Benghazi? No...Ben Dover

zappasguitar

Well-known member
Well maybe this will shut up the lunatics...but probably not.


GOP Report Acknowledges That The U.S. Military Couldn’t Have Changed Benghazi Outcome


In a new report released on Tuesday, the House Armed Services Committee concludes that there was no way for the U.S. military to have responded in time to the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya to save the four Americans killed that night. In doing so, the report debunks entirely a right-wing myth that says the White House ordered the military not to intervene.

For months after the attack that resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens, conservative media was awash in reports that on the night of the assault the Obama administration at some point ordered the military not to take action that would have saved lives. This supposed “stand down order” led to a bevy of right-wing conspiracies about why the President and his administration had let the Americans die.

“Who told the SEALs to stand down?” Rep. Steve King asked in Nov. 2012, in just one of many interviews with Republicans referring to the response to Benghazi as “worse than Watergate.”

As Media Matters reports, Fox News cited reports of a stand-down order no fewer than 85 times during prime-time segments as of June 2013. As the new report — which the Republican majority of the committee authored –makes very clear in its findings, however, no such order ever existed. “There was no ‘stand down’ order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi,” the report says, noting that the military was not positioned to respond to the attack.

“Given the military’s preparations on September 11, 2012, majority members have not yet discerned any response alternatives that could have likely changed the outcome of the Benghazi attack,” the report concludes.

This tracks with the repeated insistence from the White House and Pentagon over the months that everything possible had been done once the military assets in the region had mobilized. Then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, in the first Senate hearing on the military response, told panel members that it’s impossible to prepare for every possible contingency when planning, accusing the panel of believing the military was akin to a “911 service.”

While Senate Republicans chided Panetta at the time, it seems Republicans on the HASC now agree with the secretary’s assessment. “Majority members believe the regional and global force posture assumed by the military on September 11, 2012 limited the response,” the report continues. “Majority members recognize, of course, that it is impossible for the Department of Defense to have adequate forces prepared to respond immediately to every conceivable global contingency. Ensuring that preparations exist for some likely possibilities is not to be confused with the ability to anticipate all prospective circumstances, especially in highly volatile regions.”

The night of the attack, the United States had few military assets within the region, the report reads, requiring the transport of soldiers from U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) stationed in Germany to Libya, a trip that took several hours. Once there, the majority of the reinforcements were given the order to remain in Tripoli to prevent a possible attack on the U.S. Embassy itself, a distinct possibility in the eyes of the Pentagon. The Pentagon also confirmed to the HASC that there were no AC-130 gunships or armed drones within the region that night, another topic of speculation from right-wing media outlets.

The Democrats on the panel asked their Republican colleagues if they could finally move on from Bengahzi. “This report, produced by House Armed Services Committee Republicans, should finally bring an end to the politicization of the heinous attacks on brave Americans in Benghazi,” HASC Ranking Member Rep. Adam Smith (D-CA) and Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-MA), the HASC Oversight and Investigations subcommittee’s ranking member, said in a statement. “It is time to move forward, take the real conclusions we have arrived at and establish how to best protect our citizens around the globe. It is our hope that today’s report, which was authored by Republicans, finally brings this attempt to manufactured scandal to an end.”


http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/02/11/3276171/gop-benghazi-military-hasc/
 
Does anyone think this will shut up the lying Righties who've been trying to gain traction with this despite the fact they've been wrong about the details from square one?


NAAAHH!!
 
Well maybe this will shut up the lunatics...but probably not.


GOP Report Acknowledges That The U.S. Military Couldn’t Have Changed Benghazi Outcome


In a new report released on Tuesday, the House Armed Services Committee concludes that there was no way for the U.S. military to have responded in time to the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya to save the four Americans killed that night. In doing so, the report debunks entirely a right-wing myth that says the White House ordered the military not to intervene.

For months after the attack that resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens, conservative media was awash in reports that on the night of the assault the Obama administration at some point ordered the military not to take action that would have saved lives. This supposed “stand down order” led to a bevy of right-wing conspiracies about why the President and his administration had let the Americans die.

“Who told the SEALs to stand down?” Rep. Steve King asked in Nov. 2012, in just one of many interviews with Republicans referring to the response to Benghazi as “worse than Watergate.”

As Media Matters reports, Fox News cited reports of a stand-down order no fewer than 85 times during prime-time segments as of June 2013. As the new report — which the Republican majority of the committee authored –makes very clear in its findings, however, no such order ever existed. “There was no ‘stand down’ order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi,” the report says, noting that the military was not positioned to respond to the attack.

“Given the military’s preparations on September 11, 2012, majority members have not yet discerned any response alternatives that could have likely changed the outcome of the Benghazi attack,” the report concludes.

This tracks with the repeated insistence from the White House and Pentagon over the months that everything possible had been done once the military assets in the region had mobilized. Then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, in the first Senate hearing on the military response, told panel members that it’s impossible to prepare for every possible contingency when planning, accusing the panel of believing the military was akin to a “911 service.”

While Senate Republicans chided Panetta at the time, it seems Republicans on the HASC now agree with the secretary’s assessment. “Majority members believe the regional and global force posture assumed by the military on September 11, 2012 limited the response,” the report continues. “Majority members recognize, of course, that it is impossible for the Department of Defense to have adequate forces prepared to respond immediately to every conceivable global contingency. Ensuring that preparations exist for some likely possibilities is not to be confused with the ability to anticipate all prospective circumstances, especially in highly volatile regions.”

The night of the attack, the United States had few military assets within the region, the report reads, requiring the transport of soldiers from U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) stationed in Germany to Libya, a trip that took several hours. Once there, the majority of the reinforcements were given the order to remain in Tripoli to prevent a possible attack on the U.S. Embassy itself, a distinct possibility in the eyes of the Pentagon. The Pentagon also confirmed to the HASC that there were no AC-130 gunships or armed drones within the region that night, another topic of speculation from right-wing media outlets.

The Democrats on the panel asked their Republican colleagues if they could finally move on from Bengahzi. “This report, produced by House Armed Services Committee Republicans, should finally bring an end to the politicization of the heinous attacks on brave Americans in Benghazi,” HASC Ranking Member Rep. Adam Smith (D-CA) and Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-MA), the HASC Oversight and Investigations subcommittee’s ranking member, said in a statement. “It is time to move forward, take the real conclusions we have arrived at and establish how to best protect our citizens around the globe. It is our hope that today’s report, which was authored by Republicans, finally brings this attempt to manufactured scandal to an end.”


http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/02/11/3276171/gop-benghazi-military-hasc/

There you go, instead of your incessant whining do more stuff like this.
 
I post stuff like this all the time.

You just don't bother reading it because you've bought into the Mod's bullshit narrative.

Yes, you do....spin and bullshit....from a left wing cite that spews the same type of crap day after day..
Here is your answer.....NOT from thinkprogress..

The question was never if the military could have gotten to Benghazi "in time" to save the Ambassador and the others, the question was why wasn't some show of
military force attempted at all. As they say, better late than never. And the most obvious question, given the fact that or if no assets were available, why the fuck weren't assets available in a region where it was already known that attacks against westerners were going on for several months and the our people in the region were lacking adequate security....

Why was no military assets within reach, and why way there inadequate security in the first place ? Because, because, wait for it, because
\
Last month, the Democratic-led Senate Intelligence Committee faulted the State Department and the intelligence community for failing to increase security at the poorly protected temporary diplomatic outpost in Benghazi and a nearby CIA compound.

"The Pentagon also confirmed to the HASC that there were no AC-130 gunships or armed drones within the region that night.

You can bet your ass they now....

"Defense Department, where senior officials were unaware of the intelligence annex"

Unaware there was an annex ?...thats unbelievable.....and inexcusable.

Italy-based F-16 aircraft were not on alert status, and “it is not at all certain that they would have been particularly helpful in this instance.”

Are they really saying the F-16's weren't scrambled because they weren't on alert status ? How freakin' lame is that excuse...if no one is 'on alert status' we
don't respond to attacks? You gotta be shittin' me.


Then the pinheads on the left claim "there is no scandal ?

From the Senate report....
The White House
either failed to comprehend the situation in Libya,” despite intelligence warnings, or

“ignored the dramatically deteriorating security situation there” and did not instruct the military to change its deployment and readiness.

Both are proof of gross incompetance by the White House and the State Dept......Obama and Hillary Clinton...
 
Benghazi was a Fox News fabrication from day 1. They were in "campaign mode", and desperate.

Their coverage of that story throughout the campaign ALONE should permanently discredit any claim that they are a "news" network.
 
Yes, you do....spin and bullshit....from a left wing cite that spews the same type of crap day after day..
Here is your answer.....NOT from thinkprogress..

The question was never if the military could have gotten to Benghazi "in time" to save the Ambassador and the others, the question was why wasn't some show of
military force attempted at all. As they say, better late than never. And the most obvious question, given the fact that or if no assets were available, why the fuck weren't assets available in a region where it was already known that attacks against westerners were going on for several months and the our people in the region were lacking adequate security....

Why was no military assets within reach, and why way there inadequate security in the first place ? Because, because, wait for it, because
\
Last month, the Democratic-led Senate Intelligence Committee faulted the State Department and the intelligence community for failing to increase security at the poorly protected temporary diplomatic outpost in Benghazi and a nearby CIA compound.

"The Pentagon also confirmed to the HASC that there were no AC-130 gunships or armed drones within the region that night.

You can bet your ass they now....

"Defense Department, where senior officials were unaware of the intelligence annex"

Unaware there was an annex ?...thats unbelievable.....and inexcusable.

Italy-based F-16 aircraft were not on alert status, and “it is not at all certain that they would have been particularly helpful in this instance.”

Are they really saying the F-16's weren't scrambled because they weren't on alert status ? How freakin' lame is that excuse...if no one is 'on alert status' we
don't respond to attacks? You gotta be shittin' me.


Then the pinheads on the left claim "there is no scandal ?

From the Senate report....
The White House
either failed to comprehend the situation in Libya,” despite intelligence warnings, or

“ignored the dramatically deteriorating security situation there” and did not instruct the military to change its deployment and readiness.

Both are proof of gross incompetance by the White House and the State Dept......Obama and Hillary Clinton...

THIS!

Zippy's "argument" destroyed yet again.
 
THIS!

Zippy's "argument" destroyed yet again.


It wasn't my argument...it came from Congressional REPUBLICANS who admitted they have NOTHING.

But I sure did call it...here come the Tightie Rightie nutjobs desperate to deny the facts in the OP.
 
Benghazi was a Fox News fabrication from day 1. They were in "campaign mode", and desperate.

Their coverage of that story throughout the campaign ALONE should permanently discredit any claim that they are a "news" network.


You'd think.

Unfortunately there will always be gullible kool-aid drinking morons like NOVA and DY who are ready to guzzle down whatever nonsense Faux pours into their glass.
 
I fail to see how better late than never applies. If it's late, why burn the resources moving the irrelevant assets there in the first place?
 
Benghazi was a Fox News fabrication from day 1. They were in "campaign mode", and desperate.

Their coverage of that story throughout the campaign ALONE should permanently discredit any claim that they are a "news" network.


Well, Holy shit.....you mean it didn't happen...you shoulda told everyone....idiot.
 
It wasn't my argument...it came from Congressional REPUBLICANS who admitted they have NOTHING.

But I sure did call it...here come the Tightie Rightie nutjobs desperate to deny the facts in the OP.

Your argument was tripping all over yourself trying to come up with a way to distort what was said in order to defend your Hillary....
 
So basically Zippy, your OP argument was a straw man and you were exposed with your failing private parts for all to see....

:rofl2:
 
I fail to see how better late than never applies. If it's late, why burn the resources moving the irrelevant assets there in the first place?

Take it up with Titus Livius...."Their insolence and recklessness must be opposed, and better late than never."....I'm in no mood ... schools out for today.


[h=4][/h]
 
Take it up with Titus Livius...."Their insolence and recklessness must be opposed, and better late than never."....I'm in no mood ... schools out for today.


[h=4][/h]

"Leave no man behind" need not apply when Democrats are in charge...
 
It wasn't my argument...it came from Congressional REPUBLICANS who admitted they have NOTHING.

But I sure did call it...here come the Tightie Rightie nutjobs desperate to deny the facts in the OP.


Democrats join GOP to blame State in Benghazi
USA TODAY
11:04 p.m. EST January 15, 2014
A bipartisan report blames the State Department for failing to increase security and adds that 15 people in Benghazi who have tried to help the FBI investigate have been killed.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/15/benghazi-senate-report-clinton/4490727/

Senate Committee says Benghazi Attacks Preventable
The report notes that the State Department in 2012 had ignored its own "tripwires" set to determine when it had become too dangerous to operate in Benghazi, and continued to operate the facility there, despite a steady drumbeat of U.S. intelligence reports showing the danger was rising.

The report faults the military for being unable to help when needed. "No U.S. military resources in position to intervene in short order in Benghazi to help defend" the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, it said.
http://news.yahoo.com/senate-committee-says-benghazi-attacks-preventable-154501946.html


Yet you say there is nothing.....its all the fault of Fox News.....and you have the balls to call others "gullible kool-aid drinking morons"..?

Take a look sonny....you're wrong and we're right.....and thats because idiots like you are the gullible kool-aid drinking morons, morons that only get their news from propaganda sites like 'thinkprogress'....
we'll just ignore 'thingy'....hes pathetic....
 
Yes, you do....spin and bullshit....from a left wing cite that spews the same type of crap day after day..
Here is your answer.....NOT from thinkprogress..

The question was never if the military could have gotten to Benghazi "in time" to save the Ambassador and the others, the question was why wasn't some show of
military force attempted at all. As they say, better late than never. And the most obvious question, given the fact that or if no assets were available, why the fuck weren't assets available in a region where it was already known that attacks against westerners were going on for several months and the our people in the region were lacking adequate security....

Why was no military assets within reach, and why way there inadequate security in the first place ? Because, because, wait for it, because
\
Last month, the Democratic-led Senate Intelligence Committee faulted the State Department and the intelligence community for failing to increase security at the poorly protected temporary diplomatic outpost in Benghazi and a nearby CIA compound.

"The Pentagon also confirmed to the HASC that there were no AC-130 gunships or armed drones within the region that night.

You can bet your ass they now....

"Defense Department, where senior officials were unaware of the intelligence annex"

Unaware there was an annex ?...thats unbelievable.....and inexcusable.

Italy-based F-16 aircraft were not on alert status, and “it is not at all certain that they would have been particularly helpful in this instance.”

Are they really saying the F-16's weren't scrambled because they weren't on alert status ? How freakin' lame is that excuse...if no one is 'on alert status' we
don't respond to attacks? You gotta be shittin' me.


Then the pinheads on the left claim "there is no scandal ?

From the Senate report....
The White House
either failed to comprehend the situation in Libya,” despite intelligence warnings, or

“ignored the dramatically deteriorating security situation there” and did not instruct the military to change its deployment and readiness.

Both are proof of gross incompetance by the White House and the State Dept......Obama and Hillary Clinton...

I guess you're ignoring my responses to you in the other thread using the document you linked to.

No surprise there.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?60793-Subject-of-quot-All-Up-In-My-Snatch-quot-thinks-The-Hildebeast-is-swell&p=1439929#post1439929
 
Well maybe this will shut up the lunatics...but probably not.


GOP Report Acknowledges That The U.S. Military Couldn’t Have Changed Benghazi Outcome


In a new report released on Tuesday, the House Armed Services Committee concludes that there was no way for the U.S. military to have responded in time to the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya to save the four Americans killed that night. In doing so, the report debunks entirely a right-wing myth that says the White House ordered the military not to intervene.

For months after the attack that resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens, conservative media was awash in reports that on the night of the assault the Obama administration at some point ordered the military not to take action that would have saved lives. This supposed “stand down order” led to a bevy of right-wing conspiracies about why the President and his administration had let the Americans die.

“Who told the SEALs to stand down?” Rep. Steve King asked in Nov. 2012, in just one of many interviews with Republicans referring to the response to Benghazi as “worse than Watergate.”

As Media Matters reports, Fox News cited reports of a stand-down order no fewer than 85 times during prime-time segments as of June 2013. As the new report — which the Republican majority of the committee authored –makes very clear in its findings, however, no such order ever existed. “There was no ‘stand down’ order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi,” the report says, noting that the military was not positioned to respond to the attack.

“Given the military’s preparations on September 11, 2012, majority members have not yet discerned any response alternatives that could have likely changed the outcome of the Benghazi attack,” the report concludes.

This tracks with the repeated insistence from the White House and Pentagon over the months that everything possible had been done once the military assets in the region had mobilized. Then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, in the first Senate hearing on the military response, told panel members that it’s impossible to prepare for every possible contingency when planning, accusing the panel of believing the military was akin to a “911 service.”

While Senate Republicans chided Panetta at the time, it seems Republicans on the HASC now agree with the secretary’s assessment. “Majority members believe the regional and global force posture assumed by the military on September 11, 2012 limited the response,” the report continues. “Majority members recognize, of course, that it is impossible for the Department of Defense to have adequate forces prepared to respond immediately to every conceivable global contingency. Ensuring that preparations exist for some likely possibilities is not to be confused with the ability to anticipate all prospective circumstances, especially in highly volatile regions.”

The night of the attack, the United States had few military assets within the region, the report reads, requiring the transport of soldiers from U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) stationed in Germany to Libya, a trip that took several hours. Once there, the majority of the reinforcements were given the order to remain in Tripoli to prevent a possible attack on the U.S. Embassy itself, a distinct possibility in the eyes of the Pentagon. The Pentagon also confirmed to the HASC that there were no AC-130 gunships or armed drones within the region that night, another topic of speculation from right-wing media outlets.

The Democrats on the panel asked their Republican colleagues if they could finally move on from Bengahzi. “This report, produced by House Armed Services Committee Republicans, should finally bring an end to the politicization of the heinous attacks on brave Americans in Benghazi,” HASC Ranking Member Rep. Adam Smith (D-CA) and Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-MA), the HASC Oversight and Investigations subcommittee’s ranking member, said in a statement. “It is time to move forward, take the real conclusions we have arrived at and establish how to best protect our citizens around the globe. It is our hope that today’s report, which was authored by Republicans, finally brings this attempt to manufactured scandal to an end.”


http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/02/11/3276171/gop-benghazi-military-hasc/
Not so fast, crybaby. Read below:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...197224-7de9-11e3-95c6-0a7aa80874bc_story.html
 
Back
Top