Some time ago I speculated that perhaps Mitt Romney has been briefed and as a result concluded that the patriotic thing to do is to refrain from making an issue of this affair. That in turn implies that something very mysterious was going on in this "consulate" or "facility" or CIA establishment, of whatever label, which should remain classified.
That in turn implies that the overall mission being undertaken was legitimate and one which advances legitimate national interests of the United States. Gunrunning to Syria and to questionable rebels of undefined jihadist sympathies in Syria hardly qualifies in my opinion, but who knows? In my view it is unlikely that there was a legitimate mission being pursued because if that had been the case the administration, with its propensity to leak anything politically expedient, would surely have told the world by now.
The mystery only deepens.
I think we are looking at this backwards.
Let’s start with the fact that the so-called “annex” (which was not an annex of anything) was eventually reduced by precise mortar fire. Therefore, these mortars were placed, and the range and trajectory calculated, in the daytime (long before the attack on the “consulate” started).
Then, take the confusing nature of the forces attacking the “consulate” compared with the synchronized and methodical reduction of the “annex” later in the night.
I think the assault at the “consulate” was a feint, a diversion to pull security away from the “annex” (which is what happened). Stevens’ death was an accident, collateral damage once an unexpectedly intense firefight broke out, caused by the presence of an effective defense.
Eventually, the real attack on the “annex” began, and continued until it was reduced and the contents of the building referred to as the “warehouse” were removed - which was the point of the exercise.
Lastly, I wish intelligent conservatives would stop calling this a “terrorist” attack. It was nothing of the sort. It was a precise, organized, multi-company military operation, with centralized command and control, which succeeded both tactically and strategically.
My best guess about the lack of response is 1/3 fog of war, 1/3 cowardice, and 1/3 incompetence.