• 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
I agree. I've been a federal employee for fifteen years, in what I'm sure would seem like a very boring agency. No high-performance jet aircraft t' tool around in.

Every time something controversial involving our work gets in the papers, we get emails telling us to not EVER talk to a reporter about it. It makes an impression on me cuz I have a big mouth and I figure I'm too old to find another decent job.

On "stand down," everything I've seen indicates that Obama gave Panetta a free hand to do whatever he could. That was both of them doing their job, right? I read that some people got held up to change uniforms or some nonsense. I'm sure it wouldn't have made a difference. The Libyan government was and I suspect is today kinda weird and not really much in control.

The logic here does seem to be suspect. The argument is made that the administration had good reason to hide things, like claiming that "AQ is on the run" while it's not. Because they are seen as having something to hide, it's assumed that they must be hiding something.

Well, as I've said, AQ is on the run. They've been on the run since Sept 2001. Seems like every few weeks, a whole bunch of 'em get whacked in Yemen or whatever. We can't stop a bunch of guys in a neighborhood somewhere in North Africa from deciding they hate America and they're gonna take up some kind of armed struggle. I sort of fall back on the idea that there's probably not much they can do to get at us in the States. The way violent radicalism is spreading around Central Africa seems very dangerous for the people in those countries.

I'd like to see us find a way to get this conflict wrapped up. I don't really have any ideas other than helping with political/legal/economic/social development, patience, and caution. We obviously can't tolerate murderers, but I don't think hating people gets us too far.

I appreciate your sentiment but I don't think these whacko terrorists attacks will be ending anytime soon. Just look how many attacks since 1970! Attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here are about a dozen under Bush that FOX ignored. The George W. Bush Benghazis That Fox News Ignored - NewsHounds

Here's what the GOP doesn't want to talk about...

diplomatic-attacks4.png
 
I appreciate your sentiment but I don't think these whacko terrorists attacks will be ending anytime soon. Just look how many attacks since 1970! Attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here are about a dozen under Bush that FOX ignored. The George W. Bush Benghazis That Fox News Ignored - NewsHounds

Here's what the GOP doesn't want to talk about...

diplomatic-attacks4.png

At the very least, we dont want the mistakes made in Benghazi to happen again-because it might cost American lives. And we can do that by examining what happened there, by getting all of the facts.

Can you at least agree with that?
 
I said earlier if there were really any assets that made sense to use I would be outraged too. I am pretty much done with you. You cannot tell reality from a damn John Wayne movie and all you have is talking points and RW noise, oh and capitalize Marine.
Leaving behind Americans to die, after hours of begging for help, and after months of requests for increased security is reality to you?

With the Obama administration, it apparently is.
 
I said earlier if there were really any assets that made sense to use I would be outraged too. I am pretty much done with you. You cannot tell reality from a damn John Wayne movie and all you have is talking points and RW noise, oh and capitalize Marine.

The failure to attempt a rescue is just one of the failures here. There are plenty of others that require investigation. What is your problem with that?

I generally have great respect for Marines, they are all over southern California and I even teach them medical skills. They have an absolutely impressive history and are still the meanest branch I know. They also never leave a man behind.

In your case, marine is appropriate.
 
Now you are an expert on Marines because you seen a few in SoCal. You are a piece of work. FOAD.
The failure to attempt a rescue is just one of the failures here. There are plenty of others that require investigation. What is your problem with that?

I generally have great respect for Marines, they are all over southern California and I even teach them medical skills. They have an absolutely impressive history and are still the meanest branch I know. They also never leave a man behind.

In your case, marine is appropriate.
 
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.

I don't know about that. Maybe I have been around way too long. I first became interested in politics when Eisenhower was president. I have seen quite a few investigations, some frivolous, other actually with the intent of finding out the truth. Some for just political reasons to make the other guy look bad. Not all investigations are over a Watergate or Irancontra. Perhaps I have become nothing more than an old cynic where cover ups and investigations have become sort of routine. Maybe I just do not trust congress regardless of controls it.

Perhaps the simplest way to solve these things is to appoint and independent investigator with all the powers to enable him/her to get to the bottom of these things.
 
Now you are an expert on Marines because you seen a few in SoCal. You are a piece of work. FOAD.

Kindly point out where I stated I was an expert? Does one need to be an expert to note that not all marines would leave behind wounded military?
 
I don't know about that. Maybe I have been around way too long. I first became interested in politics when Eisenhower was president. I have seen quite a few investigations, some frivolous, other actually with the intent of finding out the truth. Some for just political reasons to make the other guy look bad. Not all investigations are over a Watergate or Irancontra. Perhaps I have become nothing more than an old cynic where cover ups and investigations have become sort of routine. Maybe I just do not trust congress regardless of controls it.

Perhaps the simplest way to solve these things is to appoint and independent investigator with all the powers to enable him/her to get to the bottom of these things.

Understood, but the conclusion of an investigative body is not in and of itself proof of the investigation being justified. Much like the fact that just because an investigation can be beneficial or harmful politically does not mean the investigation in and of itself is invalid.

Id love to see an independent investigator. From what Ive read, the select committee has appointed a non-politician to lead the proceedings.
 
What assets were available to use to not leave anyone behind with? Besides flying a big noisy jet over to scare them terrorist. Try to come up with something with a little real evidence it was even available.
Kindly point out where I stated I was an expert? Does one need to be an expert to note that not all marines would leave behind wounded military?
 
What assets were available to use to not leave anyone behind with? Besides flying a big noisy jet over to scare them terrorist. Try to come up with something with a little real evidence it was even available.

Once again, you appear to not understand the context of the attacks. When the Obama administration decided to not send help-IT WAS NOT KNOWN WHO WAS ALIVE OR DEAD.

Unless your contention that it didn't matter-and that at no point should a rescue have been attempted, or that there were no available rescue resources-and if that IS the case, you are making my case FOR an investigation-this can't happen again.
 
Once again you cannot name one single asset that was available during the attack. Stop and think once in a while instead of going deaf in the noise machine.
Once again, you appear to not understand the context of the attacks. When the Obama administration decided to not send help-IT WAS NOT KNOWN WHO WAS ALIVE OR DEAD.

Unless your contention that it didn't matter-and that at no point should a rescue have been attempted, or that there were no available rescue resources-and if that IS the case, you are making my case FOR an investigation-this can't happen again.
 
Understood, but the conclusion of an investigative body is not in and of itself proof of the investigation being justified. Much like the fact that just because an investigation can be beneficial or harmful politically does not mean the investigation in and of itself is invalid.

Id love to see an independent investigator. From what Ive read, the select committee has appointed a non-politician to lead the proceedings.

I heard the same thing. We'll see what happens, but I think for the time being most people that are not all that politically active are just saying ho hum.
 
Once again you cannot name one single asset that was available during the attack. Stop and think once in a while instead of going deaf in the noise machine.

We dont know who was available, and if the answer found by this committee is that there were none-than that is a MAJOR lapse in judgement by the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton-and will need to be rectified so it doesn't happen again.
 
Thank you. It took that long to admit you don't know what was available so you don't know if anyone was left behind or not. This is exactly what I am talking about, you just know RW noise.
We dont know who was available, and if the answer found by this committee is that there were none-than that is a MAJOR lapse in judgement by the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton-and will need to be rectified so it doesn't happen again.
 
Thank you. It took that long to admit you don't know what was available so you don't know if anyone was left behind or not. This is exactly what I am talking about, you just know RW noise.

No do fast turbo. We dont know because the white house has been adversarial from the start. There were assets in Sicily that could have been there fairly quickly, and 2 ships arrived the next day. But there is much that has not been released, and thats why we need an investigation.

Also, the response from the WH, and Clinton (who refused to cooperate) will also require investigation.

We are going to find out what happened, I guarantee you that. In the mean time, instead of making excuses for leaving Americans to die because of bad policy, you might want to do some reading- 2012 Benghazi attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note that this was a preventable attack, and that is why we need to find out what happened-to prevent it from happening again.
 
Did he? How can you tell?

>>Obama ignores the military brass because he and his administration don't trust the military. They probably don't trust the CIA.

Isn't that painting with a very broad brush? Are you saying he always ignores the military? And again, what was it he ignored? They told him that AQ was morphing into small, scattered groups that are loosely affiliated. What has he done/not done to indicate that he ignored them?

Clapper must have told him that, right? Even if he didn't, Obama would have read about his testimony before Congress to that effect, don't ya think? He doesn't ignore the NYT, I figure. That's where he gets hid left-wing talking points.

>>And if Obama were have acknowledge to the American people that …

I think the voters knew what was going on. And I also believe AQ is on the run. To be honest, I think that if we had concentrated on Afghanistan and not fought a long, expensive, and unnecessary war in Iraq, we'd have a lot fewer dead and wounded military folks, a lot less money wasted on spending that provides no return on investment, and maybe even a less volatile Middle East.

Remember waking up every morning back in 2003 and 2004 reading about American troops duking it out in bloody clashes against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan ? NOT

By 2003 Al Qeda had fled Afghanistan and fled to Yemen and the Taliban got their butts whooped and fled to Pakistan to lick their wounds for a few years waiting for the political climate to change in America before entering Afghanistan.

Robert Gates’ Book “Duty” Confirms Influence of Advisor Samantha Power – Obama’s Advisers Were Talking About Military Options In Libya Without Consulting The Military…

America's national security is in the hands of a community organizser who ignores the military.

>" Gates acknowledges forthrightly in “Duty” that he did not reveal his dismay. “I never confronted Obama directly over what I (as well as [Hillary] Clinton, [then-CIA Director Leon] Panetta, and others) saw as the president’s determination that the White House tightly control every aspect of national security policy and even operations. His White House was by far the most centralized and controlling in national security of any I had seen since Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger ruled the roost.”

It got so bad during internal debates over whether to intervene in Libya in 2011 that Gates says he felt compelled to deliver a “rant” because the White House staff was “talking about military options with the president without Defense being involved.”

Gates says his instructions to the Pentagon were: “Don’t give the White House staff and [national security staff] too much information on the military options. They don’t understand it, and ‘experts’ like Samantha Power will decide when we should move militarily.” ..."<
Robert Gates’ Book “Duty” Confirms Influence of Advisor Samantha Power – Obama

Then there's the Arab Spring. The community organizer had a hard-on over the Arab Spring. Upstairs in the living quarters of the communiy olrganizer the bed sheets were soiled every morning from wet dreams.

Arab spring has created 'intelligence disaster', warns former CIA bossMichael Scheuer says rendition should be brought back as lack of intelligence has left UK and US unable to monitor militants

>" The Arab spring has "delighted al-Qaida" and caused "an intelligence disaster" for the US and Britain, the former head of the CIA unit in charge of pursuing Osama bin Laden has warned.

Speaking at the Edinburgh international book festival, Michael Scheuer said: "The help we were getting from the Egyptian intelligence service, less so from the Tunisians but certainly from the Libyans and Lebanese, has dried up – either because of resentment at our governments stabbing their political leaders in the back, or because those who worked for the services have taken off in fear of being incarcerated or worse.

"The amount of work that has devolved on US and British services is enormous, and the result is blindness in our ability to watch what's going on among militants."

The Arab spring, he said, was "an intelligence disaster for the US and for Britain, and other European services"..."<
Arab spring has created 'intelligence disaster', warns former CIA boss | World news | The Guardian
 
only if you only know how to lose arguments when you can't get affirmative action from the moderation team and claim you aren't really like in the affirmative action threads.

:failpail:
 
True, so whats this have to do with Benghazi?

What does a smirk to a person off camera by a former presidential candidate have to do with benghazi?

Are we to infer by your photo, that Romney is somehow sinister or responsible for the President and his former secretary of state leaving Americans to die?
 
What does a smirk to a person off camera by a former presidential candidate have to do with benghazi?

Are we to infer by your photo, that Romney is somehow sinister or responsible for the President and his former secretary of state leaving Americans to die?

Well it was at a press conference about Benghazi, right before the election where he spent the time speaking in a deep and sorrowful tone bemoaning the deaths of four Americans and how we deserve a President that can keep us safe, and then he smirked about it afterwards.

In other words the sorrow was bull**** and he got caught using the tragedy for political purposes.

Also no one left anyone to die even the House Republican committees that have investigated Benghazi 7 times now have stated flat out in their reports that no was left to die and that the military couldn't have changed the outcome of the situation.
 
Well it was at a press conference about Benghazi, right before the election where he spent the time speaking in a deep and sorrowful tone bemoaning the deaths of four Americans and how we deserve a President that can keep us safe, and then he smirked about it afterwards.

Again, you dont see whats off camera. You want an assumption to be made, that Romney wasn't being sincere. Its a pretty pathetic argument, which highlights the inability of the left to make a substantive response.

Heres Obama smiling about the fast and the furious. Hundreds of people are dead because of his administration, and he cracks a grin. What does this mean? :roll:

 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom