• 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

Good golly, well that just proves everything! :roll:

The decision to go into Iraq was on false, made-up premises. The evidence is all there and not difficult to find out. You can choose to bury your head in the sand or seek the truth. If you choose to live off those quotes, then by golly, you chose to stay uninformed.

What I see in the thread is false outrage and I can't help but roll my eyes when so many Republicans are up in arms about Benghazi, but choose to remain silent when it comes to Iraq. The hypocracy is just too much for me.

Wow, you people are so prebuscently naive.

The entire Middle Eastern region is frought with factions and dictators trying to develop or get their hands on WMDs. They were then, and they are now. We're in a steady walk to a massive conflict - the WMD kind of conflict - and it is only a mere matter of time. Probably sooner than later, in fact.

So imagine if we would have gone into the heart of the Middle East and set up a staging camp to deal with this eventuality. They just bombed the twin towers and our MILITARY HEADQUARTERS. They had been sponsored and protected by Hussein, who has used chemical weapons on hundreds of thousands of his own people already, as had others like him. We KNOW he is seeking WMDs. He probably already has them. Every faction of our intelligence says so, as well as the intelligence of our allies.

Of course, when you spend nine months appeasing the UN with endless speeches on the subject before going into Iraq.....somebody might move or destroy them. Regardless, the presence of WMD was immaterial for anyone with half a brain. You've got to attack cancer aggressively, whether it's in Stage 1 or Stage 4. We did, and Bush should be applauded for it. Things would be HORRIBLY worse now if he didn't. If anything, he waited far too long after 9/11.

To some, that is common sense. To liberals, the sitation should have been handled with a little kumbaya, education, and understanding for our poor, fellow, misunderstood Muslim radicals. They just needed a hug. America just needed to mend its mean ways so they would promise not to do it anymore.

Same with Syria. Surely Assad wouldn't gas his own people. That's just not what people do, unless they're Christians, who all wear hoods and burn crosses in people's front yards. We just need to sit down with Assad and talk about our feelings. Let's smoke some weed with him and get him laid. A little partying will solve this. Let's make the rich people give him some money!

It is mind-numbing the lengths liberals will go to just to defend those that hate us or threaten the balance of peace. The short-sightedness is dumbfounding.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Read down further where all those quotes are put into their proper context.[/
QUOTE]

Why are you trolling through a thread on benghazzi pushing the " Bush lied Perople died " Democrat nonsense ?

This thread is about how disgusting our current administration is, not about empty untrue Democrat rhetoric.

IN CONTEXT those quotes STILL mean democrats thought he had WMD way before Bush went into Iraq.

Care to add anything about Benghazzi ? Or are you going to troll some more posting irrelevent nonsense ?
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

I did. To say that Bush (or Republicans) were the only ones who believed Sadam had WMDs is a lie -- no matter how you slice the pie.

UN weapons inspectors headed by Hans Blix was in country and he w anted more time, however President Bush refused.

One the Pelosi quote in 1998:


On 16 December 1998, Nancy Pelosi, a Congressional representative from California and a member of the House Intelligence Committee, issued a statement concerning aU.S.-led military strike against Iraq:
As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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.


The responsibility of the United States in this conflict is to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, to minimize the danger to our troops and to diminish the suffering of the Iraqi people. The citizens of Iraq have suffered the most for Saddam Hussein's activities; sadly, those same citizens now stand to suffer more. I have supported efforts to ease the humanitarian situation in Iraq and my thoughts and prayers are with the innocent Iraqi civilians, as well as with the families of U.S. troops participating in the current action.


I believe in negotiated solutions to international conflict. This is, unfortunately, not going to be the case in this situation where Saddam Hussein has been a repeat offender, ignoring the international community's requirement that he come clean with his weapons program. While I support the President, I hope and pray that this conflict can be resolved quickly and that the international community can find a lasting solution through diplomatic means.

(In this statement Rep. Pelosi was not urging that action be taken against Iraq in order to destroy its WMD technology; she was expressing support for attacks that had already begun with that purpose as their stated objective.)
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Yes. And clearly you know that they aren't doing that. Because, you know. When you're investigating something like this in a foreign country, you always make the details of the investigation public. Just like CSI.

Maybe that's why the Libyan President went on World-Wide Television to say what he did.....knowing that Team Obama would throw him to the lions, while blaming him and his people.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Good golly, well that just proves everything! :roll:

The decision to go into Iraq was on false, made-up premises. The evidence is all there and not difficult to find out. You can choose to bury your head in the sand or seek the truth. If you choose to live off those quotes, then by golly, you chose to stay uninformed.

What I see in the thread is false outrage and I can't help but roll my eyes when so many Republicans are up in arms about Benghazi, but choose to remain silent when it comes to Iraq. The hypocracy is just too much for me.

