PDA

View Full Version : US ambassador to Libya and 3 embassy staff members reportedly killed in Libya



txradioguy
09-12-2012, 07:09 AM
http://photos.state.gov/libraries/libya/19452/images/j_christopher_stevens.jpg

DEVELOPING: The U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other embassy staff members were reportedly killed Tuesday in an attack on the Libyan city of Benghazi, Reuters and AP report citing a Libyan official.

Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland tells Fox News they do not yet have information on the reports of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens' death at the moment. The U.S. Embassy in Tripoli says they can only confirm there was an attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi and one State Department employee was killed, which Secretary of State Clinton said in a statement Tuesday.

The officials tell the Associated Press Ambassador Stevens was killed Tuesday night when he and a group of embassy employees went to the consulate to try to evacuate staff. The protesters were firing gunshots and rocket propelled grenades. All of the officials -- three in all -- hold senior security positions in Benghazi.

They are deputy interior minister for eastern Libya Wanis al-Sharaf; Benghazi security chief Abdel-Basit Haroun; and Benghazi city council and security official Ahmed Bousinia.

Ambassador Stevens was appointed as ambassador to Libya in May 2012, according to an online State Department biography.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/us-ambassador-to-libya-and-3-embassy-staff-members-reportedly-killed-in-libya/

SarasotaRepub
09-12-2012, 07:28 AM
What POS scum.

SarasotaRepub
09-12-2012, 07:49 AM
Fearless Leader:



President Obama "strongly condemns the outrageous attack" that killed U.S.
Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.



Yeah!!! That'll show em!!! :rolleyes:

RIP to those killed.

Zathras
09-12-2012, 07:50 AM
And if we had a real president instead of the empty suit currently residing in the White House our response would be swift, decisive and violent. Instead of punishing the Libyans with asset freezing, foreign aid stoppage and military action for this act of war, our leaders will just send a letter of commendation and do nothing else.

txradioguy
09-12-2012, 08:04 AM
The Romney campaign needs to tie this to Obama as the result of his support of the so called Arab Spring.

Gina
09-12-2012, 08:32 AM
And if we had a real president instead of the empty suit currently residing in the White House our response would be swift, decisive and violent. Instead of punishing the Libyans with asset freezing, foreign aid stoppage and military action for this act of war, our leaders will just send a letter of commendation and do nothing else.

Under the Obama administration, we're much like the UN. :apologetic:

Rockntractor
09-12-2012, 09:37 AM
The embassy in Iran ended it for Carter, we were tired of waking up day after day to the shame that Carter had allowed, I remember the news reports with the people pleading for their lives before I went to work and again when I came home, it was like a dripping faucet.
People were ready to vote for Reagen, Carter's own people were tired of him, these people can't die in vain, this has to be a wake up call to throw out this disgraceful Trojan horse their Arab spring has given us, wake up Dhimmis throw Obama out of power!

txradioguy
09-12-2012, 09:52 AM
Death toll is up to 5 now.

txradioguy
09-12-2012, 09:58 AM
Drudge has a photo on the front page of the terrorists carrying Ambassador Steven's body down the street.

The monsters posted it to Facebook.

Hubie
09-12-2012, 10:13 AM
President Obama "strongly condemns the outrageous attack" that killed U.S.
Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

Fuck you, Obama. I hope this ruins what's left to ruin of your joke of a presidency. Worst. President. Ever.

txradioguy
09-12-2012, 10:25 AM
Reports are coming in now that two of those killed with the Ambassador were Marines.

Odysseus
09-12-2012, 11:03 AM
KGS Nightwatch had some comments about the attack on the US embassy in Cairo, which was triggered by the same event:


Egypt-US: Protesters scaled the walls of the US embassy in Cairo on Tuesday and pulled down the American flag during a protest over what they said was a film being produced in the United States that insulted Prophet Mohammad, witnesses said. In place of the US flag, the protesters tried to raise a black flag with the words "There is no God but Allah and Mohammad is his messenger," a Reuters reporter said. Once the U.S. flag was hauled down, protesters tore it up, with some showing off small pieces to television cameras. Then others burned remains.

A statement by the US embassy blamed the makers of the film for, essentially, bringing this violence down on the US embassy. "We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others," the U.S. embassy said in its statement.

Comment: The mainstream news services have covered the details about the storming of the US Embassy compound in Cairo. Several points are worth comment.

The first is the US Embassy's statement either is a meaningless personal statement by a scared staff or a poorly informed misrepresentation of US law. It is settled US case law, for example, that neo-Nazis can march in Jewish suburbs in any city in the US under specified conditions. No religion gets a pass. An ambassador should know that. He also should have denounced those who use religion to justify venting their anti-American sentiments in violence and destruction. The result is the US embassy appears to be apologizing to misguided, out of control rioters who were allowed by Egyptian authorities to violate US sovereign territory.
Apologies by the innocent victims of violence are acts of submission that stoke demands for greater acts of submission, even in US culture. To some Muslims, including groups in Pakistan, the very existence of the US or Israel is an affront to their interpretation of Islam and "hurts their religious beliefs." There is no way to avoid hurting their religious sensibilities.
Finally, no news services reported the presence of the Egyptian police or paramilitary security forces or any effort to control the rioters. No news clips showed Egyptian security personnel. Some news services in the past have reported that the civil disorders of the past year have resulted in the destruction of the Egyptian civil police as an effective force for civil order.


This is starting to look like 1979 all over again, although in Libya's case, the government immediately issued an apology. This isn't Iran, where Khomeini lauded the embassy attackers and supported them. However, Egypt is the real issue, as the stakes are much higher there. The Muslim Brotherhood has made no attempt to prevent these acts, and is most likely responsible for them. Morsi will use this as a pretext to consolidate even more power and purge pro-US members of the military, and may even permit an embassy takeover, a la Iran, if he perceives an opportunity. The big question for our media is, did Obama's policies of "leading from behind" in Libya and throwing Mubarak under the bus, as Carter did with the Shah, lead to the same kind of attacks on our embassies? Don't hold your breath for detailed coverage of that.

ironhorsedriver
09-12-2012, 11:12 AM
Three Carriers in the region. Alpha strikes would be good initial response.

m00
09-12-2012, 11:33 AM
:Taps4:

FlaGator
09-12-2012, 11:37 AM
And if we had a real president instead of the empty suit currently residing in the White House our response would be swift, decisive and violent. Instead of punishing the Libyans with asset freezing, foreign aid stoppage and military action for this act of war, our leaders will just send a letter of commendation and do nothing else.

Who should the attack be directed at?

Odysseus
09-12-2012, 12:11 PM
Who should the attack be directed at?

It will depend on what Libya does. The Prime Minister apologized, which is a good first step. The next step is to track down the perpetrators and bring them to justice. If the Libyans do that, then we don't have to do anything, as it will have been an internal element that they are dealing with. If they don't do it, then they are accessories to the attack, which is an act of war, and the whole country becomes a legitmate target.

Egypt is more dangerous, because from what we can see, there has been no official response to the attack on our embassy. If the Lbyan perps are not dealt with by their government, then we can expect more attacks in Egypt, as well as Tunisia, Algeria and pretty much any other Muslim state where we have a presence. My concern is that we may end up with a repeat of the Iranian hostage crisis somewhere in the Middle East. The worst place would be Egypt, but any of the other regional players would be ugly.

Another thing to watch is how this plays out in the rest of the region. Turkey has been Islamicizing for the last decade, and I would not be surprised if there was at least a protest at our embassy there, not to mention the NATO facilities. Jordan is pretty moderate, but if the Islamists see an opportunity, we can expect them to try to stir up anti-American, and by extension, anti-monarchy, sentiment. Kuwait will most likely not see any major activities, unless the Kuwaitis decide to pay some Bangladeshi servants to riot. Saudi Arabia will most likely not have any activities, since they are funding te rest of this, and the regime there will crack down hard on any attempt at independent Islamic activities.

FWIW, I suspect that the CENTCOM THREATCON is probably maxed out right now.

noonwitch
09-12-2012, 12:26 PM
Who should the attack be directed at?

Exactly why there won't be an immediate retaliation.

At least the Egyptian protestors were not armed and didn't kill anyone. They were showing the protests on the news this morning, and the Egyptian security forces were at work by then (I know it took them a while to respond). The protests had become pretty much verbal, but most of the crowd was just milling around and talking on their cell phones by that point. "Look, Mom, I'm on The Today Show!".

ABC in Georgia
09-12-2012, 12:32 PM
Fuck you, Obama. I hope this ruins what's left to ruin of your joke of a presidency. Worst. President. Ever.

Dear God I hate this man!

Hubie ... I never personally use the "F" word, but I have *no* problem quoting it! ... :evil-grin:

So will, several times!


Fuck you, Obama.
Fuck you, Obama.
Fuck you, Obama.
Fuck you, Obama.

~ ABC :vomit:

Generation Why?
09-12-2012, 12:34 PM
What. The. Fuck?

Bailey
09-12-2012, 12:34 PM
To add insult to injury the magic negro gets Hillary to apologize to the poor scum of the earth muslims.

TVDOC
09-12-2012, 01:49 PM
We can hope that this will become Obama's "Jimmy Carter moment".......

doc

FlaGator
09-12-2012, 02:00 PM
It will depend on what Libya does. The Prime Minister apologized, which is a good first step. The next step is to track down the perpetrators and bring them to justice. If the Libyans do that, then we don't have to do anything, as it will have been an internal element that they are dealing with. If they don't do it, then they are accessories to the attack, which is an act of war, and the whole country becomes a legitmate target.

Egypt is more dangerous, because from what we can see, there has been no official response to the attack on our embassy. If the Lbyan perps are not dealt with by their government, then we can expect more attacks in Egypt, as well as Tunisia, Algeria and pretty much any other Muslim state where we have a presence. My concern is that we may end up with a repeat of the Iranian hostage crisis somewhere in the Middle East. The worst place would be Egypt, but any of the other regional players would be ugly.

Another thing to watch is how this plays out in the rest of the region. Turkey has been Islamicizing for the last decade, and I would not be surprised if there was at least a protest at our embassy there, not to mention the NATO facilities. Jordan is pretty moderate, but if the Islamists see an opportunity, we can expect them to try to stir up anti-American, and by extension, anti-monarchy, sentiment. Kuwait will most likely not see any major activities, unless the Kuwaitis decide to pay some Bangladeshi servants to riot. Saudi Arabia will most likely not have any activities, since they are funding te rest of this, and the regime there will crack down hard on any attempt at independent Islamic activities.

FWIW, I suspect that the CENTCOM THREATCON is probably maxed out right now.

I've been wondering why there wasn't a large Marine presence at the Embassy. One would think that would be a prerequisite to having a embassy in a potentially hostle environment.

txradioguy
09-12-2012, 02:27 PM
Who should the attack be directed at?

Well considering the MB is pulling the strings on the Government now...Parliament would be a good start.

Then any known military strong holds in Benghazi.

txradioguy
09-12-2012, 02:28 PM
I've been wondering why there wasn't a large Marine presence at the Embassy. One would think that would be a prerequisite to having a embassy in a potentially hostle environment.

There probably is at the Embassy itself. Not so much at a Consulate.

If I had to make an educated guess...the two Marines that died were the Ambassador's PSD.

Molon Labe
09-12-2012, 03:53 PM
This is pretty sick bunch. To hell with them.

I cannot believe that idiot McCain called these tards "Libyan Patriots" last year.

Adam Wood
09-12-2012, 04:10 PM
There probably is at the Embassy itself. Not so much at a Consulate.

If I had to make an educated guess...the two Marines that died were the Ambassador's PSD.The Marines are denying any Marines were killed in Benghazi (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/marine-unit-dispatched-to-secure-consulate-in-benghazi-after-deadly-attacks/). My understanding is that our consulate was ... get this: depending upon the Libyan security forces to protect the consulate. :livid:

Egypt is a whole different story. When I'm king, Marines at embassies will have live rounds at all times with standing orders to plug anyone who comes over a wall. I can only assume that the MSD was pulled back with the rest of the embassy personnel, because otherwise, that can only mean that those Marines were there in that embassy compound and were ordered not to engage people as they invaded our sovereign turf. And of the latter is the case, then boy do I ever feel for those Marines. I can't imagine anything more disheartening than to have to be a Marine standing there watching this go on and not be able to respond.

Bailey
09-12-2012, 04:13 PM
I am reading that obama hasn't attended a Intel briefing for over a week, how does such a president not get impeached?


I don't blame obama for this, I blame the morons who voted for him. We are doomed if we cant turn this around.

FlaGator
09-12-2012, 04:15 PM
The Marines are denying any Marines were killed in Benghazi (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/marine-unit-dispatched-to-secure-consulate-in-benghazi-after-deadly-attacks/). My understanding is that our consulate was ... get this: depending upon the Libyan security forces to protect the consulate. :livid:

Egypt is a whole different story. When I'm king, Marines at embassies will have live rounds at all times with standing orders to plug anyone who comes over a wall. I can only assume that the MSD was pulled back with the rest of the embassy personnel, because otherwise, that can only mean that those Marines were there in that embassy compound and were ordered not to engage people as they invaded our sovereign turf. And of the latter is the case, then boy do I ever feel for those Marines. I can't imagine anything more disheartening than to have to be a Marine standing there watching this go on and not be able to respond.

Well said!

Hubie
09-12-2012, 04:22 PM
Dear God I hate this man!

Hubie ... I never personally use the "F" word, but I have *no* problem quoting it! ... :evil-grin:

So will, several times!



~ ABC :vomit:

I've been trying to clean up my language, but when it comes to Obumbler, it often is difficult to succeed.

Generation Why?
09-12-2012, 04:29 PM
The Marines are denying any Marines were killed in Benghazi (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/marine-unit-dispatched-to-secure-consulate-in-benghazi-after-deadly-attacks/). My understanding is that our consulate was ... get this: depending upon the Libyan security forces to protect the consulate. :livid:

Egypt is a whole different story. When I'm king, Marines at embassies will have live rounds at all times with standing orders to plug anyone who comes over a wall. I can only assume that the MSD was pulled back with the rest of the embassy personnel, because otherwise, that can only mean that those Marines were there in that embassy compound and were ordered not to engage people as they invaded our sovereign turf. And of the latter is the case, then boy do I ever feel for those Marines. I can't imagine anything more disheartening than to have to be a Marine standing there watching this go on and not be able to respond.


Or we could not be in MENA that way the Muslims only have each other to kill...

Adam Wood
09-12-2012, 04:41 PM
Or we could not be in MENA that way the Muslims only have each other to kill...I'm not willing to close up all of our embassies in the Middle East and North Africa just because we have a dimwit for a President who can't manage foreign policy as well as your average eighth-grader. We still have American citizens who live and work in these areas.

The right thing to do was to open fire on the bastards in the Egyptian embassy compound and immediately hold a press conference to say that this is what happens when you come onto American soil and try to pull this crap. Had we done that when Egypt happened yesterday, then Benghazi would not have happened last night.

NJCardFan
09-12-2012, 05:36 PM
There may be security issues in Libya. What I've been hearing is that the ambassador and his staff were shuttled out of the building and brought to a safe house. The Islamists knew exactly where to find them, stormed the house, and the rest is history. These attacks are attacks on sovereign U.S. soil and our president's response is to pander, appease, and apologize then make an empty threat. If nothing is done, it will be Iran 1979 all over again and America will be looked at as a paper tiger as it was under Carter. 4 more years of this will be an utter disaster for this country, however, this action is not surprising. Having just seen Obama 2016, it's all explained there and foretold. So, again, all you Paulbots here, still think another 4 years of Obama is worth you voting another way out of principle?

SarasotaRepub
09-12-2012, 06:43 PM
The way this is playing out should surprise no one. We have an amateur in charge of the country and these Muzzie scum can smell weakness.

This is a disgrace but you can be sure the press will continue to cover for oBAMA. Except Fox of course.

Hawkgirl
09-12-2012, 06:57 PM
Not to politicize this but, during the entire democrat convention, they were constant digs about how the world now loves us under Obama. How is that working for ya now? The democrats will never get it that showing weakness to these foreign countries only results in these scenarios.
If this happened under Bush's presidency (but didn't), I'm sure there would have been a swift message.

ABC in Georgia
09-12-2012, 07:28 PM
Not to politicize this but ... *snip* The democrats will never get it that showing weakness to these foreign countries only results in these scenarios.


Hawkgirl ... "politicize" all you like. You are 100% correct!

I will reiterate, at every opportunity as many times as I can, as I do back here in RL,

my favorite quote in his *own* words:

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction. ... "

~ ABC

Rockntractor
09-12-2012, 10:11 PM
The more I hear tonight on the news the madder I get, now there is a huge mob forming outside of the us embassy in Cairo, I hope to God there are no Americans in there.

Adam Wood
09-12-2012, 10:17 PM
The more I hear tonight on the news the madder I get, now there is a huge mob forming outside of the us embassy in Cairo, I hope to God there are no Americans in there.I hope that there are about 250 Marines there, with about 1000 rounds each.

SaintLouieWoman
09-12-2012, 10:37 PM
The more I hear tonight on the news the madder I get, now there is a huge mob forming outside of the us embassy in Cairo, I hope to God there are no Americans in there.

I'm furious and hope that the rest of America is smart enough to see what is happening. What got me the angriest is listening to Obama's opening remarks for maybe a minute or so tonight at a FUNDRAISER and campaign stop in Las Vegas. The Coward in Chief said "We had a bad day".

Bad day? What in the hell does he think it was for our ambassador who was killed and dragged around by those animals? And instead of being in Washington, getting intelligence briefings, planning what to do, he's fundraising and campaigning.

It's all about Obama, isn't it? What an arrogant self-centered amateur. See, I can say what I think without saying the f word online. But oh, have I been saying it at home.

Obama is a weak disgrace to our nation. They called him a wimp on Hannity's show tonight.

Rockntractor
09-12-2012, 10:54 PM
I'm furious and hope that the rest of America is smart enough to see what is happening. What got me the angriest is listening to Obama's opening remarks for maybe a minute or so tonight at a FUNDRAISER and campaign stop in Las Vegas. The Coward in Chief said "We had a bad day".

Bad day? What in the hell does he think it was for our ambassador who was killed and dragged around by those animals? And instead of being in Washington, getting intelligence briefings, planning what to do, he's fundraising and campaigning.

It's all about Obama, isn't it? What an arrogant self-centered amateur. See, I can say what I think without saying the f word online. But oh, have I been saying it at home.

Obama is a weak disgrace to our nation. They called him a wimp on Hannity's show tonight.

Michelle Malkin had the proper attitude toward our Muslim overlord tonight and I agreed with every word she said on Hannity.

SaintLouieWoman
09-12-2012, 10:59 PM
Michelle Malcolm had the proper attitude toward our Muslim overlord tonight and I agreed with every word she said on Hannity.
So did I. She was really fired up. Who with a heart and a brain wouldn't be?

Hubie
09-13-2012, 12:43 AM
Michelle Malcolm had the proper attitude toward our Muslim overlord tonight and I agreed with every word she said on Hannity.

Do you mean Michelle Malkin?

Rockntractor
09-13-2012, 12:49 AM
Do you mean Michelle Malkin?

yes

txradioguy
09-13-2012, 04:08 AM
Or we could not be in MENA that way the Muslims only have each other to kill...

Wow...really? That's about the most retarded thing I've heard you say..and that's saying something.

You sound like those mouth breathing retards on DU that think if we just kisssed more Muslim ass they'd not kill so many of us.

