Marines.Together We Served

Wednesday, October 03, 2012

Courageous

 
Recently I was teaching a class in my church on the biblical character, Joshua. You remember him – he’s the one who took over for Moses to lead the Israelites into the Promised Land. God made several promises to Joshua in the opening verses of this book of the Bible named after him. Three times God instructs Joshua to “be strong and courageous.” In fact, one of those times God instructed him to be “very courageous.” The road ahead was a tough one and Joshua would need to be up to the task.

The news has been full of the attacks on our embassies throughout the Muslim world, and in particular, the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others in Benghazi, Libya. However, apart from the shameful amount of disinformation willingly distributed by the Main Stream Media and the current administration, there’s a little known story of incredible bravery, heroics, and courage that should be the top story of every news agency across the fruited plain.

So what actually happened at the U.S. embassy in Libya? We are learning more about this every day. Ambassador Stevens and Foreign Service officer Sean Smith, along with administrative staff, were working out of temporary quarters due to the fact that in the spring of 2011 during the so-called Arab Spring, the United States cut ties with then president Moammar Gadhafi. Our embassy was looted and ransacked, causing it to be unusable. It is still in a state of disrepair. Security for embassies and their personnel is to be provided by the host nation. Since Libya has gone through a civil war of sorts in the past 18 months, the current government is very unstable, and therefore, unreliable

A well-organized attack by radical Muslims was planned specifically targeting the temporary U.S. embassy building. The Libyan security force that was in place to protect our people deserted their post, or joined the attacking force. Either way, our people were in a real fix. And it should be noted that Ambassador Stevens had mentioned on more than one occasion to Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, that he was quite concerned for his personal safety and the welfare of his people. It is thought that Ambassador Stevens was on a “hit list.”

A short distance from the American compound, two Americans were sleeping. They were in Libya as independent contractors working an assignment totally unrelated to our embassy. They also happened to be former Navy SEALs. When they heard the noise coming from the attack on our embassy, as you would expect from highly trained warriors, they ran to the fight. Apparently, they had no weapons, but seeing the Libyan guards dropping their guns in their haste in fleeing the scene, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty snatched up several of these discarded weapons and prepared to defend the American compound.

Not knowing exactly what was taking place, the two SEALs set up a defensive perimeter. Unfortunately Ambassador Stevens was already gravely injured, and Foreign Service officer, Sean Smith, was dead. However, due to their quick action and suppressive fire twenty administrative personnel in the embassy were able to escape to safety. Eventually, these two courageous men were overwhelmed by the sheer numbers brought against them, an enemy force numbering between 100 to 200 attackers which came in two waves. But the stunning part of the story is that Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty killed 60 of the attacking force. Once the compound was overrun, the attackers were incensed to discover that just two men had inflicted so much death and destruction on their numerically superior force.

As it became apparent to these selfless heroes, they were definitely going to lose their lives unless some reinforcements showed up in a hurry. As we know now, that was not to be. I’m fairly certain they knew they were going to die in this gun fight, but not before they took a whole lot of bad guys with them!   

Consider these tenets of the Navy SEAL Code: 1) Loyalty to Country, Team and Teammate, 2) Serve with Honor and Integrity On and Off the Battlefield, 3) Ready to Lead, Ready to Follow, Never Quit, 4) Take responsibility for your actions and the actions of your teammates, 5) Excel as Warriors through Discipline and Innovation, 6) Train for War, Fight to Win, Defeat our Nation’s Enemies, and 7) Earn your Trident every day ( http://www.navyseals.com/seal-code-warrior-creed).

Thank you, Tyrone and Glen. To the very last breath, you both lived up to the SEAL Code. You served all of us well. You were courageous in the face of certain death.

And Tyrone, even though you never got to hold your newborn son, he will grow up knowing the character and quality of his father, a man among men who sacrificed himself defending others.

God bless America!

8 comments:

John said...

Ummm, how could Doherty have been with Tyrone and "heard the noise coming from the attack" when Doherty was in Tripoli at the time. Doherty didn't arrive at the CIA compound until 1am (some sources say 4am) the next morning. Both Tyrone and Doherty were killed during the attack at the CIA compound, not at the diplomatic mission complex. Do you have alternate sources? If you do, there are an awful lot of people who would be awfully interested if any portion of this narrative is accurate.

