• 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!

McCain claims ‘massive cover-up’ on Benghazi

2002 - US Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan attacked and 10 were killed.

2004 - US embassy in Uzbekistan, attacked and two were killed and another nine injured.

2004 - US Consulate in Saudi Arabia was stormed and 8 were killed.

2006 - US embassy in Syria, attacked by armed men and one was killed.

2007 - US embassy in Athens, a grenade was thrown.

2008 - US Embassy in Serbia was set on fire.

2008 - US Embassy in Yemen, bombings killed 10.

Many embassies attacked during the Bush years before Benghazi



Why didn't the GOP want to investigate those attacks?

In how many of those attacks did the president go missing and allow Americans to be abandoned? How many times has an American president done nothing while Americans were being murdered in an eight hour battle?
 
Four Americans, dying, desperately called for help and the President, in effect, said "No, let them die." That is what he said, when he could have helped, could have saved their lives. There isn't an American combat soldier alive, past or present, that wouldn't have volunteered immediately for that mission. Gunships circling the embassy and firing into the attackers would have accomplished the goal. Those gunships, with brave American fighting men were available and ready to go.

That is why America's latest Medal of Honor winner, when asked to attend Obama's inauguration and sit with the President's wife, said NO. Obama is not one of us, he does not have America's historical warrior spirit. He has no natural feel for fighting men, no natural feel for duty, honor, country and courage.

This is such terrible garbage! That's not even close to what happened. The embassy, without warning, was attacked by 150 militants and they killed 4 Americans. The report (as mentioned several times) went into detail about what could have prevented the killings, but didn't mention anything about Obama failing to jump into his helicopter and unleash his Obamamaster Rifle which shoots lightning and lasers.

This was an attack on our embassy and a tragedy. The tragedy isn't that the administration tried to blame a youtube video. That's the coverup we're talking about. Nobody (except those who contradict the report and all other evidence) says that the White House chose to let those men die. It's like Watergate, only if the person breaking into the hotel were a 16 year old kid, completely unassociated with the Nixon administration, looking for vicodin.
 
In how many of those attacks did the president go missing and allow Americans to be abandoned? How many times has an American president done nothing while Americans were being murdered in an eight hour battle?

You think the president is like argus panoptes, the mythical Greek monster with a thousand eyes who can see everything.
 
Are you making up acronyms ? I've meen a member of the military community almost as long as the M-16 has been around and I don't see where SRA fits in to your conversation.

:lol: No. GRS (Global Response Staff), JSOC (Joint Special Operations Command), SOD (Secretary of Defense..commonly SECDEF).

Why don't we just agree, when it comes to the Obama administration, it's SNAFU.

SNAFU in the sense that it was a logistical and bureaucratic issue; one that the United States has always suffered from. We had the same problems before and during Pearl Harbor and 9/11/01. People also need to face reality and realize that the CIA is practically worthless. Its little more than a landing pad for information from foreign intelligence agencies. Nothing that comes out of these witch hunts will address that so nothing that happens here will prevent another incident. The simple truth of the matter is that we have always sucked at predicting events so the important thing is to focus on better response to them. The inane way our national defense is run was exposed, once again, on 9/11/01.
 
In how many of those attacks did the president go missing and allow Americans to be abandoned? How many times has an American president done nothing while Americans were being murdered in an eight hour battle?

Which American Presidents have been directly involved in giving specific orders in battles? Probably nobody since George Washington and that was before he became President so, nobody. Thats what the Secretary of Defense is for. The President is briefed on a situation, given a recommendation, provides approval for a general action, and the Secretary of Defense deals with the minutia. Presidents are there to rubber stamp ideas so that military commanders who know what they're talking about get things done.
 
Last edited:
This is such terrible garbage! That's not even close to what happened. The embassy, without warning, was attacked by 150 militants and they killed 4 Americans. The report (as mentioned several times) went into detail about what could have prevented the killings, but didn't mention anything about Obama failing to jump into his helicopter and unleash his Obamamaster Rifle which shoots lightning and lasers.

This was an attack on our embassy and a tragedy. The tragedy isn't that the administration tried to blame a youtube video. That's the cover up we're talking about. Nobody (except those who contradict the report and all other evidence) says that the White House chose to let those men die. It's like Watergate, only if the person breaking into the hotel were a 16 year old kid, completely unassociated with the Nixon administration, looking for vicodin.

You got it mostly right Mustachio. There was a cover up at the beginning by the Obama administration, they wanted the American people to think it was all about a video because they didn't want the American people to know the truth that unlike what Obama has been saying that Al Qaeda was on the run, that Al Qaeda was decimated, the truth is, Obama was lying on the campaign trail.

If it was all about a video, you don't send in the Marines. But if it was Al Qaeda you do send in the Marines. If Obama would have acted, it would have compromised his reelection campaign. His platform was, Bin Laden was dead, the auto industry is alive and Al Qaeda was on the run.

We have to assume that at least 52 % of Americans are unaware that Obama's Middle East foreign policies have been a complete failure. Compared to four years ago, the entire Middle East is a basket case today. The Arab Spring that Obama supported doesn't smell like spring time in the Middle East. During the past four years of the Obama administration, Al Qaeda has spread it's base of operations all across the Middle East and North Africa not to mention other radical Islamist factions and the Muslim Brotherhood has gained significant power during the Obama administration.

Do you think if more Americans were more informed, that Obama would have been given a second chance ?
 
You got it mostly right Mustachio. There was a cover up at the beginning by the Obama administration, they wanted the American people to think it was all about a video because they didn't want the American people to know the truth that unlike what Obama has been saying that Al Qaeda was on the run, that Al Qaeda was decimated, the truth is, Obama was lying on the campaign trail.

If it was all about a video, you don't send in the Marines. But if it was Al Qaeda you do send in the Marines. If Obama would have acted, it would have compromised his reelection campaign. His platform was, Bin Laden was dead, the auto industry is alive and Al Qaeda was on the run.

We have to assume that at least 52 % of Americans are unaware that Obama's Middle East foreign policies have been a complete failure. Compared to four years ago, the entire Middle East is a basket case today. The Arab Spring that Obama supported doesn't smell like spring time in the Middle East. During the past four years of the Obama administration, Al Qaeda has spread it's base of operations all across the Middle East and North Africa not to mention other radical Islamist factions and the Muslim Brotherhood has gained significant power during the Obama administration.

Do you think if more Americans were more informed, that Obama would have been given a second chance ?

Apache, since when has al qeada resorted to using armed militas? Aren't suicide bombings and bombs been their trademark?
 
Which American Presidents have been directly involved in giving specific orders in battles? Probably nobody since George Washington and that was before he became President so, nobody. Thats what the Secretary of Defense is for. The President is briefed on a situation, given a recommendation, provides approval for a general action, and the Secretary of Defense deals with the minutia. Presidents are there to rubber stamp ideas so that military commanders who know what they're talking about get things done.

You got it wrong my liberal friend. One of the biggest criticisms of the Vietnam war was LBJ micromanaging the war. Picking out the daily bombing missions and putting other restrictions upon our troops.

And it's not the job of the Secretary of Defense to decide what tactics are suppose to be used on the battlefields or even the strategy. That's the job of the Generals and Admirals.

The purpose of the Secretary of Defense and the other service secretaries is civilian oversight of the military, not telling the military how to fight and win battles or wars.
 
You got it wrong my liberal friend. One of the biggest criticisms of the Vietnam war was LBJ micromanaging the war. Picking out the daily bombing missions and putting other restrictions upon our troops.

Ok, so 1 out of 44.

There was a cover up at the beginning by the Obama administration, they wanted the American people to think it was all about a video because they didn't want the American people to know the truth that unlike what Obama has been saying that Al Qaeda was on the run, that Al Qaeda was decimated, the truth is, Obama was lying on the campaign trail.

What is with peoples' obsession with conspiracy theories? The President spoke based on the information made available to him and blaming him for the Arab Spring is just absurd. Our chess pieces in the Middle East fell and it is never a good idea to be on the wrong side of a revolution. If anything is to be learned from Iraq and the Arab Spring its that the United States shouldn't install and support tyrants in the first place. In terms of Al Qaeda, it will never be decimated and no one should clutch their pearls in shock at the idea of a politician lying on the campaign trail. Romney told quite a few whoppers himself.
 
:lol: No. GRS (Global Response Staff), JSOC (Joint Special Operations Command), SOD (Secretary of Defense..commonly SECDEF).



SNAFU in the sense that it was a logistical and bureaucratic issue; one that the United States has always suffered from. We had the same problems before and during Pearl Harbor and 9/11/01. People also need to face reality and realize that the CIA is practically worthless. Its little more than a landing pad for information from foreign intelligence agencies. Nothing that comes out of these witch hunts will address that so nothing that happens here will prevent another incident. The simple truth of the matter is that we have always sucked at predicting events so the important thing is to focus on better response to them. The inane way our national defense is run was exposed, once again, on 9/11/01.


Have know idea how old you are, but are you aware that during the 1970's that the "New Left" with in the Democrat Party castrated the CIA so they could no longer do their job. I remember when that happened.

Even the 9/11 Commission pointed this out in their report.

For you who are not familiar with military acronyms, SNAFU means, "Situation Normal All F##### Up."
 
Have know idea how old you are, but are you aware that during the 1970's that the "New Left" with in the Democrat Party castrated the CIA so they could no longer do their job. I remember when that happened.

I'm not going to blame the Democrats of the 1970s for the state of the CIA in 2013.
 

I was talking about US troops.

Cleric vows attacks if U.S. troops stay in Iraq

"A powerful anti-American Shiite cleric in Iraq with thousands of loyal followers threatened on Sunday that U.S. forces who stay past the Dec. 31 withdrawal deadline are fair game to attack.

Iraqi officials, worried about a potential backlash if U.S. troops remain in the country, have tried to portray any American force that does not withdraw as trainers of the still-growing Iraqi military rather than as combat troops.

While the security situation in Iraq has improved over the past few years, attacks are still commonplace. In June alone, 15 U.S. soldiers were killed, making it the bloodiest month for the U.S. military in Iraq in two years. Nearly all of them were killed in attacks by Shiite militias bent on forcing out American troops on schedule."
 
Ok, so 1 out of 44.



What is with peoples' obsession with conspiracy theories? The President spoke based on the information made available to him and blaming him for the Arab Spring is just absurd. Our chess pieces in the Middle East fell and it is never a good idea to be on the wrong side of a revolution. If anything is to be learned from Iraq and the Arab Spring its that the United States shouldn't install and support tyrants in the first place. In terms of Al Qaeda, it will never be decimated and no one should clutch their pearls in shock at the idea of a politician lying on the campaign trail. Romney told quite a few whoppers himself.

There have been other Presidents who have micromanaged the military during war time and peace time, Obama being another one. His deck of cards of who will be targeted for death by Hellfire missiles fired from UAV's (layman term, drones) and politically correct ROE (Rules of Engagement) forced upon our troops in Afghanistan that don't favor our troops but favor the enemy that are causing our troops to bleed and die.

But for conspiracy theories, what do you expect when there's little transparency with Obama and his administration ! Even the birth certificate issue, why didn't he just produce his birth certificate back in 2008 instead of dividing America ? Even today we know little about who Barack Obama is. You can see it in his face as if he's hiding something. He has all the signs of being a narcissist and we know he's a liar.

Thirty-six percent of the surveyed voters think the president is possibly “hiding important information about his background and early life,” the Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind survey found.

More than a third of Americans believe that President Barack Obama might be hiding something, according to a new poll.

Sixty-four percent of Republicans think the president isn't coming clean, 33 percent of independents agree, and 14 percent of Democrats say Obama is hiding something.

Poll: Republican voters say Obama


When you have 1/3 of America thinking Obama is hiding something, it's natural to have conspiracy theories unless the entire country is drinking the kool-aid.
 
In how many of those attacks did the president go missing and allow Americans to be abandoned?
Hard to say where the president was but most likely he was either at his ranch or golfing.

How many times has an American president done nothing while Americans were being murdered in an eight hour battle?
I give up, how many times? I don't think the president called in the troops or back up for any of those embassy attacks, if thats what you mean.
 
Those were not cross border operations. Tripoli is inside Libya. Even the drones were flying within Libya airspace.

I specifically refer to armed cross border operations coming out of the med or Italy. I am not aware of where other US forces were that could have been used.

The attack took a third of a day. Setting fire to the consulate should have been enough provocation for the President to order overwhelming support. Instead the President went missing for eight hours and then lied and lied and lied.

And you support him. I cannot fathom why.

I'm sorry is Germany inside Libya? I had assumed that a military flight from Germany to Libya would count as a cross border operation, in fact it would count as at least three.

And the State Department's official declassified investigation states multiple times that enough time for an armed military response did not exist, you claim otherwise. I don't know what to tell you, what source or at least what reasoning do you have to say that the State Department is wrong? You haven't provided a source and you haven't explained your reasoning. AND since I've shown that it doesn't take a President to authorize cross border operations what exactly would you have him do again? If you wanted him to personally make that call it would only take LONGER for those flights and other actions to be made, since instead of General you have to go all the way to the President. Is that what you would have wanted?

