Since we had 2 available, at one time or another, flying over Benghazi before and during the 7+ hour assault on Americans, why didn't Panetta order a strike [lasers were pointing to the enemy position on the ground]? ______________________________________________
".....On February 19, 2009, Leon Panetta was sworn in as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency by Vice President Joe Biden before an audience of CIA employees. Panetta reportedly received a "rock star welcome" from his new subordinates.
In March 2009, Panetta visited India to discuss a host of issues including common strategy on dealing with Islamic extremism and Taliban. This was his first international visit since he assumed office.
Panetta supported U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, which he identified as the "most effective weapon" against senior Al-Qaeda leadership. These attacks increased significantly under Panetta, with as many as 50 suspected Al-Qaeda militants being killed in May 2009 alone.
As Director of the CIA, Panetta presided over the operations that led to Osama bin Laden's death on May 1, 2011...." Source
That’s exactly the issue I have with the story: everyone at the WH has pulled the trigger in the past.
The UBL kill - harm’s way, no problem.
And... no one in the chain of command looks better for not pulling the trigger. If there is only the people in the chain of command - there is no upside to what they did, only downside.
That’s what leads me to speculate that there has to be an outside decision-maker.
Leon Panetta never before had any hesitancy to use DRONE STRIKES!
EXACTLEEE
Could bho be so petty as to have intentially set up Panetta for Panetta’s acting to take out OBL without permission?
First by moving Panetta from Director of CIA to Sec. of Defense, then by making him helplessly stand by and watch the murders in Benghazi and then take the blame for Benghazi. Was this a carefully laid plan/trap?
I know that’s very cynical, but it really fits my view of bho and vj.
IMO, Panetta is toast, politically speaking.