Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers...........

Posted by on May. 15, 2013 at 11:20 AM
  • 9 Replies

In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.

Why Stevens, who died of smoke inhalation in the first of two attacks that took place late Sept. 11 and early Sept. 12, 2012, would turn down the offers remains unclear. The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The next day, the embassy drafted a cable outlining the dire circumstances and saying it would spell out what it needed in a separate cable.

“In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover,” said the cable, which was first reported by Fox News.

Army Gen. Carter Ham, then the head of the U.S. Africa Command, did not wait for the separate cable, however. Instead, after reading the Aug. 16 cable, Ham phoned Stevens and asked if the embassy needed a special security team from the U.S. military. Stevens told Ham it did not, the officials said.

Weeks later, Stevens traveled to Germany for an already scheduled meeting with Ham at AFRICOM headquarters. During that meeting, Ham again offered additional military assets, and Stevens again said no, the two officials said.


Officials have publicly referred to Ham’s phone call before. In his Feb. 7 testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the military was aware of the Aug. 16 cable and that someone had turned down Ham’s offer.

Referring to the cable, Dempsey said: “I was aware of it, because it came in, in Gen. Ham’s report. Gen. Ham actually called the embassy to, to see if they wanted to extend the special security team there and was said – and was told no.”


Read more HERE

by on May. 15, 2013 at 11:20 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-9):
JustCJ
by on May. 15, 2013 at 11:36 AM

 Things change? From Aug 15th to Sept 11th...things changed. Who'da thunk a bunch of fucking no good Muslims would take them out? Who'da thunk our POTUS would lie through his teeth?

Who'da thunk, people would actually have GULL to blame the dead guy.

SMFH

BaronSamedi
by Bronze Member on May. 15, 2013 at 12:21 PM

His call his, stupidity.

Mommy_of_Riley
by Just Jess on May. 15, 2013 at 12:54 PM
1 mom liked this
That was his call to make.

They knew what it was like over there and probably felt safe enough as it was at that time...

No one can predict the future. :-/
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
JakeandEmmasMom
by Gold Member on May. 15, 2013 at 1:29 PM
1 mom liked this

 There is so much that goes into those kinds of decisions, and we don't usually have all of the pertinant information.

JoJoBean8
by Silver Member on May. 15, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Maybe he felt safe in August and then things changed rapidly and it was to late.

Trollslayer
by Terica on May. 16, 2013 at 12:44 AM

I find it odd that when he said no it was not safe, others had pulled out. Just making a point....I dont get why some are hell bent on blaming Obama for everything that happened. Stevens could have had more protection.

SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on May. 16, 2013 at 2:07 AM
1 mom liked this

Ambassador Stevens was a good guy who wanted to go through his own channels. As did Eric Nordstrom.

Too bad his own channels let him and the other three down in such a disastrous way.

Also killed some Libyans who fought to protect them.

And how about Charlene Lamb, whose job it is to provide security, who instead had been drawing it down and refusing all the requests for additional security? Who everyone said was responsible for the security failure? Charlene Lamb, who was "fired" from that position, is working at another State Dept. job. Must be nice when you can't even be fired for incompetence after bearing responsibility for killing four Americans.

pvtjokerus
by Gold Member on May. 16, 2013 at 8:39 AM
1 mom liked this

You are leaving something out:  THIS

One person familiar with the events said Stevens might have rejected the offers because there was an understanding within the State Department that officials in Libya ought not to request more security, in part because of concerns about the political fallout of seeking a larger military presence in a country that was still being touted as a foreign policy success.

“The embassy was told through back channels to not make direct requests for security,” an official familiar with the case, who agreed to discuss the case only anonymously because of the sensitivity of the subject, told McClatchy.


Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#.UZOlzrWG3XW#storylink=cpy
pvtjokerus
by Gold Member on May. 16, 2013 at 8:41 AM
1 mom liked this

 You need to read the rest of your article that you didn't post and then you need to understand how "things and request work" within the government especially the State Dept.  Once you understand this you will see what really went on.


Quoting Trollslayer:

I find it odd that when he said no it was not safe, others had pulled out. Just making a point....I dont get why some are hell bent on blaming Obama for everything that happened. Stevens could have had more protection.


 

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)