Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- another -- of bringing colonel Cedric Leighton USF bulls retired and president of Cedric Leighton associates joining us from DC -- colonel good to see you as always.
Good -- for you to Jonathan this question of the attack in Libya I wanna focus on first the attack on our consulate in Benghazi which killed four Americans.
Of course among them ambassador Chris Stevens.
It seemed curious -- to have four or five days in which.
All the indications world that we -- getting -- that this was planned.
And then Susan Rice the US ambassador the UN goes on the talk shows yesterday and says no this was a spontaneous.
Do you believe did.
There is genuine information now that.
Would -- would lead them to -- to conclude that this was spontaneous or is this up out of a spin cycle we're in here.
I'm afraid it's part of a spin cycle Jonathan because the way I look at this sense it's very hard for me to believe that I'm actually lending more credence to statements by the Libyan president that I -- statements by my own government.
It is very hard thing for people like me 22 you know put in front of them and say -- that's the way things are right now.
But when you look at the mechanics of the attack.
You look at the fact that they used to a rocket propelled grenade.
That they actually attacked -- the safe house that was used by the the consulate -- thing Ghazi.
And of course series seem to know.
That the ambassador was there.
All of that leads me to believe that they had very very good intelligence that they knew exactly what they were doing and that they were going to do it in a very very direct and targeted fashion.
And given all of those things.
That shows -- what we would call the true intelligence preparation of the battle space.
And they knew what they were doing they had the intelligence on their side and do we failed to pick up the warning signs that I think were fairly numerous actually in this particular case.
When you're from your experience -- do you think mean the security was lacking there does seem up slightly all the that on the anniversary of 9/11.
In a country like Libya was traveling with just two -- Navy SEALs not to diminish the skills of those.
Heroic Navy SEALs but.
One would imagine it was perhaps not the best day to be on the road -- -- would have been better in the actual embassy in Tripoli rather than let the consulate in Benghazi.
Absolutely -- you know the seals like you said Jonathan or a supremely professional outfit and those who have had their training.
Who have gone through their courses are nothing but the best fighting men that the world has ever seen.
But the problem that you have is that even people -- that skill set.
Cannot do anything.
Against -- mob that is bent on doing the things that that mom did and when that mob is being used as -- cover.
Four other activities which I think is the case in this situation.
Then you have a situation where.
They are basically hopeless no matter how good they are no matter how good their training is they are basically three and four.
Three -- four people out there that that are designed to protect the ambassador.
And the ambassador himself cannot defend himself either and in fact the thing that bothers me most about this.
Was that the ambassador was.
Absent from the protection of the seals.
For a very long period of time to do you know several hours.
That and that that is just something that should not happen it should never have happened.
And unfortunately I believe that something went terribly wrong.
-- in terms of the protective detail and in terms of the way in which this was organized.
Mark -- looking at the bigger picture of the unrest that we've seen across the Muslim world now.
We've had some issues in Pakistan and Afghanistan today I'll also Indonesia.
But the unrest itself from the attacks on US in -- in the Middle East itself -- this all began obviously in Egypt in particular.
Do seem to have died down what do you think is the prognosis going forward now O'Connell.
Well I think Jonathan that the prognosis is going to be one in which we will see flare ups of violence that will occur.
Anytime there is no excuse to have that to that kind of violence it should be.
They -- diplomatic slighted could be another movie it could be you know all those kinds of things that send.
-- message to the Muslim world that to -- big they believe is offensive to there religion and offensive to bear way of life.
And they will take any excuse to go forward with the actions.
They see us as -- being weak.
They see us as being in his situation where we could you do certain things in the past but seem unwilling -- able to do those things now in terms of power projection.
And I think that they will try to take advantage of that I think it's a mistake on their -- to do that.
But I think they see -- as being unity in a weakened state and that will allow them to move forward.
-- further acts of violence for the demonstrations.
And unfortunately further threats to the safety of Americans especially high ranking Americans in the Middle East.
Thought I -- on the front let you go live -- I'd be -- to get your thoughts on the comments over the weekend by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
I it seemed almost that he was making a direct.
But if you like to get involved in the American election one I wonder what you think of the merit of his comments.
And two is it ever -- -- for the leader of one democratic country.
To that seemed to try to influence the result of an election in another democratic comfort.
Well I think it's a very slippery slope and any time you get into a situation where a foreign leader.
In essence is putting his chips on the table for a particular candidate.
That becomes a very dangerous game to play the US -- had situations where we've -- to do that in the past and other nations have done similar things in the case of prime minister Netanyahu.
I would say that he's desperately trying to get cover for word any possible Israeli action against Iran because of the nuclear.
Weapons proliferation possibilities of that country has.
So -- -- given that situation he's trying to get as much support as he possibly can for his position and for potential military action.
I can understand why he did it I believe he feels very frustrated with the policies of the current administration.
Both and in word and indeed.
And did those -- the kinds of things that are driving him to make these public statements.
Now given that he's doing that.
It's -- -- it -- things in a very interesting light between the United States and Israel in terms of our diplomatic and military relationships.
But everything that the United States has to be careful -- Is being drug into a city situation.
That would inevitably lead to a shooting war over the Iranian nuclear situation and that.
It's something that we have to be very very careful with its one thing to go and do it it's another thing to be prepared to do it and you don't want to pre World War I like scenario.
-- all of a sudden you have all of the countries.
On an auto auto pilot going in and starting to invade each other's areas because of alliances and because of things.
That what grade railroad timetables in this case timetables for an attack.
That would create a significant danger to significant security risk.
For the US and -- -- the greater Middle East and.
These are certainly very volatile -- -- -- very glad to have you to guide us through some of the the he had issues here colonel Cedric -- USF foursome president of Cedric -- associates thanks so much Philip great -- -- -- -- always.
Great to see -- Jonathan thanks again.
Filter by section