Pentagon releases Benghazi timeline, defends response
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - Pentagon leaders knew of the September 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi an hour after it began, but were unable to mobilize reinforcements based in Europe in time to prevent the death of the U.S. ambassador, according to a timeline released on Friday.
Senior defence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, rejected criticism accusing the Pentagon of failing to move quickly to send reinforcements to relieve the consulate or using armed aerial drones to fire on the attackers.
"The Department of Defense acted quickly after learning of the incidents unfolding in Benghazi," said one official, adding that Marines, special forces and other military assets had either been employed or put in motion during the attack.
"Unfortunately, no alternative or additional aircraft options were available within a timeline to be effective," the official added.
Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/11/10/uk-usa-libya-pentagon-idUKBRE8A903X20121110
still_one
(92,303 posts)not believe. The resignation of petraeus because of an affair they said that wasn't the reason it was because of benghazi
I am convinced the people who watch fox are becoming mentally unstable
Sugarcoated
(7,726 posts)insists the President ordered forces to stand down and fired Gen Ham of Africom? He also believes, or thinks is likely, that President Obama used Patreaus affair as blackmail to pressure him to resign so he wouldn't have to testify, 500 retired flag-level generals and admirals are 'very unhappy with the actions of President Obama'.
I don't agree with this stuff, I'm just sharing it to debunk it.
BootinUp
(47,171 posts)Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)Plus how we should have killed everyone on the block from above while it was happening.
Hayabusa
(2,135 posts)I really do. It does seem to be the standard right wing answer to almost anything foreign. Can we bomb it?
Festivito
(13,452 posts)Surprise! There's no surprise here.
I'm not surprised.
Sugarcoated
(7,726 posts)but the RW smear machine is revving up on this. I caught the FOX "all stars" and you could see the excitement in their eyes.
FVZA_Colonel
(4,096 posts)I would not be shocked to see them try.
Sugarcoated
(7,726 posts)Do they ever learn?
PSPS
(13,606 posts)EmeraldCityGrl
(4,310 posts)and RW radio. The rest of the MSM will be done with this after the hearings
and whatever investigations are required.
A deeply unfortunate loss of life, of four people that were fully aware of the
risks involved in their professions.
Anne Stevens dignified and thoughtful interview on CNN ( unfortunately with Erin Burnett)
is for me the final words that need to be said about this matter.
http://cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2012/11/08/exp-erin-ann-stevens-libya.cnn.html
Sugarcoated
(7,726 posts)so, they're losing what little influence they have.
Iggy
(1,418 posts)for providing security at our Consulates?
why is the State Dept. off the hook?
IMHO, there's a huge lack of common sense here. if we have a consulate in a screwed up/UNstable nation like Libya, where there are still hundreds of guys walking around with an ax to grind.. and they are armed with military-style weapons--- why not have very beefed up security at our Consulate there??
and sorry, the "the repugs cut funding for security" doesn't supecede the need to protect our people in unstable nations. who's in charge here, anyone?
CarmanK
(662 posts)The US took the step of privatizing security for Embassies around the world. It was bad judgement to have CIVILIAN personnel involved in a military action. They were unprepared and ill equipped to handle the situation. It was PPP and has to be changed. RISK assessments need to be made for security placement. EMBASSIES in hostile territories need MILITARY RESPONSES to attacks. WE SHOULD HAVE LEARNED something from IRAN.