The danger remains high of an "October Surprise" retaliatory attack stunt in Libya by the increasingly-cornered desperate Obama. This contingency is being explicitly discussed daily.
Yesterday, James Jay Carafano of the Heritage Foundation lists the such an attack as the first of "Four Potential October Surprises." Carafano writes on nationalinterest.org, Oct. 18:
"1. Strike Libyan Terrorists. Hitting targets in pursuit of those who organized and executed the 9/11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi is quite possible. Indeed, shortly after the foreign media reported that the U.S. intelligence community is compiling a Libyan hit list. Recently, administration officials confirmed that strikes are under active consideration..."
On Oct. 16, Commentator Ray McGovern wrote an Op-Ed (for Consortium News), in which he takes up the possibility of Obama going for an "October Surprise." McGovern titles his column, "The Real Blame for Deaths in Libya." He discusses Obama's proclivity for a US retaliatory strike in Libya, by pointing out that John Brennan, Obama's counter-terrorism adviser, went to Tripoli recently. His going there "is not about investigation. Retribution is his bag. It is likely that some Libyan interlocutor was brought forth who would give him carte blanche to retaliate against any and all those "suspected" of having had some role in the Benghazi murders.
"So, look for 'surgical' drone strike or Abbottabad-style special forces attack -- possibly before the Nov. 6 election on whomever is labeled a 'suspect.' Sound wild? It is. However, considering Brennan's penchant for acting-first-thinking-later, plus the entrée and extraordinary influence he enjoys with President Obama, drone and/or special forces attacks are, in my opinion, more likely than not. (This is the same Brennan, after all, who compiles for Obama lists of nominees for assassination by drone.)
"If in Tuesday's debate with ex-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Obama is pressed, as expected, on his supposed weakness in handling Benghazi, attacks on "terrorists," real or "suspect," become still more likely. Brennan and other White House functionaries might succeed in persuading the President that such attacks would be just what the doctor ordered for his wheezing poll numbers.
"But what about tit-for-tat terrorist retaliation for those kinds of attacks? Not to worry. With some luck, the inevitable terrorist response might not be possible until after the voting. Obama's advisers would hardly have to remind him of the big but brief bounce after killing al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
"Mindless vengeance has been a popular political sell since 9/11. And so have drones. Both dovetail neatly with Brennan's simplistic approach to terrorism; namely, just kill the "bad guys," the comic-book moniker so often used for "suspected" militants, terrorists, insurgents and still other folks with an enduring hatred for America."
Finally, Lt. Col. (ret.) Tony Shaffer, on Fox News TV this morning, commented first that Obama dropped the phrase, "Al Qaeda on the run" out of his stump speech at all of his Oct. 17 campaign appearances, given what's happened in Libya, where there are AQIM and Ansae al Shariya. When Shaffer was asked about all the "whispering" that the U.S. might go in and "take out" persons in Libya, and even use drones, in retaliation for the Benghazi hit on the United States, Shaffer said that it is, the "wrong optic." But, the implication is that Obama may do it anyway.