

Same with party affiliation.

45 posted on 10/28/2012 1:40:30 PM PDT by houeto (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

I strongly suspect that if those drones were NOT armed, they would have already tried to use that excuse.


46 posted on 10/28/2012 1:43:26 PM PDT by Gator113 (I would have voted for NEWT, now it's Romney & Ryan.~Just livin' life, my way~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe; gaijin

I still think at least one of those drones were armed, while those below were still fighting for their lives.


47 posted on 10/28/2012 3:01:06 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Gator113

bump


48 posted on 10/28/2012 3:05:03 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Does anyone know if we can tell if the mortar shells used were those used by the American military (by forensics of the fragements)?


49 posted on 10/28/2012 3:17:52 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

me to... there could be local help that was available that DID stand down.... as well...


50 posted on 10/28/2012 3:41:53 PM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

Yes, but they won’t tell us what was available unless someone digs it up and forces it out


51 posted on 10/28/2012 3:44:13 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Never happen.. this stuff is almost as Top Secret as Obamas college records or passport.. not quite but almost..


52 posted on 10/28/2012 3:48:44 PM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

My immediate question is, would the munitions on a drone be ‘smart’ enough to target only the area outside the compound where the terrorists were and leave the buildings- where our people were- unscathed?


53 posted on 10/28/2012 3:58:16 PM PDT by Floratina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg; EDINVA; JPG; Hawthorn; Paisan; VA_Gentleman; seekthetruth; COBOL2Java; Perdogg; kabar; ...

VA Ping!

If you want on/off the VA Ping List, please freepmail me.

If you see posts of interest to Virginians, please ping me.

Thanks!


54 posted on 10/28/2012 4:13:49 PM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

If the drone was armed, that takes away another of Panetta’s excuses. Below:

“We quickly responded in terms of deploying forces to the region. We had fast platoons in the region. We had ships that we had deployed off of Libya. We were prepared to respond to any contingency, and certainly had forces in place to do that,” Panetta said here yesterday.

“But the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harms’ way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real time information about what’s taking place”, Panetta added.


55 posted on 10/28/2012 4:20:28 PM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reily

“Warner living proof that, ‘You can get by on your good looks!’”

In Warner’s case he gets by on his MONEY. In person, he’s fairly homely, has horrible skin that you’d figure he could straighten out with his hundreds of millions.

He very cleverly chose to run for US Senate vs. John Warner at the end of his career to build up his name ID. He lost vs. John, but did get that name ID established


56 posted on 10/28/2012 6:06:03 PM PDT by EDINVA (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson