• 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

Panzareta said:
OMG! No wonder they were attacked. So many loose lips in that community.
Click to expand...

Considering at the time the discussion wasn't about Benghazi but about Obama's being incopetent as CnC, and that Obama is also destroying the culture and customs of the U.S. military services in the name of political correctness.
 
Obama has been lying about many things, many times, for many years.

With tools like "matter of national security" and "executive privilege", we'll never get to the bottom of this or anything else.
 
Removable Mind said:
I seriously doubt that any president ever elected...hasn't ran on lies, distortions, and deceptions. It's the nature of the beast.
Click to expand...

I can't accept this overgeneralization or the cynicism that begat it.
 
ChezC3 said:
Obama has been lying about many things, many times, for many years.

With tools like "matter of national security" and "executive privilege", we'll never get to the bottom of this or anything else.
Click to expand...

Meh.....a good azz wippin and some water boarding on his pathetic azz and I guarantee you he will fess up. I doubt the Pencil Pusher would last long.
shrug.gif
 
APACHERAT said:
During the Iraq Insurrection, we killed 6,000 Al Qaeda fighters in Iraq.

When President G.W. Bush left office there were no Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Guess what ?, Al Qaeda is back in Iraq today.
Click to expand...


There was no al Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded. There's no doubt we killed 6,000 people, but I've never seen documentation they were al Qaeda. Got a link to that documentation?
 
Catawba said:
There was no al Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded. There's no doubt we killed 6,000 people, but I've never seen documentation they were al Qaeda. Got a link to that documentation?
Click to expand...

Well they weren't called Al Qaeda at the time.....Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad. often abbreviated to "JTJ" or shortened to Tawhid and Jihad, Tawhid wal-Jihad and sometimes Tawhid al-Jihad (or just Al Tawhid or Tawhid), was started by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and a combination of foreigners and local Islamist sympathizers. But Saddam was Spying on them as he viewed Ansar al Islam as a threat to his regime.

His network may have been involved in the late 1999 plot to bomb the Millennium celebrations in the United States and Jordan. Zarqawi's operatives were also responsible for the assassination of U.S. diplomat Laurence Foley in Jordan in 2002.....snip~

al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Even Basic Wikipedia.....has the info. But it doesn't really matter. As Iraq has nothing to do with Benghazi and the Incompetent Obamabots, nor the failure of Obama's Foreign Policy.
 
MMC said:
Well they weren't called Al Qaeda at the time.....Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad. often abbreviated to "JTJ" or shortened to Tawhid and Jihad, Tawhid wal-Jihad and sometimes Tawhid al-Jihad (or just Al Tawhid or Tawhid), was started by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and a combination of foreigners and local Islamist sympathizers. But Saddam was Spying on them as he viewed Ansar al Islam as a threat to his regime.

His network may have been involved in the late 1999 plot to bomb the Millennium celebrations in the United States and Jordan. Zarqawi's operatives were also responsible for the assassination of U.S. diplomat Laurence Foley in Jordan in 2002.....snip~

al-Qaeda in Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Even Basic Wikipedia.....has the info. But it doesn't really matter. As Iraq has nothing to do with Benghazi and the Incompetent Obamabots, nor the failure of Obama's Foreign Policy.
Click to expand...


From your own link -

"The group was founded in 2003 as a reaction to the American-led invasion and occupation of Iraq"

And the point being made was McCain's hypocrisy of whining about 4 killed in Benghazi when he supported the nation being led to war in Iraq based on bad intel that resulted in almost 5,000 dead, and tens of thousands of wounded, many maimed for life!
 
Catawba said:
From your own link -

"The group was founded in 2003 as a reaction to the American-led invasion and occupation of Iraq"

And the point being made was McCain's hypocrisy of whining about 4 killed in Benghazi when he supported the nation being led to war in Iraq based on bad intel that resulted in almost 5,000 dead, and tens of thousands of wounded, many maimed for life!
Click to expand...

So what he supported what most Democrats did.....it doesn't compare to the Hypocrisy of Democrats in the slightest. That History which Democrats just cant get rid of. Nor will they ever.

All one need do is look at Deaths and Wounded caused by Democrats. Whining about Iraq can't change that fact.
 
Catawba said:
There was no al Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded. There's no doubt we killed 6,000 people, but I've never seen documentation they were al Qaeda. Got a link to that documentation?
Click to expand...

Six thousand Al Qaida fighters killed in Iraq says top official -> Six thousand Al Qaida fighters killed in Iraq says top official | GulfNews.com


Al-Qaeda making comeback in Iraq, officials say
Qassim Abdul-Zahra, Associated Press 6:26p.m. EDT October 9, 2012

BAGHDAD (AP) — Al-Qaeda is rebuilding in Iraq and has set up training camps for insurgents in the nation's western deserts as the extremist group seizes on regional instability and government security failures to regain strength, officials say.

Al-Qaeda making comeback in Iraq, officials say
 
MMC said:
So what he supported what most Democrats did.....it doesn't compare to the Hypocrisy of Democrats in the slightest. That History which Democrats just cant get rid of. Nor will they ever.

All one need do is look at Deaths and Wounded caused by Democrats. Whining about Iraq can't change that fact.
Click to expand...


Well why did Republicans vote to cut funding for Embassies security funding?
 
winston53660 said:
Well why did Republicans vote to cut funding for Embassies security funding?
Click to expand...

That was debunked.....as the Senate and Obama made sure they had appropriate funding.


House Democrats opened Wednesday’s House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing by attacking Republicans for cuts to embassy security funding — cuts that only happened thanks to overwhelming support from House Democrats, including House Oversight Committee Ranking Democratic member Rep. Elijah Cummings. In fact, more House Democrats – 149 of them — voted for the cuts than did House Republicans, of which 147 voted for them.

What Cummings and the Democratic Oversight Committee staff are referring to is the final fiscal year 2012 omnibus appropriations package that included $2.075 billion for the programs – $567.5 million less than the Obama administration’s request.

Cummings and the Democratic staff memo don’t mention that Democrats made those cuts into embassy security funding possible.

A spokeswoman for Cummings has not returned a request for comment on the matter.

Read more: Dems accuse GOP of cutting security funding in Libya despite majority Dem support for vote | The Daily Caller

Was there any confusion concerning that.....considering Fact Check and Politi Fact both validated it so.
rolleyes.png
 
MMC said:
So what he supported what most Democrats did.....it doesn't compare to the Hypocrisy of Democrats in the slightest. That History which Democrats just cant get rid of. Nor will they ever.

All one need do is look at Deaths and Wounded caused by Democrats. Whining about Iraq can't change that fact.
Click to expand...


The majority of Democrats in Congress voted against AOF in Iraq vs nearly every single Republican, including McCain, that voted for AOF in Iraq.
 
APACHERAT said:
Six thousand Al Qaida fighters killed in Iraq says top official -> Six thousand Al Qaida fighters killed in Iraq says top official | GulfNews.com


Al-Qaeda making comeback in Iraq, officials say
Qassim Abdul-Zahra, Associated Press 6:26p.m. EDT October 9, 2012

BAGHDAD (AP) — Al-Qaeda is rebuilding in Iraq and has set up training camps for insurgents in the nation's western deserts as the extremist group seizes on regional instability and government security failures to regain strength, officials say.

Al-Qaeda making comeback in Iraq, officials say
Click to expand...



From MMC's link -
"The group was founded in 2003 as a reaction to the American-led invasion and occupation of Iraq"
 
Catawba said:
From MMC's link -
"The group was founded in 2003 as a reaction to the American-led invasion and occupation of Iraq"
Click to expand...

Founded by the same Al Qaeda who attacked us on 9/11.

I think most Americans were uninformed on the organization of Al Qaeda. You have Al Qaeda terrorist and Al Qaeda fighters who wage war on the battlefields. We can assume that 3,000 of the Al Qaeda who were killed in Iraq were Al Qaeda terrorist because they blew themselves up with bombs. While the other 3,000 Al Qaeda were Al Qaeda soldiers. As we see today in most of the Middle East and North Africa like in Libya, you have Al Qaeda militia's.

Look back twelve or eleven years ago, most Americans had no clue who the Taliban was, most thought the Taliban were terrorist, they weren't. Just a splinter group of what use to be the Mujhaideen who were mostly illegal aliens living and occupying Afghanistan. We went after the Taliban in 2001 kicked their butts and they fled to their sanctuaries in Pakistan to lick their wounds for five or six years. The only reason we went after the Taliban was because they allowed Al Qaeda to use Afghanistan as a base for training and launching terrorist attacks against the West.
 
APACHERAT said:
Founded by the same Al Qaeda who attacked us on 9/11.

I think most Americans were uninformed on the organization of Al Qaeda. You have Al Qaeda terrorist and Al Qaeda fighters who wage war on the battlefields. We can assume that 3,000 of the Al Qaeda who were killed in Iraq were Al Qaeda terrorist because they blew themselves up with bombs. While the other 3,000 Al Qaeda were Al Qaeda soldiers. As we see today in most of the Middle East and North Africa like in Libya, you have Al Qaeda militia's.

Look back twelve or eleven years ago, most Americans had no clue who the Taliban was, most thought the Taliban were terrorist, they weren't. Just a splinter group of what use to be the Mujhaideen who were mostly illegal aliens living and occupying Afghanistan. We went after the Taliban in 2001 kicked their butts and they fled to their sanctuaries in Pakistan to lick their wounds for five or six years. The only reason we went after the Taliban was because they allowed Al Qaeda to use Afghanistan as a base for training and launching terrorist attacks against the West.
Click to expand...

The Taliban came to power because of the civil war and the corrupt misdeeds of the warlords. If Ahmed shah massud had not been assasinated on September 9th 2001, Afghanistan would have had a better choice of a leader.
 
APACHERAT said:
Founded by the same Al Qaeda who attacked us on 9/11.
Click to expand...

