The Defense Drumbeat Blog

Recent Blog Posts

February 2013

Feb 13 2013

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Dempsey: We Can’t Give You Another Dollar

“What do you want your military to do? If you want it to be doing what it’s doing today, then we can’t give you another dollar.”

Last week, President Obama opened the door to a temporary fix of sequestration.  When asked to elaborate on what that fix would look like, Spokesman Jay Carney again advocated paying down sequester with more defense cuts. VIEW CHART

Today, testifying with all the service chiefs, General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was asked about the magnitude of additional cuts the military can endure.  His important answer: “We can’t give you another dollar.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey:

“We built a strategy last year that we said we could execute and absorb $487 billion. I can't sit here today and guarantee you that if you take another $175 billion that that strategy remains solvent....

The question I would ask this committee: What do you want your military to do? If you want it to be doing what it's doing today, then we can't give you another dollar. If you want us to do something less than that, we're all there with you and we'll figure it out.” 

Below are additional highlights from the testimony of America’s military commanders, detailing the impacts of repeated cuts to the Department of Defense:

Top Items:

  1. Cancel all ship and aircraft deployments to Africa, halting support to counter-terrorism operations on the continent during a time when terrorist affiliates are active there.
  2. Degrade training for deploying units due to lack of fuel, equipment and spare parts.
  3. Cut flight hours available for pilot proficiency, safety, and certification.
  4. Cancel 70% of ship maintenance in private shipyards and all aircraft maintenance scheduled in the 3rd and 4th quarters of FY13.
  5. Reduce by about one-third the number of days at sea and hours of flight operations for ships and aircraft permanently stationed in the Asia-Pacific; cancel all aircraft deployments and four of six ship deployments to the region.

Detailed List:

Department of Defense

· As of March 1, services will begin cancelling ship and aircraft maintenance work for the 3rd and 4th quarters. It is estimated that about 25 ships and 470 aircraft will be affected unless we can reverse these actions.|

· Most services and defense agencies will institute civilian hiring freezes, with exceptions for mission-critical activities. This freeze will disproportionately affect veterans, who make up 44 percent of the DoD civilian workforce. Hiring freezes will also be felt across the nation, since 86 percent of DoD’s civilian jobs fall outside the Washington, D.C. metro area.

· Most services and defense agencies will begin laying off a significant portion of our 46,000 temporary and term employees, again with exceptions for mission-critical activities.

· Most services and defense agencies will curtail facilities maintenance. More than $10 billion in funding— mostly to contractors and small businesses—would be affected, translating into lost jobs in the private sector. The Air Force, for example, plans to cut facilities maintenance projects by about half, including cuts to 189 projects at 55 installations in 26 states.

· The Army and other services are curtailing training not directly related to missions. The Army has directed a reduction of 30 percent in base operating services relative to FY 2012 levels and other services are also limiting base support. 

U.S. Army

· We are terminating an estimated 3,100 temporary and term employees and have directed an immediate Army-wide hiring freeze. These employees typically fill gaps in our installation services such as Army substance abuse programs, law enforcement, physical security, public works, and installation education programs.

· We have initiated planning to furlough up to 251,000 civilians for one day a week for twenty-two weeks, in full recognition of the risks of decreased productivity, morale, and the loss of 20% of their pay while furloughed. In addition to the hardship this poses to our dedicated workforce, this furlough will have an immediate trickle-down effect as the majority of these civilians are located throughout the U.S. on our posts and stations, and their spending directly impacts local economies and contributes towards state and local taxes. Any furlough would have an immediate impact on fire and emergency services, law enforcement, airfield operations, and all of our Army family programs.

· We are making plans to cancel 3rd and 4th quarter depot maintenance. As a result, we are terminating employment of an estimated 5,000 temporary, term, contractor, and permanent employees due to the reduced Depot Maintenance workload. 

· We will reduce Army purchase orders with 3,000 companies, of which 37%, or approximately 1,100, may consequently face moderate to high risk for bankruptcy. The reduction in maintenance will delay equipment readiness for six Divisions (3rd Infantry Division [Georgia], 4th Infantry Division [Colorado], 10th Mountain Division [Louisiana and New York], 25th Infantry Division [Alaska and Hawaii], 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) [Kentucky] and 82d Airborne Division [North Carolina]).

· These delays will halt the reset of 1,000 Tactical Wheeled vehicles, 14,000 communication devices and 17,000 weapons in Active and Reserve units for three to four years following redeployment. 

U.S. Navy

· Cancel 70% of ship maintenance in private shipyards and all aircraft maintenance scheduled in the 3rd and 4th quarters of FY13; this affects up to 25 ships and 327 aircraft and eliminates critical ship and aircraft repair and adds to an existing maintenance backlog generated by a decade of high-tempo operations – resulting in an overall Navy maintenance backlog of about $3 billion;

· Reduce by about one-third the number of days at sea and hours of flight operations for ships and aircraft permanently stationed in the Asia-Pacific; cancel all aircraft deployments and four of six ship deployments to the region;

· Reduce by half the number of days at sea and by one quarter the hours of flight operations for ships and aircraft in the Middle East and Arabian Gulf; reduce carrier presence in the Arabian Gulf to one (the requirement is two carriers);

· Stop Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) deployments to the Middle East / Arabian Gulf in FY14 after USS BOXER; this loses the nation’s primary response force for crises such as noncombatant evacuations in Liberia and Lebanon, floods in Pakistan and Thailand and terrorism threats in Africa – all of which were addressed by ARGs in the past decade.

· Cancel five of six FY13 ship deployments (including USNS COMFORT) and stop all aircraft deployments to South America, stopping efforts that interdicted hundreds of tons of illegal drugs into the U.S. in 2012.

· Cancel all ship and aircraft deployments to Africa, halting support to counter-terrorism operations on the continent during a time when terrorist affiliates are active there;

· Stop training and certification of ballistic missile defense ships, resulting in no new deployments of these ships to Europe after October 2013;

· Cancel most non-deployed operations including exercises, pre-deployment certification, and all port visits in the continental U.S.; as a result, the number of ships available for homeland defense will be reduced and it will take 9-12 months for ships that were not preparing to deploy to regain certification for Major Combat Operations;

· Stop training and certification for Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) except for the one next to deploy to the Middle East / Arabian Gulf; We will have only one additional or “surge” CSG certified for Major Combat Operations in FY13 and throughout FY14 (down from almost three on average);

· Stop training and certification for Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), resulting in no additional or “surge” ARG certified for Major Combat Operations in FY13 and FY14;

· Freeze hiring of civilian workers and release current temporary workers, resulting in a reduction of about 3,000 people from our shipyard workforce of Navy civilians;

· Plan to furlough up to about 186,000 civilians for 22 days, resulting in a 20 percent pay Reduction.

U.S. Marine Corps

· Reduce depot funding to 27% of the identified requirement, thus decreasing throughput of depot level maintenance for organizational equipment, and delaying our ability to reset war- torn equipment by eighteen months or more

· Park over eighty aircraft as depot maintenance schedules are stretched out

· Reduce support to theater geographic combatant commander requirements for shaping their theaters, responding to crisis and preventing conflict

· Reduce participation in multi-national training exercises, degrading one of the most effective investments in building partner nation capacity. 

· Degrade training for deploying units due to lack of fuel, equipment and spare parts

· Cut ammunition allocations for gunner certification and training

· Cut flight hours available for pilot proficiency, safety, and certification

· Reduce facility maintenance to 71% of the requirement

· Delay Marine Corps contributions to Joint special operations and cyber forces. 

· Further reduce an already thinned civilian workforce

· Severely curtail or extend acquisition programs

· Reduce organizational activities including recruiting, range-maintenance, family-housing maintenance and quality of life enhancements for military families. 

· Curtail safety and base security investments. Cut educational investments in the human capital of our uniformed and civilian workforce 

· Reprioritize an entire year of Military Construction projects into FY 14 and beyond. Given the current fiscal limitations, some could be delayed or deferred or may be cancelled. When reductions in facilities sustainment are compounded with the inability to execute our planned Military Construction program for FY 13, we are faced with a situation where we have severely impacted planned aviation unit lay-downs associated with the MV-22 and F- 35B, as well as other critical projects at home and in the Pacific.

· Delay major procurement programs such as Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar, Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, and Amphibious Combat Vehicle resulting in the possibility of Nunn- McCurdy breaches, Initial Operational Capability delays, and increased unit and total program cost.

· Cancel major multi-year procurements such as the MV-22 and incur greater cost and program delay in future program buys.

U.S. Air Force

· Should sequestration occur, the Air Force expects the requirement to involuntary furlough up to 180,000 civilian Airmen. Although the exact figures are still in work, we anticipate the loss of 22 working days for each civilian Airman between mid-April and September 30, 2013. This loss goes far beyond the 31.5 million man-hours of productivity we will lose—it also hits each individual with a 20 percent loss in pay over a six-month period, and it breaks faith with an integral and vital element of the Air Force family.

· The operational impacts will be particularly severe in parts of the Air Force that rely most heavily on civilians, like our depots and some of our flying training bases. For example, at Laughlin AFB, Texas, the Air Force’s largest pilot producer in FY122, civilian Airmen comprise the entire maintenance and simulator instructor workforce. A twenty percent reduction in that base’s ability to maintain jets and train student pilots will slow vital pilot production, an issue that always requires careful management.

· On April 1, 2013, Air Education and Training Command will curtail advanced flight training courses, freeing up resources necessary to protect initial qualification flight training. Despite those actions, initial qualification flight training may also stand down in early September 2013, or perhaps earlier depending upon the impact of civilian Airmen furloughs. The cascading effects of stoppages like these could result in future pilot shortages that could take over a decade to remedy. 

National Guard

· "The Air National Guard may not have the equipment available to respond to a new contingency. The Air National Guard will have to “park” aircraft due to reduced funding for flying hours." 

· "The Army will cancel all Combat Training Center rotations and Division Warfighter Exercises except for training for deploying units. Fifteen Field Artillery classes will also be cancelled by the Army. Further reductions in Basic Combat Training will result in drastic reductions in the number of deployable Soldiers."

· "Within the Air National Guard, the number of flight training missions will also be reduced as training flights are cancelled and as flying hours are allocated for priority missions. Under sequestration most flying units will be below acceptable readiness standards by the end of this fiscal year."

 

White House details impact of sequestration on non-defense agencies but GOP says focus must be on military
By Leada Gore
Huntsville Times
February 11, 2013

Fewer food inspectors, teachers and law enforcement agents will be on the job and programs for the homeless, mentally ill and those with HIV will be scaled back if the across-the-board cuts known as sequestration begin March 1.

With the deadline a little more than two weeks away, the White House is sending dire warnings about the impacts of sequestration. And while defense cuts have taken center stage in recent weeks, the administration's latest message centers on the other departments - ranging from education and health programs - that are on the chopping block.

GOP questions White House focus

While the White House's numbers paint a dark picture, Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said they also miss the main reason sequestration must be avoided.

"The White House finally broke their silence on the consequences President Obama's sequester would have on domestic spending. I wouldn't downplay those important impacts, but I was stunned at the president's silence on national security risks and I am frustrated that he continues to look to our men and women in uniform to pay the cost of America's debt crisis. After all, it is their lives that are at greater risks today, because of the cuts already imposed."

McKeon pointed out the cuts the military is making even before sequestration goes into effect, including the decision not to deploy the USS Harry Truman to the Persian Gulf and the delay of equipment maintenance.

"There was not one mention of the military, which is half of sequester's cuts, in the White House's fact sheet. I don't know which is worse, the deafening silence from the White House or the tone-deafness about sequester's impact on national security.

"President Obama unveiled his idea for a 'balanced' resolution of the sequestration crisis. It involved as much as $21 billion in additional defense cuts over the next seven months. I don't doubt that important domestic programs will be in jeopardy if sequester falls in March, but our military is in jeopardy today. To consider deeper cuts to the military now as a way to solve a financial crisis driven by entitlement programs, is both irresponsible and unacceptable."

Last week, President Obama said he was proposing a mixed bag of increased taxes and spending cuts to try and reach a short-term fix and avoid the $1 trillion in cuts - split evenly between defense and other programs - set take place in the next 10 years. Republicans countered with a plan of their own. It includes a 10 percent reduction in the federal work force with all the cuts coming from attrition.

With both sides seemingly far apart on the issues, major dates in the sequester debate loom large.

The Pentagon will send Congress a request for authorization to furlough civilian workers by this Friday, a step it's required to take before notifying some 790,000 workers they face up to 30 days furlough in the coming fiscal year. Plans call for civilian employees to take one unpaid day per week starting in mid-April and running through the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.

CBS This Morning: Military already impacted by looming spending cuts
February 7, 2013 

"If Congress doesn't approve a budget deal in the next three weeks, billions of dollars in automatic spending cuts go into effect - and it's already having an direct impact on the military. David Martin reports."

cbstm


Armed Services committees' Republicans propose plan to avert sequester with federal workforce attrition

By JOYCE TSAI
Stars and Stripes

WASHINGTON – The day after President Barack Obama proposed a short-term budget plan to avert sequestration’s devastating cuts before the March 1 deadline, top Republicans on the House and Senate Armed Services committees unveiled their own proposal based on a 10 percent reduction in the federal workforce through attrition.

The $85 billion budget plan proposed Wednesday includes Congressional pay freeze this year and every year that there is a federal deficit, and it reintroduces legislation that House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif, and Senate Armed Services Committee member Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., sponsored last year.

The plan would reduce federal civilian employees, including those in the Defense Department, by 10 percent over 10 years. For every three people who leave the agency, one can be hired, taking the Pentagon back to 2009 staffing levels.

The proposed savings of $85 billion would replace the amount that would have been cut by the fiscal 2013 sequester, including $46 billion from the Pentagon budget.

McKeon and Ayotte unveiled the budget proposal in a Capitol Hill press conference, alongside Republican Armed Services top brass, including Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., as well as House Armed Services Committee chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, and Mike Turner, R-Ohio.

McKeon called Obama’s recent plan to avert sequestration, which called for about half of the deficit savings to be raised through additional tax revenue and half through defense and non-defense cuts “irresponsible and unacceptable.”

“It leaves our troops and our economy unready to face the challenges of the future threats of today,” McKeon said, adding that it would cut into the vital resources, training and leadership that troops needed.

The president “should be looking out for soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines that he sends into harm’s way,” he said. “He should not be sending them with anything less than the total that they need.”

The committees’ proposal “will give us some breathing room on the sequestration,” McKeon said. “It gives us time to think about it, and pays for it. … It’s as painless as possible to protect our troops.”

Unlike sequestration, the proposal’s hiring limitation would occur at the agency level, rather than as an across-the-board reduction within agencies, giving the Defense Department the freedom to protect its military readiness, Ayotte said. It could also be waived in the event of a national security threat or extraordinary emergency.

Graham called out Obama for not living up to his pledge during the presidential debates that sequestration “will not happen.” The $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts over 10 years will wreak havoc on all federal agencies, but it falls too hard and disproportionately on the Defense Department, he said.

Even though defense represents about 18 percent of the federal budget, nearly half of the spending cuts called for under the 2011 Budget Control Act, which created the mechanism of sequestration, will be shouldered by the military, he said.

Top military leadership have warned that the Defense Department has “gone past cutting the fat,” McKeon said.

“We are now into cutting the bone,” he said. “And where they are going to have to cut will reduce the ability to train and equip these people properly -- and that’s going to start costing lives.”

Feb 07 2013

ICYMI – McKeon and HASC Republicans Propose “Down Payment” to Protect National Security

McKeon Calls the President’s Plans for More Tax Hikes and Defense Cuts “Irresponsible and Unacceptable”

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. “Buck” McKeon was joined at a press conference today by HASC Vice Chairman Mac Thornberry, Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Chairman Michael Turner, and Senators Inhofe, Ayotte, McCain, and Graham, where they unveiled the Down Payment to Protect National Security Act of 2013.

You can also view video of today’s press conference Here

The Hill newspaper reported on today’s press conference:   

“I visited with our top leaders and they have told me we have gone past cutting the fat. We've gone past cutting the meat. We're into the bone,” said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.).

“It's time for the president to face up to what the real responsibility is, what the real problem is, and that's to look at mandatory spending.”

The one-year delay, which is being spearheaded by McKeon and Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), was a plan that was “as painless as possible to protect our troops,” McKeon said.

The legislation would reverse the $85 billion in sequester cuts still on the books after the two-month delay that was included in the “fiscal cliff” deal. The funds would be offset by cutting the federal workforce by 10 percent over the next decade through attrition, by hiring back one worker for every three who leave.

The bill would also include a congressional pay freeze.”

Read the full article here: GOP Proposes Alternative Sequester Plan

To learn more about The Down Payment to Protect National Security Act of 2013, see the HASC Fact Sheet.  

January 2013

Jan 18 2013

"Republicans Were Right: The Pentagon Should Have Sketched Out Budget Cuts"

DOD scrambles to impose hiring freeze, curtail training, and cancel maintenance

Republicans Were Right: The Pentagon Should Have Sketched Out Budget Cuts
By telling defense officials not to specify sequestration cuts, the White House put them in a terrible position.

By Sara Sorcher
National Journal (Full text) 

Over the past year, even as fiscal-cliff anxiety mounted, the White House had a message for every federal agency: Don’t plan for the sequester. The administration didn’t want a debate over how it should trim spending to distract from the debate about whether lawmakers would force it to do so. Budget offices across the government set the question aside.

At the time, Republicans said this was ludicrous. They were especially incensed about the failure to plot out defense cuts, which, done poorly, could compromise national security. In August, for instance, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon grumbled that a concrete plan would give the Pentagon time to make safer reductions and build political will for compromise, because people would see how $500 billion in cuts would affect their jobs and districts.

At the witness table, Jeff Zients, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, refused to bite. ...

Republicans were right. Here we are with less than two months before sequestration, which more and more members of Congress now say they might support. The Pentagon should have planned for this. By failing to do so, it missed a chance to bargain with members for flexibility to make reductions, and it lost a major political bargaining chip.

Now the Defense Department appears to be scrambling. Last week, it imposed a civilian hiring freeze, curtailed training, and canceled maintenance for ships. It ordered each armed service to provide detailed plans for sequestration within weeks. “They went from the guidance that said, ‘Don’t even think about planning’ to a new realization: ‘Why are we so far behind?’ ” says David Berteau, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Had officials broadcast the details earlier—including a possible furlough of virtually all 800,000 Defense Department civilians—they could have induced a little more urgency in lawmakers, he says.
Not that the Pentagon has been silent.

Under White House orders not to plan, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta spent a year calling the cut a “doomsday” that would result in “a brigade without bullets.” On top of the $450 billion the department already agreed to trim, Panetta has said, sequestration would be “like shooting ourselves in the head.”
...

Currently, the Pentagon is forced to take 9 percent from nearly every line item in its budget—from F-35 jets to Army recruiting. 
...

The Pentagon would do well to take Republicans’ advice: Determine, quickly, how many civilians would need to be furloughed and alert them. Inform industry about specific cutbacks so that they too can issue warnings about layoffs. Allowing the workers and contractors to panic is the last ammunition the Pentagon has to get Congress to compromise or change the law. Specificity now may be too little, too late, but, as Berteau says, “it would certainly make it hard to ignore that it’s going to happen.”

Jan 10 2013

Defense Cuts Have Navy Struggling to Maintain Middle East Carrier Presence

Obama Administration Strategy At Odds With Cuts

In a recent story, the Washington Times explored the effects of the current aircraft carrier shortage on sailors and the broader U.S. security strategy. Despite $487 billion in defense cuts signed into law in 2011, the Navy’s responsibilities in the Middle East remain unchanged by the Obama Administration.

Aircraft Carrier Fleet Not Sized to Match Strategy
“Sailors and Marines serving on aircraft carriers can expect long deployments for the next few years because of ongoing crises in the Middle East and a shrinking number of carriers available for duty. …That has reduced the U.S. fleet of carriers from 11 to nine, as the Navy struggles to maintain a two-carrier presence in the Middle East as required by the Obama administration since 2010.”

“However, the end of the two-carrier presence in the Middle East is not likely anytime soon. The carriers are deployed there to deter Iran from acting on its threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway through which a fifth of the world’s traded oil transits; to intervene if Syria’s regime unleashes chemical weapons in its 22-month-long civil war; and to host fighter jets that provide close air support to troops in Afghanistan.”

“'We need 11 carriers to do the job. That’s been pretty clearly written, and that’s underwritten in our defense strategic guidance,' Adm. Jonathan Greenert, chief of naval operations, said recently.”

Sailors Face Longer Deployments
“Carrier deployments have lengthened gradually over the past decade, from six months to as long as nine months.”

“Adm. Greenert said it will be at least two or three years before carriers return to six-month deployments, as the Navy strains to keep operational its flattop fleet and the battle groups of combat and supply vessels that support their missions.”

“Adm. Greenert said the frequency of deployments, known as ‘operational tempo,’ is higher than he expected 14 months ago when he became chief of naval operations, and the two-carrier presence in the Middle East needs to be reconsidered.”

December 2012

Dec 11 2012

McKeon: National security and economy affected by more military cuts

The Foreign Policy Initiative, writers from the Washington Examiner and New York Post weigh in.

Chairman McKeon on Bloomberg TV
Appearing on Bloomberg TV 's "Street Smart," House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon discussed how further defense cuts, in addition to the $487 billion already made, would not only affect our national security, but also have a negative impact on our economy. 

Play 

FPI Analysis: Don’t Throw National Defense Off Fiscal Cliff

“...further cuts to Pentagon spending risks imperiling national security.” …

“Second, the Pentagon’s leaders have repeatedly warned that President Obama’s defense budget for FY 2013—which cuts $487 billion from core annual spending over 10 years—is the absolute floor for funding the military’s current strategy to defend the United States.”  …

“Contrary to the prevailing wisdom, defense spending has been repeatedly cut in recent years.” …

“Domestic spending—not national defense spending—has been and continues to be the primary driver of total federal spending, and therefore the primary driver of America’s federal debt.” … 

Hugh Hewitt: Rescuing Defense from the fiscal hostage crisis
Washington Examiner

“…I interviewed Tom Donnelly, Mackenzie Eaglen, and Gary Schmitt of the American Enterprise Institute and Max Boot of the Council on Foreign Relations -- all experts on the Pentagon and the impacts of the cuts should they fall….  All of those voices and there are many more, are unanimous in urging that the mindless cutting at the Pentagon be stopped. The president pledged that it would not occur during the campaign. So why are our troops and the equipment on which they depend and the comfort and safety of their families part of the hostage negotiations over tax rates, spending cuts and entitlement reform?” 

Arthur Herman: Gutting US defense - The other fiscal-cliff fallout
The New York Post

“If our Pentagon ends up going over the fiscal cliff, it will set off the most decisive shift in the balance of world power since the fall of the Berlin Wall.” …

“We end up with armed forces less willing and able to project power or put their remaining assets at risk—and an America with a smaller strategic footprint than at any time since the end of the Vietnam War. By the way, the cuts have grim implications for the US economy, too. A study by George Mason’s Stephen Fuller puts the impact at a loss of nearly 1 million defense-related jobs — many of them union jobs — and an $86.5 billion drop in national GDP.” …

“In short, defense cuts are going to further weaken an already feeble economy — even as friends and foes alike start the countdown on the decline of American power around the world.”

November 2012

Nov 01 2012

Washington Post: Lingering Questions about Benghazi

"The Obama administration needs to level with the country,"

The Washington Post’s David Ignatius asks in a recent Op-Ed, “Lingering questions about Benghazi”:

...So what did happen on the night of Sept. 11, when Woods, Ambassador Christopher Stevens and two others were killed? The best way to establish the facts would be a detailed, unclassified timeline of events; officials say that they are preparing one and that it may be released this week. That’s a must, even in the campaign’s volatile final week. In the meantime, here’s a summary of some of the issues that need to be clarified. ...

…. Was it wise to depend on a Libyan militia that clearly wasn’t up to the job? Could it have made a difference for those under attack at the consulate if [Tyrone] Woods had moved out as soon as he was, in one official’s words, “saddled and ready”?

"Second, why didn’t the United States send armed drones or other air assistance to Benghazi immediately? …

What more could have been done? A Joint Special Operations Command team was moved that night to Sigonella air base in Sicily, for quick deployment to Benghazi or any of the other U.S. facilities in danger that night across North Africa. Armed drones could also have been sent. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta summarized last Thursday the administration’s decision to opt for caution: 'You don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on.'

…. The Obama administration needs to level with the country about why it made its decisions.

September 2012

Sep 27 2012

House Members Seek Answers on Libya Terrorist Attack

House Chairmen, Reps. Thornberry, Turner Continue to Press for Information

foxletter

Fox Special Report Highlights House Letter to President on Libya
 
ThornCNN

Rep. Mac Thornberry on CNN Outfront to Discuss Unanswered Questions on Libya
 
Turnercnn
Rep. Michael Turner on CNN to Discuss Breaking News on Libya

Sep 27 2012

WSJ Editorial: The Libya Debacle

"The more we learn, the more Benghazi looks like a gross security failure."

Read the full article
.....

"None of the initial explanations offered by the White House and State Department since the assault on the Benghazi consulate has held up. First the Administration blamed protests provoked by an amateurish anti-Islam clip posted on YouTube. Cue Susan Rice, the U.N. Ambassador and leading candidate for Secretary of State in a second Obama term: 'What happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction . . . as a consequence of the video, that people gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent.'"

.....

"Journalists have stayed on the case, however, and their reporting is filling in the Administration's holes. On Friday, our WSJ colleagues showed that starting in spring, U.S. intelligence had been worried about radical militias in eastern Libya. These armed groups helped topple Moammar Ghadhafi last year but weren't demobilized as a new government has slowly found its legs. As we've noted since last winter, the waning of American and European interest in Libya could have dangerous consequences."

"Deteriorating security was no secret. On April 10, for example, an explosive device was thrown at a convoy carrying U.N. envoy Ian Martin. On June 6, an improvised explosive device exploded outside the U.S. consulate. In late August, State warned American citizens who were planning to travel to Libya about the threat of assassinations and car bombings."

Despite all this, U.S. diplomatic missions had minimal security. Officials told the Journal that the Administration put too much faith in weak Libyan police and military forces. The night of the Benghazi attack, four lightly armed Libyans and five American security officers were on duty. The complex lacked smoke-protection masks and fire extinguishers. Neither the consulate in Benghazi nor the embassy in Tripoli were guarded by U.S. Marines, whose deployment to Libya wasn't a priority.

Read the full article

*Currently displaying the latest 10 records. Use the select boxes from the filter bar above to view more records.