Page 4 of 28 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 273

Thread: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

  1. #31
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,251

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    Either this is a additional detail to
    this case or we finally found the person who turned down offers of additional security.

    Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say | McClatchy
    McClatchy ?? The idiot who thinks the sub-prime collapse started after 2004 and had nothing to do with Fannie or Freddie ?

    Who blatantly dismisses the over 5 Trillion in Sub-prime and Alt-A loans and MBSs backed by Sub-Prime loans that Fannie and Freddie passed off to the US Treasury after their ENRON accounting nearly collapsed the US economy ?

    Lol...the guy has ZERO credibillity.

    Unbelievable.

    I mean why don't I just post articles written by Carl Rove or the Koch Brothers ?

    If you have to turn to McClathey for ANY data youv'e lost the debate because he will say anything to cover Obama's corrupt ass.

  2. #32
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,377

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    then you would want us to believe that since we went into pakistan after osama bin laden without pakistani government approval that we should also be able to conduct military operations in canada without that government's approval
    notice how absurd your conclusion is
    Are terrorists, with anti-armor and indirect fire weapons killing our diplomatic personel in Canada?

    I'm think that should an event like that go down in Canada, we wouldn't HAVE to conduct military operations in Canada, because the Canadians would be taking those actions, themselves.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  3. #33
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,136

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Are terrorists, with anti-armor and indirect fire weapons killing our diplomatic personel in Canada?

    I'm think that should an event like that go down in Canada, we wouldn't HAVE to conduct military operations in Canada, because the Canadians would be taking those actions, themselves.
    read what your buddy asserted
    that if there is even one exception then there are no rules
    deal with your own folks and their stupid posts
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  4. #34
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,251

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Are terrorists, with anti-armor and indirect fire weapons killing our
    diplomatic personel in Canada?

    I'm think that should an event like that go down in Canada, we wouldn't HAVE to conduct military operations in Canada, because the Canadians would be taking those actions, themselves.

    FFS why don'r these Libs just admit they elected a scum bag.

    I mean the evidence is over whelming. It just makes them look desperate when they try to mitigate his lies.

    They wouldn't have put up with this under Bush. Hell, those guys made up scandals when Bush was in office.

  5. #35
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,377

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    read what your buddy asserted
    that if there is even one exception then there are no rules
    deal with your own folks and their stupid posts
    I'm too busy dealing with your spid posts.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  6. #36
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,377

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    FFS Libs why don't you just admit you elected a scum bag.

    I mean the evidence is over whelming. It just makes you look desperate when you try to mitigate his lies.

    You wouldn't have put up with this under Bush. Hell, you guys made up scandals when Bush was in office.
    You quoted the wrong person, bro....LOL!!
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #37
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,136

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    FFS Libs why don't you just admit you elected a scum bag.

    I mean the evidence is over whelming. It just makes you look desperate when you try to mitigate his lies.

    You wouldn't have put up with this under Bush. Hell, you guys made up scandals when Bush was in office.
    in the meantime your side is telling us that since we pursued osama bin laden without oakistani government authority we should then feel free to conduct military operations in canada without that government's approval, because if there are any exceptions there are no rules

    laughable
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    then you would want us to believe that since we went into pakistan after osama bin laden without pakistani government approval that we should also be able to conduct military operations in canada without that government's approval
    notice how absurd your conclusion is
    Why would you need Canada's approval to invade Canada, or carry out military exercises there?

    There are dozens of countries the US has involved themselves in where no approval was given by the host country, but in my experience it has been for the good. If the US feels a country needs invading and they have the interests to do it they will, as with Panama and Grenada, just do it.

    There is no reason whatsoever to invade Canada, unless you know something Canadians don't.

  9. #39
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,187

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Good morning, CJ.

    Excellent post!
    Good morning Lady P - hope all is well with you, and thanks.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Mcclatchy: amabasador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Gates is playing Monday morning quarterback. He had no idea how the events would unfold beforehand.
    Exactly no one knew how events would unfold beforehand that's his entire point, which is why we didn't just throw a bunch of military asessts into the area because we didn't know how it would turn out.

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Marine 24th MEU Rapid Deployment Force, with the capability of deploying over 100 troops from anywhere in the world to anywhere in the world in 18 hours was tooling around in the Mediterranean at the ready. It would take a few hours at most to deploy them.
    The 24 MEU was in Djibouti on Sept 11, 2012. Warrior competition pits U.S. Marines against each other in mountains of Djibouti > 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit > Article Display Page

    Also no military fighting organization has the ability to simply move anywhere in the world at 18 hours notice, especially a sea-borne fighting force.

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Maybe if this was a Canadian Ambassador relying on the Canadian military for assistance, this might be credible because we do not have resources throughout the world but to suggest that the US military is incapable of any military action in North Africa within 8 hours of being informed. I'm not suggesting that such action would have been successful but to suggest the US couldn't even try is a sad commentary and perhaps an indictment of a country that spends around $700 billion a year on defense.
    If you read the article Gates is not saying that it would have been impossible to move asessts into the area, you're creating a strawman by pretending that his statement says something other than what it clearly does say

    "We don't have a ready force standing by in the Middle East, and so getting somebody there in a timely way would have been very difficult, if not impossible." he explained.

    Suggestions that we could have flown a fighter jet over the attackers to "scare them with the noise or something," Gates said, ignored the "number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from [former Libyan leader] Qaddafi's arsenals."

    "I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances," he said.

    Another suggestion posed by some critics of the administration, to, as Gates said, "send some small number of special forces or other troops in without knowing what the environment is, without knowing what the threat is, without having any intelligence in terms of what is actually going on on the ground, would have been very dangerous."

    "It's sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces," he said. "The one thing that our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm's way, and there just wasn't time to do that."
    Its about proper decision making and planning not just throwing assests into threatre. Also thinking that flying a fighter jet over the compound is going to "scare away" anyone is just stupid, or have we forgotten that in the 11 years in Afghanistan that fighers don't just run from aircraft, or the near 9 years we spent in Iraq that the enemy doesn't just run from aircraft, and did we also forget that Libya had been for months part of a very extensive air campaign wherein people not only knew from reputation of the militaries flying sorties over Libya but also from personal experience of seeing aircraft fly over head that they aren't going to just drop bombs in the middle of a city?

    The notion that aircraft are going to scare people away plays into a sterotype that these people are some kind of primative caveman that will look in dumb-founded awe and fear and technology, and that's especially wrong for militiants and terrorists who have experience fighting technologically superior fighing forces or have studied those who had.

    Its about not throwing military asessts and personel into a situation that you do not understand and know nothing about.

Page 4 of 28 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... 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
  •