[Keb]

You said “Modern laser designators can archive grid locations/GPS coordinates for later use by other platforms. I don’t know about the guy saying that painting a laser on the mortar team means that an AC-130 or armed Predator was overhead at that time.”

If I’ve got the terminology right, the key word is “painting”. To “paint” a target is to hold a designator on it, so it can be attacked by something which can hit the designation point. The same designator can be used to capture coordinates, to be used in a call for indirect fire (or to stamp on a souvenir photo, for that matter), but that’s not called “painting” a target.

If I’ve got the terminology right, when someone is painting a target instead of shooting, that means that he thinks something is available to fire on the laser spot.

You’re more familiar with this than I am; it that right?

[Travis McGee]

I never used modern laser designators, so I don't know the ins and outs or the "inside baseball" terms. But yes, the laser dot can be homed-in-on by a missile fired from another platform, or it can be used to capture coordinates. In both cases I'd say they were "painting" the target while the laser was on. It's risky, because plenty of enemies now have NODs, and a laser in a NOD is a bright green line pointing straight to your position, in this case, the MG on the roof of the CIA annex. The two savvy former SEALs would not be like rookies, waving that green light saber all over Benghazi to help everybody aim at them. They would use the IR laser the minimum to do a job. To get coordinates, just a moment. But if an AC-130 was overhead and they were begging for supporting fire to take out the mortar position, they would leave it on.

And the longer it's on, the longer everybody in Benghazi with a NOD (or even many modern digital cameras) would be seeing that green line pointing right at the SEALs.