I wasn’t disputing the issue of the mortars. I did find that exact same thing on wiki and a few other places that I hadn’t noticed before.
I don’t disagree with much you say here. With the exception of the last paragraph.
I’m not sure anyone has claimed to have been surprised. We continue to live in a dangerous world. Ambassador Stevens knew that. We both know the ties between the state department and the intelligence community. Stevens was part of that. He knew the risks.
The mortars change everything, yet change nothing. I think we both know the nature of the facility in Benghazi. Ambassador Stevens knew what it was. Which is probably why there is slim evidence that any additional security was requested through state for that particular facility. If more security was needed for that facility, it wouldn’t have gone through state, and it’s highly unlikely that request would have been declined, and there is no way in hell that request will ever become public. (Issa shut down his hearings for a reason. And it certainly was not because there was a shortage of political capital.) Which leads me to believe that there was no intelligence which indicated an attack on Benghazi was imminent. If there had been, Ambassador Stevens wouldn’t have been there. I think it’s more likely, just the opposite, that Benghazi was believed safe.
I don’t know whether this attack was entirely planned or partly spontaneous. I don’t suspect we’ll ever know. (The mortars would lead me to believe it was at least partially planned.) Nor do I think it’s terribly pertinent. There was a failure here. But it wasn’t a state department security problem. It was an intelligence problem. And we don’t get to find out about intelligence problems. Nor should we.[/quote]
SK: There was considerable intel and in the MONTHS leading up to the Benghazi attack and this intel came from US, Western (largely British) and Libyan sources.
This intel indicated that al-Qaeda was now active in the Maghreb, and that this arm of al-Qaeda was separate and distinct from AQI (al-Qaeda Iraq) or AQAP (al-Qaeda Arabian Peninsula). Moreover, they were actively developing on-the-ground intel in Libya, with the express purpose of striking a US and/or Western target (probably British).
This intel was returned to the US through multiple channels, including CIA, NSA and military (specifically the USMC, since the Marines are responsible for embassies, consulates and trade missions). It was widely disseminated and there was considerable talk in the week or so leading up to the attack of deploying a 16 man USMC extraction team of the sort that specializes in removing US diplomatic personnel from “hot spots” like this one, due to the fact that Stevens was in a “soft” target (largely unprotected and indefensible compound) versus a “hard” target (hardened facility like an embassy with a US Marine security contingent). This USMC team was not deployed, in spite of repeated requests from the senior USMC officer responsible.
The problem here, again, is that the intel being developed shows clearly that al-Qaeda is not a spent force, which runs contrary to the administration’s narrative, post-bin Laden, that it was, along with the inconvenient fact that Libya is still inherently unstable and growing worse, which also contravenes the narrative that Libya represents a successful new paradigm in US involvement and one that doesn’t require US manpower on the ground.
No one in the intel or military community felt that Benghazi was safe, hence the round-the-clock drone coverage, along with the constant return of on-scene intel, including that from friendly Libyan sources warning of an imminent attack on Stevens, which Stevens dutifully passed back to both DepState and the administration, through DNI. One cannot make a credible case that we (the US) were unaware of the impending attack, simply because there is too much intel and information that contradicts that assertion.
We got caught with our pants down and largely because we wish to continue perpetuating the myth that the Arab Spring hasn’t resulted in further anti-American sentiment and that the strategies deployed by this administration have largely been successful and that Obama and the US are now viewed more favorably (in spite of the fact that they’re burning him in effigy now).
Our drone program is now essentially the best recruiting tool that al-Qaeda possesses, and we’re seeing a large upswing in both al-Qaeda membership, as well as operational capabilities, as shown by the Benghazi attack. This wasn’t a quickly planned operation. They knew the layout of the compound, they knew the comings and goings of the various personnel on-site, including the security team and they launched a sophisticated and well-timed strike that killed the ambassador, as well as two former SEALs and you know those guys didn’t go quietly. This was a massive show of force and it illustrates al-Qaeda’s capabilities in North Africa quite well.
