You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Africa North
Obama Won't Answer Whether Americans in Benghazi Were Denied Help
2012-10-27
Story and video at the local TV shop is here.
In an interview with a Denver TV reporter Friday, President Obama twice refused to answer questions as to whether the Americans under siege in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012, were denied requests for help, saying he's waiting for the results of investigations before making any conclusions about what went wrong.

After being asked about possible denials of requests for aid, and whether it's fair to tell Americans that what happened is under investigation and won't be released until after the election, the president said, "the election has nothing to do with four brave Americans getting killed and us wanting to find out exactly what happened. These are folks who served under me who I had sent to some very dangerous places. Nobody wants to find out more what happened than I do."

President Obama told KUSA-TV's Kyle Clarke large that "we want to make sure we get it right, particularly because I have made a commitment to the families impacted as well as to the American people, we're going to bring those folks to justice. So, we're going to gather all the facts, find out exactly what happened, and make sure that it doesn't happen again but we're also going to make sure that we bring to justice those who carried out these attacks."
Posted by:Fred

#14  Thaqnks, B. I presume you meant you can paint all day long.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2012-10-27 16:01  

#13  Obama should continue to avoid answering what are, frankly, racist (TM)(R) questions.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2012-10-27 15:52  

#12  #8 what blackfive and source seem to be saying is that the ground laser cannot illuminate a target without a weapon system in the loop. is this true
Posted by Nimble Spemble

An LTD (Laser Target Designator) is somewhat similar to a non-directional ground beacon (NDB) which aviators use for guidance. The NDB transmits a radio frequency signal whether aircraft are present or not. The LTD "paints" or lases a target directionally, for weapons and targeting systems (which have on-board laser acquisition devices) to identify and vector toward. As long as your LTD batteries are up, you can't paint all day long. I hope this is helpful.
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-10-27 11:15  

#11  It's very simple. If they weren't denied help, he'd say "They weren't denied help." If they were, he'd obfuscate and block and twist like a twisty thing. Gee...
Posted by: Lionel Panda6719   2012-10-27 10:35  

#10  we know a drone was watching and presumably they did also. thus it isn't necessarily true that a 130 was overhead, just a conjecture absent other evidence.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2012-10-27 10:22  

#9  the ground laser cannot illuminate a target without a weapon system in the loop

Not 'cannot' so much as why the hell would you? The beam is invisible, except to the targeting system. There is no point to shining a target if you are not expecting something to happen. The something could be incoming ordnance or simply identifying a location/person. In any case, someone is watching.
Posted by: SteveS   2012-10-27 10:12  

#8  what blackfive and source seem to be saying is that the ground laser cannot illuminate a target without a weapon system in the loop. is this true
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2012-10-27 08:41  

#7  Doesn't this appear to be a behavior pattern of the school yard bully. As long as they can get away with angry pompous overbearing territorial behavior they have standing in the yard. However, basically a coward when confronted by something else they can't overawe, they turn tail.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2012-10-27 08:32  

#6  He's caught.
Posted by: Frank G   2012-10-27 08:28  

#5  Re: wanting ambassadorships, I suspect there are quite a few CAIR and ISNA members who'd volunteer.
Posted by: lotp   2012-10-27 06:34  

#4  I cannot help but think of the Mersk Alabama as a background study when considering this situation.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2012-10-27 01:28  

#3  And more from commenter at Blackfive --- (wish I have thought of this) Wonder who would want to be appointed to an ambassadorship in a Middle Eastern Hotspot if this miserable excuse for a human being and his ass-clown compatriots gets a second term?
Posted by: Sherry   2012-10-27 01:20  

#2  we want to make sure we get it right

Either he does not know (in comp e tent)

Or he knows (and will not say because he has no balls) and thus has been caught in the big lie.

Not good, not good...

The jig is up, Mr President....

He is thinking "the buck does not stop here or any where close to me".

mr president, (non caps intended) you are a small man and have the intellect of a 13 year old, about when you started on drugs.
Posted by: Au Auric   2012-10-27 00:45  

#1  Blackfive is checking in with Having a back and forth with a former legendary Delta operator
From the retired 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!

Then added to the post:
Update 4: From quoted retired Delta operator, "Jeff is correct (about lasing without air asset) but the only reason you would do that is to determine a specific grid for indirect fire which the SEAL did not have available. You are in an active firefight against mortars and MGs; there is only one reason to cease returning fire and paint a target and it ain't because you thought it was a good time to pull a PMCS on your f******g GLD."

Found in the comments about that PMCS for us non-military folks:
...and for those who don't know, PMCS is maintenance and testing on a device you do during slack time back in garrison, not in the heat of some deadly shoot up.

And I have a question -- in all of this, seems the Ambassador might not have been saved since the fire overran their location.... my question is... how long was it from when the SEAL Ty Woods knew of the shots before he and the guys ran to the rescue?

The report reads that it was the SEAL and the team he brought with him that saved the ones they got out... how long did they wait to disobey orders and rush to the scene?

If they had gotten the okay to go immediately, they were only a mile away, could they have made a difference?

If we are to believe the reporting by the Times reporting of the interviews with the Libyan guards, they were in that safe room, there was a period of time before the fire started and the smoke engulfed them.
Posted by: Sherry   2012-10-27 00:37  

00:00