OpEd: Jack
I must admit I was anticipating General Ham's early retirement...now he is free to speak openly..! It is sad thou that the military is losing our really good Command Officers...The Obama administration is running them out in droves...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by
Is it payback or just shame? General Carter Ham, the combatant commander of Africa Command and a key figure in the Benghazi scandal, is retiring from the Army years short of the mandatory retirement age, according to the Washington Times.
Ham’s name came up in relation to Benghazi last week when Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta was trying to explain why no military backup was sent into the battle at the U.S. mission despite repeated requests from those under siege:
“(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”
This despite having a live video feed of the events in Benghazi in the situation room, where information from other sources has placed President Obama as well.
I must admit I was anticipating General Ham's early retirement...now he is free to speak openly..! It is sad thou that the military is losing our really good Command Officers...The Obama administration is running them out in droves...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by
Is it payback or just shame? General Carter Ham, the combatant commander of Africa Command and a key figure in the Benghazi scandal, is retiring from the Army years short of the mandatory retirement age, according to the Washington Times.
Ham’s name came up in relation to Benghazi last week when Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta was trying to explain why no military backup was sent into the battle at the U.S. mission despite repeated requests from those under siege:
“(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place. And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”
This despite having a live video feed of the events in Benghazi in the situation room, where information from other sources has placed President Obama as well.
Why would the WH not want a rescue operation that a General in the field was willing to send be recalled and the commander relieved? If the Obama WH had different intentions for Ambassador Scott than just his killing. It is rumored that the Muslim Brotherhood had an arrangement with our President to allow them to kidnap Scott in exchange for the Blind Sheik we have detained from the first Trade Center bombing. Security was lowered for months prior to 9/11 to allow this to happen. This could have gone very wrong and now they are covering their butts. Watch what happens when the election is over and demand for the facts.
ReplyDelete