The Libyan President was humiliated and shown to be a liar. When what he reported to World News has now come out to be True. Which was the attack was premeditated and AQ was involved. Then because of us he sacked 2 security Chiefs. I also got that fact down that the Libyans let us know 3 days ahead of time that Benghazi was to dangerous. That's 3 days prior to 911. Then we know he offered up a C130 to take our people. Yet only later to have Hillary testify about the Host Country's Responsibility to provide Security.....not saying it was Libya's Fault. Yet in actual reality and political-wise. That it was Libya's fault.

Which now all this lil mess did was leave us some problems with the TNC and Libya. Oh and of course Ansar Al Sharia.....who says they control that part of Libya. You didn't think the Berbers would give up control to the MB in Libya now.....did you?

Got that down now with the Foreign Policy bit?
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Read down further where all those quotes are put into their proper context.

Why are you trolling through a thread on benghazzi pushing the " Bush lied Perople died " Democrat nonsense ?

This thread is about how disgusting our current administration is, not about empty untrue Democrat rhetoric.

IN CONTEXT those quotes STILL mean democrats thought he had WMD way before Bush went into Iraq.

Care to add anything about Benghazzi ? Or are you going to troll some more posting irrelevent nonsense ?

Yes, it's witch hunt thats falling apart.


Fox Anchor Bret Baier Botches Benghazi Timeline | Blog | Media Matters for America
 
Last edited:
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

I did. To say that Bush (or Republicans) were the only ones who believed Sadam had WMDs is a lie -- no matter how you slice the pie.

I suppose the defense would be "that stupid idiot bush KNEW there were no WMDs... the Democrats were just ... stupid?"

Or something.... they can't seem to grasp that everyone thought there were WMDs in Iraq because Saddam had used WMDs in Iraq.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

hillary plans bold move to salvage career

benghazi - hillary - testifying.jpg
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

UN weapons inspectors headed by Hans Blix was in country and he w anted more time, however President Bush refused.

One the Pelosi quote in 1998:


On 16 December 1998, Nancy Pelosi, a Congressional representative from California and a member of the House Intelligence Committee, issued a statement concerning aU.S.-led military strike against Iraq:
As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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.


The responsibility of the United States in this conflict is to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, to minimize the danger to our troops and to diminish the suffering of the Iraqi people. The citizens of Iraq have suffered the most for Saddam Hussein's activities; sadly, those same citizens now stand to suffer more. I have supported efforts to ease the humanitarian situation in Iraq and my thoughts and prayers are with the innocent Iraqi civilians, as well as with the families of U.S. troops participating in the current action.


I believe in negotiated solutions to international conflict. This is, unfortunately, not going to be the case in this situation where Saddam Hussein has been a repeat offender, ignoring the international community's requirement that he come clean with his weapons program. While I support the President, I hope and pray that this conflict can be resolved quickly and that the international community can find a lasting solution through diplomatic means.

(In this statement Rep. Pelosi was not urging that action be taken against Iraq in order to destroy its WMD technology; she was expressing support for attacks that had already begun with that purpose as their stated objective.)

I don't know what you think you prove by this, but a glaring insight into the mind of a super lib like Pelosi is revealed here....

From your own quote...

"...I believe in negotiated solutions to international conflict...."

Since G.W. Bush couldn't, or wouldn't continue the game being played by an organization who's ultimate goal is to ensure that there are no winners in warfare, is little more than simplistic arm chair quaterbacking after the fact.

The fact is that liberals believe that any evil can be negotiated with, and we know through history that is false.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

it's witch hunt thats falling apart

tell it to cbs and wapo

and say hi to david

tell him to quit waving guns around when he's strung out on meth
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

UN weapons inspectors headed by Hans Blix was in country and he w anted more time, however President Bush refused.

One the Pelosi quote in 1998:


On 16 December 1998, Nancy Pelosi, a Congressional representative from California and a member of the House Intelligence Committee, issued a statement concerning aU.S.-led military strike against Iraq:
As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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.


The responsibility of the United States in this conflict is to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, to minimize the danger to our troops and to diminish the suffering of the Iraqi people. The citizens of Iraq have suffered the most for Saddam Hussein's activities; sadly, those same citizens now stand to suffer more. I have supported efforts to ease the humanitarian situation in Iraq and my thoughts and prayers are with the innocent Iraqi civilians, as well as with the families of U.S. troops participating in the current action.


I believe in negotiated solutions to international conflict. This is, unfortunately, not going to be the case in this situation where Saddam Hussein has been a repeat offender, ignoring the international community's requirement that he come clean with his weapons program. While I support the President, I hope and pray that this conflict can be resolved quickly and that the international community can find a lasting solution through diplomatic means.

(In this statement Rep. Pelosi was not urging that action be taken against Iraq in order to destroy its WMD technology; she was expressing support for attacks that had already begun with that purpose as their stated objective.)

111 Democrats voted for the invasion. The quotes that appear in the Snopes link proves that many powerful Democrats believed there were WMD's in Iraq, including Nancy Pelosi. That old horse just keeled over in my book.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

That comment just proves you didn't read the link.

I read the link. The problem is that Media Matters is manned by a bunch of idiots and you listen to them.

The flight that was negotiated was scheduled for 6:00am, the Second team did not get on the plane because they were ordered not to. So this order came down some time before 6:00am. On the ground in Benghazi an evacuation didn't even begin until 6:05am, meaning the order to stand down came while there were still people under attack in the annex.

What We need to know is what was the President doing to try and secure a flight to Benghazi, a why he didn't simply order the rescue mission proceed without authorization. First shots were fired 7 hours before the order to stand down, and the second assault was under way when the order was given. There is no viable excuse for this delay when it is clear from testimony that, contrary to the Administration's testimony, there were indeed military assets within 45 minutes of Benghazi that were never used.

The military doesn't operate on a train schedule. Just because the Libyan government dragged it's ass for 7 hours while our consulate was under attack didn't mean we needed to. Obama certainly didn't show any qualms about military action without authorization in Pakistan... so why the hell did he drag his feet for 7 hours during the Benghazi attack?
 
Last edited:
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

UN weapons inspectors headed by Hans Blix was in country and he w anted
more time, however President Bush refused.

One the Pelosi quote in 1998:


On 16 December 1998, Nancy Pelosi, a Congressional representative from California and a member of the House Intelligence Committee, issued a statement concerning aU.S.-led military strike against Iraq:
As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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.


The responsibility of the United States in this conflict is to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, to minimize the danger to our troops and to diminish the suffering of the Iraqi people. The citizens of Iraq have suffered the most for Saddam Hussein's activities; sadly, those same citizens now stand to suffer more. I have supported efforts to ease the humanitarian situation in Iraq and my thoughts and prayers are with the innocent Iraqi civilians, as well as with the families of U.S. troops participating in the current action.


I believe in negotiated solutions to international conflict. This is, unfortunately, not going to be the case in this situation where Saddam Hussein has been a repeat offender, ignoring the international community's requirement that he come clean with his weapons program. While I support the President, I hope and pray that this conflict can be resolved quickly and that the international community can find a lasting solution through diplomatic means.

(In this statement Rep. Pelosi was not urging that action be taken against Iraq in order to destroy its WMD technology; she was expressing support for attacks that had already begun with that purpose as their stated objective.)

Still trolling off topic ?

Face it, you folks elect low lifes and then make up Lies and narratives to denigrate good people.

How about the other 20 or so quotes showing Democrats KNEW he had MD ?

Or here's a thought. Stop trying to mitigate the disgusting lies of Obama and Hillary with off topic talking points.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

111 Democrats voted for the invasion. The quotes that appear in the Snopes link proves that many powerful Democrats believed there were WMD's in Iraq, including Nancy Pelosi. That old horse just keeled over in my book.

But, he will keep fighting it just to keep the focus off of Benghazi.

Don't let him.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Read down further where all those quotes are put into their proper context.
Why, Pete? Do you think Maggie reading them will make your position look any less foolish than when you and I did this dance two days ago and it was proven the context is just find and if anything MORE damning with context? Good lord, son...seriously? You had to ADMIT that the dems didnt lie so Bush couldnt have lied just 2 short days ago...and now...new thread so you just want to pretend that all DIDNT happen? Thats...sad...
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

I read the link. The problem is that Media Matters is manned by a bunch of idiots and you listen to them.

The flight that was negotiated was scheduled for 6:00am, the Second team did not get on the plane because they were ordered not to. So this order came down some time before 6:00am. On the ground in Benghazi an evacuation didn't even begin until 6:05am, meaning the order to stand down came while there were still people under attack in the annex.

What We need to know is what was the President doing to try and secure a flight to Benghazi, a why he didn't simply order the rescue mission proceed without authorization. First shots were fired 7 hours before the order to stand down, and the second assault was under way when the order was given. There is no viable excuse for this delay when it is clear from testimony that, contrary to the Administration's testimony, there were indeed military assets within 45 minutes of Benghazi that were never used.

The military doesn't operate on a train schedule. Just because the Libyan government dragged it's ass for 7 hours while our consulate was under attack didn't mean we needed to. Obama certainly didn't show any qualms about military action without authorization in Pakistan... so why the hell did he drag his feet for 7 hours during the Benghazi attack?

To be fair there was a special forces team reviewing embassy security in tripoli at the time of the attack in Benghazi, however it appears they were not equipped for combat and were only armed with 9 mm handguns. I doubt they would have done much good.

Official: US Special Forces team wasn't allowed to fly to Benghazi during attack - Open Channel

Maybe they were ordered not to deploy because they would have met certain death.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

But, he will keep fighting it just to keep the focus off of Benghazi.

Don't let him.

I wonder if that is the official strategy ?

Because I'm starting to see it more and more. Theyr'e third graders, trying to delfect and divert attention away from their lies and poor choices by pointing to Bush.

And it's a Bs narrative anyway, " Bush lied ".

Obama lied, J. Karney Lied, Hillary Lied.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

I'm outraged at the cover up of....something.

I can't believe they tried to do that thing.

It's very clear the mob was motivated by ...something, and the administration was clearly saying it was...the other thing. But they changed tgeir mind several times, which can only mean...something.

And Obama was campaigning for President! That clearly was wrong because it interfered with....something.

Perhaps if those in possession of the knowledge of just what those somethings are would come clean and put the data on the table, then we would not have to speculate.
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

I wonder if that is the official strategy ?

Because I'm starting to see it more and more. Theyr'e third graders, trying to delfect and divert attention away from their lies and poor choices by pointing to Bush.

And it's a Bs narrative anyway, " Bush lied ".

Obama lied, J. Karney Lied, Hillary Lied.

Yeah, remember at first Clinton put it back on Obama. But then she got caught up and acted like she was going to fall on her sword.

The State Department has said that it never believed the September 11th attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was the result of a protest over an anti-Islam movie - directly contracting the rest of the Obama administration.

By trying to distance her department from the inept and deceptive handling of the Benghazi attack, which left U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three other American officials dead, Hillary Clinton could help herself politically for a 2016 presidential run.

In a briefing on Tuesday, State Department officials said 'others' in the executive branch concluded initially that the attack was part of a protest against the film, which ridiculed the Prophet Muhammad. That was never the State Department's conclusion, reporters were told.

In a briefing on Tuesday, State Department officials said 'others' in the executive branch concluded initially that the attack was part of a protest against the film, which ridiculed the Prophet Muhammad. That was never the State Department's conclusion, reporters were told.

memo on Tuesday by the Oversight Committee's Democratic staff provided details of Nordstrom's interview with the panel's investigators.

In that interview, Nordstrom said he sent two cables to State Department headquarters in March 2012 and July 2012 requesting additional diplomatic security agents for Benghazi, but he received no responses.

He stated that Charlene Lamb, the deputy assistant secretary for international programs, wanted to keep the number of U.S. security personnel in Benghazi artificially low.

He said Lamb believed the Benghazi facilities did not need any diplomatic security special agents because there was a residential safe haven to fall back to in an emergency.

Nordstrom's October 1 memo to the congressional investigator said: 'You will note that there were a number of incidents that targeted diplomatic missions and underscored the GoL's (government of Libya) inability to secure and protect diplomatic missions.

'This was a significant part of (the diplomatic) post's and my argument for maintaining continued DS (diplomatic security) and DOD (Department of Defense) security assets into Sept/Oct. 2012 - the GoL was overwhelmed and could not guarantee our protection.

'Sadly, that point was reaffirmed on Sept. 11, 2012, in Benghazi.'

Read more: Death of U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens revealed: AK-47s, grenade attacks, and a smoke-filled safe-room | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Details......all in those lil details. ;)
 
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

To be fair there was a special forces team reviewing embassy security in tripoli at the time of the attack in Benghazi, however it appears they were not equipped for combat and were only armed with 9 mm handguns. I doubt they would have done much good.

Official: US Special Forces team wasn't allowed to fly to Benghazi during attack - Open Channel

Maybe they were ordered not to deploy because they would have met certain death.

The second team was better armed and also in Tripoli, the delay of their involvement was over the negotiation of transport. The first team arrived because they said "Screw this!" and chartered their own flight.

Unlikely they would have met certain death, and if you are withholding SpecOps from a Rescue mission because it's dangerous then you aren't doing it right.
 
Last edited:
Re: There was a stand down order given in Benghzi

Unlikely they would have met certain death, and if you are withholding SpecOps from a Rescue mission because it's dangerous then you aren't doing it right.

The only spec ops team nearby was in tripoli at the time, and they were not properly armed for combat since the only weapons they had were their 9 mm hand guns.

What good would they have done againist the heavily armed opposition they would have encountered in Benghazi?

Also there was the fact that the situation on the ground was still uncertain and there were concerns that the embassy in tripoli could have been targeted next.
 
Back
Top Bottom