They were largely Iraqi's that fought against our invasion. It would be correct to say we killed 6,000 of the "al Qaeda" in Irag that our invasion created! Big whoop!
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Apache does not take Jon Stewart seriously, so he will not bother watching.

I know from my experience of trying to debate him
Click to expand...


That's alright, the majority of Americans don't take John McCain seriously! :cool:
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
The Taliban came to power because of the civil war and the corrupt misdeeds of the warlords. If Ahmed shah massud had not been assasinated on September 9th 2001, Afghanistan would have had a better choice of a leader.
Click to expand...

I concur.

It seems Ahmed didn't have the blessings of the Clinton administration, probably because Ahmed didn't like leftist, especially Communist. But I was aware who Ahmed was during the 80's and 90's from just reading "Soldier of Fortune" magazine which was the best source for information on what was happening in that part of the world.

But after 9/11/01 and when we first went in to Afghanistan I was surprised how many teens and young adults had no clue who the Northern Tribes were and who the Taliban was especially after the Taliban blew up the Buddhist Statues of Bamyian in March of 2001. They were built in the 500's A.D. and I know ABC, NBC/MSNBC, CBS and CNN gave the story at least 15 seconds of coverage and Fox News gave it a few minutes of coverage.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Apache does not take Jon Stewart seriously, so he will not bother watching.

I know from my experience of trying to debate him
Click to expand...

Catawba said:
Jon Stewart destroys Sen. John McCain over hypocritical Benghazi outrage
Click to expand...

I'm well informed that the majority of Obama's supporters get their news from and are heavily influenced from watching the Comedy Channel's John Stewart's "Daily Show" the "Colbert Report", MSNBC and Saturday Night Live Weekend Update. Isn't that how Obama got elected ?

What's there to debate, that it wasn't Sarah Palin who said "I can see Russia from my house." when we already know that 48 % of Americans already know that it was Tin Fay on SNL who said it. But 97 % of those who voted for Obama believed that Sarah Palin said it.
 
APACHERAT said:
I concur.

It seems Ahmed didn't have the blessings of the Clinton administration, probably because Ahmed didn't like leftist, especially Communist. But I was aware who Ahmed was during the 80's and 90's from just reading "Soldier of Fortune" magazine which was the best source for information on what was happening in that part of the world.

But after 9/11/01 and when we first went in to Afghanistan I was surprised how many teens and young adults had no clue who the Northern Tribes were and who the Taliban was especially after the Taliban blew up the Buddhist Statues of Bamyian in March of 2001. They were built in the 500's A.D. and I know ABC, NBC/MSNBC, CBS and CNN gave the story at least 15 seconds of coverage and Fox News gave it a few minutes of coverage.
Click to expand...

Given that the Pakistanis seemed to prefer to support hekmatyer over mossud, and apperently we relied on the ISI for advice in the region, we allowed supplies to reach hekmatyer.

Funny thing though, hekmatyer soon fell out of favor with Pakistan and soon it was the Taliban who became Pakistans lapdogs.

Ahmed shah mossud was a hero. He was a veteran of the afghan civil war, and his forces fought back successfully againist the soviet invasion and the Taliban. Mossud was a great leader, they called him " the lion of panjishir" unfortunately he could not have become leader of Afghanistan, he was Tajik in a country dominated by pushtuns.

I think al qeada saw him as a legititmate threat. I doubt the fact that he was murdered two days before 9/11 is mere coincidence.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
I think al qeada saw him as a legititmate threat. I doubt the fact that he was murdered two days before 9/11 is mere coincidence.
Click to expand...

That's why he was assassinated.

Unitedwestand, what do you think of the late Rep. Charlie Wilson ? Yes, the same Charlie Wilson as the movie "Charlie Wilson's War."

Not to many Democrats like him around today. He was the last of the old Democrat Party before the fringe of the left gained control of the Democrat Party. Most liberal Democrats like Charlie Wilson left the Democrat Party during the late 60's and 70's and came under the GOP tent as part of the neoconservative movement. Charlie remained loyal to the DNC.

He was a great American.

Charlie Wilson (Texas politician) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Charlie Wilson's War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
APACHERAT said:
That's why he was assassinated.

Unitedwestand, what do you think of the late Rep. Charlie Wilson ? Yes, the same Charlie Wilson as the movie "Charlie Wilson's War."

Not to many Democrats like him around today. He was the last of the old Democrat Party before the fringe of the left gained control of the Democrat Party. Most liberal Democrats like Charlie Wilson left the Democrat Party during the late 60's and 70's and came under the GOP tent as part of the neoconservative movement. Charlie remained loyal to the DNC.

He was a great American.

Charlie Wilson (Texas politician) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Charlie Wilson's War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

I wonder if Charlie could have foreseen which mujahideen received the supplies the United States paid for? Most of the supplies went on to arm the forces of gulbuldin hekmatyer, who later turned out to be a bad investment. IGulbuddin Hekmatyar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On the other hand, Ahmed shah mossud was able to fight off soviet forces without any outside help. He was the true leader of the northern alliance.

Ahmad Shah Massoud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom