May 16, 2013 10:12pm
|Prairie, I too can glean information from sources and have 25 years of military experience. I use my life experience and apply it to the situation after reading significant numbers of the sources on the subject. I am no more special than you or you me. The difference is I maintain logic throughout the debate and do not peddle in trolling or non-supportable comments. In this case, it was your insistence about whether I read the ARB document or not.
I again submit. Why was there no attempt by the military to get to Benghazi? According to you, someone in the military made the decision? Was not responding to the right thing to do for American Diplomats or American Warfighters? I submit to you: I would have rather scrambled a jet from Alaska and made an attempt to get there. I would have taken a plane with only a loaded machine gun and sent it to Benghazi. There are refuelers in the air all over the world. There are Navy Carriers all over the world with airplanes and ICBMs. It is inexcusable. No one knew how long the fight was going to happen. It lasted for over 8 hours. Even if we got there and could do nothing at least we tried. Maybe someone would have scrambled to shoot us down or not allowed us to fly over their territory. I don’t care. This is general known as American Spirit and Effort. What if by chance, we could have got there in less than 8 hours?
For your information, as I was stationed in Qatar, the majority of US military aircraft used to support air operations in the Middle East comes from Al Udeid AB, Qatar. Doha, Qatar to Benghazi by the way the crow flies is about 2000 miles or less than a four hour flight.
On the Wilson County News comment you lamented day after day about questioning others, but on this cluster you are satisfied. It makes no sense. I will give you one example of leadership in spite of military top brass.
Do you recall the surge in Iraq?
On November 15, 2006, General John P. Abizaid testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that he opposed the "surge" strategy: "I do not believe that more American troops right now is the solution to the problem. I believe that the troop levels need to stay where they are." The Washington Post reported on December 21, 2006, that "other generals have been equally resistant in public and private comments. So what did Bush do. Both General John P. Abizaid Abizaid, US Central Command Commander and Gen. George W. Casey, Jr., the Army's second-ranking general were replaced, because they thought they were the smartest people in the room. They voiced skepticism about an increase in troop numbers, instead wanting to focus on training Iraqi forces. Also, you buddy nutjob Biden was against. It took political pressure by McCain and others and firing of Generals to get the surge. Guess what it worked. President Bush went against the Pentagon and US Central Command because the military is run my civilians and thank God because all you have to do is look at history and see how many times the military got it wrong. So, again I will submit, the military needs examined for its doctrine and the ARB was a State Department Board not a military board. We learn from our actions and we need unbiased outsiders some times to get to the truth.
Truly, I will comment no more on this article as you have no facts or logical reason for your position of blinding supporting the Military Top Brass, the President and Secretary of State and your life experiences do not reflect the responsibilities and duty I feel towards my fellow warfighters and the diplomats who serve in hostile areas who like me expect their government to at least TRY!!