• 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!

Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

Are Republicans Exploiting Benghazi?

  • Total voters
    79
APACHERAT said:
mmi said:
Of course, it's very easy to capture these people. You just go out there with a butterfly net, right? And how much of an expert on counterintelligence in this specific area are you? What intelligence should we be risking American lives to gather?


QUOTE]

Have you ever heard of a place called Guantanamo Bay Naval Base ? U.S. Marines called it GITMO.

After 9-11-01 during the Bush administration the U.S. needed a place to incarcerate captured terrorist off of U.S. soil so liberals and the ACLU wouldn't be intervening in behalf of Al Qaeda demanding that terrorist be protected by the Constitution. GITMO seemed to be the place.

558 suspected terrorist, Al Qaeda leaders and unlawful combatants including the mastermind of 9-11-01 were captured and sent to GITMO.

How many were captured during the Obama administration ? 0

How easy is it to capture "these people"? I suppose it depends how competent an Executive administration is.
Click to expand...

Obama is short on capturing and long on blowing their ass of the map. I'm cool wit' dat. :cool:
Click to expand...
 
Captain America said:
APACHERAT said:
Obama is short on capturing and long on blowing their ass of the map. I'm cool wit' dat. :cool:
Click to expand...

Along with any innocent bystanders who are within range of a Hellfire fragments.

What was the Obama's administration's response when they discovered how many innocent people were having their asses blown off the map ? They changed the definition of who's a combatant. If your closed enough to be killed or wounded by a Hellfire missile, the Obama administration now classifies you as a combatant.

Do your own research.

I myself could care less.

I'm leaning with the internationalist lawyers who pointed out that Obama is writing the rules on how UAV's (aka drones) can be used. If the USA can conduct hellfire attacks over soverign nations so can any other country.

If some Chinese is wanted by the PRC and seeks asylum in America, the rules now are that China could fire a missile from a UAV at the person sitting on a bus bench on Main St. USA. Obama wrote those rules. According to Obama, any innocent American killed near the bus bench are combatants.

Within the next ten years, 150 countries will be operating UAV's.
Do your own research.
Click to expand...
 
bubbabgone said:
you really should stop loading up your comments with replies to the entire DP membership and every comment they ever made. Know what I mean?
Click to expand...
I guess maybe I don't. It looks like yer sarcastically suggesting that I responded to too many comments by others. My suggestion would be that you stop reading my posts if yer finding that I've included too many responses. Or did I misunderstand you?

So which is it? Does it make no difference why the 4 Americans were killed or who did it ? ... or is the job is to figure out that very thing? Can't do the latter if you believe the former.
Click to expand...

I think I can answer that. The Secretary was saying that we need to focus more on doing "everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again" than on some ridiculous, partisan exercise of trying to identify exactly who, in what agency, at what time, for what purpose, after perhaps consulting with which individuals, in which agencies, at what time … made each specific edit to a document that has no real importance whatsoever.

We all now know why the document took the shape it did and why the edits were made. Local media reports based on interviews with some of the terrorists involved in the attack alluded to the video — a video that, whether you like it or not, was the cause of protests in a number of countries in the region at that time. I'd say it makes sense that some of the terrorists would mention it. Many Muslims found the video offensive. You would certainly expect fanatical extremists to be offended as well. In fact, they might try to use the video to justify their violent murder of Americans in the city.

There was some anger and confusion going on between State and CIA. Something really terrible had happened. A situation that arguably should not have existed (CIA operations of a particular nature being run out of what was supposed to be a diplomatic facility) may have contributed to that tragedy. People in the WH tried to smooth things over by allowing both agencies to delete anything and everything they didn't like from the talking points memo.

Only partisan hacks who vehemently opposed Obama's candidacy, much less presidency, would even consider trying to turn some watered-down statements delivered on Sunday talk shows into one of the worst scandals in American political history.

The reason Republicans are going to take yet another beating on this investigation is twofold: first, nothing will come of it, but really much more importantly, everybody in the country knows about Certificategate, Wrightgate, Ayersgate, Muslimgate, Terrorist Sympathizergate, Not Really a lLaw Professorgate, Did Poorly in Schoolgate, Forced To Give Up His Law Licensegate, and on and on.

About how he's the worst president ever. He's an inveterate liar. He can't speak coherently without a teleprompter. He's really not smart at all. His wife goes on multi-million-dollar shopping sprees with government credit cards. He murdered his grandmother and his gay lover. He wants to destroy America. He's both a communist and a fascist, a rather impressive feat. He didn't write those books. He refuses to lift a finger to work with the Republicans in the Congress. He's weak, feckless, indecisive, desperate, flailing, panicking. He's a coward. The military hates him and he forced a hundred senior officers out to serve his political ends. He stole the election, I mean both elections. The media covers up for him. He uses the IRS to attack his political opponents. He effectively rules as a dictatot through executive orders.

Well, I figure I at least hit some of the highlights. There is no wolf.

Meanwhile, the people that have cajoled, threatened, and harassed Boehner into appointing this committee are the same ones that block efforts to enact legislation the voters support on immigration reform and raising the minimum wage.

And the rest of her comment reiterated that contradiction.
Click to expand...

In what way?

'Two days after this attack,' said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, 'we were in a briefing with Hillary Clinton and she screamed
Click to expand...

Hearsay. Why hasn't anyone backed him up on what happened? Just more grist for the right-wing media mill.
 
APACHERAT said:
Captain America said:
Along with any innocent bystanders who are within range of a Hellfire fragments.

What was the Obama's administration's response when they discovered how many innocent people were having their asses blown off the map ? They changed the definition of who's a combatant. If your closed enough to be killed or wounded by a Hellfire missile, the Obama administration now classifies you as a combatant.

Do your own research.

I myself could care less.

I'm leaning with the internationalist lawyers who pointed out that Obama is writing the rules on how UAV's (aka drones) can be used. If the USA can conduct hellfire attacks over soverign nations so can any other country.

If some Chinese is wanted by the PRC and seeks asylum in America, the rules now are that China could fire a missile from a UAV at the person sitting on a bus bench on Main St. USA. Obama wrote those rules. According to Obama, any innocent American killed near the bus bench are combatants.

Within the next ten years, 150 countries will be operating UAV's.
Do your own research.
Click to expand...

O.M.G. Really? Don't they have any people knowledgeable about the "legality" of what's going on in DC? I think they're called "watchdogs?"

Greetings, APACHERAT. :2wave:
Click to expand...
 
mmi said:
Yes, I know. When I said "t was a CIA station," I was referring to the location where Stevens was killed.
Click to expand...
Stevens was not killed at the CIA station. He was already dead when the CIA station was attacked by AQ terrorists.



mmi said:
Looks like you've got a real scoop there. As I noted, the Pentagon says it.
Click to expand...
No. It is well known and documented history. Not a scoop.

Yes, I do understand that sometimes very idiotic LWNJ's somehow equate rumors that Saddam was not controlling AQ in Iraq to somehow mean that AQ was not in Iraq at all. But that is a totally illogical assumption. Saddam Hussein did not control very large areas of northern Iraq in 2003. AQ did control some of those areas. Therefore, any piece of crap LWNJ who claims that AQ was not in Iraq is simply an anti-USA zealot who cannot keep his lips off of their socialist hero, Saddam Hussein's, penis even many years after that sick ****er was hanged. It seems like the LWNJs of sites like this are trying to mummify and worship Saddam Hussein's penis in their collective mouths.
 
mmi said:
I guess maybe I don't. It looks like yer sarcastically suggesting that I responded to too many comments by others. My suggestion would be that you stop reading my posts if yer finding that I've included too many responses. Or did I misunderstand you?



I think I can answer that. The Secretary was saying that we need to focus more on doing "everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again" than on some ridiculous, partisan exercise of trying to identify exactly who, in what agency, at what time, for what purpose, after perhaps consulting with which individuals, in which agencies, at what time … made each specific edit to a document that has no real importance whatsoever.

We all now know why the document took the shape it did and why the edits were made. Local media reports based on interviews with some of the terrorists involved in the attack alluded to the video — a video that, whether you like it or not, was the cause of protests in a number of countries in the region at that time. I'd say it makes sense that some of the terrorists would mention it. Many Muslims found the video offensive. You would certainly expect fanatical extremists to be offended as well. In fact, they might try to use the video to justify their violent murder of Americans in the city.

There was some anger and confusion going on between State and CIA. Something really terrible had happened. A situation that arguably should not have existed (CIA operations of a particular nature being run out of what was supposed to be a diplomatic facility) may have contributed to that tragedy. People in the WH tried to smooth things over by allowing both agencies to delete anything and everything they didn't like from the talking points memo.

