[disndat]

I was under the thought that any embassy, and it should apply to consulates, that they are per se actual places considered to be the home soil of said embassy's homeland. Any attack on a said embassy (or consulate?) can be considered an act of war.

Under Reagan he did this.

"The 1986 United States bombing of Libya, code-named Operation El Dorado Canyon, comprised air strikes by the United States against Libya on Tuesday, 15 April 1986. The attack was carried out by the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps via air strikes, in response to the 1986 Berlin discotheque bombing." wikipedia

What the current administration did with or the way they handled the attack in Benghazi is STILL an act of treason that should be enforced old school style.

[Darksheare]

Yes..and no.
Trav knows more about this than I do.
(I’ll let him explain if he wants.)
The embassy was “Sovereign US soil”, but the CIA mission was pretty much an undisclosed and “nonexistent” site that falls under grey hazy area.
Secret sites may have special political disposition, may not.
Depends on alot of things.

Like I said, Trav would know more on that.
But, running weapons through Benghazi was shady, and likely violated some....local agreements and disposition of forces treaties if any existed?
Trav, any way to elaborate, correct, and make it easy to understand?

[Travis McGee]

It is not a narrow legalistic issue, such as “It’s an official, listed American consulate, therefore we have the right to go defend it.”

Reagan granted CBA and ordered our USAF and USN to bomb the crap out of Tripoli after the Berlin disco bombing.

Obama granted CBA and ordered the SEALS to get OBL.

The POTUS/CINC can grant CBA and order the USAF to bomb Teheran tomorrow if he wanted to. (Not that he would.)

Don’t get stuck in the weeds on things like “It depends on if it’s an official consulate or not.”