I'm not supporting anything but facts, if those destroy your arguments well than that's your fault for coming up with bad arguments and being ignorant. :/
 
You got it mostly right Mustachio. There was a cover up at the beginning by the Obama administration, they wanted the American people to think it was all about a video because they didn't want the American people to know the truth that unlike what Obama has been saying that Al Qaeda was on the run, that Al Qaeda was decimated, the truth is, Obama was lying on the campaign trail.

If it was all about a video, you don't send in the Marines. But if it was Al Qaeda you do send in the Marines. If Obama would have acted, it would have compromised his reelection campaign. His platform was, Bin Laden was dead, the auto industry is alive and Al Qaeda was on the run.

We have to assume that at least 52 % of Americans are unaware that Obama's Middle East foreign policies have been a complete failure. Compared to four years ago, the entire Middle East is a basket case today. The Arab Spring that Obama supported doesn't smell like spring time in the Middle East. During the past four years of the Obama administration, Al Qaeda has spread it's base of operations all across the Middle East and North Africa not to mention other radical Islamist factions and the Muslim Brotherhood has gained significant power during the Obama administration.

Do you think if more Americans were more informed, that Obama would have been given a second chance ?

I feel ambivalent in regard to what you're saying. On one hand, I think that the amazing hope we witnessed in places like Libya and Egypt provided evidence that our foreign policy should embrace a "less is more" strategy. Younger generations will transform their own countries, both modernizing them and bringing them closer to a positive relationship with America. On the other hand, what we witnessed wound up as more of a revolving door than a revolution.

But then, if the Middle East is hopeless, we're only going to inflame anti-American sentiment with our presence there. At the end of the day, that's the problem. The policies of the Bush administration created a huge backlash against America and it is those kind of policies that wind up most detrimental. I'm not trying to justify inadequate foreign policy, I'm trying to discern between what is and isn't adequate and it's very difficult. So to answer your question, no, I don't think most Americans believe we can stop anti-American radicals with brute force (unless we kill every terrorist's entire family as well) and I don't think if people were more informed about the current state of "the war on terror" they would have moved to Romney.
 
Last edited:
I was talking about US troops.

Oh, sure. 17k remaining personel and a continuted committment to cooperation = "Kicked their ass out!"
 
President is just following the Reagan tradition!

QUOTE]

And what tradition would that be ?

>" According to Ronald Reagan himself, as told to his trusted long-time friend and U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese, the biggest mistake of his presidency was signing the 1986 amnesty for what turned out to be more than half the five million illegal immigrants in the country. Reagan was uncomfortable with the amnesty but was persuaded by some of the leaders of his own party (still living) that it would only affect a small number of illegal immigrants and would assure that Congress would follow through with more vigorous enforcement of U.S. immigration laws. The misnamed Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 was touted by its supporters as “comprehensive immigration reform” that would grant amnesty only to a few long-settled immigrants and strengthen border security and internal immigration enforcement against employers who were hiring illegal immigrants.

Internal enforcement was critical to Reagan. He knew that the real key to stopping illegal immigration was to cut off the job magnet at the employment place. He was also honest enough to call what he believed would only be a small amnesty by its real name—amnesty. He did not try to deceive the American people into thinking it was not really an amnesty, a deception much in vogue with many politicians today. "< Ed Meese Says Reagan Regretted 1986 Amnesty | VDARE.com

The Reagan tradition as in not trying to deceive the American people ? Obama is no Reagan.

You're floundering.
 
This is such terrible garbage! That's not even close to what happened. The embassy, without warning, was attacked by 150 militants and they killed 4 Americans. The report (as mentioned several times) went into detail about what could have prevented the killings, but didn't mention anything about Obama failing to jump into his helicopter and unleash his Obamamaster Rifle which shoots lightning and lasers.

This was an attack on our embassy and a tragedy. The tragedy isn't that the administration tried to blame a youtube video. That's the coverup we're talking about. Nobody (except those who contradict the report and all other evidence) says that the White House chose to let those men die. It's like Watergate, only if the person breaking into the hotel were a 16 year old kid, completely unassociated with the Nixon administration, looking for vicodin.
Given what we already know you have to know that what you wrote is a lie.

The battle lasted about 8 hours. The Information Officer was killed in the initial attack. It is unclear when the Ambassador was killed or under what circumstances.
Doherty and Woods bled out while still fighting seven hours later.

The president was aware because Panetta told him at the beginning of the battle. Then the president washed his hands and disappeared for eight hours. He abandoned them to die. Then he lied about it for nearly three weeks.
 
I'm not going to blame the Democrats of the 1970s for the state of the CIA in 2013.
I doubt you would blame the Democrats for anything.

Not only did they wreck the CIA then. They burned assets. It can take 20-30 years to get assets in place. They also passed laws saying we are not allowed to use bad guys. Democrats could mess up a marble.
 
Hard to say where the president was but most likely he was either at his ranch or golfing.

I give up, how many times? I don't think the president called in the troops or back up for any of those embassy attacks, if thats what you mean.
I do not believe we have ever had an eight hour battle before. One American, the Information Officer Smith was killed in the initial attack. Woods and Doherty bled out as they continued to fight more than seven hours later.

Panetta says he had a fifteen minute conversation with Obama at the beginning of the battle. Then Obama went missing and did not turn up for another eight hours after the Abandoned Four had all been murdered by Obama's new found Islamofascist buddies.
Why is Obama wrecking America while helping the Islamofascists in the Middle East and Africa?
 
I'm sorry is Germany inside Libya? I had assumed that a military flight from Germany to Libya would count as a cross border operation, in fact it would count as at least three.

It would count as a cross border operation if the aircraft had been armed and engaged in battle. It is not just crossing a border it is conducting operations.

And the State Department's official declassified investigation states multiple times that enough time for an armed military response did not exist, you claim otherwise.
The State Department did nothing and are covering up. It seems to be working as some people unable to construct a timeline are eager to buy the lie. And yet the timeline exists. The battle lasted nearly eight hours and two Americans bled out while fighting more than seven hours after the attack began. That is plenty of time to respond. The State Department ought to stick to their tea parties and leave the fighting to real Americans.

I don't know what to tell you, what source or at least what reasoning do you have to say that the State Department is wrong? You haven't provided a source and you haven't explained your reasoning.
My my. It is not as if there are not excellent timelines already out there. If you wanted to know you would know.

AND since I've shown that it doesn't take a President to authorize cross border operations
Cross border operations are military operations, crossing the border of a nation we are not at war with to fight. Flying two hospital aircraft into Libya to pick up the bodies is not a cross border operation. It could be a part of one if combat forces had been moved across the border to fight. I understand that for someone who has not served this is a distinction easily missed. I should have been clearer a few messages back.

what exactly would you have him do again?
Ultimately, after developing the situation, direct the State Department to coordinate with the Libyan government to let them know we were coming with combat troops to secure the consulate and the Annex. Direct the SECDEF to determine what combat assets were ready or could be made ready. I would have had him go to the Situation Room to be prepared to give the orders to go once the SECDEF and the CJCS positioned the assets to cross the border. The Secretary of Defense has the authority to put everything in motion. I believe that only the president can direct that the military cross that border to conduct military operations.

Combat aircraft that were two hours away could have been launched and enroute withing a few minutes, perhaps as few as five to fifteen minutes. The second set of aircraft could have been launched withing 30 minutes to an hour. After that we could have launched the rest of the squadron in about two more hours.

I do not know what ground forces were available but at least one response team was nearby. Had they reached the Annex four hours after the start of the battle they would have been in position to decisively change the nature of that battle over the last three hours of the fight.

If you wanted him to personally make that call it would only take LONGER for those flights and other actions to be made, since instead of General you have to go all the way to the President. Is that what you would have wanted?
This is incorrect. Long ago when I was young and the Earth was still cooling we could get critical information to the president from anywhere in the world in about ten minutes. The White House Situation Room has adequate comms to all of our forces for the president to order and for the military to respond to his orders very quickly.

The President did not need to order that the forces launch, he need only authorize cross border combat operations before the forces actually crossed the border.

I'm not supporting anything but facts, if those destroy your arguments well than that's your fault for coming up with bad arguments and being ignorant. :/

That would be fine if you were arguing from facts. You are not.

I think the difference between us is that I served as an intelligence officer on an airborne command post. I was also an intelligence officer in a major command headquarters (think CENTCOM, AFRICOM, PACOM...) and know what is possible.
 
In how many of those attacks did the president go missing and allow Americans to be abandoned? How many times has an American president done nothing while Americans were being murdered in an eight hour battle?

We will never know, because they were ignored. A 30-second soundbite and the incidents went into the files of history. Incidents involving US interests only seem to be important when they are named Kenya, Tanzania, and Benghazi. I wonder what the commonality is.
 
Back
Top Bottom