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.
Dittos
Needs to be repeated
****** “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.” *****
TT