Reaction to Panetta's Benghazi testimony
Senator Rand Paul on military response
- Duration 5:02
- Date Feb 7, 2013
Senator Rand Paul on military response
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- we had just been listening to testimony by the secretary defense.
Leon Panetta and he talked about -- Ghazi.
And there is no doubt that this has prompted a huge number of questions at these senators are likely to press him on let's play a little bit editorial.
There we're gonna talk to senator Rand Paul.
This was pure and simple in the absence as I said of any -- of advance warning a problem of distance and time.
Frankly even if we were able to get the F sixteens are the AC 130s over the target in time.
The mission still depends on accurate information.
About what targets are supposed to hit.
-- this race is so many.
Questions I'm joined now by Republican senator Rand Paul he's on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
What I heard from that you -- -- your take -- was is that that the US military was not able.
-- to help out in this situation does that does that make sense -- you.
Yet I don't doubt that they tried to do everything they could but he hit the nail on the head time and distance.
Which begs the question who made a decision not to have.
130s closer RF sixteens closer.
But I think he does make a point that they can't always be there -- exactly when needed.
However the other command decision as Secretary Clinton made was.
Why did we put someone into a situation like this without adequate military protection.
I never would have had an embassy and still would not have an embassy in Libya and less aware and have complete control of the military.
Like the embassy was in the original days in Baghdad.
There's a great deal of similarity between Libya and Baghdad but there's not much similarity between parents and Baghdad and Paris and Ben Ghazi.
So really we should be treating -- as a war zone and I think the military should be in charge of security in its entirety until the country's stable yet.
I mean it's it's not as if this situation just sort of popped up in an area where there had been no unrest that was very very far away that we haven't had an -- and this is -- Africa.
Adding a very unstable Libyan government with -- deposed dictator who had recently.
I've been been killed by people -- on the ground.
It was September 11.
I you know we there are a number of hot spots across this region and I agree with you I don't I don't think anyone.
Is second guessing the military and that is that it then yeah I don't know -- planning and preparation and -- and view of the world is it not.
Absolutely the person I second guess is not the Defense Department I second I -- Secretary Clinton.
For not having adequate security for turning down security for saying oh I get a million cables I didn't have time to read the cables asking for more security.
Well I'm not asking that she read every cable from Bulgaria to Estonia.
But -- was one of the five most dangerous places in the world easily by anybody's calculations.
And it was inexcusable for her not to read these requests for security and then -- -- -- department turned down the request for security.
Really that was inexcusable and I really think there there has not been enough made of the laps or lack of security in advance of the attacks not the response after the attacks and I think that'll always be difficult.
But really in advance of this it was a huge judgment -- not to have more protection for our consulate and -- for.
Our embassy still to this day in Tripoli I think needs more security.
I understand you know and Leon -- it admits that his -- need to Harden our facilities.
In these areas which I think would be very shocking to a lot of Americans that in the is very volatile areas.
They're not hardened facilities also just a lot of sort of Fuzzy -- us about about the an -- about what was going on there he -- we didn't have enough intelligence on the ground.
To inform us about what we were what we're heading -- -- there which.
Also I think -- surprised by the time you you have the CIA a block away you don't have enough intelligence as to what's going on.
And I still think the one question -- been lost in this whole cover up with this movie being the cause.
I really think part of the cause may have been that there was a gun running operation going on in Ben Ghazi.
Leaving Libya going to Turkey in distributing arms to the rebels now in -- you.
Don't let up senator excuse me firfer pipe in -- when you brought that up and hearing with Hillary Clinton.
I she looked shocked she -- I have no idea what you're talking about.
And you know we're just talking with Jennifer Griffin -- -- said in a perhaps that's the tail end of your question wasn't included that gave it a little more contacts.
Well the thing is is that.
They -- they've interviewed the captain of the ship class ship from Libya -- for Turkey a week before the ambassador was killed.
It was full of arms.
And they interviewed the captain and he actually specifically talks about the distribution of the arms to Syrian rebels.
So it sounds to me is if this is a -- it's been reported in the London times in New York Times.
And really I think the administration needs to answer are they involved with running guns to Turkey to Syria.
You raise a question senator we'll see if we hear more about today thank you very much Rand -- senator good CF.