Let Them Die
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta was on the news Thursday explaining that no military aid was sent to American diplomats under attack in Libya, despite repeated calls for help, because "we didn't have enough information." We had live video feed from a drone overhead. We were on the telephone with people on the ground. One of our people had a laser trained on the mortar that killed him. What more information did we need? An FBI investigation?
This is not what commanders do. They do not leave endangered troops to fend for themselves when they have it in their power to help them. On 911 New York City firemen streamed up the stairwell of the World Trade Center, ultimately to their deaths. That was a proud hour of sacrifice, duty, and courage. This smacks of cowardice.
But cowardice doesn't explain it. For a president who routinely orders drone attacks on terrorists from Yemen to Pakistan what's the risk in dropping a precision bomb on a mortar position in Libya while a US mission is under attack? Something else is going on here. This is a national scandal of the first order.
The scandal extends to the traditional news media. Why aren't they covering this? If you don't watch Fox News you probably don't know it happened. AP reported the story, suggesting that an air strike would have required violating Libyan airspace. Libyan airspace? Oh please! Most outlets didn't even carry it. What are they trying to hide? Some pundits have offered the absurd explanation that it is Mitt Romney's fault for not challenging Barack Obama on the fiasco during the last presidential debate. Mitt Romney does not control news coverage for National Public Radio.
The story is a month and a half old and gets worse every day. The Obama administration line is that they are releasing new information as it comes to light. To borrow a word from the Vice President, malarkey! The State Department, the CIA, and presumably the White House knew exactly what happened in Benghazi on the night it happened. There were no demonstrations. There was nothing spontaneous about this. This was a planned military assault by people with heavy weapons trained in their use. Why not just say that? Why not just say that security was inadequate? It was a mistake but mistakes happen. The only thing changing is the spin.
Why did it take weeks for FBI investigators to visit the site? Too dangerous? Now you tell us! It wasn't too dangerous for a CNN reporter to wander through the consulate and pick up the ambassador's diary. Why haven't they interviewed any suspects? The New York Times did.
I'm at a loss to explain any of this but a few things are clear. Having engineered the downfall of Muammar Gaddafi (ok I misspelled it but nobody knows how to spell it) we have left North Africa less stable and the world less safe. The scandal isn't going away. Terrorists are revitalized. They have new safe havens not just in Libya but in northern Mali and quite possibly Syria. We don't appear to have a coherent strategy for dealing with it.
The scene of a helicopter evacuation from the Saigon embassy symbolized the end of what had been our longest war. But at least it was the end of a war. The scene of a burning compound in Benghazi may well come to symbolize the beginning of a new chapter in an even longer war, one that may continue for another generation. The decision not to go to the aid of the men in Benghazi and the subsequent fumbling response will have far reaching consequences. Four men are dead. There will be more.

