Movie 13 Hours will re-open Benghazi discussion

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

"Supposedly" there were AC130s on the ramp at Sigonella in Sicily (450mi, 2 hour flight time - 3 hours on station assuming 1 hour). I do not know if that is true or not. F16s out of Aviano were in range , 2 hours flight time, F16s from Bitburg 3 hours flight, F15e out of Incirlik 2 hours, all possible, all within reason. There are B1s at Qatar that are 4 hours flight time. And yes, all could have reasons why they were not available.

"Supposedly" implies a sense of unknowing, perhaps based on speculation or rumor. It's perfectly appropriate during the initial phases of the discussion. But later, when investigations are complete and findings are made it's just a conspiracy code-word to persist doubt and scandal.

Even the Republican led House Armed Services Committee found no response options that would have changed the outcome.

And from SecDef Robert Gates:

"And frankly I've heard, well, why didn't you just fly a fighter jet over there to scare 'em with the noise or something. Given the number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from Qaddafi's arsenals I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances."

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

"Supposedly" implies a sense of unknowing, perhaps based on speculation or rumor. It's perfectly appropriate during the initial phases of the discussion. But later, when investigations are complete and findings are made it's just a conspiracy code-word to persist doubt and scandal.

Even the Republican led House Armed Services Committee found no response options that would have changed the outcome.

And from SecDef Robert Gates:

"And frankly I've heard, well, why didn't you just fly a fighter jet over there to scare 'em with the noise or something. Given the number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from Qaddafi's arsenals I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances."

That's funny, because it was a single aircraft that brought Jack Silva, one of the operators, to Benghazi. It was also a single aircraft that landed in Benghazi that brought the SEAL Glen Doherty from Tripoli. And according to the book, it was a single aircraft (a big, slow aircraft, not an F-16, and thus much more vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire) that got the Americans out of Libya to Germany the next day. So it would appear that Gates' concern there, is, well, quite selective.

So our defense secretary would never send a single aircraft in support of ground troops, anyplace where surface-to-air missiles exist. That's what I'm supposed to believe? Can you sharethat link, please? I'd like to share that with some folks I know.

I also see that you aren't addressing Hilary's flip-flopping on the video.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

That's funny, because it was a single aircraft that brought Jack Silva, one of the operators, to Benghazi. It was also a single aircraft that landed in Benghazi that brought the SEAL Glen Doherty from Tripoli. And according to the book, it was a single aircraft (a big, slow aircraft, not an F-16, and thus much more vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire) that got the Americans out of Libya to Germany the next day. So it would appear that Gates' concern there, is, well, quite selective.

Doherty and crew didn't fly in on a military aircraft, they commandeered a private plane. The flight to Germany didn't leave from Benghazi and by that time there were more eyes on the ground.

So our defense secretary would never send a single aircraft in support of ground troops, anyplace where surface-to-air missiles exist. That's what I'm supposed to believe? Can you sharethat link, please? I'd like to share that with some folks I know.

That's not what he said at all.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Doherty and crew didn't fly in on a military aircraft, they commandeered a private plane. The flight to Germany didn't leave from Benghazi and by that time there were more eyes on the ground.


That's not what he said at all.

Good points.

I read his comments in a news article, exactly as you posted them. He seems to be saying that there's no such thing as a quick reaction force that he would ever agree to send in.

We had an unarmed, predator drone over the annex during much of the 12 hour fight, sending real-time video to the white house. Plus we had radio contact with multiple people on the scene. If that's not sufficient eyes on the ground to send in aircraft, then I can't fathom an active-battle scenario that is, I just can't.

If Gates' hangup is that he wouldn't send in a single aircraft, then fine, send two. Who said it had to be one?

Has anyone ever itemized exactly what assets were within a 12 hour flight time of Benghazi? That I'd like to see. It has to be a long list, because that's a huge radius.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

We had an unarmed, predator drone over the annex during much of the 12 hour fight, sending real-time video to the white house. Plus we had radio contact with multiple people on the scene. If that's not sufficient eyes on the ground to send in aircraft, then I can't fathom an active-battle scenario that is, I just can't.

The drone was already in the area performing surveillance.

Has anyone ever itemized exactly what assets were within a 12 hour flight time of Benghazi? That I'd like to see. It has to be a long list, because that's a huge radius.

The 2014 House investigation did look into this and found no assets that could have helped. It's not just flight time, for instance the F-16's in Aviano that JohnR mentioned were configured for training and not combat. There were no C130's nearby.

There are also logistical considerations like tankers to refuel, AWACS, search and rescue etc...

I just think it's pretty absurd that in this whole Clinton hate fest people would discount we had a lot of very smart and dedicated American's trying like hell to sort this out.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I just think it's pretty absurd that in this whole Clinton hate fest people would discount we had Bob trying like hell to sort this out.

fixed it

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

The drone was already in the area performing surveillance.


The 2014 House investigation did look into this and found no assets that could have helped. It's not just flight time, for instance the F-16's in Aviano that JohnR mentioned were configured for training and not combat. There were no C130's nearby.

There are also logistical considerations like tankers to refuel, AWACS, search and rescue etc...

I just think it's pretty absurd that in this whole Clinton hate fest people would discount we had a lot of very smart and dedicated American's trying like hell to sort this out.

"The drone was already in the area performing surveillance."

according to the book, a drone showed up ove rth ebattle, after the former SEALs asked for it. We have sent assets to the rescue with less than that.

"The 2014 House investigation did look into this and found no assets that could have helped"

Which means what, exactly? If there were 8 guys that could have been flown in (like Glen Doherty did), that could have made ALL the difference.

"pretty absurd that in this whole Clinton hate fest "

When she keeps flip-flopping about the video, she deserves an avalance of criticism.


If there were no assets within a 12-hour flight time, that generates a new line of very fair criticism...why the hell wasn't there anything within a 12 hour flight radius of a well-known hotspot? Has anyone asked that? Whose job is it, to make sure that we don't send people into harm's way with no possible means of support, and why hasn't that person been publicly fired for this?

A 12 hour flight time represents a huge chunk of the planet. If ther ewa snothing in that radius to help these people, that's almost as bad as if there were assets that were never sent.

I can't fathom the reluctance to be outraged. That has zip to do with politics.

And again, her behavior in the aftermath, was revolting.

[JohnR]

Spangdahlem in Germany has a squadron of F16C/Ds - 1500 miles away

Aviano in Italy has 2 squadrons of F16C/Ds - 850 miles away
Both of those locations, if they had anything approaching alert, might have A2A loaded and not A2G

Lakenheath UK - has 2 squadrons of F15E Strike Eagles which are probably the ideal kit in central/western Europe for something like this. (2 F15Es made the round trip from Lakenheath in June 2015 to early retire some bad guys in Libya so yes it can be done)

Pro: with the right loadups they could have been effective (or really overkill) and the guys on the ground did have laser designation devices.

Ideal would have been an AC130 or even Reaper UAVs with Hellfire (better for small targets) but a Reaper would have been at extreme range limits with little to no loiter time if out of Sigonella. Just doesn't have the legs. There have been discussions on whether or not AC130s were in Italy or not.

Onsite was (reportedly) an RQ4 Global Hawk which I do not believe can be armed. So I believe reports of an armed drone onsite are false.

Other US assets in range:

Navy - nothing really in range, nearest CSG was 3,000 miles away.

Air Force has B1Bs in Qatar and looks like some AC130 (GoogleMaps that date window) but they would not have the speed to get on station for hours (The B1s could). Might have something at Al Dahra, UAE (F15Es).

Nothing is available without heavy tanking support.

Interestingly, SOEUR with US ARMY SOF and Navy Seal units are stationed at Panzer Kaserne (worked there when well wet behind the ears) which is just down the street from Patch Barracks EUCOM and Kelly Barracks HQ AFRICOM - both which would have been heavily interested and listening into what was going on in Benghazi. And they would want to get down there quick but would not have been down in time.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

"Supposedly" implies a sense of unknowing, perhaps based on speculation or rumor. It's perfectly appropriate during the initial phases of the discussion. But later, when investigations are complete and findings are made it's just a conspiracy code-word to persist doubt and scandal.

Even the Republican led House Armed Services Committee found no response options that would have changed the outcome.

And from SecDef Robert Gates:

"And frankly I've heard, well, why didn't you just fly a fighter jet over there to scare 'em with the noise or something. Given the number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from Qaddafi's arsenals I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances."

If Gates really said this (and I don't doubt you), I'd like to know in what scenario, exactly, would he send in a quick reaction force? If it means you need to have 2 aircraft, fine. But whatever the protocol is, why didn't we have that functionality, within 12 hours of a well-known hotspot, on the anniversary or 09/11? And whose fault is it, that we didn't? Sarah Palin's?