Only partisan hacks who vehemently opposed Obama's candidacy, much less presidency, would even consider trying to turn some watered-down statements delivered on Sunday talk shows into one of the worst scandals in American political history.

The reason Republicans are going to take yet another beating on this investigation is twofold: first, nothing will come of it, but really much more importantly, everybody in the country knows about Certificategate, Wrightgate, Ayersgate, Muslimgate, Terrorist Sympathizergate, Not Really a lLaw Professorgate, Did Poorly in Schoolgate, Forced To Give Up His Law Licensegate, and on and on.

About how he's the worst president ever. He's an inveterate liar. He can't speak coherently without a teleprompter. He's really not smart at all. His wife goes on multi-million-dollar shopping sprees with government credit cards. He murdered his grandmother and his gay lover. He wants to destroy America. He's both a communist and a fascist, a rather impressive feat. He didn't write those books. He refuses to lift a finger to work with the Republicans in the Congress. He's weak, feckless, indecisive, desperate, flailing, panicking. He's a coward. The military hates him and he forced a hundred senior officers out to serve his political ends. He stole the election, I mean both elections. The media covers up for him. He uses the IRS to attack his political opponents. He effectively rules as a dictatot through executive orders.

Well, I figure I at least hit some of the highlights. There is no wolf.

Meanwhile, the people that have cajoled, threatened, and harassed Boehner into appointing this committee are the same ones that block efforts to enact legislation the voters support on immigration reform and raising the minimum wage.



In what way?



Hearsay. Why hasn't anyone backed him up on what happened? Just more grist for the right-wing media mill.
Click to expand...

I was saying you responded to a number of people in one comment but in order for any one of those people to respond to you they have to Reply With Quote and then delete all the stuff that has nothing to do with their reply.
But you should go ahead and do whatever works for ya.


As for what Hillary said, what you think she meant notwithstanding, she said it doesn't matter and then essentially said it's their job to find out.
That entire paragraph was one big fat self-contradiction.
Can't get around that.
And not only that, you're still hawking that video as a reasonable excuse for your guys & gals in the WH to have used.
Amazing.

Rather than respond to the rest of your run-on comment that I presume was meant as biting sarcasm to minimize Obama's failures, how about if you simply give us a thumbnail description of how YOU perceive Barack Obama so we know the level of fanboy we're dealing with and thus can handle accordingly.
 
From what I understand, the primary U.S. influence and control in the area was indeed CIA. Stevens was within an unprotected facility with minimal security at his own discretion and was not under CIA or Embassy protection at the time of the attack. It is rather silly to blame either for this...let alone the State Dept. as the only assets available were many miles away and lacked the resources to act.
It would be wonderful to have foreseen this disaster and placed the troops before it occurred....we did not do so do to a lack of psychic ability and unlimited congressional money. Expecting military support from outside the country bases to be anything close to immediate belies a lack of understanding of international airspace and treaty obligations, as well as a completely naïve belief that we can enact miracles.

Shiat happens People....and it does not smell like roses.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Obama and his administration lied for two weeks
Click to expand...

"They were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy. ... At this point, what I would say is that a number of different elements appear to have been involved in the attack, including individuals connected to militant groups that are prevalent in eastern Libya, particularly the Benghazi area, as well we are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda affiliates, in particular al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb." —Matthew Olson, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, testifying before a Senate committee hearing, Sept 19, 2012

That's one week. And of course you've got Obama talking about an act of terror and not mentioning the video the morning after. I'm guessing Carney made similar statements during the week, but what's the point of finding them? You guys are hounds on a wrong scent and too stubborn to be recalled.
 
polgara said:
O.M.G. Really? Don't they have any people knowledgeable about the "legality" of what's going on in DC? I think they're called "watchdogs?"

Greetings, APACHERAT. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Your post has me making Apacherat's quote. Don't s'pose you'd mind fixing that would ya?
 
Last edited:
polgara said:
APACHERAT said:
O.M.G. Really? Don't they have any people knowledgeable about the "legality" of what's going on in DC? I think they're called "watchdogs?"

Greetings, APACHERAT. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Happy Mothers Day Polgara :2wave:

Well you know how Obama is, his track record is he only recognizes those parts of the Constitution that he agrees with.

