myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Benghazi-gate
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 31, 32, 33 ... 80, 81, 82  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 6026

PostPosted: Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For some time now NW30, you've got a hair up your ass about what happened in Libya. Why are you so twisted about this event? No doubt, 4 people died and that's unfortunate, but I can't really figure why you're so critical and full of such pointed blame. You stand out as bent about this event in particular, but it's actually quite minimal on the scale of deaths occurring in everything happening in the Muslim theater, both in North Africa and the Middle East.

Why is this event so personal with you? I just don't get it. Do you really understand the risk of being in this part of the world, and do you actually believe that anyone can eliminate all the risks? While we are a strong military power in the world, I think that history continually proves that we can't wash away the hard line opposition to our ideas and positions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1545

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler,

You may be right and this incident was just an unfortunate event. However, once the administration tried to mislead the public as to why we were caught with our pants down, THAT opened up the can of worms. Now that the person at the top of the state department seems to be avoiding testifying, skeptics have to wonder if there is more to the cover up than we know.

Had the administration been honest and upfront from the beginning, this would have been a non issue.

And you wonder why this won't go away, just read below.

From: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/benghazi_penalties_are_bogus_ncP7RZx5uTIgDPbTp5WtoN
Quote:
Benghazi penalties are bogus. The four officials supposedly out of jobs because of their blunders in the run-up to the deadly Benghazi terror attack remain on the State Department payroll — and will all be back to work soon, The Post has learned.

The highest-ranking official caught up in the scandal, Assistant Secretary of State Eric Boswell, has not “resigned” from government service, as officials said last week. He is just switching desks. And the other three are simply on administrative leave and are expected back.

The four were made out to be sacrificial lambs in the wake of a scathing report issued last week that found that the US compound in Benghazi, Libya, was left vulnerable to attack because of “grossly inadequate” security.

State Department leaders “didn’t come clean about Benghazi and now they’re not coming clean about these staff changes,” a source close to the situation told The Post., adding, the “public would be outraged over this.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1916
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

swc~

Who pushed the video? And why was it pushed so hard, and for so long?
If you remember this administration even spent $75k on making a movie apology about the video, to be shown in the arab countries. That's how hard they pushed the video.
If the video was never used as a lame excuse, then this wouldn't even be an issue.
Coverups in the past used to be a big deal, especially if it was a republican administration.
So why do you have a hair twisting up your ass about not wanting to get to the bottom of it, if you are soooo sure that there is nothing there?
You shouldn't be afraid to getting the the truth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14612

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900 wrote:
swchandler, you may be right and this incident was just an unfortunate event

That's just plain dumb. That degree of disconnection from the facts and importance of issues this revealing about any administration's incompetence and outright lying is inexcusable in anyone who is even considering voting. It transcends mere ignorance, WAY into simple ideological blindness leading to outright stupidity. I hope to HELL my conservative tilt doesn't blind me that thoroughly on ANY issue. It shouldn't, considering the hours I spend each day listening to professional far left ideologues argue their side for big bucks ... as I just shake my head at their endless ignorance and deliberate distortion of known facts.

We already know the most basic, irrefutable truths: President Obama's official representative was left to die under a prolonged assault by terrorists with zero attempt to deploy forces that could probably have helped. Then the administration from top to bottom lied about it for weeks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5570

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another attack in Afghanistan, and growing instability in Iraq--yet all the right wants to talk about is Benghazi. Where, as I recall, there was not enough money in the Department of State's budget after the Republicans were done, to fund all requests for increased security. The story arc by the Re-thugs? Obama's bragging about the number of terrorists killed was wrong. It probably was, and we have known since the start of these wars--by Georgy Porgy--that wars in foreign land create new terrorists, sometimes faster than the old ones.

It is richly ironic, that the Re-thugs who disdain diplomacy, and ignore the recommendations of the Department of State, and diminish their budget, have chosen this issue to make such a fuss over. Can we all spell hypocrisy?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 6026

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Regarding the incident in Benghazi, the real difference between us is that I'm not bent on finding folks to mount on a pillory and blame. Moreover, the way the right wing media has handled this event is both inappropriate and shameful. They knew who they wanted to target for blame, so it became a witch hunt for the highest officials of the land. Guilty until proven innocent. It seemed to me like some killing event in the Roman Coliseum where the crowd roars for death and destruction from the safety of their seats. Certainly not the kind of spectacle that I want to be part of.

