Posted on 05/11/2013 5:25:37 PM PDT by black_diamond
What if the personnel responding to the assistance requested by those on the ground in Bengazi on September 11, 2012, were assembled and loaded on transports, just waiting for the green light from Washington and then no green light came from Washington? Not a “no go,” but no “go” or “no go.”
How could that be? We have a President who cannot make a tough decision, hell it took him several tries before he could give the OK to launch the bin Laden raid, so it is entirely possible that he made no decision (voted present) on the request from Bengazi. That would give him the ability (plausible deniability) to say he did not give the order to stand down. Then someone in the chain of command, after waiting and waiting for the order to launch eventually realized that it was not coming and then used the term “stand down” to tell those who were assembled and ready to return to their pre-alert status (go home). Just a thought. What do you think?
Spot On!
I agree. Somebody gave the order to stand down. I can’t imagine anyone in the military would do it and I certainly do not believe O has it in him to make the decision either way. My theory is that he decided not to decide.
You’re on your own!!
Let me try saying this another way.
There is no question that an order to send the military into action has to come from the President. The only exception being if it’s an attack on a military base, where the commander has a bit more leeway.
Point is, the default mode is “no go”. It takes a specific order to send troops into action, whether it is to defend, rescue, or recover bodies.
It’s going to some down to sworn testimony and exact words. There’s a difference between “no go” which is the default state while awaiting orders, and “stand down” which implies going to a reduced state of readiness. That’s why they’ve got to get the military and CIA people on the record, under oath. There’s not much point in parsing words that are filtered to us through the news media.
that’s a nice list......they should be repeated in daily press conferences and TV ads until we have answers.
I agree that there may have been a breakdown in the chain of command. That breakdown came from indecision at the top; the military reacts well when it receives orders, even if they are orders they don’t like. What it does not react to very well is the lack of orders.
A fish rots from the head - Russian proverb.
Another one would be: Was President Obama asked to make a decision on sending help to Bengazi? If so, when, what was his response and when was it given?
Possible. One thing we know for sure, is that the President is the only one that can give the cross border order, and that didn’t happen, so the only effort for rescue would have to come from within the country.
Initially I read that a group was being sent from Tripoli, then I read that that group had been ordered back to Tripoli.
I guess it is possible that they didn’t want leave the embassy in Tripoli undefended due to the violence in other locations of the Mideast at our other diplomatic locations. Figuring that Tripoli could be next site to be attacked.
Lots of people can say "Stand down".
Only one person can say "Go".
Unfortunately, we have a hostile media, who would rather see the country burn to the ground than do their jobs.
Point is, the default mode is “no go”
Exactly. CIA, State and the military passed the actionable info up to the NSC in the White House. They did nothing, fearing a Desert One type scenario. Since then we have been dealing with a steaming pile of CYA for why the White House did nothing.
Obama took one phone call early on as events unfolded. After that, nobody knows where he was for the remainder of the evening. We need to pin somebody down, under oath, to specifically describe where Obama was, and what he was doing during these “lost hours.”
What do I think? Glad you asked. To dither is the same as saying “no go.” The b@st@rd is equally guilty either way.
I believe that those people in the Consulate in Benghazi had reasonable expectation of rescue, given their close proximity to the Med, and the knowledge that there were Special Operations Forces already in-country. Would that we had a Thomas Jefferson as CinC now, and not that current limp-wristed sissy.
It’s not just a matter of calling for action, it’s a matter of legistics. Would you ready men and materials on the outset of an attack? Or, would you rule it a protest and let what may happen...happen? Knockoff at 5pm and have fish tacos and watch TV -this was Obama.
What I said earlier;
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2951371/posts?page=279#279
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2951276/posts?page=11#11
That's all fine, good and well ... until they get to an international border.
At that point, there is exactly one person on the face of the earth who can say "Keep going".
Since he said they were told twice to “stand down” he would have lied under oath if instead they received “crickets” from Washington.
If anyone but the President authorized a stand down order, she/he must be fired.
If the President gave it, and then threw the video maker under the bus to protect his reelection, EVERYONE including the biggest Obama fans, is going to be very upset at this President. I know people who adore Obama, volunteered for him, who would have nothing to say about it in his defense, if he let those people die so that he could be reelected.
IF HE DID, THEN BENGHAZI IS HIS CHAPPAQUIDDICK.
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.