As an Artilleryman, myself, I can attest to "shake 'n bake" being mostly a fire support reference. Usually, at least for my old gun platoon, it was "shake 'em with HE" and then "bake 'em with Willy Pete."
Steven Wiederholt you seem to forget said air support would have to come from the USA. Also Hillary couldn’t reject air support. She was Secretary of State, not in the DOD.
Brendan Davison she was in charge of the annex it was her decision to not have bomb barricades and marines, and she sent ambassador Stevens there for 9/11 but sure she did nothing wrong... morons
I'm not going to comment on the facts of this incident, there's a LOT more people far more qualified to do so, however as an "operator", and "just a Doc for grunts", I can give an educated view on security contractors I personally interacted with. My first interaction was around March 2005, when an entire convoy of security contractors escorting South Africans for reasons from Haditha Dam to southern Al Anbar just plain got lost and drove into the town of Hit, a town we had not started fully started operations in, and had been generally ignored or avoided for nearly a year prior due to commitment of the necessary support elements elsewhere. One survived the hasty ambush, by managing to drive a station wagon, which was on fire, from Hit to an Out post outside the city. Due to not having those assets mentioned earlier, getting QRF out to the city took longer than it should've, and by the time of our arrival, the bodies, all having been shot multiple times, likely post mortem, were piled and wired to explode with direct connect electronic detonation. These guys died due to poor resources, because they weren't U.S. military. The U.S. had no command over them, gave them the necessary Intel to make it as safely as possible, but due to a lack of resources not provided by their employer, like a GPS for example, and proper armored vehicles, they got lost in a very active town, and all of their vehicles could've easily been neutralized by small arms, let alone a few RPGs in a hasty ambush. Point being, these guys signed up for considerable pay, in comparison to military personnel, and sported the Black Hawk catalog on their body, but as far as useful resources, they just didn't have them because they do not work for or answer to the U.S. military, and therefore were nearly impossible to support by the military outside of tracking their departure and arrival. They have limited resources because those resources are supposed to be supplied by their employer. When utilised by the U.S. government, they have access to more resources via a middle man, but because of the very nature in which they function, handing them a military encrypted radio without any accountability for that very sensitive device is not practical, and could result in compromising Intel and lives. So there's this barrier where one cannot simply adequately support the other, and things go bad quick in that atmosphere.
Breaker, breaker, this goes out to all you Benghazi terrorists out there: If you smell a delicious, crispy smell after the race, that's not your tailpipe....It's just a little bit of s-s-s-s-s-s-s-hake 'n bake!
Not being an American and not being aware of the politicisation of this event, it was clearly a propaganda piece when watching. You really had to scrape off a lot of the mother shit to get the baby with this movie. Thanks for sorting out what was real and what important stuff was left unsaid.
That RPG scene where he fires the rocket into the ground and the explosion is delayed, wouldn't happen. RPGs detonate immediately after impact. My buddy saw one guy run across a road with an RPG, trip with it, and the nose of the rocket hit the ground of exploded immediately upon impact. But it is a neat Hollywood scene.
Hunter Cihal RPGs do not detonate immediately as one the warhead doesn't prime until after the rocket has travelled about 10 meters and the warhead is not designed to detonate on impact its an armour piercing weapon so it detonates shortly after impact. I think your "buddy's" story is bs
@@chris5306 Why do RPGs have safety caps on the projectile then? It it doesn't activate until it's been fired, that wouldn't be necessary. You need to do some research.
Read the book, watched the movie, and found that if you read between the lines, it did not paint a flattering picture. The contractors trying to paint themselves in the best light, while also posturing and constantly berating everyone not in their posse, while glossing over their own blatant errors that I found shocking, just from my own experience in Afghanistan. ("We told a local to close the gate and then we were surprised he didn't do it!") I'm glad I wasn't the only one who picked up on it. Interesting to see just how skewed the movie was, big-picture wise.
jarvy251 I think what you're trying to say is that the 'mercs' should have closed the gate themselves. But they were in a hurry to search the place for survivors and the General of the local militia was going to get his men inside using that gate.
Anyone who's worked with local forces knows that if you tell them to do a task in the future, no matter how simple, no matter soon, if it's even just 10 minutes from now, it will *not* be done. They'll forget, or they dismiss the importance and wander off to do something else, or maybe they never understood the instruction in the first place. Irregular forces in particular need constant handholding. Securing the site is a high enough priority that yes, one of the 'mercs' should have made sure that the gate was closed, made sure no infiltrators tacked themselves on to the "friendly" procession, because no one else was going to do it. If they were in such a hurry they decided the gate 100% didn't matter, fine, but don't be surprised or angry when it's still open an hour later. The books mention that their personal weapons were not zeroed, which *could* be outright negligence. And as someone who's talked a lot of bullshit in my day, I recognized their squabbles with the station chief as made-up bravado posturing that didn't happen, or unprofessional childishness if it did. They're brave guys for sure, but their accounts go over the top with embarrassing levels of self-praise.
Horseshit about "did nothing". Benghazi security had been lowered AGAINST her advice. By who? Republicans, who said it was a safe area and it would save money. When Hilary would try to get more security added? The Republicans said no. That's right, they engineered the situation and set Americans for the slaughter so they could score political points. Hilary took full personal responsibility and has been extensively interviewed several times by a hostile congress. It has been determined by people with a vested interest in destroying her that she was NOT at fault. I'd like to see Fayk Nooz Bone Spurs Covfefe Putinovich do that.
I read through a lot of comments in this. I was never in the military and my understanding of this subject matter is obviously inferior than a lot of the posters but I haven't seen a single detractor site, source, or reference any supporting materials at all. If anyone is guilty of being biased I would have to say it's a lot of the people commenting on this video. With all that being said, thank you to everyone who served, regardless of bias. You're all braver than I am.