I have no doubt that there are important lessons to be learned from Benghazi, and I'm confident that it will be done over time. Are there wanton criminals to be strung up and punished? I honestly don't think so. However, I'm sure there are circumstances where poor decisions were made. Overall, I'm more interested in the changes that will be made to mitigate the possibility of a similar recurrence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3538

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One thing that the right media is hoping we don't know about US Embassy staff is how few of them have the level of protection given the Libyan Ambassador. There has been at least one other staff killed in Yemen and likely others this year that barely make the news.
The Right Media is misleading us about the RELATIVE danger faced by this one guy because they have little else left from the election nonsense to use to sell soap.
The Embassy people worldwide eat in restaurants, shop, go to movies and make easy targets. The bad guys were amateur assholes. They went after this guy in a steel safe room, better protection than almost any Embassy person gets at any time, as apart of an attack that included a secret CIA facility.
Does the Right media care in the least about the numerous embassy staff killed worldwide through the years?
Nope.
Screw em unless it can be twisted into blame on Obama.
A small force with a lot of explosives can briefly storm any outlying US Embassy as long as they don't mind dying. This has always been true and will continue for the future. The fake news hopes you think that Benghazi was somehow not typical and that was Obamas fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1916
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

keycocker wrote:
One thing that the right media is hoping we don't know about US Embassy staff is how few of them have the level of protection given the Libyan Ambassador. There has been at least one other staff killed in Yemen and likely others this year that barely make the news.
The Right Media is misleading us about the RELATIVE danger faced by this one guy because they have little else left from the election nonsense to use to sell soap.
The Embassy people worldwide eat in restaurants, shop, go to movies and make easy targets. The bad guys were amateur assholes. They went after this guy in a steel safe room, better protection than almost any Embassy person gets at any time, as apart of an attack that included a secret CIA facility.
Does the Right media care in the least about the numerous embassy staff killed worldwide through the years?
Nope.
Screw em unless it can be twisted into blame on Obama.
A small force with a lot of explosives can briefly storm any outlying US Embassy as long as they don't mind dying. This has always been true and will continue for the future. The fake news hopes you think that Benghazi was somehow not typical and that was Obamas fault.

Heh, not surprising, this angle was inevitable that somebody was going to bring up, 'it's a dangerous place, people might get killed', yeah, like when was that ever considered as part of the job description presented to the ambassador? Really, do you really believe that, eventhough he was an unarmed representitive of our country, in a supposed secure area?
Seriously?
If that is the case, anybody who wants to be an ambassador in a delicate country is nothing but a fool, in this day and age.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3538

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 5:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your logic is perfect and those who are fooling with you will be glad you prefer partisan logic to hearing about the real world from those who have been there.
I spent my life among expatriates all over the world. Plenty of our crowd are present or former embassy staff.
My wife for example.
I applied to State and the possibility of getting hurt in a foreign assignment is mentioned on the initial paperwork they give you before taking the tests.
If you are not down with that they want you to drop out before applying.
It is dangerous to take foreign assignments with State ,my brother, or to go to those countries just to travel and make friends with embassy staff.
We get hurt sometimes.
There are hundreds or thousands of Americans in Libya right now, along with numerous Euro expats.
They are not locked in a steel room. They are shopping in the market.
I am a real world conservative, by the way.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5570

PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NW--you are still a paranoid and biased guy who ignores the larger context. From page 27, here are all of the attacks on embassies during Republican administrations that didn't raise your ire:

Quote:
What complaints did you make about Ronald Reagan when 241 people died in an attack on our barracks in Beirut? What complaints did you make when a soldier died in the April 5, 1986 bombing of a Berlin disco? http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0406c.asp

And then there is shrub. According to this site, there were 12 attacks on embassies during his tenure: http://www.usmessageboard.com/middle-east-general/246760-twelve-u-s-embassy-attacks-during-george-w-bush-administration.html. I didn't know that--but I did know that he ignored bin Laden despite the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993--he wasn't President. But he was president when the Cole was bombed in 2000. Up until that point, I think that we can consider both Reagan and Bush's failures underestimation rather than negligence. But after that? Negligence to close the door to your national security staff working on finding bin Laden. I had a friend who survived both WTC bombings. Bush was negligent. It might not have mattered, given the fact that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies weren't working together. That was incompetence. We didn't hear from you right wing chicken hawks when Bush said don't bother me any more about this guy that blew up a couple embassies, the WTC once, and the US Cole.


You Faux fans keeping hoping for some traction.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 31, 32, 33 ... 80, 81, 82  Next
Page 32 of 82

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group