Posted on 10/30/2012 12:26:59 PM PDT by Starman417
It's simple logic. In Libya there is only one possible threat to an AC130 gunship: surface to air missiles. Thus this is the only way Panetta wasn't lying when he said that it was lack of information about the threat environment that kept him from sending defenders into "harm's way" in Benghazi. He must have been afraid that the jihadists were lying in wait with surface to air missiles, and he had good reason to suspect such a ploy.
A primary task of the Libyan mission was to round up the war materiel of the deposed and decomposing Moammar Ghadaffi and funnel it to chosen opponents of Assad in Syria. Which part of the Syrian opposition has Obama been choosing to supply? Al Qaeda:
“Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats,” the Times reports.According to Adm. James A. Lyons (retired), the Libyan arms that have been funneled to the jihadists include substantial numbers of surface to air missiles:The paper quotes one U.S. official as saying, “The opposition groups that are receiving the most of the lethal aid are exactly the ones we don’t want to have it,” adding that “officials, voicing frustration, say there is no central clearinghouse for the shipments, and no effective way of vetting the groups that ultimately receive them.”
We now know why Ambassador Christopher Stevens had to be in Benghazi the night of 9/11 to meet a Turkish representative, even though he feared for his safety. According to various reports, one of Stevens’ main missions in Libya was to facilitate the transfer of much of Gadhafi’s military equipment, including the deadly SA-7 – portable SAMs – to Islamists and other al Qaeda-affiliated groups fighting the Assad Regime in Syria. In an excellent article, Aaron Klein states that Stevens routinely used our Benghazi consulate (mission) to coordinate the Turkish, Saudi Arabian and Qatari governments’ support for insurgencies throughout the Middle East. Further, according to Egyptian security sources, Stevens played a “central role in recruiting Islamic jihadists to fight the Assad Regime in Syria.”So of course Panetta had to worry about the jihadists having man-portable SAMs. He had been supplying them, and a successful SAM attack on our military with these U.S. supplied weapons would be devastating for Obama's election chances. From the start of the Libyan operation critics have been complaining about U.S. aid going to the jihadists. To have that treasonous strategy backfire in such spectacular fashion would be Fast and Furious times a thousand.
So they made a calculated decision. Our people on the ground would be sacrificed to Obama's political ambition and the Obamatons would coordinate on a cover story about there not being any planned attack at all, when it actually appeared to them to be so well planned as to look like a possible trap.
(excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
Then this is aid to the enemy....Constitutionally speaking.
Disgustingly makes sense.
...and the AC130s have countermeasures...shown on the picture. Worst choice of 2 ugly options...
.
From ‘The Audacity Of Hope,“I WILL STAND WITH THEM (MUSLIMS) SHOULD THE POLITICAL WINDS OF WAR SHIFT IN AN UGLY DIRECTION..”
.
Is it correct to call Benghazi the Middle East Fast and Furious or International version of Fast and Furious?
What’s the range on the SAM’s in question?
Did our drones fly within range of the SAM’s in question?
How far above a target can our aircraft be and still hit a target whose coordinates are entered into its system?
None of this makes sense with the contingency plans anyway. My understanding, based on what the military folks here and elsewhere have said, is that if you don’t know what the situation is, you make all assets available ASAP so you have what you need to respond appropriately as soon as you DO know what the situation is. You don’t have to use everything you have available but you have to make it available in case it is needed.
And somebody correct me if I’m mistaken on this, but if you don’t have the assets available from one site (Italy) then you get the assets from where they ARE available if they can arrive in decent time. If the Obama regime created a situation where there were no assets available ANYWHERE in the volatile Middle East and northern Africa areas - the hotbeds of terrorism - then the incompetence and/or treachery is an even BIGGER problem than if we had just removed critical security from Benghazi alone.
What about the supposedly armed predator drone that was over the consulate?
I guess after Hussein 0bama’s success [sic] with Fast and Furious, he decided to run guns and all kinds of weapons on an international scale to his muzzie jihadist bros.
PLEASE PLEASE put that quote on EVERY POLITICAL THREAD!!!
Then there’s this bombshell at BlackFive from a former Delta operator:
Having spent a good bit of time nursing a GLD (ground Laser Designator) in several garden spots around the world, something from the report jumped out at me.
One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target. That means that Specter WAS ON STATION! Probably an AC130U. A ground laser designator is not a briefing pointer laser. You do not “paint” a target until the weapons system/designator is synched; which means that the AC130 was on station.
Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on POTUS direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area.
If the AC130 never left Sigonella (as Penetta says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed.
If that SEAL was actively “painting” a target; something was on station to engage! And the decision to stand down goes directly to POTUS!
To go astray the SA-24 must be DAZZLED; it generally won’t be deceived by mere flares. I think the AC-130U is equipped with such a dazzler but I’m sure their worries were still huge.
I believe the Consulate attack was not only a snatch attempt but possibly PRIMARILY a trap to lure an AC-130 close enough for a shoot-down —it has happened before.
But this doesn’t let the Choom Gang off the hook —the shot instead have come from Predator. In fact they could have responded in MANY ways.
Barry let them die and hit the hay as prep for his Vegas trip —why wouldn’t the media cover for him this time, the way they did for him with Fast and Furious...?
I regularly see AC-130s flying around here tho I don’t know much about their defensive measures.
It has come to my mind at times watching them slowly circle an area, that even a WWII German 88mm anti-aricraft battery would/could ruin the day for an AC-130 crew.
The WWII 88 battery might get off one shot, the radar, optics & laser target designators would then see that never happened again.
No Private, let alone a SEAL would light up a target w a laser without an asset in place to fire IMMEDIATELY!!
The notion that there were no 130’s available is WRONG!
It was UP and On-Orbit, awaiting orders to fire!
And the only person in the room who would have used the non-military term “stand down”, is the @$$hat in chief.
There was an armed aircraft overhead. It may not have been an AC130 Spectre, it may have been a UCAV, but one of the operators was actively painting a target, which means he was in active communication with an armed aircraft.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.