If you were any kind of scholar of that area and knew the history...you'd know that we could pull out of every Embassy in that area...bnring all our troops home and they would still hate us...they'd still plot to kindnap kill and terrorize us.

Thyey don't do it because we're over there. They do it because of who we are and what we stand for.

By your thinking we should have pulled out of Germany when Libyans tossed a grenade into a Disco and killed IIRC 4 soldiers. I mean after all if we pulled out they'd only have Germans to kill right?

Or how about the Lockerbie Pan Am bombing. Should we pull our Air Force units from England because then all they'd have to kill are Brits?

You should really find another place to study this issues other than the Ron Paul School of Foreign Policy.

Molon Labe
09-13-2012, 08:15 AM
If you were any kind of scholar of that area and knew the history...you'd know that we could pull out of every Embassy in that area...bnring all our troops home and they would still hate us...they'd still plot to kindnap kill and terrorize us.

Thyey don't do it because we're over there. They do it because of who we are and what we stand for.



Bullshit.

Global Jihad isn't simply exacerbated by being a free society. Ayatollah Khomeini tried to garner support for Jihad worldwide based on the "freedom" schtick in the 80's and he had very little. When did it pick up traction? When the US started encroaching further east during the Clinton years.

So nobodies trying to destroy the US simply because we have women who bare their tits, and eat at McDonalds, go to NFL football games, watch Honey boo boo child and use their 1st Amendment right to rail about about useless tripe.

So for someone who's critical of non scholarship, you have a lot of work to do:

The Soviet General staff wrote about exactly why terrorism against them increased there in the 80's. It was because they were in Afghanistan. When they left, it ended. And the Soviets were hardly "FREE". The Bear went over the Mountain (http://www.amazon.com/Bear-Went-over-Mountain-Afghanistan/dp/0788146653)

and, if all that you say is true then why would the book BLOWBACK (http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/Repository/CSA%20Reading%20List.pdf) be on the US Army's Chief of Staff Reading list for all Officers? It's about the things we "do" that lead to consequences. Why would the US Army be promoting a book that is in direct contrast to your belief?




Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today. - Ronald Reagan

noonwitch
09-13-2012, 08:46 AM
Bullshit.

Global Jihad isn't simply exacerbated by being a free society. Ayatollah Khomeini tried to garner support for Jihad worldwide based on the "freedom" schtick in the 80's and he had very little. When did it pick up traction? When the US started encroaching further east during the Clinton years.

So nobodies trying to destroy the US simply because we have women who bare their tits, and eat at McDonalds, go to NFL football games, watch Honey boo boo child and use their 1st Amendment right to rail about about useless tripe.

So for someone who's critical of non scholarship, you have a lot of work to do:

The Soviet General staff wrote about exactly why terrorism against them increased there in the 80's. It was because they were in Afghanistan. When they left, it ended. And the Soviets were hardly "FREE". The Bear went over the Mountain (http://www.amazon.com/Bear-Went-over-Mountain-Afghanistan/dp/0788146653)

and, if all that you say is true then why would the book BLOWBACK (http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/Repository/CSA%20Reading%20List.pdf) be on the US Army's Chief of Staff Reading list for all Officers? It's about the things we "do" that lead to consequences. Why would the US Army be promoting a book that is in direct contrast to your belief?

Great response!!!

txradioguy
09-13-2012, 09:39 AM
Bullshit.

You should have stopped right there Lube. Seriously.


Global Jihad isn't simply exacerbated by being a free society.

Yes it is. They despise the freedom we have what they percieve as a loose culture..especially when it comes to women. But it goes much deeper than that.


Ayatollah Khomeini tried to garner support for Jihad worldwide based on the "freedom" schtick in the 80's and he had very little.

Tell that to Arafat...and Hezbollah...the Taliban traces its roots to the 80's. Then there was Munich before that. Tell Terry Anderson and others kidnapped and held..and the families of those killed in Beruit that what you call a "sctick" had no traction in the 80's.

I doubt they'd agree with you.



When did it pick up traction? When the US started encroaching further east during the Clinton years.

Nope...it started way earlier than that Lube. Just because your memory only goes back to 1992...doesn't mean that's when radical Islamic terrorism started.


So nobodies trying to destroy the US simply because we have women who bare their tits, and eat at McDonalds, go to NFL football games, watch Honey boo boo child and use their 1st Amendment right to rail about about useless tripe.

Let me guess it's because of our foreign policy right?

I see you studied at the same Ron Paul school for foreign policy idiots that Generation Wha did.

:rolleyes:


So for someone who's critical of non scholarship, you have a lot of work to do:

That was a slap at his serious lack of knowledge on the subject...looks like you display the sme problem. Typical of Paulbots.


The Soviet General staff wrote about exactly why terrorism against them increased there in the 80's. It was because they were in Afghanistan. When they left, it ended. And the Soviets were hardly "FREE". The Bear went over the Mountain (http://www.amazon.com/Bear-Went-over-Mountain-Afghanistan/dp/0788146653)

and, if all that you say is true then why would the book BLOWBACK (http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/Repository/CSA%20Reading%20List.pdf) be on the US Army's Chief of Staff Reading list for all Officers? It's about the things we "do" that lead to consequences. Why would the US Army be promoting a book that is in direct contrast to your belief?

I know about the books. Read a couple of them actually. It's their opinion. Doesn't mean it's right or takes into consideration all of the driving forces. General officers tend to have a worse long term memory than you do when it comes to these issues. And depending on who is writing the book...it could very welkl be written in such a way that it pleases some Libtard senator on a comittee that determines whether the author gets his next star or not.

THAT is why the Army would be pimping a book like that...because the upper echelons have gotten just as wrapped up in the "we can't offend them...its our fault" PC bullshit as anyone.

The ONLY reason you're agreeing with what they say is because it fits your Ron Paul blame America first mentality.

txradioguy
09-13-2012, 09:40 AM
Great response!!!

Imagine that...a Libtard and a Liberaltarian agreeing. No wonder Libs love Ron Paul as much as his own cult followers.

Molon Labe
09-13-2012, 10:29 AM
You should have stopped right there Lube. Seriously.



I know about the books. Read a couple of them actually. It's their opinion. Doesn't mean it's right or takes into consideration all of the driving forces. General officers tend to have a worse long term memory than you do when it comes to these issues. And depending on who is writing the book...it could very welkl be written in such a way that it pleases some Libtard senator on a comittee that determines whether the author gets his next star or not.



Yep Blame America First. LOL!

I guess that since it comes from the CIAs own assesment they must fall into that category eh?

FFS........They termed the phrase Blowback.

The CIAs own head of Bin Laden studies said this:


In the long run, we're not safer because we’re still operating on the assumption that we’re hated because of our freedoms, when in fact we’re hated because of our actions in the Islamic world. There’s our military presence in Islamic countries, the perception that we control the Muslim world’s oil production, our support for Israel and for countries that oppress Muslims such as China, Russia, and India, and our own support for Arab tyrannies."


President Bush's Secretary of Defense asked the Defense Science Board (http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/index.htm) to convene to study the issue and they came to this conclusion:


American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.

Muslims do not "hate our freedom," but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf states.


Furthermore, in the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering. U.S. actions appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in order to best serve American national interests at the expense of truly Muslim selfdetermination.

Therefore, the dramatic narrative since 9/11 has essentially borne out the entire radical Islamist bill of particulars. American actions and the flow of events have elevated the authority of the Jihadi insurgents and tended to ratify their legitimacy among Muslims. Fighting groups portray themselves as the true defenders of an Ummah (the entire Muslim community) invaded and under attack – to broad public support.


Ok..then if it isn't because that major world powers encroach in their sphere of influence, then give me some scholarly government or independantly recognised book that the Mooslims want to destroy our freedoms cause I own my property, like to look at girls in thongs and drink Beer and spit up on weekends

Then you can also tell me why this theory doesn't apply to other free societies like New Zealand, Holland, and Switzerland.

Oh....and try to do it witout mentioning the words "Paul" or "liberal" or "Blame America", it's weak and the equivalent of an argument of "nuh ugh" lol....

wasp69
09-13-2012, 10:54 AM
Ok..then if it isn't because that major world powers encroach in their sphere of influence, then give me some scholarly government or independantly recognised book that the Mooslims want to destroy our freedoms cause I own my property, like to look at girls in thongs and drink Beer and spit up on weekends


Maybe you can help me out with this: America stood idly by while dictators were deposed in Libya, Egypt, etc, obama has told Israel to piss up a rope many times, has apologized profusely for our existence for almost 4 years, and the mohammadian savages still destroyed property and killed an ambassador. An ambassador, I might add, who worked diligently aiding the "rebels" that deposed Khadaffi (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/chris-stevens-us-libya-ambassador-killed-142949456.html).

So, American "policy" has been changed to hands off and they still did this. Why?

txradioguy
09-13-2012, 11:10 AM
Yep Blame America First. LOL!

I guess that since it comes from the CIAs own assesment they must fall into that category eh?

FFS........They termed the phrase Blowback.

The CIAs own head of Bin Laden studies said this:

The CIA? Really? The same CIA that hasn't been able to accurately give us info on any attack or invasion in recent menory?

Hell they didn't even see what happened two days ago coming.

And yet you want us to believe that we're supposed to take them at their word on this?

Oh yeah that's right we're supposed to believe them cause it supports your crackpot isolationist crap.





President Bush's Secretary of Defense asked the Defense Science Board (http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/index.htm) to convene to study the issue and they came to this conclusion:

Again...these so called "think tanks"...never seem to deal with reality. It's like the conduct their "studies" in a vaccum.

But because it backs up your Ron Paul ideology...we should take it as holy writ.




Ok..then if it isn't because that major world powers encroach in their sphere of influence, then give me some scholarly government or independantly recognised book that the Mooslims want to destroy our freedoms cause I own my property, like to look at girls in thongs and drink Beer and spit up on weekends


Oh....and try to do it witout mentioning the words "Paul" or "liberal" or "Blame America", it's weak and the equivalent of an argument of "nuh ugh" lol....

You know...you...like the Libtards that are allowed to post here...never seem to learn that when I talk about this stuff...I actually do research and have credible stuff to back up what I say.

As for pinging you for being a Ronulan...deal with it...you choose to lip synch his backwards ass view of foreign "policy"...expect to get called on it.


Islam is not conducive to Western or modern society. It is a belief system that is based on medieval source documents written in a far bloodthirstier and illiberal time. Too many of the freedoms we in the West take for granted are considered Haraam, and Islam is intent on getting rid of all of them.

The rest of your desperately needed lesson on Islam is here:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/haraam---what-islam-hates-about-the-west.html


Then you can also tell me why this theory doesn't apply to other free societies like New Zealand,

New Zealand is an isolated Island country in the middle of nowhere. However they DO have terrorist organizations operating within their country.



Holland,

Holland = The Neatherlands and they have had riots over a cartoon drawing you ignorant ass. They are up to their necks in problems with radical Islam.



and Switzerland.


Jewish leaders from around the world were enraged when Muslims protesting in Switzerland last weekend used the yellow Star of David symbol as part of their demonstration against discrimination.

http://cdn.radicalislam.org/blog/radical-islam/muslims-switzerland-demonstrate-yellow-star-david


Try again Lube. Your weak attempt to pick three obscure countries as strawmen to prove your point failed miserably.

Lanie
09-13-2012, 11:10 AM
So, everything is Obama's fault now? Islamist extremists weren't around before Obama at all. I remember when Obama first became the president, terrorists went and destroyed the world trade center. Oh wait, that wasn't on Obama's watch. Seriously, you all act like a bunch of DUers blaming everything in the world on the President you don't like. Don't care to discuss it like an adult. Don't think it would work on you all. Seriously, you all should be ashamed of yourselves. Obama condemned this act.

Getting a little bit tired of the crap's don't stink party.

txradioguy
09-13-2012, 11:17 AM
So, everything is Obama's fault now? Islamist extremists weren't around before Obama at all. I remember when Obama first became the president, terrorists went and destroyed the world trade center. Oh wait, that wasn't on Obama's watch. Seriously, you all act like a bunch of DUers blaming everything in the world on the President you don't like. Don't care to discuss it like an adult. Don't think it would work on you all. Seriously, you all should be ashamed of yourselves.

Obama's policies..his support of radical Islam in Egypt and Libya and his continued snubs to our lone ally in the region have motivated these attacks.

By doing nothing..by backing the Muslim Brotherhood...he's told the terrorists it's ok to do this without repercussions.

So yes Bridget...it IS his fault.



Obama condemned this act.

Clinton condemned allllllllll the attacks against the U.S. and it's citizens and embassies too...with almost the same words as Obama.

They're empty words. The terrorists know that. Hence the reason the Embassy in Egypt is under siege again today and they are burnig the American flag of our Embassy in Yemen.


Getting a little bit tired of the crap's don't stink party.

Finally getting tired of the Dems Bridget? I mean after all they are the party that refuses to take the blam for anything and continue to blam a Preaident who has been out of office almost four years now for all of America's problems.

wasp69
09-13-2012, 11:31 AM
So, everything is Obama's fault now? Islamist extremists weren't around before Obama at all. I remember when Obama first became the president, terrorists went and destroyed the world trade center. Oh wait, that wasn't on Obama's watch. Seriously, you all act like a bunch of DUers blaming everything in the world on the President you don't like. Don't care to discuss it like an adult. Don't think it would work on you all. Seriously, you all should be ashamed of yourselves. Obama condemned this act.

Getting a little bit tired of the crap's don't stink party.

Tell me, Bridget/Lanie/Jade, do you think this would have happened with an apology and a half assed threat under President Bush? Think we'll see anything of significance come from obama in response or will this be a replay of Carter's debacle in 1979? Keep in mind that Carter helped oust the Shah and install Kohmeni before you take it upon yourself to answer.

Gina
09-13-2012, 12:24 PM
America is a paper tiger. -OBL

I miss peace through strength.

Molon Labe
09-13-2012, 12:26 PM
Maybe you can help me out with this: America stood idly by while dictators were deposed in Libya, Egypt, etc, obama has told Israel to piss up a rope many times, has apologized profusely for our existence for almost 4 years, and the mohammadian savages still destroyed property and killed an ambassador. An ambassador, I might add, who worked diligently aiding the "rebels" that deposed Khadaffi (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/chris-stevens-us-libya-ambassador-killed-142949456.html).

So, American "policy" has been changed to hands off and they still did this. Why?

Hardly. The CIA has been right in the middle of all of this. We even backed those rebels who did this. I beg you to do some research and see just how involved they have been.

I don't give a rats ass what Obama has said...apology what not....His administration has been right up the asses of those overthrows since day one. For gods sake even McCain praised the rebels in Libya last year. The same Rebels that now killed this Ambassador and US citizens.

wasp69
09-13-2012, 12:52 PM
Hardly. The CIA has been right in the middle of all of this.


Yes, I know.



We even backed those rebels who did this.


Yep, have many friends who were sent that way.



I beg you to do some research and see just how involved they have been.


Thank you for your concern, I am up to date on what has/has not been done in Libya and Egypt.



I don't give a rats ass what Obama has said...apology what not....His administration has been right up the asses of those overthrows since day one. For gods sake even McCain praised the rebels in Libya last year. The same Rebels that now killed this Ambassador and US citizens.


You completely missed the point. When our policy was essentially reversed and left to make things happen, more or less, on their own (ie not forcing a sympathetic or puppet government and turning up our noses at the hated Jews) the islamist savages still killed an pillaged. If we kiss their asses instead of kicking them and they still act like cavemen, what is the excuse now?

FlaGator
09-13-2012, 01:04 PM
I firmly believe that they hate America and all countries that are not Muslim. By being over there we have just sped up the process and they would have gotten around to making our lives miserable sooner or later. Muslims seek global domination and will not rest until the whole world is Islamic or they have gone the way of the dinosaurs.

Right now they are trying to assimilate Europe and the near and far east. They grow their populations in 'democratic' populations and then use their numbers to change the laws. Take a good look at Egypt... that is coming to a European country near you in the not to distant future. Get the population to vote you in and then establish control over the country and set aside democracy as a tool that has out lived it's usefulness.

Countries that don't fall this way, that resist, will face a war of conversion...

Gina
09-13-2012, 01:12 PM
I firmly believe that they hate America and all countries that are not Muslim. By being over there we have just sped up the process and they would have gotten around to making our lives miserable sooner or later. Muslims seek global domination and will not rest until the whole world is Islamic or they have gone the way of the dinosaurs.

Right now they are trying to assimilate Europe and the near and far east. They grow their populations in 'democratic' populations and then use their numbers to change the laws. Take a good look at Egypt... that is coming to a European country near you in the not to distant future. Get the population to vote you in and then establish control over the country and set aside democracy as a tool that has out lived it's usefulness.

Countries that don't fall this way, that resist, will face a war of conversion...

Indeed. And the big question is, what is America's role? What sort of country do we want to be in regard to this? Talk about encroachment, Molon what do you think Islam is doing?

wasp69
09-13-2012, 01:14 PM
Indeed. And the big question is, what is America's role? What sort of country do we want to be in regard to this? Talk about encroachment, Molon what do you think Islam is doing?

We provoked them...

Gina
09-13-2012, 01:17 PM
We provoked them...

I know he thinks that and I have prepared an answer: EVEN IF that were true, the reality is that we have to make a decision NOW as to what to do. The blame game isn't getting us anywhere.

Novaheart
09-13-2012, 01:22 PM
As of this morning I have come to believe that our response to WTC bombing was incorrect. We should model ourselves after the Borg or Michael Corleone depending upon which you can relate to. Our mistake is in hating our enemy, not because of some biblical platitude, but as a matter of logic and tactical finesse.

We should have simply ignored the WTC bombing. Yes, people died. On the bright side it got rid of those godawful skyscrapers marring the New York skyline. By our response, we have taught the Muzzies that they can drive us crazy and cost us more money and liberty than WWII in a matter of minutes. Down the road, we would exact payment for what was done, but did we do that? No, we spent money. We sacrificed liberty.

But I take responsibility for what I wanted and what I said on 9-11. I said, "Today I am glad that Al Gore didn't win. Today, I want bombs dropped on (Islam)."

txradioguy
09-13-2012, 01:54 PM
Hardly. The CIA has been right in the middle of all of this. We even backed those rebels who did this. I beg you to do some research and see just how involved they have been.


So involved that they failed to see this coming and issue any warnings.

Just like they didn't see 9/11 coming.

Just like they missed Saddam's WMD program and their plans to invade Kuwait.

Just like they didn't see....aww hell they've been wrong and blind more times than they've been right.

Molon Labe
09-13-2012, 03:19 PM
So involved that they failed to see this coming and issue any warnings.

Just like they didn't see 9/11 coming.

Just like they missed Saddam's WMD program and their plans to invade Kuwait.

Just like they didn't see....aww hell they've been wrong and blind more times than they've been right.

Then it would probably be a good idea to get the little bastards under control wouldn't it?


Look, I know fully well that I will never convince any of you that it is more than we hate "freedom". You will believe what you wish to believe. Are there those in Islam that hate western freedom?...... Yeah probably a bunch. But not enough to cause the type turmoil the M.E. is in. But if you add in another element, such as the perception real or unreal that the west is encroaching.....and you deny that encroaching into sphere's of influence doesn't exacerbate it, and help recruit against the West, then we are going to keep seeing the same thing happen over and over and over.


It's just not good foreign policy and it will eventually be our undoing. A strong National Defense has nothing to do with projecting everywhere. I'm far more concerned with our debt, economy and brothers in arms in harms way for Iraqis and Afghanis who could care less and eventually turn into Jihadists, than I am for a bunch of Muslims in caves.

I think it's a crappy religion and full of violence and backwards practices. But I am also not scared to death of it like a lot of you are, and believe that we can't take care of the wack jobs without occupying every podunk Islamic state on earth.

Get our selves energy independant and off of M.E oil.

The day we find something better than petroleum is the day we leave those rat holes and let those idiots go back to living in Caves and drawing on walls.

Odysseus
09-13-2012, 03:20 PM
And, we're seeing similar attacks in Yemen, as well. If we were smart, we'd evacuate the rest of the embassy staff in those three countries before COB today. The Friday afternoon prayers are going to be a vicious exhortation to violence, and unless the local governments intervene, the subsquent attacks will be an order of magnitude greater than what we have seen. State needs to pull those people into secure locations immediately, or they will be killed.


Drudge has a photo on the front page of the terrorists carrying Ambassador Steven's body down the street.

The monsters posted it to Facebook.

There's video elsewhere. KGS Nightwatch mentioned it in their overnight, which I'll post below.


The Marines are denying any Marines were killed in Benghazi (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/marine-unit-dispatched-to-secure-consulate-in-benghazi-after-deadly-attacks/). My understanding is that our consulate was ... get this: depending upon the Libyan security forces to protect the consulate. :livid:

Egypt is a whole different story. When I'm king, Marines at embassies will have live rounds at all times with standing orders to plug anyone who comes over a wall. I can only assume that the MSD was pulled back with the rest of the embassy personnel, because otherwise, that can only mean that those Marines were there in that embassy compound and were ordered not to engage people as they invaded our sovereign turf. And of the latter is the case, then boy do I ever feel for those Marines. I can't imagine anything more disheartening than to have to be a Marine standing there watching this go on and not be able to respond.

Again, Nightwatch discussed this. The ambassador to Egypt was apparently selected based on her well-practiced dhimmihood.


Or we could not be in MENA that way the Muslims only have each other to kill...

You really don't understand the issues at all, do you? The last time that I checked, the WTC was nowhere near the Middle East. In 2000, we provided over $100 million in emergency food aid to Afghanistan. Despite this, they provided safe haven to Bin Laden and al Qaeda while they plotted and executed the 9/11 attacks, and continued to do so despite our threat to invade. This isn't about local politics, although the local power brokers do benefit from the jihad, it's about a totalitarian death cult that has remarkable similarities to communism and Nazism, and represents a similar threat. Simply withdrawing from the world will not end that threat, but will encourage its adherents and make them bolder. Our existence as a free, non-Muslim people is our affront to them, and we cannot put enough distance between us to protect us from their hate.
We cannot defeat them by running and hiding, or paying tribute, and if we do not defeat them, then they will surely defeat, subjugate and destroy us.


KGS Nightwatch's take on the events:


Egypt-US: The day after the storming of the US Embassy, all day and night on 12 and 13 September, mainstream media aired footage of obviously unemployed Egyptian young men gathering and milling near the US Embassy in Cairo. A single security vehicle was imaged making an occasional and completely feckless foray through the gathering area, during the early morning of 13 September in Cairo. No Egyptian police or military or other security personnel were present.

Comment: The normal time for organized, violent Muslim protests is Friday afternoon, after prayers. Muslim Brotherhood leaders already have called for "non-violent" anti-US protests on Friday after prayers. Readers should expect more anti-US protests and no Egyptian security forces. The unemployed and the underemployed in Cairo are amusing themselves by protesting in the name of Islam over just about anything they think is offensive. Much larger and dangerous protests are likely after the miscreants are infused with Islamic fervor after Friday prayers. Had the Mursi government begun to deliver on its promises of more jobs, theoretically, the unemployed and under-employed youth would have been asleep in anticipation of going to work. The unemployment rate for men under 35 is about 50%. It is a negative commentary about the job creation accomplishments of the Mursi government to date that so many men have nothing to do in Cairo but vent their frustrations. In Egypt there is no penalty for destroying a foreign embassy, but criticism of President Mursi is a criminal offence. That explains why Egyptian men would judge they could attack the US embassy, when their real target should have been the Mursi government. The protestors said, in paraphrase, that they understand the US has freedom of speech; the US needs to understand that they have freedom of action. Theirs is a claim to justify lawlessness granted by the Mursi government as long as the violence is not turned against Mursi. What is important is that the Mursi government has not denounced the violence. The US and the US president are vowing to bring justice to the killers in Libya, but the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood government has made no comment or apology. Instead, Mursi's reaction is to urge the US to punish the US filmmaker.

Comment: There is only a trailer of the film, no film yet, Mursi has not seen it nor have most of the protestors in Egypt and Libya. The riots are flash mobs, arranged and manipulated by others.

NightWatch Special Comment: Ambassador Anne Patterson's April Glaspie moment. Ambassador Anne Patterson, the US Ambassador to Egypt, experienced her 'April Glaspie' moment yesterday when she blamed Americans instead of Egyptians for attacking, storming and desecrating the US Embassy in Cairo and the US Flag. Old hands will remember, April Glaspie, who was a rising star in the State Department's constellation of diplomats. Her notorious conversation with Saddam Hussein in early 1990 led Saddam to believe that the US encouraged and condoned an Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Having worked closely with US officials for a decade in the struggle and war against Iran, Saddam understood that everything after the Glaspie talk was plausible deniability by US President Bush, 41. Glaspie misunderstood and misjudged the Iraqi leadership and the situation in Iraq. Patterson's operations at the US Embassy in Cairo bespeak a comparable misjudgment of the Egyptian Arab situation, its volatility and the depth of anti-American sentiment. She did not permit US Marine guards to carry live ammunition, according to USMC blogs. Thus she neutralized any US military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy. In this respect, she did not defend US sovereign territory and betrayed her oath of office. She neutered the Marines posted to defend the embassy, trusting the Egyptians over the Marines. She apparently judges that Egyptian President Mursi spearheads a democracy and a new civil order, despite the mounting evidence that Mursi disregards US interests, cavorts with US enemies, is a budding authoritarian ruler who disdains parliament and does not honor the basic obligations of diplomatic agreements and the Geneva conventions. Readers, by definition, whenever an embassy of any country is overrun by locals in any country, everyone knows that the ambassador and senior staff must be replaced. Timing Readers also should remember that by definition the time for an official government protest for an attack on a US embassy is always when rioters attack or deface the embassy compound itself, long before they violate or penetrate the US sovereign territory or deface the US Flag. Not nine hours later and not when the details become clear. Then it is too late to take action to keep an embassy from burning or to protect American diplomats. The objective is safety, more than knowledge. When foreign TV videos showed rioters on the walls of the US Embassy and tearing apart the US Flag on the early evening of 11 September, the time for a strong US official protest and angry telephone calls to Mursi had already passed. Every student of international affairs and international diplomacy knows this. Every experienced foreign policy staff and every competent journalist knows this. But not this State Department and not this US administration and not mainstream US news services. The US simply failed to defend itself.

