• 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!

Diplomats in Benghazi Debacle Back on Job

Benghazi wasnt a John Wayne movie. that could have just made the death toll 10 instead of 4. I am sure making such decisions would weigh heavily one anyone that had to make it. Of course Fox has you all beleiveing every in the government is completely amoral and uncaring, but making the decision not to send 6 more to certain death might have been a completely appropriate call. But none of us will ever knwo for sure, it was a judgement call in the fog of war. Fox shamefully politiziced the deaths of good Americans while performing their duties. That is the point.
Anthony60 said:
What is the point?
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
, but making the decision not to send 6 more to certain death might have been a completely appropriate call.
Click to expand...

I'm very surprised the Obama administration allows you such access to their crystal ball. Certain death, uh? LOL.

The only amount of death that was/is certain in this case was all directly related to the blundering, incompetent decisions made prior to that day, all made by the Obama administration. And the uncaring, blundering, incompetent decisions, all made by the Obama administration, during the attack. Maybe they could not have been saved. But to put zero effort into it, is dereliction of duty on a slew of people up through the chain in the Obama administration. Their actions of complete lack of integrity and misdirection after the fact just pile the evidence on to their incompetence.

So far the only person to have been punished at all for this attack, had absolutely nothing to do with it even though the Obama administration told lie upon lie that he was completely responsible for it. The guy that made the silly movie is still in jail as far as I know and the only crime he committed in relation to the attack was practicing the right of free speech. That will teach the bad guys a lesson, uh?
 
mak2 said:
Benghazi wasnt a John Wayne movie. that could have just made the death toll 10 instead of 4. I am sure making such decisions would weigh heavily one anyone that had to make it. Of course Fox has you all beleiveing every in the government is completely amoral and uncaring, but making the decision not to send 6 more to certain death might have been a completely appropriate call. But none of us will ever knwo for sure, it was a judgement call in the fog of war. Fox shamefully politiziced the deaths of good Americans while performing their duties. That is the point.
Click to expand...

You don't really seem to know much at all about Benghazi, do you? Those six guys rescued six State Department personnel who would have certainly been killed. They also aided in the evacuation of about 30 people from the CIA annex, while protecting classified information and killing dozens of attackers. These were skilled Spec Ops people, but you think another 10 would not have helped. If they only had some air support, even 1 jet, they probably would have all gotten out alive. Oh, and none of this info is from Fox, CNN, or MSNBC (LOL!).
I am sure the deciscion weighed heavily on someone, not Obama as he dreamed of sugar plums in his little bed.
 
Oh really, where is this info from?
Anthony60 said:
You don't really seem to know much at all about Benghazi, do you? Those six guys rescued six State Department personnel who would have certainly been killed. They also aided in the evacuation of about 30 people from the CIA annex, while protecting classified information and killing dozens of attackers. These were skilled Spec Ops people, but you think another 10 would not have helped. If they only had some air support, even 1 jet, they probably would have all gotten out alive. Oh, and none of this info is from Fox, CNN, or MSNBC (LOL!).
I am sure the deciscion weighed heavily on someone, not Obama as he dreamed of sugar plums in his little bed.
Click to expand...
 
Grant said:
That response had nothing to with my question, which was
Click to expand...

Yes, there was a list which had the exact incidents you requested on there. Now you are just ignoring evidence because you do not want to believe the truth.



Grant said:
You had bombed them to help the people who are in power and now they wont help you? What kind of screw-up is that? Is is the job of the Obama administration to lead from behind drop bombs on people they don't like, with no regards for the consequences? Isn't that rather short-sighted?
Click to expand...

They are in charge of their sovereign nation and rebuilding and securing it after their coup. This is the difference between something like Iraq and something like libya. In Iraq we invaded and then had to set about securing the country with our forces while we trained our puppet government to secure it themselves. During the time we occupied we did not have to ask permission to go do things like send in troops. the troops were already there. In libya we left most of that stuff to their newly established government which is not loyal to us, but rather to themselves and their people. Yes, this means that they will not allow foreign armies to invade their civilian areas and engage in combat. You may find that wrong, but I do not see that as something anyone with any reason should expect. I also recognize the reality that having US troops come in and massacre their citizens in the street would certainly have destabalized any power the new government had and hindered their effectiveness. What you are talking about is absurd to expect. It is their country, they run it, and we did not take it. That means they have every right to say no even though we may think they should have said yes. That may mean we decide not to give them support or diplomatic relations with the US, which is something that probably benefits their government much more than ours, but we do not get to invade them with our military, and that may mean some people die. Sorry, but that is the way the world works. You can dislike that and feel it is unfair, but you really cannot blame Obama for those realities as they existed long before he was even born.

Oh, and before you start thinking the US is way above tjhat sort of thing you should be aware our country would almost certainly not exist without the help of the french. We should owe the french and be thankful for their help in our own revolution because without them we would all be drinking tea and soluting the queen of england. Really, do we treat the french with any sort of respect? If some of the right wing got together a few years back and decided to blow up a french embassy in the US because they did not like the frenchs' opposition to our wars, would the french army been allowed to start flying warplanes over the area and dropping in troops to kill american citizens, or would we have had our police secure the area and stop the riot? Could you imagine the meltdown the right wing would have if obama allowed any foreign country to come onto US soil with their military and attack something, even if their own countryment were certain to be killed by americans? So yes I do not expect the libyans to allow a foreign country to operate their military against their citizens when there is no way we would ever allow that on our own soil. What you are saying is hypocrisy.

Grant said:
Isn't that exactly what you did earlier to Libya? And what did it get you??
Click to expand...

Personally i always thought libya was a stupid thing to get intio. Kadaffi was a evil nutbar, but he had calmed his position towards the US, and may have actually kept his country secure from terrorists. The destruction of his regime has also destroyed the stability of libya and has empowered smaller factions to grow in power and gain footing in the country. About the only good thing was obama did not put us on the hook for an invasion and merely gave support and left it there. Of course, that means that the libyans can say no to us, and they can drag their feet or not investigate this fully. It might be they do not have the present stability and power to even operate like that if they wanted to. I think they should take responsibility for the safety of foreign diplomats as most countries would, but I can see where they are not ready to do that yet. I also recognize the reality that if the US removes aid from libya we also reduce the ability their government has of getting control, and if we push issues and decide to invade when we shouldn't the country will be another enemy. It is a sucky situation as many things in the world are. At best I could say there is an argument we should not have had diplomats there to begin with, but considering they could be an ally and an asset I do not think that argument has any meritt.
 
Grant said:
So you are against 'patriotic support'? That goes a long way in explaining why you are in the same camp as Hillary and Barry.
Click to expand...

Oh, take that patriotism BS and go stick it. You guys have beaten that horse to death and the insult means nothing anymore. All you do now is just show you are a republican tool. So please go take your flag decal made in china and go tell that to your plants.
 
tererun said:
Yes, there was a list which had the exact incidents you requested on there. Now you are just ignoring evidence because you do not want to believe the truth.





They are in charge of their sovereign nation and rebuilding and securing it after their coup. This is the difference between something like Iraq and something like libya. In Iraq we invaded and then had to set about securing the country with our forces while we trained our puppet government to secure it themselves. During the time we occupied we did not have to ask permission to go do things like send in troops. the troops were already there. In libya we left most of that stuff to their newly established government which is not loyal to us, but rather to themselves and their people. Yes, this means that they will not allow foreign armies to invade their civilian areas and engage in combat. You may find that wrong, but I do not see that as something anyone with any reason should expect. I also recognize the reality that having US troops come in and massacre their citizens in the street would certainly have destabalized any power the new government had and hindered their effectiveness. What you are talking about is absurd to expect. It is their country, they run it, and we did not take it. That means they have every right to say no even though we may think they should have said yes. That may mean we decide not to give them support or diplomatic relations with the US, which is something that probably benefits their government much more than ours, but we do not get to invade them with our military, and that may mean some people die. Sorry, but that is the way the world works. You can dislike that and feel it is unfair, but you really cannot blame Obama for those realities as they existed long before he was even born.

Oh, and before you start thinking the US is way above tjhat sort of thing you should be aware our country would almost certainly not exist without the help of the french. We should owe the french and be thankful for their help in our own revolution because without them we would all be drinking tea and soluting the queen of england. Really, do we treat the french with any sort of respect? If some of the right wing got together a few years back and decided to blow up a french embassy in the US because they did not like the frenchs' opposition to our wars, would the french army been allowed to start flying warplanes over the area and dropping in troops to kill american citizens, or would we have had our police secure the area and stop the riot? Could you imagine the meltdown the right wing would have if obama allowed any foreign country to come onto US soil with their military and attack something, even if their own countryment were certain to be killed by americans? So yes I do not expect the libyans to allow a foreign country to operate their military against their citizens when there is no way we would ever allow that on our own soil. What you are saying is hypocrisy.



Personally i always thought libya was a stupid thing to get intio. Kadaffi was a evil nutbar, but he had calmed his position towards the US, and may have actually kept his country secure from terrorists. The destruction of his regime has also destroyed the stability of libya and has empowered smaller factions to grow in power and gain footing in the country. About the only good thing was obama did not put us on the hook for an invasion and merely gave support and left it there. Of course, that means that the libyans can say no to us, and they can drag their feet or not investigate this fully. It might be they do not have the present stability and power to even operate like that if they wanted to. I think they should take responsibility for the safety of foreign diplomats as most countries would, but I can see where they are not ready to do that yet. I also recognize the reality that if the US removes aid from libya we also reduce the ability their government has of getting control, and if we push issues and decide to invade when we shouldn't the country will be another enemy. It is a sucky situation as many things in the world are. At best I could say there is an argument we should not have had diplomats there to begin with, but considering they could be an ally and an asset I do not think that argument has any meritt.
Click to expand...

We did owe the French and we paid the debt back in our blood at least twice. We don't owe them anymore.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
We did owe the French and we paid the debt back in our blood at least twice. We don't owe them anymore.
Click to expand...

So what day did you finally pay off your parents for your existence? They are so silly trying to talk to you and be a part of your life after you paid them back for your birth. be3cause it is totally like you can pay that sort of thing off.
 
tererun said:
So what day did you finally pay off your parents for your existence? They are so silly trying to talk to you and be a part of your life after you paid them back for your birth. be3cause it is totally like you can pay that sort of thing off.
Click to expand...

LOL.

The French were not and are not our parents. And lets not lose sight of the fact that they didn't help us out just from the goodness of their heart, there was a lot of advantage in it for them.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
LOL.

The French were not and are not our parents. And lets not lose sight of the fact that they didn't help us out just from the goodness of their heart, there was a lot of advantage in it for them.
Click to expand...

At any rate we would have never allowed the french to act on our soil with their military and attack our citizens even before the day you think we paid them off. Why should libya be different than us?
 
tererun said:
At any rate we would have never allowed the french to act on our soil with their military and attack our citizens even before the day you think we paid them off. Why should libya be different than us?
Click to expand...

I don't know. Ask Obama. He's the one that attacked a sovereign nation that had threatened no other country. Problem is, Obama doesn't like to talk about Libya much these days so he'll probably ignore you like he does everybody else.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
I don't know. Ask Obama. He's the one that attacked a sovereign nation that had threatened no other country. Problem is, Obama doesn't like to talk about Libya much these days so he'll probably ignore you like he does everybody else.
Click to expand...

Never mind the mess he made of egypt....


"What difference does it make?" said hillary....fine..let hillary be ambassador to libya then.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
I don't know. Ask Obama. He's the one that attacked a sovereign nation that had threatened no other country. Problem is, Obama doesn't like to talk about Libya much these days so he'll probably ignore you like he does everybody else.
Click to expand...

So you are cool with saying the US should not play world police and should keep it's nose out of other country's affairs?
 
tererun said:
So you are cool with saying the US should not play world police and should keep it's nose out of other country's affairs?
Click to expand...

As long as our security or vital national interest are not at stake, yes. Nobody could lie good enough to convince a rational person the Libya misadventure met either.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
As long as our security or vital national interest are not at stake, yes. Nobody could lie good enough to convince a rational person the Libya misadventure met either.
Click to expand...

I cannot disagree with that all that much since I always thought the libya thing was a bit stupid to begin with. About the only thing I can say is it is not just Obama who gets us into these dumb things, and i wish both parties would stop playing the cherry picking failure superhero country.
 
tererun said:
Yes, there was a list which had the exact incidents you requested on there. Now you are just ignoring evidence because you do not want to believe the truth.
Click to expand...

Well I should know what I requested, I posted it twice, so it seems you didn't understand the question. No big deal.
 
Where is it from?
Anthony60 said:
You don't really seem to know much at all about Benghazi, do you? Those six guys rescued six State Department personnel who would have certainly been killed. They also aided in the evacuation of about 30 people from the CIA annex, while protecting classified information and killing dozens of attackers. These were skilled Spec Ops people, but you think another 10 would not have helped. If they only had some air support, even 1 jet, they probably would have all gotten out alive. Oh, and none of this info is from Fox, CNN, or MSNBC (LOL!).
I am sure the deciscion weighed heavily on someone, not Obama as he dreamed of sugar plums in his little bed.
Click to expand...
 
almost all the links say foxnewsinsider. The scandal is made up and kiept alive by fox news and the right wing blogoshpere.
Anthony60 said:
Benghazi: The Definitive Report, written by Brandon Webb and Jack Murphy
Click to expand...
 
Strawman. This is another (one of the many) reason only RWers listen to the drivel.
American said:
Just a couple of worthless Navy Seals killed, right?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
mak2 said:
Strawman. This is another (one of the many) reason only RWers listen to the drivel.
Click to expand...

That operation was a total and incompetent **** up, and you know it. Stop protecting the incompentency of the leadership.
 
I am not defending the POTUS as much as I am pointing out the extreme stupid on the right. Since before the election the RWers have been getting stupider and stupider, at first it was lapel pins and him not saluting during hail to the chief, then and still the birth certificate thing, now it is he left Americans to die cause he went to his room to hide or to LasVegas or something, or he is picking on Repuclican "grass roots" groups. All I hear from the right are made up scandals and name calling, simply childish. Count the asteriks in you post if you dont beleive me.
American said:
That operation was a total and incompetent **** up, and you know it. Stop protecting the incompentency of the leadership.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom