Oh please EDN, I doubt Fox News puts the lack of response by the military in Benghazi in the context of a $1 Trillion Dollar Plus annual military/industrial/complex. Those types love that stuff.
The only person who sounds like a Fox News Guy is your conservative hard on inducing comment about "Overwhelming Force" in 24 hours.
yeah these two statements kinda conflict. But more to the point, I sound like someone who has read a book and not talking points.
The entire point of the Airborne is to provide quick reaction force upto the Division level. Its not about getting a hard on about our forces, its the reality of the structure of the American military.
I think you're just lashing out because things like your "indigenous populations" rising up thoughts are being excoriated again and again as a myriad of news sources from the NYT on down are outlining the heavy CIA/Western Intelligence involvement in all of this upheaval. Libya was obviously a NATO/Western Intelligence operation and lots of people are asking why? Not saying Gaddafi was a good guy (but hey, the U.S. is more than willing to arm their favorite thug regimes and Theocratic States to the teeth), but he had renounced terrorism, had renounced WMD desires etc. etc. But wait, didn't he aspire for a North African Union that would be less dependent on Western economic mechanisms and influence . . . hmmm?? Have the Chinese been exerting more influence in North Africa in regards to things like energy production? Funny how AQ seems to pop up in places the Chinese are poking around in, obviously forcing the U.S. to send in JSOC/Military resources and other "aid".
So once again, a right and proper series questions to be asking is . . . .why was Benghazi teaming with CIA spooks? Were they there to weed out AQ, or get the usual AQ suspects ready to ship off to Syria, or was it some sort of CIA rendition destination?
Here is the inherent problem with your position which removes all Arab/ME/North Africa agency in their OWN affairs. The US has been trying to get rid of Gaddafi for DECADES. CIA, MI6 (especially) have been putting a large amount of assets behind his removal since Pan Am with NO success. Just because the US is being opportunistic with its foreign policy or security objectives doesn't mean that the local insurgents didn't do the majority of the heavy lifting.
Aside from your alex jones, gold standard, african union talking point, which is much more radical than i gave you credit for, Gaddafi was a hated man, his tribe were a hated people by large segments of the country.
One school of thought is that the CIA was buying weapons that Libyan militias had captured from the Libyan military for export to the "freedom fighters" in Libya.
Multiple reports of arms that the former Yugoslavia sold Gaddafi's military being found in the hands of Syrian "rebels".
Actual Libyan "Freedom Fighters" showing up on the battlegrounds of Syria is extremely well documented.
In the vast majority of these cases, these types of operations need state sanctioned intelligence agencies in order to be effective.
Its been proven, as I've already mentioned, more of these resources went south to Mali and was once again the cause for direct (colonial) western intervention. Now I'm sure there were a number of fighters and resources that went to Syria, but the timelines, logic, and common sense don't back that those movements occurred on a large scale like you're supposing.