Let's Talk About This "Stand Down" Order Thing....

[Antares]

''So you see as usual what is happening is a parsing of words by the Left.
They were indeed told NOT to go."

Sure, just the left lol...

They were told not to go franco, its just the way it is.

The Left is FAMOUS for "it depends on what the definition of is is".

That is your legacy.

 

[francoHFW]

Our legacy will be the destruction of the disgraceful Pub Propaganda Machine, which has been saying for almost 2 years that Obama stopped any help from coming...or Hillary, or the left. Thamnks for some truth for a change, I'm stunned...

 

[Clementine]

Mr. Conaway. Were you a~are of Lieutenant Colonel Gibson's
activities on the 11th? Were you in communication with him?

General Ham. I was not in direct communication with him. I had
met him previously_, but as the events unfolded in Tripoli and Benghazi
I was not in direct contact with him.

Lieutenant Colonel Gibson

This is the Officer in charge of the team wanting to go to Benghazi from Tripoli.

Mr. Conaway. Did he receive an order to not go from anybody in
your chain of command?

General Ham.He did not. t. I didn't know that night. I know now
that Lieutenant Colonel Gibson requested approval to move to Benghazi
in the morning of the 12th. And it is understandable to me why he would
want to do that. What military people want to do is move to the sound
of the guns. The decision was no_, you have a mission in Tripoli.

Mr. Conaway. Whose decision was that?

General Ham. Rear Admiral Losey_, as the Commander of Special
Operations Command Africa.

http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=AAEBCAA5-4C8F-4820-BACD-2DB9B53C3424

So you see as usual what is happening is a parsing of words by the Left.
They were indeed told NOT to go.

"Did he receive an order to not go from anybody in your chain of command?"

Orders to not go? I've never even heard of issuing orders to a commander to not engage in a military intervention in a foreign country.

Another canard takes flight where it will undoubtedly bounce around the Internet (again) sooner or later with charges of President Obama preventing a rescue of some kind.

Then? Uh, talk of Impeachment, perhaps?

Get over your partisanship and yourself kid.

That is the testimony of General Ham to Congress.

What you think in no way matters, the General is telling you what happened that night.

The Team that wanted to go was told no, they were told that because THEY were the only defense of our people in Tripoli.

Of course, at that point it was too late anyway. Look at the way they are sending security to Iraq now and likely getting our people out of there. That is exactly what should have been done in Benghazi before 9/11. Stevens had asked about more security and even if he hadn't, the turmoil there and the countless attacks aimed at us and the direct public threats to Stevens should have been enough cause to order our people to be removed from the danger zone. The Obama administration wanted them there for some reason. Considering how Obama was willing to release top Taliban leaders for one deserter, the general's story about Benghazi being a staged kidnapping to trade the embassy personnel for another terrorist is looking quite credible. It's the only thing that makes sense considering the inaction prior to the attack and the lies after. I don't think it was because Obama was embarrassed to have active terrorists because that is something we will always have. I think it goes far deeper than that.

Then there were the immediate lies told about the protesters. Obama, Hillary and Rice were the only ones pushing that lie, which means Obama was well aware of what had been going on and was a party to the cover up. They lied because they knew damn well they were about to be exposed for their negligence in helping the people at the embassy, if not worse. Whether it was negligence or a plot, they couldn't let the truth out. They did manage to keep a lid on the scandal, with the help of an obedient press, and probably hoped the clock would run out and it would all go away.

Now Obama is bragging about catching one of the terrorists. Notice he didn't say he caught a protester, even though he never came out and corrected his statements regarding the protesters gone wild. The useful idiots accept the talking points today regardless of how much they contradict yesterday's talking points.

There are times when stand down orders are wise, but they are rarely used. In this case, it indicates people automatically following protocol by preparing to respond to our people in need and were stopped from doing so. Of course, denying security beforehand and neglecting to remove our people from a dangerous situation was by design. Any interference would have ruined whatever plan was being carried out. The Marines went above and beyond, managing to kill a number of hostiles before being killed themselves. That wasn't part of the plan and I do find it credible that the Marines actions caused the terrorists to believe they were double crossed. Again, it makes sense that the administration was cooperating with what was happening or they would have taken measures at some point to protect the people. And rushing the survivors off to a remote location and not allowing them to talk to the press is another indication of a major cover up.