Loved this Cypher!!! Great analysis and references. Thanks for engaging with a political topic. For history sake your analysis is valuable, I hope you could brush off the political hot mess in the comment section.
He says there is a political motive to this movie but during the whole movie it has nothing to do with politics it’s all based and what the soldiers did and saw
Emperor of Holy Rome 70 currently. It just depends on whether I watch the movie. Lots of notes and research makes watching movie take twice as long as just watching it.
Former USAF aircraft weapons troop here. Lots of holes in your explanation of why they didn't receive air support. We don't disassemble entire squadrons of jets for maintenance at once. That just doesn't happen. It makes no sense to do that in the first place. Jets get maintained one at a time, per crew (not to mention that it's hilarious that you insinuate it's possible to disassemble an entire base's aircraft in 24 hours). The F22's were requested because often times a simple fly over causes some combatants to flee, which would have lessened the amount of those combatants that were firing on our guys. Drones are pretty quiet, comparing a done to being equal air support as an F22 doing low altitude fly overs, it's laughable. You say the movie is politically aligned, I say your video is, "brother". Can't believe you trusted the word of our government over those that were your brothers in arms... That movie is a tribute to the words of those that were on the ground because everyone in our government decided they didn't want to look like the incompetent imbeciles that they were, and you made a 17 minute video trying to discredit those who were on the ground. Sad.
Typical play, use the same strategy thrown at you and pick one thing that doesn't defend your point. You said they were disassembled. That's maintenance in our world. It's like talking to a civi...
"typical play" huh? You've proven your ignorance, so let's break it down: 1 you've never heard of inspections? wewlad. "It's like talking to a civi..." 2 there was no argument over what the F22s were for. You clearly ignored the differentiation made between CAS and other forms of AS, but that requires paying attention or having even the vaguest willingness to understand the conversation 3 "Can't believe you trusted the word of our government over those that were your brothers in arms." Because they are omniscient? I'm a historian, not an ignoramus who gets to pick and choose evidence. Deny the evidence all you want, it only proves your own ignorance. BTW, for extra points, if you disbelieve government investigations, you automatically disbelieve "your brothers in arms" because their testimony was part of those investigations. So you are doubly ignorant! What fun
Dam when this movie starts airing on TV, my dad, will comment to me something like "Can you believe they didn't give them air support? The planes were even waiting on the runway." And then I will have to spend an hour explaining that it's not based on facts. And then I will have to spend another hour explaining that most movies are historically inaccurate.
The military wasn't in bad shape. The idea was that it was easier to just do all the planes at once then doing them at different times. At the time there was no threat in the area after all.
they arnt inaccurate when they are told by the 6 sorry 5 men who fought through the whole thing anywhere there I'm pretty sure they told it pretty accurately from what they experienced being there and all
Just a couple points, i could see them wanting a flyover from any plane over a drone because a flyover from even an unarmed aircraft has a tendency to make the enemy scatter and they said in the book that they were calling out everything that the drone guys were seeing already. Also the local 'friendly' military having the bad guys phone number is pretty common in the kind of fights America gets in, The ANP in Afghanistan have been known to have the Talibans number for example.
Shake and bake is not an artillery command saying it over the radio will not lead to any fire missions, HE followed by WP structured in the fire mission format would be the way to have a "shake and bake mission". Plus shake and bake is not a "combination munition" its HE shells landing with WP landing immediately afterwards. I've heard some crazy shit on internal nets, radio equiette need not apply. In addition, really people would never use a handheld radio with a radio on their vest? Because no one ever use or need two radio frequencies that's just unheard of in combat. Love your videos man but sometimes the military stuff you point out is pretty off base. From an 8 year forward observer here
I think that the movie was about the mercs on the ground and what they felt which is why it didnt really Go into the logistics about what was happening outside of Benghazi
rollinNsearchin he actually did. Aerial recon is not the same as CAS. This "veteran" has no idea what he is talking about. He is probobly a slick sleeve acting hard
He absolutely did. He clarifies that a drone is a _form_ of air support, just not CAS. Then he goes on to say it's stupid to complain that they couldn't get an F-22 flyover, as if that's the same thing. Think about it. In a combat situation are you asking for an attack aircraft to fly over so it can *take pictures* !?! NO! You want it to fly low overhead at Mach 1.2 and scare the shit out of the bad guys! Make them think the gunship is coming close behind. That said, if they can't get there, they can't get there, though that also seems pretty stupid. We have the most expensive military in the world, supposedly so we can be on-site anywhere in the world on short notice, and the closest CAS was in *freaking Virginia* ?!?
I'm really struggling with this video. It comes across as very apologetic. Clinton was the Secretary responsible for all of these outposts. As such any failing or loss of life owing to poor foresight must rest with her. Allow me to lay out this case (i'm from the UK no political allegiance rep or democrat) Parts of the Middle East are breaking out in violence. We'd seen before how a planned military move in Mogadishu had turned into a nightmare. We have a poorly protected US Ambassador in Bengazi. There is evidence of frequent requests for additional security. The 'Merc's' are on record stating they felt the facilities were under protected. Those requests were ignored. Now the idea that the US has zero available air support across the whole of Europe and the ME is ridiculous. There are bases all over Germany, Kuwait, Iraq with US military assets. The idea that every single US asset was out of commission at the same time (if true) would be grounds for people being fired. What would happen if the Russian's decided to go into Poland for example - there is no way the US didn't have committed and aware leaders with assets supporting all possible European attack vectors. We know that the US Ambassador did die as a result of the attack on that compound. We know that there was then an attack on the CIA compound. The only thing that saved the CIA compound was the presence of the contractors (merc's) had they not have been there that CIA compound would have been over run too. So to critique their account does come across as harsh when they are at the sharp end of the actual defence. The plains facts are, the threat assessment was far wide of the risk. Support was not made available. An Ambassador died. Two US compounds were attacked. Who ultimately owns the blame for this? On whose watch did all this happen? What should a good commander do when on their watch a complete disaster breaks out? Truth is, Hillary refused to take ownership of any of the blame for this. That is a big reason why she looked so awful. Leaders should always own the mess that happens on their watch. Just some thoughts.
my brother, fellow veteran, you know how happy you were to see those KBR trucks before chow... don't even pretend to lie about that lol. i'm not sure if you guys had them in Afghanistan, but in Iraq KBR was _always_ around, as well as other PMCs. i didn't mind them as they were pretty much *all* vets like you and me or they were truck drivers just trying to make a better living than they could in the states. so, the big thing here seems to be your problem with "mercs" who are actually just contractors who were _legally_ hired. i know a good number of guys working for Triple Canopy after they ETS'd but i didn't go into the field just because i suffered a bad head injury which is why i was discharged. anyhow, State Dept was atrocious in this situation, you have to admit that. all the hearings i've seen about this have shown just how *AWFUL* these folks reacted to the attack, and then how Clinton just tried to "pass the buck" about everything, man! you know these things, come on! on a positive note, i was an m240B gunner myself so i agree with most of your other assessments... i guess i have a bad taste in my mouth about how you talked about those who participated in the Doolittle Raid as i just watched your otherwise excellent video on *Pearl Harbor* so maybe i'm being a little too difficult here. i actually agree with you on the _majority_ of your assessments here and you have gained a new subscriber. thanks for going through all the effort!
Dude, you gave an excellent impartial analysis of a real hot button recent sore spot movie with both academic and personal knowledge. Have an upvote and a sub.
Don't be bro. They will not let you fail. It's tough, but you won't have a choice once you start training. That is somewhat comforting when you feel like you can't go on. Good luck
I don't remember if the book was as 'we need air support' heavy, however everyone on the merc team was ex tier one: seals, rangers, marine recon ex, and those teams pretty much always call for air support in this sort of situation. so it would make sense for them to banter about it mid-combat. Also they said in the book that the drone guys weren't telling them anything they couldn't see on the ground, they would want a bird flyover even disarmed because militants will typically scatter for a fighter pilot flyover.
I don’t know where you’re coming from and this was one of the better movies I’ve ever seen in my life and I’m one hell of a critic I only watch the good shit everybody likes
I refuse to believe as was stated in this video that an american airbase would at any time completely disable every warplane on the base for maintenance. That would be a case of extreme unreadiness and mismanagement.
Love the videos, even if I don't always agree, but is there a chance of changing the color of the text you put in these videos? As someone who is color blind and has trouble seeing red text on a black background, it would be much appreciated!
The term 'shake and bake' can be used in terms of nascar, popularised by the film Talladega nights, probably explains why he used this term while driving
The movie is based on the book. The director as well as the merc are very clear on that. Perhaps in the future, someone should make another version based on another source.
I have to say I agree with a lot of what you said. I was really disappointed that the film never really touched on the most import thing. The reason why we were even in Benghazi. Only one little scene even touches on this point and if you don't know what you're looking at it is just a fluff scene. But this isn't a political forum so I won't even touch it.
If they had a drone flying over with a camera, drones could have been equipped with hell fire missiles and provided "close air support". The military was and still is striking targets all over the world with these assets for at least 8 years now. So ya when it was stated no air support was given to help strike targets, this is a true statement.
I would have more apreciated if the director, the narrator here and probably also a great share of the audience would have taken just a minute to think about all these events from the non American, probably even Lybian perspective. The real scandal about "Benghazi" was and remains this: WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING THERE?
America, as well as most countries, have embassies and consulates in such places to keep diplomatic ties. The CIA compound is a bit of a different story, but you'll find that the CIA maintains compounds throughout the world
That's the whole background to this story? seriously? So I guess that's a thing which happens just like rainy weather - embassys/consolates get raided from time to time.
Quick question, if the Italy airfleet was not available then they would lose the main airborne ability for NATO in Europe. I assume some aircraft where available so i would have to side with the mercs
I read the book before watching the movie. You won't fully understand what's going on in the movie unless you do. BTW... I would call them security guards, not mercs. And yes, the movie is like a comic book.
Sigh. Comment section proves we are in the end of The Age of Reason. I was alive and awake in the 80's. I wonder how many of the keyboard warriors would be calling for "Lock Reagan up!" for the hundreds of American embassy workers who died during his administration?
So let me get this straight. Something happened with Regan in the 80's therefore it is OK for Hillary and her state department to screw up and get four American's killed. Right?
The State Department tried to get more guards and support for the embassy, moron. Congress denied them every time, so on that night there just. Wasn't. Any.
Oh no there was plenty of other stuff to have him locked up for. I'd've had him and his staff lined up and shot for Iran Contra -- they sold weapons and drugs to TERRORISTS to fund an actively ENEMY DICTATORIAL TERRORIST REGIME by giving them WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. That is the definition of TREASON!
Brian Mead I seem to recall that it was a fairly big issue back in the day. Now you’ll find lots of fans of Reagan on the right (hence you trying to perform a character assassination) but every single one of them regards the Iran contra issue as his darkest hour. Additionally, 14 people were indicted for it including the sec def, and despite the investigation finding no evidence the Reagan knew the extent of both the Iranian weapons trade or the funding and support of the Nicaraguan contras, Reagan still stepped forward and said the he will accept responsibility, which is more than Obama and Hillary did. Now the “WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION” that were sold were Hawk and Tow missiles, which are certainly powerful and dangerous, but it’s not exactly on the same playing field as selling the Iranians uranium and expecting the not to build nuclear weapons (despite them saying that they will make sure they burn Israel and expressing a desire for nukes) and then providing no oversight. If you would have Reagan and his staff shot, then in the interest of consistency shoot Obama and his staff. After all, they sold uranium to Iran, and funded several Islamist militant groups so that they would fight other Islamist militant groups, and received money and campaign donations from radicalized countries. So at this point, the only way anyone can be able to respect your argument is if you either retract your statement or double down and show that you’re at least a consistent idiot
That fleet-wide disassembly you spoke of sounds like a logistical nightmare! Crazy that the nearest useful air support was in the US! I enjoy Bay's films, but this one seemed to miss the mark, I think bending the truth is a bit more acceptable for films like Pain and Gain, where you don't have a political ulterior motive for the film. Love your videos!
Fleet-wide inspections are a regular part of Air Force service. Much like the inspections in the army that I'm familiar with, they are an annoyance that really only causes a couple days of problems.
So was this claim also false? www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3586432/We-saved-Navy-Seals-Benghazi-F-16-pilots-Italy-standby-help-besieged-forces-Libya-order-launch-never-came.html If so then the next question would be why there were no available aircraft? No carriers in that part of the world?
Johnny Congress has been very clear in stating that the planes in Italy were not available. The daily mail has degenerated quite a bit in the internet age BTW.
Terlington Crumbumber III LOL, I had heard as much. Funny enough, I had to go into their digital archives for an upcoming episode, and before WWI they were an industry leader. Then I saw a bunch of their newer stuff and kinda went, "What the hell happened?"
I don't understand how this movie is political. They say that they did not get air support. But how does that make it a political issue? The review does not make this clear.
while I get what youre trying to get at with some of the complaints, the characters like the station chef are there to create tension in the movie for dramatic effect if he was like yea go over there and deal with this and not contrary then the characters would look less heroic it would seem less dramatic when they do decide to go a lot of the choices you complain about are choices made to make something hollywood and not real life.
I guess the way they made every Libyan look dumb when everyone switches sides freely also has something to do with the fact that the Libyan fighters are on the American side, taking American supplies but only suddenly switching sides and became actual terrorist so that became an internal joke like how one Libyan fighter can be your friend now but suddenly 5mins into the help he switches side. PS: A point to note, the term "Shake and Bake" in the film doesn't mean the term "Shake and Bake" that we know of in the military. Our term is phrosporus weapons but for their term used in the movie, it's a term meant for driving. Shake and Bake was coined during the movie "Tallegeda Nights" which basically means to tailgate someone close to their bumper then slingshot an overtake move to either the outside or inside of the corner. That's their definition of "Shake and Bake" in the movie. Plus they're driving for that thing does make sense.
Why does he keep showing that political comic of Benghazi constantly throughout the video same could be said of 9/11 and other similar terrorist attacks
As an Artilleryman, myself, I can attest to "shake 'n bake" being mostly a fire support reference.
Usually, at least for my old gun platoon, it was "shake 'em with HE" and then "bake 'em with Willy Pete."
Contrasting The Void What branch?
Still waiting for that air support, Cypher.
still waiting hillary for prison..
Why? She dident do anything wrong tho
srsly.. ?
Steven Wiederholt you seem to forget said air support would have to come from the USA.
Also Hillary couldn’t reject air support. She was Secretary of State, not in the DOD.
Brendan Davison she was in charge of the annex it was her decision to not have bomb barricades and marines, and she sent ambassador Stevens there for 9/11 but sure she did nothing wrong... morons
I'm not going to comment on the facts of this incident, there's a LOT more people far more qualified to do so, however as an "operator", and "just a Doc for grunts", I can give an educated view on security contractors I personally interacted with. My first interaction was around March 2005, when an entire convoy of security contractors escorting South Africans for reasons from Haditha Dam to southern Al Anbar just plain got lost and drove into the town of Hit, a town we had not started fully started operations in, and had been generally ignored or avoided for nearly a year prior due to commitment of the necessary support elements elsewhere. One survived the hasty ambush, by managing to drive a station wagon, which was on fire, from Hit to an Out post outside the city.
Due to not having those assets mentioned earlier, getting QRF out to the city took longer than it should've, and by the time of our arrival, the bodies, all having been shot multiple times, likely post mortem, were piled and wired to explode with direct connect electronic detonation.
These guys died due to poor resources, because they weren't U.S. military. The U.S. had no command over them, gave them the necessary Intel to make it as safely as possible, but due to a lack of resources not provided by their employer, like a GPS for example, and proper armored vehicles, they got lost in a very active town, and all of their vehicles could've easily been neutralized by small arms, let alone a few RPGs in a hasty ambush. Point being, these guys signed up for considerable pay, in comparison to military personnel, and sported the Black Hawk catalog on their body, but as far as useful resources, they just didn't have them because they do not work for or answer to the U.S. military, and therefore were nearly impossible to support by the military outside of tracking their departure and arrival. They have limited resources because those resources are supposed to be supplied by their employer.
When utilised by the U.S. government, they have access to more resources via a middle man, but because of the very nature in which they function, handing them a military encrypted radio without any accountability for that very sensitive device is not practical, and could result in compromising Intel and lives. So there's this barrier where one cannot simply adequately support the other, and things go bad quick in that atmosphere.
I think shake n bake is a reference to slipstreaming from Taledaga Nights
It is
Breaker, breaker, this goes out to all you Benghazi terrorists out there:
If you smell a delicious, crispy smell after the race, that's not your tailpipe....It's just a little bit of s-s-s-s-s-s-s-hake 'n bake!
Oooh boy, this comments' section is going to be wonderful.
Not being an American and not being aware of the politicisation of this event, it was clearly a propaganda piece when watching. You really had to scrape off a lot of the mother shit to get the baby with this movie. Thanks for sorting out what was real and what important stuff was left unsaid.
That RPG scene where he fires the rocket into the ground and the explosion is delayed, wouldn't happen. RPGs detonate immediately after impact. My buddy saw one guy run across a road with an RPG, trip with it, and the nose of the rocket hit the ground of exploded immediately upon impact. But it is a neat Hollywood scene.
