Page 19 of 27 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 261

Thread: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edited)

  1. #181
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,985

    Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Spec Ops deployed without their combat gear? What are you kidding me, something doesn't sound right about that.
    They were not there for security. They were there to reveiw security at the embassys

  2. #182
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    You'll get no argument from me. But. For those who say it was Bush's Daddy's War and Bush's War for Oil? They're full of ****.
    There was no reason to attack Iraq, they didn't attack us or any of our allies so we should not have attacked them.

    What Democrat said: "Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud?"

  3. #183
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Last Seen
    01-28-15 @ 06:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    5,587
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    There was no reason to attack Iraq, they didn't attack us or any of our allies so we should not have attacked them.

    What Democrat said: "Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud?"
    The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies Jerusalem, Washington

  4. #184
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    There was no reason to attack Iraq, they didn't attack us or any of our allies so we should not have attacked them.

    What Democrat said: "Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud?"
    I don't know. But I do know who said these snips:

    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
    --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
    "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
    "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
    "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
    "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
    "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
    "There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
    "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
    "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
    "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
    "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
    "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
    "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
    "There is unmistakable evidence that [/B]Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
    "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" -- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
    "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
    "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
    "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
    Democrat Quotes on WMD
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  5. #185
    Advisor Iron Yank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Last Seen
    12-21-16 @ 09:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    317

    Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    There was no reason to attack Iraq, they didn't attack us or any of our allies so we should not have attacked them.
    If I remember correctly, Saddam had signed a treaty and a no fly zone was put in place. When the Iraqis fired at our jets the treaty was broken and this gave us every legal right to remove him. If you remember Bill Clinton bombed Sadddam for years and it continued back & forth all the way up to Bushs tenure. Not to say it was a great idea, that is for history to judge, but there was certainly plausible reasons to remove him.

  6. #186
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    I don't know. But I do know who said these snips:


















    Democrat Quotes on WMD
    Thanks for making my point, the fact is that quote was from President Bush and Condoleezza Rice made similar statements. They made it sound as though a nuclear attack fom Saddam imminent. No Democrat ever made that statement, you guys say the Democrats said the same things as Bush, but they didn't.

  7. #187
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Thanks for making my point, the fact is that quote was from President Bush and Condoleezza Rice made similar statements. They made it sound as though a nuclear attack fom Saddam imminent. No Democrat ever made that statement, you guys say the Democrats said the same things as Bush, but they didn't.
    Hopeless. Absolutely hopeless. There are none so blind as those who will not see. Our country is doomed. Did you even read the damned quotes?? No, I thought not.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  8. #188
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Last Seen
    01-28-15 @ 06:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    5,587
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Hopeless. Absolutely hopeless. There are none so blind as those who will not see. Our country is doomed. Did you even read the damned quotes?? No, I thought not.
    Yes!

    However, I suggest Googling those often pegged quotes to find an original source, Maggie.

  9. #189
    Quantum sufficit

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,648

    Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(ed

    I recommend everyone watch Colbert from tonite regarding Benghazi.

    He nailed it.
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

  10. #190
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Hopeless. Absolutely hopeless. There are none so blind as those who will not see. Our country is doomed. Did you even read the damned quotes?? No, I thought not.
    I read them, here is what John Kerry actually said oct 9 2002:


    When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. And the administration, I believe, is now committed to a recognition that war must be the last option to address this threat, not the first, and that we must act in concert with allies around the globe to make the world's case against Saddam Hussein.

    Let me be clear, the vote I will give to the President is for one reason and one reason only: To disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, if we cannot accomplish that objective through new, tough weapons inspections in joint with our allies.

    In giving the President this authority, I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days — to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough and immediate inspection requirements, and to act with our allies at our side if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force. If he fails to do so, I will be among the first to speak out.


    If we do wind up going to war with Iraq, it is imperative that we do so with others in the international community, unless there is a showing of a grave, imminent — and I emphasize "imminent" — threat to this country which requires the President to respond in a way that protects our immediate national security needs.

    Prime Minister Tony Blair has recognized a similar need to distinguish how we approach this. He has said that he believes we should move in concert with allies, and he has promised his own party that he will not do so otherwise. The administration may not be in the habit of building coalitions, but that is what they need to do. And it is what can be done. If we go it alone without reason, we risk inflaming an entire region, breeding a new generation of terrorists, a new cadre of anti-American zealots, and we will be less secure, not more secure, at the end of the day, even with Saddam Hussein disarmed.

    Let there be no doubt or confusion about where we stand on this. I will support a multilateral effort to disarm him by force, if we ever exhaust those other options, as the President has promised, but I will not support a unilateral U.S. war against Iraq unless that threat is imminent and the multilateral effort has not proven possible under any circumstances.

    In voting to grant the President the authority, I am not giving him carte blanche to run roughshod over every country that poses or may pose some kind of potential threat to the United States. Every nation has the right to act preemptively, if it faces an imminent and grave threat, for its self-defense under the standards of law. The threat we face today with Iraq does not meet that test yet. I emphasize "yet." Yes, it is grave because of the deadliness of Saddam Hussein's arsenal and the very high probability that he might use these weapons one day if not disarmed. But it is not imminent, and no one in the CIA, no intelligence briefing we have had suggests it is imminent. None of our intelligence reports suggest that he is about to launch an attack.

    The argument for going to war against Iraq is rooted in enforcement of the international community's demand that he disarm. It is not rooted in the doctrine of preemption. Nor is the grant of authority in this resolution an acknowledgment that Congress accepts or agrees with the President's new strategic doctrine of preemption. Just the opposite. This resolution clearly limits the authority given to the President to use force in Iraq, and Iraq only, and for the specific purpose of defending the United States against the threat posed by Iraq and enforcing relevant Security Council resolutions.

    The definition of purpose circumscribes the authority given to the President to the use of force to disarm Iraq because only Iraq's weapons of mass destruction meet the two criteria laid out in this resolution.

Page 19 of 27 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •