A Deadly Mix in Benghazi by David D. Kirkpatrick, New York Times.
… Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.
A fuller accounting of the attacks suggests lessons for the United States that go well beyond Libya. It shows the risks of expecting American aid in a time of desperation to buy durable loyalty, and the difficulty of discerning friends from allies of convenience in a culture shaped by decades of anti-Western sentiment. Both are challenges now hanging over the American involvement in Syria’s civil conflict.
The attack also suggests that, as the threats from local militants around the region have multiplied, an intensive focus on combating Al Qaeda may distract from safeguarding American interests…
More:
5 Takeaways From The New York Times Benghazi Investigation - Time
Comments
For a counterpoint to the article, see http://sofrep.com/30947/libya-kirkpatrick-benghazi-dos-jsoc-covert-ops-…. Granted the SOFRep folks are not unbiased, but they've done some digging into Benghazi and their comments are pretty pointed regarding Kirkpatrick's article.
An impressive NYT article, although some questions and issues remain. Principally one expects or suspects the USG has the answers, so we await as ever the helpful leak.
Meantime Clint Watts has a valuable commentary: http://selectedwisdom.com/?p=1194