Hunter Cihal RPGs do not detonate immediately as one the warhead doesn't prime until after the rocket has travelled about 10 meters and the warhead is not designed to detonate on impact its an armour piercing weapon so it detonates shortly after impact. I think your "buddy's" story is bs
@@chris5306 Why do RPGs have safety caps on the projectile then? It it doesn't activate until it's been fired, that wouldn't be necessary. You need to do some research.
Not all RPG rockets are the same. Some have different purposes for different scenarios. Some take time to arm and others don't.
Read the book, watched the movie, and found that if you read between the lines, it did not paint a flattering picture. The contractors trying to paint themselves in the best light, while also posturing and constantly berating everyone not in their posse, while glossing over their own blatant errors that I found shocking, just from my own experience in Afghanistan. ("We told a local to close the gate and then we were surprised he didn't do it!") I'm glad I wasn't the only one who picked up on it. Interesting to see just how skewed the movie was, big-picture wise.
jarvy251 I think what you're trying to say is that the 'mercs' should have closed the gate themselves. But they were in a hurry to search the place for survivors and the General of the local militia was going to get his men inside using that gate.
Anyone who's worked with local forces knows that if you tell them to do a task in the future, no matter how simple, no matter soon, if it's even just 10 minutes from now, it will *not* be done. They'll forget, or they dismiss the importance and wander off to do something else, or maybe they never understood the instruction in the first place. Irregular forces in particular need constant handholding.
Securing the site is a high enough priority that yes, one of the 'mercs' should have made sure that the gate was closed, made sure no infiltrators tacked themselves on to the "friendly" procession, because no one else was going to do it.
If they were in such a hurry they decided the gate 100% didn't matter, fine, but don't be surprised or angry when it's still open an hour later.
The books mention that their personal weapons were not zeroed, which *could* be outright negligence. And as someone who's talked a lot of bullshit in my day, I recognized their squabbles with the station chief as made-up bravado posturing that didn't happen, or unprofessional childishness if it did.
They're brave guys for sure, but their accounts go over the top with embarrassing levels of self-praise.
Your description says Michael Bae.
corrected, thanks
how you doin? iI understand you are a Vet? OIF or OEF?
im OIF, 25 Bravo
people call for hillary to go to prison for the email situation not for Benghazi.
She got the call at 3 a.m. and choked.
Horseshit about "did nothing".
Benghazi security had been lowered AGAINST her advice. By who? Republicans, who said it was a safe area and it would save money. When Hilary would try to get more security added? The Republicans said no. That's right, they engineered the situation and set Americans for the slaughter so they could score political points.
Hilary took full personal responsibility and has been extensively interviewed several times by a hostile congress. It has been determined by people with a vested interest in destroying her that she was NOT at fault.
I'd like to see Fayk Nooz Bone Spurs Covfefe Putinovich do that.
@@brianmead7556 And you learned that all from the reliable news organization named Vox, right?
@@Tinfoil_HardhatVox is reliable, cope
@@Tinfoil_Hardhathow cute, Vox is far more reliable than faux news
I read through a lot of comments in this. I was never in the military and my understanding of this subject matter is obviously inferior than a lot of the posters but I haven't seen a single detractor site, source, or reference any supporting materials at all. If anyone is guilty of being biased I would have to say it's a lot of the people commenting on this video. With all that being said, thank you to everyone who served, regardless of bias. You're all braver than I am.
Ok but what about my air support???
Loved this Cypher!!! Great analysis and references. Thanks for engaging with a political topic. For history sake your analysis is valuable, I hope you could brush off the political hot mess in the comment section.
Nice video. And I'm glad I found you from history buffs
He says there is a political motive to this movie but during the whole movie it has nothing to do with politics it’s all based and what the soldiers did and saw
Hey cypher, could you do a Based on a True story on Hotel Rwanda.
It's on the list, the horribly long list
Cynical Historian How many movies are on that list?
Emperor of Holy Rome 70 currently. It just depends on whether I watch the movie. Lots of notes and research makes watching movie take twice as long as just watching it.
Well done, sir. I was wondering when you were going to release this one. It feels like I watched the film already even though I haven't.
Former USAF aircraft weapons troop here. Lots of holes in your explanation of why they didn't receive air support. We don't disassemble entire squadrons of jets for maintenance at once. That just doesn't happen. It makes no sense to do that in the first place. Jets get maintained one at a time, per crew (not to mention that it's hilarious that you insinuate it's possible to disassemble an entire base's aircraft in 24 hours).
The F22's were requested because often times a simple fly over causes some combatants to flee, which would have lessened the amount of those combatants that were firing on our guys. Drones are pretty quiet, comparing a done to being equal air support as an F22 doing low altitude fly overs, it's laughable.
You say the movie is politically aligned, I say your video is, "brother". Can't believe you trusted the word of our government over those that were your brothers in arms... That movie is a tribute to the words of those that were on the ground because everyone in our government decided they didn't want to look like the incompetent imbeciles that they were, and you made a 17 minute video trying to discredit those who were on the ground. Sad.
Lol, never said "for maintenance." Lots of holes in your eardrums
Typical play, use the same strategy thrown at you and pick one thing that doesn't defend your point. You said they were disassembled. That's maintenance in our world. It's like talking to a civi...
"typical play" huh? You've proven your ignorance, so let's break it down:
1 you've never heard of inspections? wewlad. "It's like talking to a civi..."
2 there was no argument over what the F22s were for. You clearly ignored the differentiation made between CAS and other forms of AS, but that requires paying attention or having even the vaguest willingness to understand the conversation
3 "Can't believe you trusted the word of our government over those that were your brothers in arms." Because they are omniscient? I'm a historian, not an ignoramus who gets to pick and choose evidence. Deny the evidence all you want, it only proves your own ignorance. BTW, for extra points, if you disbelieve government investigations, you automatically disbelieve "your brothers in arms" because their testimony was part of those investigations. So you are doubly ignorant! What fun
Most guys who leave the military act like these guys lol. I did 3 years active as an infantryman, but this stage hasn't hit me yet!
They complain about air support in this movie more than Blair Witch complained about the map.
Dam when this movie starts airing on TV, my dad, will comment to me something like "Can you believe they didn't give them air support? The planes were even waiting on the runway." And then I will have to spend an hour explaining that it's not based on facts. And then I will have to spend another hour explaining that most movies are historically inaccurate.
Just show him this video.
This guy did it in 17min
The military wasn't in bad shape. The idea was that it was easier to just do all the planes at once then doing them at different times. At the time there was no threat in the area after all.
they arnt inaccurate when they are told by the 6 sorry 5 men who fought through the whole thing anywhere there I'm pretty sure they told it pretty accurately from what they experienced being there and all
MrHappyBollox what the hell is wrong with you
You forgot the funniest thing: A Merc was playing COD Advance Warfare on Xbox One in 2012!
Just a couple points, i could see them wanting a flyover from any plane over a drone because a flyover from even an unarmed aircraft has a tendency to make the enemy scatter and they said in the book that they were calling out everything that the drone guys were seeing already. Also the local 'friendly' military having the bad guys phone number is pretty common in the kind of fights America gets in, The ANP in Afghanistan have been known to have the Talibans number for example.
Shake and bake is not an artillery command saying it over the radio will not lead to any fire missions, HE followed by WP structured in the fire mission format would be the way to have a "shake and bake mission". Plus shake and bake is not a "combination munition" its HE shells landing with WP landing immediately afterwards. I've heard some crazy shit on internal nets, radio equiette need not apply.
In addition, really people would never use a handheld radio with a radio on their vest? Because no one ever use or need two radio frequencies that's just unheard of in combat.
Love your videos man but sometimes the military stuff you point out is pretty off base. From an 8 year forward observer here
Lost it at the PT belt meme.
Micheal Bay is like a fresh boot. Whenever they meet someone from an advanced or special force, their pants get all soiled.
What is the difference between a military contractor and a mercenary exactly?
according to the UN: nothing
according to PMCs: the're loyal to America before money, and technically they are only supposed to act as guards
I think that the movie was about the mercs on the ground and what they felt which is why it didnt really Go into the logistics about what was happening outside of Benghazi
VERY disingenuous to equate a drone flying over head with actual air support.
He didn't. He talked about the situation. Please grow up.
rollinNsearchin he actually did. Aerial recon is not the same as CAS. This "veteran" has no idea what he is talking about. He is probobly a slick sleeve acting hard
He absolutely did. He clarifies that a drone is a _form_ of air support, just not CAS. Then he goes on to say it's stupid to complain that they couldn't get an F-22 flyover, as if that's the same thing. Think about it. In a combat situation are you asking for an attack aircraft to fly over so it can *take pictures* !?! NO! You want it to fly low overhead at Mach 1.2 and scare the shit out of the bad guys! Make them think the gunship is coming close behind.
That said, if they can't get there, they can't get there, though that also seems pretty stupid. We have the most expensive military in the world, supposedly so we can be on-site anywhere in the world on short notice, and the closest CAS was in *freaking Virginia* ?!?
None could be provided.the drone was likely the only thing which had enough fuel to reach Benghazi,let alone on time.
you think those F-22 is cheap huh
I'm really struggling with this video. It comes across as very apologetic. Clinton was the Secretary responsible for all of these outposts. As such any failing or loss of life owing to poor foresight must rest with her. Allow me to lay out this case (i'm from the UK no political allegiance rep or democrat)
Parts of the Middle East are breaking out in violence. We'd seen before how a planned military move in Mogadishu had turned into a nightmare. We have a poorly protected US Ambassador in Bengazi. There is evidence of frequent requests for additional security. The 'Merc's' are on record stating they felt the facilities were under protected. Those requests were ignored.
Now the idea that the US has zero available air support across the whole of Europe and the ME is ridiculous. There are bases all over Germany, Kuwait, Iraq with US military assets. The idea that every single US asset was out of commission at the same time (if true) would be grounds for people being fired. What would happen if the Russian's decided to go into Poland for example - there is no way the US didn't have committed and aware leaders with assets supporting all possible European attack vectors.
We know that the US Ambassador did die as a result of the attack on that compound. We know that there was then an attack on the CIA compound. The only thing that saved the CIA compound was the presence of the contractors (merc's) had they not have been there that CIA compound would have been over run too. So to critique their account does come across as harsh when they are at the sharp end of the actual defence.
The plains facts are, the threat assessment was far wide of the risk. Support was not made available. An Ambassador died. Two US compounds were attacked. Who ultimately owns the blame for this? On whose watch did all this happen? What should a good commander do when on their watch a complete disaster breaks out?
Truth is, Hillary refused to take ownership of any of the blame for this. That is a big reason why she looked so awful. Leaders should always own the mess that happens on their watch.
Just some thoughts.
That shake and bake line may have been a Talladega Nights reference.
my brother, fellow veteran, you know how happy you were to see those KBR trucks before chow... don't even pretend to lie about that lol. i'm not sure if you guys had them in Afghanistan, but in Iraq KBR was _always_ around, as well as other PMCs. i didn't mind them as they were pretty much *all* vets like you and me or they were truck drivers just trying to make a better living than they could in the states. so, the big thing here seems to be your problem with "mercs" who are actually just contractors who were _legally_ hired. i know a good number of guys working for Triple Canopy after they ETS'd but i didn't go into the field just because i suffered a bad head injury which is why i was discharged. anyhow, State Dept was atrocious in this situation, you have to admit that. all the hearings i've seen about this have shown just how *AWFUL* these folks reacted to the attack, and then how Clinton just tried to "pass the buck" about everything, man! you know these things, come on!
on a positive note, i was an m240B gunner myself so i agree with most of your other assessments... i guess i have a bad taste in my mouth about how you talked about those who participated in the Doolittle Raid as i just watched your otherwise excellent video on *Pearl Harbor* so maybe i'm being a little too difficult here. i actually agree with you on the _majority_ of your assessments here and you have gained a new subscriber. thanks for going through all the effort!
Utter Bovine Scatology! Three rapid response forces were ready to go and within easy range of Benghazi. All three were forced to stand down.
2 responded, and nowhere have i seen claims of a third unit. What are you talking about?
Dude, you gave an excellent impartial analysis of a real hot button recent sore spot movie with both academic and personal knowledge. Have an upvote and a sub.
God damn it what’d they do to Pam?
Took her off the all-cocaine diet she had in season 5.
your bias is so incredibly disappointing
I smell 11 barvo. Thanks for your service man. Good review
19d/k actually, thanks
The Cynical Historian hey np man. I'm planning on going in 11b pretty soon...kinda nervouse
Don't be bro. They will not let you fail. It's tough, but you won't have a choice once you start training. That is somewhat comforting when you feel like you can't go on. Good luck
The Cynical Historian alright thanks. I'm just scared of being the guy throwing up and collapsing after a mile 😂😂 not the long distance runner
It's a shame you don't have millions of subscribers...thx for doing what you're doing...and thx for having the balls to go to war for me.
“It’s been investigated by both sides of the aisle.”
Great! All the neocons agree.
I thank you for your military service, Cypher.
You are a veteran?!
I think after the turn of recent events lately, this will be a more historically accurate movie than zero dark thirty.
Micheal Bay. That is all you need to make a vomit movie.
“Shake and bake” could’ve been there own internal brevity code, but you were clearly an army pog so you probably don’t know what that means.
I don't remember if the book was as 'we need air support' heavy, however everyone on the merc team was ex tier one: seals, rangers, marine recon ex, and those teams pretty much always call for air support in this sort of situation. so it would make sense for them to banter about it mid-combat. Also they said in the book that the drone guys weren't telling them anything they couldn't see on the ground, they would want a bird flyover even disarmed because militants will typically scatter for a fighter pilot flyover.
where was the air support map from?
first in the citation section
That was fast + thx
It feels like you dont like mercs... it is actually very clear to me....
I don’t know where you’re coming from and this was one of the better movies I’ve ever seen in my life and I’m one hell of a critic I only watch the good shit everybody likes
Why is there always a bleak blue letters/numbers on weapon
I refuse to believe as was stated in this video that an american airbase would at any time completely disable every warplane on the base for maintenance. That would be a case of extreme unreadiness and mismanagement.
All requests were done by Email or phone. All were denied.
It was not a consulate. That was why it did not have the security
They weren’t Lybian Terrorists, they were Islamists. Why do you try to make it seem like the IRA is attacking?
Do want to say that a drone is going to have a different effect than a jet.
Love the videos, even if I don't always agree, but is there a chance of changing the color of the text you put in these videos? As someone who is color blind and has trouble seeing red text on a black background, it would be much appreciated!
+Liam O'Byrne I've recently changed it to white. I just like the color red, but i finally have in
The term 'shake and bake' can be used in terms of nascar, popularised by the film Talladega nights, probably explains why he used this term while driving
I would love to see a video where you discuss bad tactics in movies
The movie is based on the book. The director as well as the merc are very clear on that. Perhaps in the future, someone should make another version based on another source.
This is the best Michael Bay Movie.
Levon Gevorgyan not saying much
Good video, thank you for your service
The movie was supposed to show the BOTG perspective.
I have to say I agree with a lot of what you said. I was really disappointed that the film never really touched on the most import thing. The reason why we were even in Benghazi. Only one little scene even touches on this point and if you don't know what you're looking at it is just a fluff scene. But this isn't a political forum so I won't even touch it.
If they had a drone flying over with a camera, drones could have been equipped with hell fire missiles and provided "close air support". The military was and still is striking targets all over the world with these assets for at least 8 years now. So ya when it was stated no air support was given to help strike targets, this is a true statement.
When you’re in battle you don’t have someone there writing everything thing down, so of course you ain’t gonna have the stand down documented.
This little piece of propaganda should have just been titled, "Don't Vote For Hillary: The Movie"
Never second guess an operation from an arm chair.... period.
I would have more apreciated if the director, the narrator here and probably also a great share of the audience would have taken just a minute to think about all these events from the non American, probably even Lybian perspective. The real scandal about "Benghazi" was and remains this: WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING THERE?
America, as well as most countries, have embassies and consulates in such places to keep diplomatic ties. The CIA compound is a bit of a different story, but you'll find that the CIA maintains compounds throughout the world
That's the whole background to this story? seriously? So I guess that's a thing which happens just like rainy weather - embassys/consolates get raided from time to time.
Nobody said anything about f-22's, they were asking for f-16's in italy under NATO control....
Man there are a lot of butthurt people in the comments
So it’s a bad thing that the movie was in the POV of the Mercs?
More that they refused to accept that the mercs weren't omniscient. They aren't capable of knowing whether something is ready 1k+ miles away
Quick question, if the Italy airfleet was not available then they would lose the main airborne ability for NATO in Europe. I assume some aircraft where available so i would have to side with the mercs
Was the movie itself good? I mean being historically accurate is important but what about the movie itself.
not so separable if you know the story already
wait was this guy in the way??
Damn dude I have been watching your stuff for over 2 hours now , "into the bad lands" is on . OK you got another sub . good stuff
There was NO offensive Air Power sent to them at all. A couple of unarmed drones. That it’s.
Considering that these mercs were military, then decided to go back for a day job, and you are making youtube videos... yeah they are badass!!!
I didn't find this movie boring at all.
We get it you were in the Army. 🙄 Being in the Army doesn’t mean you’re an expert on what support is given in certain situations.
god damn, must be the best unit ever, they even got Gordon Freeman on their side
shake 'n bake is a reference to Talladega Nights, a car-racing comedy movie
I read the book before watching the movie. You won't fully understand what's going on in the movie unless you do. BTW... I would call them security guards, not mercs. And yes, the movie is like a comic book.
This is a top five movie for me
Why was Jim from the office in this
tbf, when mentioning Tarantino- Django Unchained is an amazing movie
Sigh. Comment section proves we are in the end of The Age of Reason.
I was alive and awake in the 80's. I wonder how many of the keyboard warriors would be calling for "Lock Reagan up!" for the hundreds of American embassy workers who died during his administration?
So let me get this straight. Something happened with Regan in the 80's therefore it is OK for Hillary and her state department to screw up and get four American's killed. Right?
The State Department tried to get more guards and support for the embassy, moron. Congress denied them every time, so on that night there just. Wasn't. Any.
Oh no there was plenty of other stuff to have him locked up for. I'd've had him and his staff lined up and shot for Iran Contra -- they sold weapons and drugs to TERRORISTS to fund an actively ENEMY DICTATORIAL TERRORIST REGIME by giving them WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. That is the definition of TREASON!
Brian Mead I seem to recall that it was a fairly big issue back in the day. Now you’ll find lots of fans of Reagan on the right (hence you trying to perform a character assassination) but every single one of them regards the Iran contra issue as his darkest hour. Additionally, 14 people were indicted for it including the sec def, and despite the investigation finding no evidence the Reagan knew the extent of both the Iranian weapons trade or the funding and support of the Nicaraguan contras, Reagan still stepped forward and said the he will accept responsibility, which is more than Obama and Hillary did. Now the “WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION” that were sold were Hawk and Tow missiles, which are certainly powerful and dangerous, but it’s not exactly on the same playing field as selling the Iranians uranium and expecting the not to build nuclear weapons (despite them saying that they will make sure they burn Israel and expressing a desire for nukes) and then providing no oversight. If you would have Reagan and his staff shot, then in the interest of consistency shoot Obama and his staff. After all, they sold uranium to Iran, and funded several Islamist militant groups so that they would fight other Islamist militant groups, and received money and campaign donations from radicalized countries. So at this point, the only way anyone can be able to respect your argument is if you either retract your statement or double down and show that you’re at least a consistent idiot
yeah, i'm just gonna say most of these points are invalid. coming from a person who has watched the movie over 5 times.
Shake and bake...
Ricky Bobby
Talledega knights
The moment you decided to call the GSR members Mercs instead of Contractors I just stopped caring about your point of this video.
That fleet-wide disassembly you spoke of sounds like a logistical nightmare! Crazy that the nearest useful air support was in the US! I enjoy Bay's films, but this one seemed to miss the mark, I think bending the truth is a bit more acceptable for films like Pain and Gain, where you don't have a political ulterior motive for the film.
Love your videos!
Fleet-wide inspections are a regular part of Air Force service. Much like the inspections in the army that I'm familiar with, they are an annoyance that really only causes a couple days of problems.
So was this claim also false? www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3586432/We-saved-Navy-Seals-Benghazi-F-16-pilots-Italy-standby-help-besieged-forces-Libya-order-launch-never-came.html
If so then the next question would be why there were no available aircraft? No carriers in that part of the world?
Johnny Congress has been very clear in stating that the planes in Italy were not available. The daily mail has degenerated quite a bit in the internet age BTW.
As a Brit, I can tell you that the Daily mail wasn't respected long before they had a website.
Terlington Crumbumber III LOL, I had heard as much. Funny enough, I had to go into their digital archives for an upcoming episode, and before WWI they were an industry leader. Then I saw a bunch of their newer stuff and kinda went, "What the hell happened?"
Shake and Bake is a reference to Talladega Nights: Ballad of Ricky Bobby
I'm super late but I think shake and bake was supposed to be a reference to the scene in Talladega nights.
I don't understand how this movie is political. They say that they did not get air support. But how does that make it a political issue? The review does not make this clear.
Because the Cynical Historian is a democrat who believes that Hillary farts Chanel No. 5.
while I get what youre trying to get at with some of the complaints, the characters like the station chef are there to create tension in the movie for dramatic effect if he was like yea go over there and deal with this and not contrary then the characters would look less heroic it would seem less dramatic when they do decide to go a lot of the choices you complain about are choices made to make something hollywood and not real life.
John Krasinsky?
I guess the way they made every Libyan look dumb when everyone switches sides freely also has something to do with the fact that the Libyan fighters are on the American side, taking American supplies but only suddenly switching sides and became actual terrorist so that became an internal joke like how one Libyan fighter can be your friend now but suddenly 5mins into the help he switches side.
PS: A point to note, the term "Shake and Bake" in the film doesn't mean the term "Shake and Bake" that we know of in the military. Our term is phrosporus weapons but for their term used in the movie, it's a term meant for driving. Shake and Bake was coined during the movie "Tallegeda Nights" which basically means to tailgate someone close to their bumper then slingshot an overtake move to either the outside or inside of the corner. That's their definition of "Shake and Bake" in the movie. Plus they're driving for that thing does make sense.
I have one question, after I seen so often Ramstein in this video...
Why the heck does the germans goverment still allows american Nukes in Ramstein?
Why does he keep showing that political comic of Benghazi constantly throughout the video same could be said of 9/11 and other similar terrorist attacks
What was your MOS?
Maybe they said "shake and bake" in reference to Talladega Nights and they were gonna do a Ricky Bobby move!
Is that your own footage of the m240 from Afghanistan?
Yep