When General Ham received his “stand down” orders from Obama, he made
plans to commit mutiny and go ahead with the rescue of Stevens, as he
did, he was arrested within minutes of contravening he order by his
second in command, General Rodriquez. Admiral Gayouette, the commander
of Carrier Strike Group Three, was preparing to provide intelligence and
air cover for General Hamm’s rescue team in violation of his standing
orders and he was promptly relieved of command for allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.”
The positions held by Hamm and Gayouette are so powerful and so
sensitive, their replacements required approval from the Senate. Also,
at that time, the Middle East was considered to be a war zone in which
it was believed that the US was trying to provoke Syria and/or Iran into
attacking the US so we could have the pretext for invasion.
Key questions about the mutiny on Benghazi:
1. Did Hamm and Gayouette commit mutiny in a war zone?
Answer: Without question!
2. Where did Hamm and Gayouette fit into the power structure of the military?
Answer: In a war zone, these two men represented two of the top four
commanders in the region. Hamm would have overseen any military
incursion into Syria or Iran. When Obama fired the two leaders, he
effectively gutted his military command structure in the region.
3.. Did Hamm and Gayouette’s conspiracy to commit mutiny in the face standing presidential orders occur in isolation?
Answer: Only a person with absolutely no knowledge of military
command structure would be so naive to believe this assertion. The
military builds in redundant chains of command which overlap. There is
no way that Hamm and Gayouette’s mutiny was occurring without the
knowledge of their superiors as well as the NSA, which explains how the
Obama administration learned of this betrayal and moved to arrest both
men before any rescue effort could have been launched.
4. Why were key leaders in the military willing to risk their careers in this mutiny?
Answer: Because every senior command military officer was being faced
with the continual acquisition and control of our military by outside
forces, this threatened the upward mobility of the more aggressive
commanders and it threatened the very viability of the military itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment