• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

CaptinSarcastic said:
So here's my problem with the whole Benghazi meme:

There have been dozens of different accusations made against the Administration since the moment this event was happening in real time.

The only accusations with any shred of truth are how the event was characterized.

Nothing anyone has accused the administration of indicates that any positive action would have had any likelihood of saving lives.

Monday morning quarterbacking is all fine and good, and it always possible to say that if different decisions were made a different outcome would have transpired. But if one is looking to assign actual culpability, malfeasance, or negligence, one would have to PROVE that not only were standard decision protocols not followed, but that the failure to follow them resulted in these deaths.

Too much of this meme is based on hatred of Obama and/or a desire to see a powerful political opponent crushed.

America does not want it's President to be guilty of causing American deaths, but Americans will accept evidence if he is.

The problem is that this meme is long on accusations but VERY short on any actual evidence that the administration did anything so wrong as to create culpability. Anything, and everything, less than that is just second guessing and political attacks.

These are very serious accusations that no American should WANT to be true much less be pushing them without evidence.

I know it "feels" right to people that hate Obama and they would be happy to find him guilty on general principal, but I would argue that this kind of nonsense hurts America more than it hurts Obama and people that are engaging in this witch hunt would wreck the country over political attacks. And the same people have done it before in the ten year witch hunt surrounding White Water, a land deal in which the Clinton's were ultimately the victims of fraud.
Click to expand...


Bingo, we have a winner here.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Unitedwestand13 said:
And let us not forget that many democrats now regret voting to authorize that war. Somthing very few republicans are openly willing to admit.
Click to expand...
Not sure why they should admit to anything. Saddam is gone. Thats not a bad thing. He brutalized people in his country and the region for decades. His sons built human shredders. His special military guard had carte blanche to do whatever they wanted to whover they wanted. He openly defied 17 UN resolutions and numerous demands to give an accounting of his WMD program. The UN inspectors...those are the same guys that were being held at one end of an inspection site whilst caravans of trucks were rolling out the back. We didnt know what we knew and only today know what we know because Bush didnt give them yet another 10 years to hide, lie, move, or whatever the hell he did with the remaining weapons...weapons which the UN teams were looking to account FOR because they had previously cataloged them.

MOST every elected democrat held the same position on Iraq, Hussein, and their WMDs and his threat to the world as did Bush. 29 Senators voted to act. The problem remains NOT with the action. The war was swift, effective, and well executed. The problem (to Bush's discredit) was with the postwar operations. They have made the same mistakes in Iraq that they did (and still are) in Afghanistan.

The 'lie' rhetoric is bull****. Democrats said the same thing, testified to the same thing and presented the same information for 10 years. That ANYONE would make the claim Bush lied about WMDs and not hold out the same scorn and rhetoric for the democrats speaks volumes.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Unitedwestand13 said:
And let us not forget that many democrats now regret voting to authorize that war. Somthing very few republicans are openly willing to admit.
Click to expand...

They didn't vote for a war with boots on the ground. They would have preferred that UN weapons inspector Hans Blix been given extra time for the search, but President Bush refused so they had to leave. He wanted his war.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Middleground said:
They got suckered into it, like many others waving the American flag. Even the media missed the boat... apart from the 2 reporters from Knight Ridder.
Click to expand...
Sure they did. Proactively as well...since they supported the military actions against Iraq when Clinton was pres and they had access to all that intel long before Bush ran, let alone became president.

Yeah...they were all just snookered...poor bunch of mindless retarded democrats. Shame on Bush for tricking them. How could they have known (I mean...other than those decades of intel briefings, committee meetings, etc).
 
Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

Unitedwestand13 said:
You keep forgetting that embassy security funding had been reduced by
congress in its attempt to cut wasteful spending.

The embassy's were doing what they could with what they had.

If you wanted the embassy's security to be ironclad, you would need to be willing to provide a blank check.
Click to expand...


STOP LYING....I am NOT a Obama supporter and I'm not susceptable to BS.

In a Committee on Government Oversight, Charlene Lamb ( the person who denied increased Security ) was asked " Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which led you NOT to increase the number of people in their security force " ?

Charlene Lamb : " No sir ''
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

VanceMack said:
Not sure why they should admit to anything. Saddam is gone. Thats not a bad thing. He brutalized people in his country and the region for decades. His sons built human shredders. His special military guard had carte blanche to do whatever they wanted to whover they wanted. He openly defied 17 UN resolutions and numerous demands to give an accounting of his WMD program. The UN inspectors...those are the same guys that were being held at one end of an inspection site whilst caravans of trucks were rolling out the back. We didnt know what we knew and only today know what we know because Bush didnt give them yet another 10 years to hide, lie, move, or whatever the hell he did with the remaining weapons...weapons which the UN teams were looking to account FOR because they had previously cataloged them.

MOST every elected democrat held the same position on Iraq, Hussein, and their WMDs and his threat to the world as did Bush. 29 Senators voted to act. The problem remains NOT with the action. The war was swift, effective, and well executed. The problem (to Bush's discredit) was with the postwar operations. They have made the same mistakes in Iraq that they did (and still are) in Afghanistan.

The 'lie' rhetoric is bull****. Democrats said the same thing, testified to the same thing and presented the same information for 10 years. That ANYONE would make the claim Bush lied about WMDs and not hold out the same scorn and rhetoric for the democrats speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

I am not sure a civil war was the intended result of the Iraq invasion.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Middleground said:
Bingo, we have a winner here.
Click to expand...

Please. This was a massive screw-up followed by a massive cover-up right before a Presidential election.

Nothing more, and nothing less.
 
Re: Diplomat:eek: Benghazi during attacks(edited)

Middleground said:
Again, I ask... you think I'm a Democat?
Click to expand...

Im commenting on the fact that you are engaging in the very same behavior that you are actively complaining about from the other side.

How you see yourself politically is irrelevent to that point.

Or, even better, you think I am not without criticism of Obama? I do admit to leaning left, though.
Click to expand...

How are the two mutually exclusive?
 
Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

pbrauer said:
They didn't vote for a war with boots on the
ground. They would have preferred
that UN weapons inspector Hans Blix been given extra time for the search, but President Bush refused so they had to leave. He wanted his war.
Click to expand...

Oh sure, you asked each one of them personally right ?

What you guys will do to not admit you elected crooks just blows my mind.

But what does Iraq have to do with Benghazzi anyway ?
 
Last edited:
Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

Fenton said:
STOP LYING....I am NOT a Obama supporter and I'm not susceptable to BS.

In a Committee on Government Oversight, Charlene Lamb ( the person who denied increased Security ) was asked " Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which led you NOT to increase the number of people in their security force " ?

Charlene Lamb : " No sir ''
Click to expand...

So stop pretending that anything could have been done to stop the attack while it was progress. The special forces in tripoli were not equipped for the task. The special forces in Europe would have arrived 12 hours after the attack ended.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Erod said:
Please. This was a massive screw-up followed by a massive cover-up right before a Presidential election.

Nothing more, and nothing less.
Click to expand...

The Reports say there was no cover up. There was evidence of screw ups on the part of the state department, but no evidence of cover ups.
 
Re: Diplomat: enghazi during attacks(edited)

pbrauer said:
They didn't vote for a war with boots on the ground. They would have preferred that UN weapons inspector Hans Blix been given extra time for the search, but President Bush refused so they had to leave. He wanted his war.
Click to expand...

If they didn't want boots on the ground why did they vote to authorize the war?
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Unitedwestand13 said:
And let us not forget that many democrats now regret voting to authorize that war. Somthing very few republicans are openly willing to admit.
Click to expand...
Sure they're going to say they regret it NOW. They're doing so for the exact same reason that they voted for it to begin with. It's called pandering to public opinion. During the run-up to the war the American public overwhelmingly supported it. Voting no would have risked re-election, so those Democrats who were potentially vulnerable voted yes.

Now that history has shown that there were no WMDs and popular support for the war has evaporated, those same Democrats are now going public with their "regrets". They were gutless when they voted for the war just as they are gutless now in expressing their regret.

I guess history really does repeat itself...
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Jack Fabulous said:
Sure they're going to say they regret it NOW. They're doing so for the exact same reason that they voted for it to begin with. It's called pandering to public opinion. During the run-up to the war the American public overwhelmingly supported it. Voting no would have risked re-election, so those Democrats who were potentially vulnerable voted yes.

Now that history has shown that there were no WMDs and popular support for the war has evaporated, those same Democrats are now going public with their "regrets". They were gutless when they voted for the war just as they are gutless now in expressing their regret.

I guess history really does repeat itself...
Click to expand...

It takes more courage to admit a mistake.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Unitedwestand13 said:
It takes more courage to admit a mistake.
Click to expand...
I see no courage in walking back the decision to go to war at this point. It's pandering, plain and simple.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Jack Fabulous said:
Sure they're going to say they regret it NOW. They're doing so for the exact same reason that they voted for it to begin with. It's called pandering to public opinion. During the run-up to the war the American public overwhelmingly supported it. Voting no would have risked re-election, so those Democrats who were potentially vulnerable voted yes.

Now that history has shown that there were no WMDs and popular support for the war has evaporated, those same Democrats are now going public with their "regrets". They were gutless when they voted for the war just as they are gutless now in expressing their regret.

I guess history really does repeat itself...
Click to expand...

In the case of useless wars like Iraq, let's hope that doesn't repeat. McCain wants us in Syria now. Is that wise? Why are Republicans so quick to send Americans to their deaths without a plan to win? Do they hate our troops that much?
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

pbrauer said:
They didn't vote for a war with boots on the ground. They would have preferred that UN weapons inspector Hans Blix been given extra time for the search, but President Bush refused so they had to leave. He wanted his war.
Click to expand...
Horse****. You vote for a war or you don't.

If youre so stupid to vote for a war when you don't want boots on the ground,

Then you're too incompetent to be in congress!!

And yes they are too incompent to be in,but can't get rid of em.
 
Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(ed

penn1954 said:
Horse****. You vote for a war or you don't.

If youre so stupid to vote for a war when you don't want boots on the ground,

Then you're too incompetent to be in congress!!

And yes they are too incompent to be in,but can't get rid of em.
Click to expand...

That's funny. The resolution didn't read war or no war. It encouraged use of diplomatic means.

The Repubs knew they couldn't get a war resolution through, so they didn't. That way, they could pretend they had big swinging dicks when the war was over in a week, but his behind the concept that the war was Bushs fault.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

iguanaman said:
In the case of useless wars like Iraq, let's hope that doesn't repeat. McCain wants us in Syria now. Is that wise? Why are Republicans so quick to send Americans to their deaths without a plan to win? Do they hate our troops that much?
Click to expand...
I think the Democrats still hold the record for sending our troops to war without a plan to win. Vietnam anyone?

None the less, we shouldn't be going into Syria or anyplace else but if that decision is made it will be made by Democrats. That is a fact.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

penn1954 said:
Horse****. You vote for a war or you don't.

If youre so stupid to vote for a war when you don't want boots on the ground,

Then you're too incompetent to be in congress!!

And yes they are too incompent to be in,but can't get rid of em.
Click to expand...

I agree. I also think congress needs to declare and put this nation on a war footing instead of just passing a resolution, an opinion of congress before this nation ever participates in another war. Too many times in the past since WWII, the civilians of this country didn't really know or had to sacrifice as they should to become part of the war effort. Only the soldiers paid the price of knowing a war was going on.
 
Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

Issa will not have the hearing all to himself, there is his democratic counterpart Elijah Cummings
Click to expand...

also present will be steven lynch, congressman from south boston

Lynch: Benghazi talking points 'scrubbed' - POLITICO.com

ranking chair of house intel dutch ruppersberger won't be at the hearings, he is not a member of oversight

but the lead voice in pelosi's caucus on intel issues has also spoken out about the scrubbing of pertinent truth from the advisory prepared by the cia for the edification of the american public

Democrats now critical of Rice's Benghazi explanation, amid more damaging evidence | Fox News

the progressive rep from baltimore, as a matter of fact, is the person who got the whole controversy going when he wrote to the cia asking, what should i tell my constituents

ruppersberger---"that's what an investigation is about, let's get the facts"

you'd think so, wouldn't you

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

Unitedwestand13 said:
So stop pretending that anything could have been done to stop the
attack while it was progress. The special forces in tripoli were not equipped for the task. The special forces in Europe would have arrived 12 hours after the attack ended.
Click to expand...

Oh please.

THAT'S the point. That after they repeatedly asked for more security, after they were attacked NOTHING was done to provide more security.

No alternatives for re-inforcments were available.

YOU LIED when you said it was a lack of funding It was a lack of qualified leadership that YOU GUYS are responsible for.

Suck it up. You screwed the American people and the people at that Consulate.
 
Re: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks(edit

Unitedwestand13 said:
The Reports say there was no cover up. There was evidence of screw ups
on the part of the state department, but no evidence of cover ups.
Click to expand...

Who's report ?? The panel Clinton assembled ? Seriosuly ?

Clinton lied to the face of a Father who lost his son.

What makes you think she wont lie to you ?
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Unitedwestand13 said:
I am not sure a civil war was the intended result of the Iraq invasion.
Click to expand...
As I said...post war ops...huge mistakes. Thats on Bush.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom