Replies

You're telling me that WE NO LONGER HAVE BOMBERS AND TANKERS STANDING ALERT,like SAC use to do?

That is correct. Most of the bombers and tankers were taken off ALERT in the '90s, after the Soviet Union fell. Our enemies were gone, right?

However, it is possible to bring forces up to a rapid launch ALERT status on most bases on a case by case basis. But it does require prior planning and positioning the assets ahead of time.

For example, Sigonella is just across the pond from Benghazi (and Egypt, and Tunisia, and Algeria), and could and should have had air assets set up to go and support forward operations in the area, like AC-130s and maybe tankers. Apparently Rota, Spain had one of the assault teams ready to go, and there was a team in Croatia that could have launched as well. What air assets were available in the region is unknown, but Aviano certainly had fighter assets that could be easily set up and used. There are other satisfactory bases (Italian, NATO, but with US basing agreements) even further south in Italy from which aircraft could have been staged and put on alert with a little planning and effort. Apparently, there was none of that done we know of.

Of course, maybe there were assets ready to go but they were refused launch. That contradicts what Panetta and Dempsey have publicly claimed, but it is quite possible there were assets which they didn't want to talk about available close by, so they denied they were there because of diplomatic or security reasons.

Or, maybe the President just ordered them to lie their azzes off about it to cover His?

Nevertheless, what should have been possible was never done, Those unfortunates left naked in Benghazi were left to fight their own way out of the deadly trap and find their own way home with whatever help could be hastily scraped up in Tripoli by Mr. Hicks and his heroic embassy staff. They are darned lucky most escaped with their lives.

"Shameful" does not describe what happened here.