Anonymous said...

Clearly the good pastor neglected to do proper research about what happened. Had he done that, he would have known Doherty was not at the consulate but arrived from Tripoli.

Anonymous said...

Clearly the message of the good pasture was lost on the men above seeking to have absolute facts. The point I have taken from this blog is his very well poised tribute of these two heroic men, whom I have no doubt fought to their death in efforts to protect fellow Americans and allies. Long live their brotherhood.

Judd del Mar said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Judd del Mar said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Judd del Mar said...

I assume you meant the good pastor, not good pasture. With all due respect to everyone involved, there's never an excuse for spreading misinformation either lazily or knowingly or both. The consequences of doing such can range from the mildly annoying to the quite dangerous, which can and indeed does frequently prove harmful to people's integrity and reputation, and even to people physically in extreme cases. The protocol for distributing information is very simple in regard to properly stating facts (and there is ZERO wiggle room here: either you do or you do not possess facts that you have verified to the best of your ability, and you know the difference), there are two options: 1) for any and all particular points for which you cannot provide factual backup, you must state clearly up front that you're speculating - something which should only and always be done very carefully and for specific, legitimate, above-board reasons, and with your best good judgment; or, 2) without exception, only state facts that you've obtained from reports by credible, nonpartisan news agencies and always include the source. Sources for facts should never come solely from partisan political sites or postings from any kind of personally-affiliated venue, such as newsletters from a church pastor. Clearly these are not news agencies. I've done a lot of fact checking over the past several years, leading to absolutely enormous amounts of tracking the origins of highly charged claims of a political nature in particular, and the following conclusion is made factually: it is highly consistent, and easily traced, that (in a quite large majority) it is contributors and political opinion personalities on more hardline, conservative, Republican websites and so-called news blogs who spread misinformation and outright misrepresentations and fabrications - and they do so in alarming rates and very quickly, in very identifiable chains. With no one in the chain even attempting any kind of verification. It's also fairly common for one person early in or even originating the chain to have misread who wrote an article that they're quoting or being outraged about some fact that they've gotten completely wrong due to a sloppy or incomplete reading of the article they are allegedly referencing. And this Information and these incorrect conclusions break out like an infectious disease epidemic, without exception. This is not my opinion. This is not something I'm wishing on any particular group over any other. However, the pattern and trail is blatant. This behavior is dangerous, lazy, willfully ignorant, and very difficult to understand, considering this is the 21st century and it is usually very easy to check most every single fact you find in searches on the internet, and relatively quickly. The Internet, however, cannot teach people to be responsible and to think and have integrity before they act. That's a matter of character and a factor of both cognitive intelligence and emotional intelligence. And frankly, as it boils down to ultimately, a matter of choice. It would be nice to see things going in the other direction among hardcore conservatives, but there does not seem to be any evidence of such. The evidence is actually to the contrary. Something about which I am very concerned. I'll conclude with this: if you believe what you have to say and what you are reporting about is important enough for you to invest your time and energy and reputation on, then it's important enough that you have, without fail, not included claims or statements as fact that you have not reasonably and responsibly verifIed.

Judd del Mar said...

These people actually are pretty much fully aware they should not be making such statements under these conditions. Yet they do so anyway, and it seems that the biggest motivation for it is to be able to win and get their way by cheating when they can't support and prove their argument legitimately. Fairly and respectfully, as well developed adults do. The consequences of this ethically and integrity deficient behavior are real and they can be long lasting and devastating. What kind of person does this or wants to do this purposefully? They should take a hard look. And be held accountable.

Anonymous said...

How could Doherty be fighting along side Woods at the embassy when he was in Tripoli? Doherty was part of the backup team that arrived at the CIA station early in the morning after the attack. He was killed along with woods in the attack on the CIA station, not at the embassy. Only Stevens and Smith were killed at the embassy. This is not disputed in any of the 8 investigations nor in the book.
You're lying and making a tragedy into a political issue for your own personal gain. You will burn in hell for your sins.m
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/26/who-was-glen-doherty.html
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/herald_bulldog/2016/04/glen_dohertys_family_awarded_400000_death_benefitS

Psalm for the Day