Page 3 of 38 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 376

Thread: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

  1. #21
    Guru
    annata's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    beneath the bodi tree
    Last Seen
    02-16-17 @ 12:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,163

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    you don't think the possibillity exists that what caused the tragic deaths in benghazi was simply bureaucratic confusion?
    more likely a covert CIA ops gone bad. the Anex was supposed to retrieve Libyan weapons. Stevens went jogging in Bengazi many mornings.

    The militias, and Libyan police cars were the security. keeping the consulate low profile, would make the Libyans happy.
    They wouldn't want to visit/deal with actual US Embassy guards -too risky for them


    All of which shows me the consulate was deliberately under-protected; I THINK ( but cannot prove) Steven was playing fast and loose with Libyan warlords.

    Making deals for weapons (manpads, etc.) that the Annex was shipping to Syria.
    We know Libyan weapons were being smugged in -prior to 9-11-12

    They were probably directed to the Syrian "moderates", before the current internecine jihadist/Islamists/moderate Sunni war.

    Rand Paul did try to dig into this - was shot down - can't testify about CIA. I'm not much on conspiracys, but this one does all fit.
    Oṃ maṇi padme hūṃ

  2. #22
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,266

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    In just-declassified testimony, General Hamm (AFRICOM CG) testified that "within minutes" of the attack starting, live drone coverage was available in both his command headquarters, and being consumed by Washington, and that he briefed the SecDef and Chairman JCS that it was a terrorist attack before they went to brief the President. This went up too high too rapidly to be blamed on bureaucratic fumbling.
    This was mentioned early on in the conversation regarding the events in Benghazi and summarily dismissed by the left. The hope was that the smoke generating equipment would shroud the entire event from scrutiny and the rest would be left to bureaucratic malaise and dissemination. It hasn't worked out that way. I believe the hope now is to release as little as necessary far enough from the coming elections so as to limit the damage in the national memory. Any sense of national honor was thrown overboard long ago in favor of political necessity.

  3. #23
    Guru
    annata's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    beneath the bodi tree
    Last Seen
    02-16-17 @ 12:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,163

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    My bottom line on all this: Rice lied about Qaddafi passing out Viagra to troops, and encouraging them to "use rape as a weapon of war"

    While rape is a weapon of war in Africa it wasn't the widespead claims boht Susan Rice & Hillary Clinton claimed.
    Making Qaadafi an evil facilitator of rape


    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last week said she was "deeply concerned" that Gaddafi's troops were participating in widespread rape in Libya.
    "Rape, physical intimidation, sexual harassment, and even so-called 'virginity tests' have taken place in countries throughout the region," she said.

    Donatella Rovera, senior crisis response adviser for Amnesty, who was in Libya for three months after the start of the uprising,
    says that "we have not found any evidence or a single victim of rape or a doctor who knew about somebody being raped
    Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war - Africa - World - The Independent
    Rice lied, Hillary backed it up, and the war became against the despot (Qaddafi) who systematically used rape. as a war weapon.

    Obama went along for the ride. But there is the real blame - Hillary and Rice once again.
    Oṃ maṇi padme hūṃ

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    As no one said that, nice strawman.
    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    I agree. Holding Obama responsible for his policy decisions is outrageous.
    He and other folks should be held responsible, things like "Agencies not communicating with each other" which prevented intelligence from being shared and perhaps prevented the State Department from having as much warning about these attacks as it should have is exactly where we should be looking and holding people responsible, President not excluded.

    But the idea that Obama, less than two months before an election, would literally make a decision to "let" four Americans die because for God knows what reasons is just plain silly. I use the word 'let' because I'm trying to especially highlight the argument that it was a specific conscious decision on his part to not save these people when it was in his power. It makes no sense whatsoever from either a pragmatic standpoint, again what looks better 2 months before an election a heroic save or 4 deaths, or a human standpoint that any human would just four guys die because he's that much of an asshole.

  5. #25
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,266

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    He and other folks should be held responsible, things like "Agencies not communicating with each other" which prevented intelligence from being shared and perhaps prevented the State Department from having as much warning about these attacks as it should have is exactly where we should be looking and holding people responsible, President not excluded.

    But the idea that Obama, less than two months before an election, would literally make a decision to "let" four Americans die because for God knows what reasons is just plain silly. I use the word 'let' because I'm trying to especially highlight the argument that it was a specific conscious decision on his part to not save these people when it was in his power. It makes no sense whatsoever from either a pragmatic standpoint, again what looks better 2 months before an election a heroic save or 4 deaths, or a human standpoint that any human would just four guys die because he's that much of an asshole.
    Okay. I think they tried to play a risky game and got burned, which appeared predictable given the events preceding the attack. After all, who would think that an attack on Americans might occur on 9/11 in the middle east? Anyway, we'll see how it turns out, if it does actually turn into something in which people shoulder responsibility. I have my doubts given the obfuscation up to this point.

  6. #26
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,948
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    Okay. I think they tried to play a risky game and got burned, which appeared predictable given the events preceding the attack. After all, who would think that an attack on Americans might occur on 9/11 in the middle east? Anyway, we'll see how it turns out, if it does actually turn into something in which people shoulder responsibility. I have my doubts given the obfuscation up to this point.
    From my view, the issue of contention isn't that some decisions went bad, security wasn't provided for properly, and 4 Americans died as a result. Yeah, it's not good, but sometimes it happens, and I'm glad that lessons learned are going to be incorporated so as not to happen again.

    It's the handling of the matter after the attack that I have a serious problem with.

    Both reports (Senate and House) clearly state that the President and the administration both knew before the attack and again within hours after the attack started, that it was 2 terrorist groups associated with Al Qaeda.

    This ran afoul of the Obama campaign narrative that Al Qaeda was beaten down into irrelevancy.

    It must have been perceived as a threat to Obama’s reelection chances, so what’s the tactic employed to mitigate this? Blame it on a YouTube video. Doesn’t matter that both the administration and the President already knew that the attack wasn’t a spontaneous demonstration, I mean really, how does someone spontaneously lug a mortar from wherever it was in the field to within range of an embassy? In a city?

    So Rice, who wasn’t in the loop, was offered up to the media alter of the Sunday talking head shows to continue the YouTube narrative.

    Carney continues to proffer up that narrative for the attack from his White House Press Secretary’s podium, for consumption and distribution to the electorate by the White House Press Corp.

    As late as Obama’s address to the UN, the proffered narrative was a spontaneous demonstration caused by a YouTube video.

    All this to obscure the truth of a significant event, a significant terrorist attack, to influence the upcoming presidential elections that November.

    We already know that this president and this administration has little reservations about lying to the American public of matters of importance to the public. Seems that would include lying to the American public in order influence the results of a presidential election as well.

    This, more than anything else, Obama and this administration needs to be held to account for.

    When the President and his administration take on the role of distorting the truth for political gain, how close are we really to the famed and reviled ‘Ministry of Truth’?

    So, “What difference does it make now?” Plenty. Not only now, for the remained of this administration, but also for future presidents and future administrations, and frankly, for the future of the nation as well. Are the electorate to be continued to be lied to? Continued to be manipulated for favorable and desired election results? Continued to led from the truth of the matter rather than to the truth of the matter?

  7. #27
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,266

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post
    From my view, the issue of contention isn't that some decisions went bad, security wasn't provided for properly, and 4 Americans died as a result. Yeah, it's not good, but sometimes it happens, and I'm glad that lessons learned are going to be incorporated so as not to happen again.

    It's the handling of the matter after the attack that I have a serious problem with.

    Both reports (Senate and House) clearly state that the President and the administration both knew before the attack and again within hours after the attack started, that it was 2 terrorist groups associated with Al Qaeda.

    This ran afoul of the Obama campaign narrative that Al Qaeda was beaten down into irrelevancy.

    It must have been perceived as a threat to Obama’s reelection chances, so what’s the tactic employed to mitigate this? Blame it on a YouTube video. Doesn’t matter that both the administration and the President already knew that the attack wasn’t a spontaneous demonstration, I mean really, how does someone spontaneously lug a mortar from wherever it was in the field to within range of an embassy? In a city?

    So Rice, who wasn’t in the loop, was offered up to the media alter of the Sunday talking head shows to continue the YouTube narrative.

    Carney continues to proffer up that narrative for the attack from his White House Press Secretary’s podium, for consumption and distribution to the electorate by the White House Press Corp.

    As late as Obama’s address to the UN, the proffered narrative was a spontaneous demonstration caused by a YouTube video.

    All this to obscure the truth of a significant event, a significant terrorist attack, to influence the upcoming presidential elections that November.

    We already know that this president and this administration has little reservations about lying to the American public of matters of importance to the public. Seems that would include lying to the American public in order influence the results of a presidential election as well.

    This, more than anything else, Obama and this administration needs to be held to account for.

    When the President and his administration take on the role of distorting the truth for political gain, how close are we really to the famed and reviled ‘Ministry of Truth’?

    So, “What difference does it make now?” Plenty. Not only now, for the remained of this administration, but also for future presidents and future administrations, and frankly, for the future of the nation as well. Are the electorate to be continued to be lied to? Continued to be manipulated for favorable and desired election results? Continued to led from the truth of the matter rather than to the truth of the matter?
    The lies are all out for every one to see. I don't care that forces weren't well disposed to respond. You try. They didn't even do that - just walked away and declared it over. Our people deserve better - even a failed attempt is better than no attempt at all. This rankles me more than anything else surrounding this event. I hate to say it, but I'm used to the lies. I am not used to Americans abandoning Americans, and I never will be.

  8. #28
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    There have been arguments to the effect that Obama didn't know, couldn't have known, and was thus not accountable for the result. Perhaps not here - I haven't read all the threads associated with this event here, and I don't intend to. The point is that if Obama is not responsible, and Wiseone seems to be making that point in post #4, then who in the hell is? I want a name of the Cabinet level person who made the policy decision regarding Benghazi because they are they only ones with the power to do that beside the president himself. So if it's not Obama...The effort has been to spread the responsibility so thin and so far as to not hold anyone accountable for anything, and claim is was a systemic failure. That's unacceptable.
    And that would likely be true that he didn't or couldn't have known everything, which is why he should hold people accountable. Acknowledging that doesn't mean he can't be held accountable for his choices for the job or how he handled it. And no, Wiseone was not saying Obama wasn't responsible. He was clearly addressing the hyperbole that comes too often with Obama critics.

    And yes, you can discuss a failure to hold anyone accountable. That would make much more sense than what most these threads devolve into.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #29
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,266

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    And that would likely be true that he didn't or couldn't have known everything, which is why he should hold people accountable. Acknowledging that doesn't mean he can't be held accountable for his choices for the job or how he handled it. And no, Wiseone was not saying Obama wasn't responsible. He was clearly addressing the hyperbole that comes too often with Obama critics.

    And yes, you can discuss a failure to hold anyone accountable. That would make much more sense than what most these threads devolve into.
    Why, thank you. I may discuss other things as well, though maybe not in this specific thread. I have a feeling it'll be in the news for some time to come.

  10. #30
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Senate report: Attacks in Benghazi could have been prevented

    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    Why, thank you. I may discuss other things as well, though maybe not in this specific thread. I have a feeling it'll be in the news for some time to come.
    Though it will likely never reach the level of what many Obama critics want it to reach.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Page 3 of 38 FirstFirst 1234513 ... 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
  •