Obama has surrounded himself with incompetent yes men and since there are no international laws or rules how UAV can be used, Obama has been writing his own rules without any international input.

Obama looks at the world as he sees it should look like, his view.

Obama made the stupid comment that the era of geopolitics became obsolete at Midnight, January 1st, 2000. One problem, there's not one world leader or one country who agrees with Obama.

I just prey there's not another community organizer who wants to become Commander in Chief.
Click to expand...
 
APACHERAT said:
maybe Obama would have learned back in 2011 that Al Qaeda has …
Click to expand...

I thought you said the CIA told him that.

A few years ago the CIA warned the Obama administration that Obama's war against terrorism has been relying solely on intelligence gathered during the Bush administration and that the intelligence was drying up fast.
Click to expand...
You've been in these meetings?
 
One would think that might be classified info...I mean, if you think about it.
mmi said:
I thought you said the CIA told him that.

You've been in these meetings?
Click to expand...
 
mmi said:
I thought you said the CIA told him that.

You've been in these meetings?
Click to expand...

The CIA did tell him. Obama ignored them.

As we have read in Sec. of Defense Gates recent book or Admiral McRavens comments, Obama ignores the military brass because he and his administration don't trust the military. They probably don't trust the CIA.

And if Obama were have acknowledge to the American people that since he entered the White House that Al Qaeda can now be found operating in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa, Obama couldn't have run on a platform to get reelected (given a second chance) that "Al Qaeda is being decimated and was on the run."
 
Raising money on the tragedy is a good indication that the GOP is exploiting the event.

I wonder how many politicians in DC harping on the issue actually know the names of the dead or have paid the fallen any form of actual respect.
 
mak2 said:
One would think that might be classified info...I mean, if you think about it.
Click to expand...

Afternoon Mak2.

Remember the CIA whistle blower who said that the Obama administration has been working off of intelligence gathered during the Bush administration and that the intelligence was drying up ?
 
Muhammed said:
Actually AQ was flying their flags over the government buildings in Benghazi before the 9/11 attack. Yet Hillary's State department still sent Ambassador Stevens there with inadequate security. To a facility that had recently had it's perimeter wall blown up by terrorists. Then they tried to blame it on some jerk in California who put a video on YouTube.
Click to expand...

Indeed, and even after several attacks she still denied the requests for additional security.

Why did she do this? She herself said it was NOT because of funding. Could it have been because to do so would go against the Obama campaigns narrative that AQ was on the run? Perhaps, and if so she was playing politics with the lives of those Americans. And the attempt to blame it on a video could have very well been the same thing.

We dont know, partially because the Obama administration threatened witnesses, and has not been forthcoming with providing the data surrounding the attack-the most transparent administration ever only releases this data when its threatened with litigation.
 
APACHERAT said:
polgara said:
Happy Mothers Day Polgara :2wave:

Well you know how Obama is, his track record is he only recognizes those parts of the Constitution that he agrees with.

Obama has surrounded himself with incompetent yes men and since there are no international laws or rules how UAV can be used, Obama has been writing his own rules without any international input.

Obama looks at the world as he sees it should look like, his view.

Obama made the stupid comment that the era of geopolitics became obsolete at Midnight, January 1st, 2000. One problem, there's not one world leader or one country who agrees with Obama.

I just prey there's not another community organizer who wants to become Commander in Chief.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the Mothers Day greeting! :thumbs: It's been a super nice day so far, with one visitor bearing gifts - neighbor made me some fudge - so unless I take up some serious jogging, which isn't in my immediate plans, I'm going to have to adjust my scale to start out with a negative number if I'm going to have to look at it! The "Roly-poly look" is only for Care Bears who love chocolate, not me! Fair is fair! :lamo:
Click to expand...
 
Hello APACHERAT. Honestly I don't. How do we know he is telling the truth?
APACHERAT said:
Afternoon Mak2.

Remember the CIA whistle blower who said that the Obama administration has been working off of intelligence gathered during the Bush administration and that the intelligence was drying up ?
Click to expand...
 
No, arguing a jet flying over is going the scare terrorist that are too close to Americans to be attacked in any way (beside a loud jet kinda noise) is mind boggling. :roll:
US Conservative said:
Do you think I meant to attack in any way? Mind boggling.
Click to expand...
 
Muhammed said:
Stevens was not killed at the CIA station. He was already dead when the CIA station was attacked by AQ terrorists.
Click to expand...
I guess I must have gone for popcorn and missed that part. Thanks.

No. It is well known and documented history. Not a scoop.
Click to expand...

Call the Pentagon. Don't even wait till tomorrow morning. This is too important. (703) 545-6700

very idiotic LWNJ's
Click to expand...

Like the people at the Institute for Defense Analyses

any piece of crap LWNJ who claims that AQ was not in Iraq is simply an anti-USA zealot who cannot keep his lips off of their socialist hero, Saddam Hussein's, penis even many years after that sick ****er was hanged. It seems like the LWNJs of sites like this are trying to mummify and worship Saddam Hussein's penis in their collective mouths.
Click to expand...

I saw a lot of homophobic projections from right-wing haters in a forum I posted in for a few months. I decided I should just go back to coding and English language usage for my discussion group recreation. Then I stumbled upon this place and thought I'd give it a shot. Yer the first of these neurotics I've encountered here. I do give you credit for working in the necrophilic angle with such enthusiasm.
 
mak2 said:
Hello APACHERAT. Honestly I don't. How do we know he is telling the truth?
Click to expand...

How many Al Qaeda have been captured to gather intelligence since 2009 ?

The prison population at GITMO hasn't gotten any larger since 2009.

Al Qaeda wasn't operating in any country along the Mediterranean Sea in 2009.

As soon as Gaddafi was sodomized and murdered many news sources showed pictures of Al Qaeda's black flag flying over Libya.

Was Obama lying to the American people in 2012 when he said that Al Qaeda was on the run ?
 
US Conservative said:
Do you think I meant to attack in any way? Mind boggling.
Click to expand...

Mind boggling yes, jets flying overhead for what? Does anyone think that a jet has a precise weapon to take out bad guys when friendlies are in their midst? Does anyone think that the bad guys don't know this? e.g., if you kill me, you'll also kill your own... I rest my case against jets flying overhead.
 
Perotista said:
Are the Republicans exploiting Benghazi? I don’t know and at this point I really do not care. I suppose the answer to that question will be what they find out if anything. If this special investigation committee uncovers something new and relevant, then the answer will be no. If not, then the answer is yes. So I prefer to sit, listen, watch and wait. Until this thing is over, it will be just something that is there, something that is ongoing that has no effect on my daily life and something I will not pay much attention to if at all. I would say 90% or more of America isn’t paying any attention to this either. That is unless your politically active, like the posters on DP here are, most just don’t care. Now a revelation of wrong doing may bring their attention back, if nothing is found that really stands out and puts the world on edge, it probably will be just a waste of time, money and energy. But time will tell. For me this is nothing to get upset about or to avidly back it. It politics as normal in a very partisan divided Washington we have today. Get used to it, these type of things are not going to go away.
Click to expand...

I dont agree with this line of thought. Americans were killed and we dont know yet what actually happened-largely because the Obama administration is dragging its feet. Its either worth investigating or its not-regardless of whats found.
 
US Conservative said:
Im going to hold the people in charge accountable. Obama should have had jets buzzing that compound every 3 minutes until the help he never sent arrived. The ambassador sent multiple requests for help, and none came. Some of those dead hero's went so far as to paint laser designators on the gun trucks that were part of the attack-hoping for air support that never came.

And then the WH decides to wait weeks before sending the FBI in (it was unsafe, they said-after repeated requests for increased security by the dead ambassador were ignored). In the mean time, the masterminds of the attack are freely and openly seen in public all over Benghazi and elsewhere, at one point seen drinking cocktails in a high end western hotel. Quick reaction forces all over the region were told to stand down when they might have made a difference-and if they didn't-we wouldnt have left the Presidents representative and 3 other heros to die alone surrounded by terrorists.



And the entire time, the spin machine of the Obama admin was running overtime. It was clear who committed these attacks but that might have hurt Obama in that election season-reminding people that AQ ISNT on the run, and on 9/11 no less-wouldnt be politically viable. So they lied, obscured, and left the families in the dark-all for politics.

And yet the silly libs of this forum want to accuse the Republicans of playing politics here. Its mind boggling. This type of thing can't happen again, and with a select committee the Obama admin is going to be pulled kicking and screaming into the sunlight. We are going to find out what they knew, and when.
Click to expand...

That's about the dumbest thing I've ever read at DP, and I'm a newbie. I'm sure there'll be more dumb stuff later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom