There is an obvious danger lurking for Republicans in the Benghazi affair: The more they attack President Obama for alleged weakness in allowing the U.S. consulate to be attacked and the ambassador killed, the more vulnerable they make themselves to a backlash should Obama act decisively to capture or kill the perpetrators of the attack. This New York Times article suggests such a response may be in the works: It reports the not-terribly-surprising news that the Joint Special Operations Command, home of Delta Force, SEAL Team Six, and other top-tier operators, is preparing “target packages” on those believed to be responsible for this brazen assault. It is not hard to imagine that Obama could well go on TV sometime in the next month to announce that justice has been delivered to Ambassador Stevens’s killers by the U.S. military’s elite forces, thus reinforcing the impression fostered by the Osama bin Laden raid that this is one commander-in-chief who is not afraid to use lethal force against our enemies.
Republicans have been trying to turn Benghazi into another Iranian Hostage Crisis but with such a tough response Obama could turn the analogy on its head. Just imagine what the political fallout would have been if the mission to rescue Iranian hostages had succeeded, rather than ending in a fireball in the Iranian desert. Jimmy Carter could have dispelled in an instant the impression that he was weak and might well have defeated Ronald Reagan.
Of course, to reap such political benefit, Obama will actually have to carry out an operation–not just have his aides leak word that such an operation may be in the offing. And indeed, by leaking to the New York Times, someone inside the government may well be putting the Libyan suspects on their guard and endangering the potential success of any future mission. There is really no justification for the whole world–including the segment of the world composed of jihadists–to learn that JSOC planners “are putting together information on where these individuals live, who their family members and their associates are, and their entire pattern of life”–information that the Times attributes to “one American official who has been briefed on the target planning now under way.”
This would appear to be of a piece with the other leaks–including details of the bin Laden operation and the revelation that a double agent had been working inside al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula–that redound to the president’s political benefit but that endanger highly classified operations.
I doubt very much, Max, if 'justice will delivered'; only revenge. America lost any sense of justice it ever had yonks ago.
This Administration is a train wreck and unfit to lead and the fact that they leak classified information is also criminal. Enough-is-enough, time to vote these bumbling buffoons out of office.
News reports were that Obama turned down two chances to take out Osama. Yes, our diffident Prez might actually use military assets and have an October surprise. Or he may consider, and debate, and soliloquize until past Christmas. Or this may turn out to be another fable like that leaked Israeli strike against Tehran's nuclear facilities yesterday, last week, last month, last year….
So Obama will show that he's a resolute, get-things-done leader by sending a kill team to take out a few of the people who his irresolute, fail-to-do-obvious-things, let-disasters-happen leadership allowed to kill four Americans, sack numerous embassies or consulates, and run up Al Qaeda flags on US territories.
Yeesh, Mr. Boot. The other day you were peddling the meme that we'd better give the Egyptians a cool $450 million in emergency aid or else we might wind up with even more crazed Islamist terrorists than the Muslim Brotherhood is already managing to crank out. Now we have more fear and worry that if we criticize Obama for his criminal neglect of security for our embassies, he just might just hit back with some kind of bin Laden-like operation. Conservatives cannot and should not take the counsel of their fears. n nEspecially false ones like this. First, Obama is inherently risk averse. As one commenter above noted, he passed on multiple opportunities to get bin Laden (Bin Laden!) and only gave the go ahead after being dragged into it and issuing a directive that was the biggest CYA imaginable if anything went wrong. He will only going to consider a risky operation of going into Libya if and only if the polls show him in desperate straits versus Romney. It's not even clear that Obama gets real-world advice any longer as news reports indicate that he leads one of the most cocooned and insulated lives of any recent president, hearing only what he wants to hear. You can bet that Obama is hearing all coos and flattery. n nSecond, given the OPSEC that this administration of middle school girls employs, he would have to be crazy to try something in Libya now. We could very well see another Carteresque debacle in the desert or Black Hawk Down. n nThird, there is a very easy solution to the danger you pose: preempt it! The GOP should keep up the attacks on the embassy security scandal while also now pointing out the outrageous leaks about a possible response that clearly endangers our SOF. Chairman Issa ought to be demanding an investigation into who exactly leaked this info to the NYT. This could turn out to be a major campaign issue to say that this Admin is so reckless that they think nothing of leaking highly sensitive information to the media about the Bin Laden raid, about the drone strike kill list, and now about possible retaliation against the Libya attackers. The GOP needs to be on the offensive when it is given bazookas like this, gift wrapped by the Obama Admin. n nBuck up, Mr. Boot.
Republicans need to be critical of the Administration's handling of this whole affair right up and until it's rectified. Worrying about the POTUS finally doing the right thing is not how the party out of power needs to behave. They should be coaxing him to do the right thing continuously.
“The more they [the GOP] attack President Obama for alleged weakness in allowing the U.S. consulate to be attacked and the ambassador killed, the more vulnerable they make themselves to a backlash should Obama act decisively to capture or kill the perpetrators of the attack.”r nr nSo I guess you GOPers are hoping that the perps go unpunished.
"The more they [the GOP] attack President Obama for alleged weakness in allowing the U.S. consulate to be attacked and the ambassador killed, the more vulnerable they make themselves to a backlash should Obama act decisively to capture or kill the perpetrators of the attack." n nSo I guess you GOPers are hoping the perps go unpunished.
"Just imagine what the political fallout would have been if the mission to rescue Iranian hostages had succeeded, rather than ending in a fireball in the Iranian desert. Jimmy Carter could have dispelled in an instant the impression that he was weak and might well have defeated Ronald Reagan." n nWhew! You GOPers really dodged a bullet with that one. Thank heavens the mission failed, huh?
Obama circumvented Congress to go to war against Lybia and take out Gadaffi which has led to the current mess and now he would regain his honour if he takes out the Islamists/extremists/BinLadinists who killed his Ambassador about whom he gave not a dog’s doo?
The problem for Obama is that the Libyan attackers are nameless, faceless. Even if they know the names of the attackers, it's easy to doubt they have the actual attacker if they ever capture any. Look how many people really believe that the prisoners at Gitmo are innocent.