Our military people are not trained to do nothing while our own are in dire need of help. Someone made sure we didn't have people there who could have successfully protected everyone after they were left there. We had a few sitting ducks who were hung out to dry amid some serious terrorist threats. That can not be an accident or simple oversight. The writing was on the wall, especially with the anniversary of 9/11 approaching, and it just isn't believable that the State Dept was that damn stupid. Complacency makes sense. Ignorance doesn't fly in this case. It might be that Stevens was going along with whatever was happening, but being tortured and killed wasn't part of it. If this had been the Bush administration, I am willing to bet that he would have been accused of turning his back on Stevens because he was gay.

 

[francoHFW]

No one was close enough to help, and he wasn't tortured. Pubs cut security funding twice, and there were no lies, clueless hater dupe.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Let's Talk About This "Stand Down" Order Thing....

Why ‘talk about’ something that never happened:

A report by Republicans on the Armed Services Committee recently declared: “There was no ‘stand down’ order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi.” A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report released in January said: “The Committee has reviewed the allegations that U.S. personnel, including in the IC [Intelligence Community] or DOD, prevented the mounting of any military relief effort during the attacks, but the Committee has not found any of these allegations to be substantiated.”

Issa?s ?suspicions? that Hillary Clinton told Panetta to ?stand down? on Benghazi - The Washington Post

We could talk about it in the context of the propensity of most on the partisan right to contrive lies for some perceived political gain, other than that there’s nothing to ‘talk about.’

 

[Antares]

No one was close enough to help, and he wasn't tortured. Pubs cut security funding twice, and there were no lies, clueless hater dupe.

Ms. Shea-Porter.Before this attack there had been budget cutbacks. And there was
a lot of talk about impact on budget cutbacks. So I would just like
to ask you did budget cutbacks in any way set up a stage for this event or any future events that you can see?



General Ham .. No, ma'am, not as far as Africa Command was
concerned. There was not a budgetary constraint that affected my
decision-making in this event.

http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=AAEBCAA5-4C8F-4820-BACD-2DB9B53C3424

You lose again asshole.

 

[Antares]

franco you and Jake are neck and neck for village idiot.

 

[Moonglow]

"Did he receive an order to not go from anybody in your chain of command?"

Orders to not go? I've never even heard of issuing orders to a commander to not engage in a military intervention in a foreign country.

Another canard takes flight where it will undoubtedly bounce around the Internet (again) sooner or later with charges of President Obama preventing a rescue of some kind.

Then? Uh, talk of Impeachment, perhaps?

Get over your partisanship and yourself kid.

That is the testimony of General Ham to Congress.

What you think in no way matters, the General is telling you what happened that night.

The Team that wanted to go was told no, they were told that because THEY were the only defense of our people in Tripoli.

here's a question for you - if he was not 'ordered' not to go what would he have done?

As a soldier you have basic soldier commandments, one of the first you learn is to be at the post you are ordered to secure and you do not leave until properly relieved of duty..

So, If he did not have orders to not to go(Which would not exist)he would be obliged to stay at his post he was ordered to occupy..

 

[Antares]

Let's Talk About This "Stand Down" Order Thing....

Why ‘talk about’ something that never happened:

A report by Republicans on the Armed Services Committee recently declared: “There was no ‘stand down’ order issued to U.S. military personnel in Tripoli who sought to join the fight in Benghazi.” A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report released in January said: “The Committee has reviewed the allegations that U.S. personnel, including in the IC [Intelligence Community] or DOD, prevented the mounting of any military relief effort during the attacks, but the Committee has not found any of these allegations to be substantiated.”

Issa?s ?suspicions? that Hillary Clinton told Panetta to ?stand down? on Benghazi - The Washington Post

We could talk about it in the context of the propensity of most on the partisan right to contrive lies for some perceived political gain, other than that there’s nothing to ‘talk about.’

Sorry Counselor, I've already proven that they were readyto go, they were told NOT to go and that it was for a very good reason.

Not a damn thing you can cite to change it.

 

[Antares]

Get over your partisanship and yourself kid.

That is the testimony of General Ham to Congress.

What you think in no way matters, the General is telling you what happened that night.

The Team that wanted to go was told no, they were told that because THEY were the only defense of our people in Tripoli.

here's a question for you - if he was not 'ordered' not to go what would he have done?

