General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGranting requests for additional security in Libya would not have prevented the Benghazi attack
that killed Ambassador Stevens and 3 other Americans. Why? The requests for additional security in Libya were for the Tripoli compound NOT the Benghazi compound where the attack occurred.
In a stream of diplomatic cables, embassy security officers warned their State Department superiors of a worsening threat from Islamic extremists, and requested that the teams of military personnel and State Department security guards who were already on duty be kept in service.
The requests were denied, but they were largely focused on extending the tours of security guards at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli -- not at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi, 400 miles away.
And State Department officials testified this week during a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing that extending the tour of additional guards -- a 16-member military security team -- through mid-September would not have changed the bloody outcome because it was based in Tripoli, not Benghazi.
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/world/libya-security-flap-debated-657392/#ixzz29BhFnDqS
SmileyRose
(4,854 posts)At U.S. diplomatic facilities overseas, the host nation is primarily responsible for providing security outside the compound's walls. Inside the compound, the State Department is in charge, relying on a mix of diplomatic security officers, local contract guards and Marines. The Marines are responsible for guarding classified documents, which they are instructed to destroy if there is a breach of the compound. Senior diplomats are protected by diplomatic security officers, not a detachment of Marines, as Mr. Ryan asserted in Thursday night's debate
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/world/libya-security-flap-debated-657392/#ixzz29Bku0r4m