If armed forces/assets of the US (be they military or paramilitary) knew of the attack, had the means to get there, and had their weapons ready, was there no one in command of those forces at any level who had the balls (and a proper sense of obligation) to ignore a lack of orders to go (or orders not to), and just go? Is this incident an example of the kind of military leadership we now have – that we have emasculated our military commanders? When they write their memoirs, are those who were in the chain of command when this incident occurred going to write that they “followed orders” when the chips were down? Where are leaders like Alan West when you need them?
Damning details about this national scandal continue to emerge, even as the administration hunkers down and tries to wait it out on a political timetable. ABC News' Jake Tapper describes the succession of appalling revelations as a slow drip, but the stream is picking up. Let's pick through what we've learned over the last 48 hours alone (if you're short on time, skip down to item number five, which is the biggest story of the bunch):
(1) As Katie reported yesterday, secret cables sent from US personnel in Libya to the State Department offered dire and specific...
the rear admiral in charge in the med was also relieved of command by fubarack
those two tried to help
There are people that have been relieved of Command, this is career ruining, this man/child has to go.