As a soldier you have basic soldier commandments, one of the first you learn is to be at the post you are ordered to secure and you do not leave until properly relieved of duty..

So, If he did not have orders to not to go(Which would not exist)he would be obliged to stay at his post he was ordered to occupy..

Too many movies where they say **** it and go anyway.

I won't say it NEVER happens, but it rarely happens.

 

[Moonglow]

The one thing that surprised me is that during the last wars our military abandoned the rapid deployment strategy..

 

[blackhawk]

We have been told repeatedly in regards to the trade of the Taliban five and Bowe Bergdahl we leave no man behind yet when it came to Benghazi we were willing to leave men behind even if we couldn't get there in time to save these men does that mean we don't even try?

 

[Moonglow]

here's a question for you - if he was not 'ordered' not to go what would he have done?

As a soldier you have basic soldier commandments, one of the first you learn is to be at the post you are ordered to secure and you do not leave until properly relieved of duty..

So, If he did not have orders to not to go(Which would not exist)he would be obliged to stay at his post he was ordered to occupy..

Too many movies where they say **** it and go anyway.

I won't say it NEVER happens, but it rarely happens.

It depends how much extra duty you want or duckies deducted from article 15's.

 

[Antares]

The one thing that surprised me is that during the last wars or military abandoned the rapid deployment strategy..

We were stretched too thin.

That was Rumsfeld's doing.

 

[Moonglow]

We have been told repeatedly in regards to the trade of the Taliban five and Bowe Bergdahl we leave no man behind yet when it came to Benghazi we were willing to leave men behind even if we couldn't get there in time to save these men does that mean we don't even try?

Soldiers, these men were CIA and contractors,and yet the CIA does not have that motto.. What you may find disheartening also is, the US now depends on the host nation to provide the security for embassies.

 

[Moonglow]

The one thing that surprised me is that during the last wars or military abandoned the rapid deployment strategy..

We were stretched too thin.

That was Rumsfeld's doing.

Yes, they didn't want to draft..

 

[Antares]

The one thing that surprised me is that during the last wars or military abandoned the rapid deployment strategy..

We were stretched too thin.

That was Rumsfeld's doing.

Yes, they didn't want to draft..

Well faster stronger and all of that bullshit.

 

[blackhawk]

We have been told repeatedly in regards to the trade of the Taliban five and Bowe Bergdahl we leave no man behind yet when it came to Benghazi we were willing to leave men behind even if we couldn't get there in time to save these men does that mean we don't even try?

Soldiers, these men were CIA and contractors,and yet the CIA does not have that motto.. What you may find disheartening also is, the US now depends on the host nation to provide the security for embassies.

CIA, contractors, or military they were still Americans and in my opinion we owed it to them to try and save them even if we couldn't make it in time to do so and yes that is disheartening.

 

[francoHFW]

No one was close enough to help, and he wasn't tortured. Pubs cut security funding twice, and there were no lies, clueless hater dupe.

Ms. Shea-Porter.Before this attack there had been budget cutbacks. And there was
a lot of talk about impact on budget cutbacks. So I would just like
to ask you did budget cutbacks in any way set up a stage for this event or any future events that you can see?



General Ham .. No, ma'am, not as far as Africa Command was
concerned. There was not a budgetary constraint that affected my
decision-making in this event.

http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=AAEBCAA5-4C8F-4820-BACD-2DB9B53C3424

You lose again asshole.

Wrong again, shyttehead. Africa Command is military, the Pub cuts were for diplomatic security. General Ham, btw, is a gd idiot known only for premature, irrelevant, and out of context idiocy that Fox uses to misinform ignorant morons like YOU. Keep trying, dingbat, and thanks for this OP which proves the "Bengazi scandal is pure Pubcrappe. I"diot.

 

[Moonglow]

We have been told repeatedly in regards to the trade of the Taliban five and Bowe Bergdahl we leave no man behind yet when it came to Benghazi we were willing to leave men behind even if we couldn't get there in time to save these men does that mean we don't even try?

Soldiers, these men were CIA and contractors,and yet the CIA does not have that motto.. What you may find disheartening also is, the US now depends on the host nation to provide the security for embassies.

CIA, contractors, or military they were still Americans and in my opinion we owed it to them to try and save them even if we couldn't make it in time to do so and yes that is disheartening.

I am sure that Custer felt the same way....and the Mrs., as they never got back the 7th Calvary..