It bears repeating: apologies never mollify criminals. Only law abiding citizens believe such baloney. Criminals consider apologies to be acts of submission, especially in foreign cultures. O'Reilly at Fox needs to wise up!

The NightWatch Chronology When NightWatch wrote last night, every news channel carried video footage of the violation of the US Embassy; the destruction of the Embassy's US flag; the raising of the Islamic flag - not the al Qaida flag, mind you - and the burning of the US flag. AFTER those events, the news services carried Ambassador Patterson's denunciation of Americans at fault. Ambassador Patterson at no time denounced in public the Islamists who violated her Embassy. When the NightWatch ended, details about the Benghazi atrocity had not yet been reported by any major news services. Subsequently, Twitter and Facebook postings by the Cairo embassy, after the Libyan catastrophe was reported in the press, insisted that the Americans were wrong for hurting the feelings of the Muslims, despite the loss of life in Benghazi.

Patterson's embassy astonishingly continued to try to minimize the loss of American life and to justify the acts of the Egyptian and Libyan crazies by blaming Americans. In an earlier era, less politically correct, old time professionals would have called this clientisis - falling in love with one's client. It is similar to Stockholm syndrome and is an occupational hazard of US diplomats. The US Embassy staff in Cairo has it, based on public, twitter and facebook postings. The bottom line is that some deferential, weak US diplomats have done more to encourage anti-American outbursts and to promote the perception of US weakness and subservience to Muslims than US citizens exercising free speech. They need to be vetted and replaced because they do not speak for us.

Final note, in most less-developed countries of the world, from Morocco to Indonesia, no one believes the press is free of government control. There is no free press in any of those countries. Thus their leaders, analysts and others disbelieve the US press is free of government control. They mirror-image their own conditions and project them onto the US. NightWatch has talked with senior foreign officials who simply refuse to believe the American press is free of US government control and manipulation. US official apologies for the actions of private citizens reinforce this astonishing misperception, around the world. Libya: Multiple sources have reported more details on the events that led to the death of Ambassador Stephens. The details suggest this was another case of well-intentioned but misguided hubris by Americans, as to their own safety, and well-aimed and well- targeted attacks by the Muslim attackers. This appears, in fact, to have been a deliberate assassination of an effective diplomat, within the cover of an anti-US demonstration in Benghazi. The reporting indicates that the number of fundamental US security and intelligence lapses, blunders and examples of ineptitude make the efforts of Libyan security and of a local, loyal militia force to protect the US Consulate look heroic by comparison.

Comment: The State Department admitted that the Ambassador and an information management officer - an ex-US Air Force veteran - were killed. Foreign media reported two US Marines also were killed. The website for gateway pundit carries video images of US Ambassador Stevens' body being dragged through the streets of Benghazi by his Muslims miscreant murderers. All mainstream US media failed to report that the Muslim miscreants not only killed the US ambassador, they defiled his body.

Note to analysts: It is important for intelligence analysts to never forget that the fundamental purpose of US intelligence, as stated in the legislative history of the US National Security Act of 1947, is to keep the US, its persons, property and its interests safe. Yesterday, US intelligence apparently did none of them.

Odysseus
09-13-2012, 03:32 PM
Molon, you keep trucking out this quote, and I keep demolishing it:


In the long run, we're not safer because we’re still operating on the assumption that we’re hated because of our freedoms, when in fact we’re hated because of our actions in the Islamic world. There’s our military presence in Islamic countries, the perception that we control the Muslim world’s oil production, our support for Israel and for countries that oppress Muslims such as China, Russia, and India, and our own support for Arab tyrannies."

If this were true, then we would not have had to fight the Barbary Pirate Wars. If this were true, then the Danish Mohammed cartoons wouldn't have led to hundreds of deaths (Denmark has never been a military, much less a colonial, power). If it were true, then Obama's policies of mollifying Muslims would have prevented this violence. This quote is just self-serving crap from the State Department, which argues that if we simply did what the permanent bureaucracy told us to do, then everything would be just fine in the world, but, as always, when we do what they tell us to do, we end up with situations like this. Bill Clinton spent the 90s throwing money at Afghanistan, but they still harbored Bin Laden. We've spent decades providing the Saudis with the technical expertise to extract oil, for which we then pay through the nose, but they still bankroll radicalism. Obama has done everything short of grovelling before Ahmedinejad, and Iran continues to slap away his hand whenever he offers it.

You are dangerously naive.

txradioguy
09-13-2012, 03:40 PM
Then it would probably be a good idea to get the little bastards under control wouldn't it?

It is to everyone except you it would seem.

You want us to apologize for intruding and beat feet back to our own borders.

Just like Obama.



Look, I know fully well that I will never convince any of you that it is more than we hate "freedom". You will believe what you wish to believe. Are there those in Islam that hate western freedom?...... Yeah probably a bunch. But not enough to cause the type turmoil the M.E. is in. But if you add in another element, such as the perception real or unreal that the west is encroaching.....and you deny that encroaching into sphere's of influence doesn't exacerbate it, and help recruit against the West, then we are going to keep seeing the same thing happen over and over and over.

You are not only nave you're a fool. A dangerous combination when it comes to these issues. And you're so uninformed on this crap you have resorted to DNC talking points. Right now you sound like a spokes person for Obama 2012 or DU.

You also display a complete lack of comprehension of the Muslim mind. IF they can't convert us or claim our lands...they'll kill us. It really is that simple.

Right now around the world they are waging a two pronged attack. Sharia only areas in England and other countries demanding male police and parking enforcement officers in areas where Muslim immigrants reside. Not to mention their victory mosque in sight of where the twin towers USED to stand.

Meanwhile we've got a President that is AWOL when our best ally in the area needs us the most...tacitly giving a green light to a sworn enemy of ours as well as Israel's to attack without fear of repercussions from the U.S.

The Muslim culture understands and respects strength...and right now they don't see much to respect or even fear from the U.S.

And you seem to be happy about it too for that matter.



It's just not good foreign policy and it will eventually be our undoing.

Our undoing will be a weak foreign policy of appeasement and retreat. Something you seem to gleefully embrace.

What you propose...the Islamists see as weakness to be exploited...just like they did on 9/11 after years of Clinton gutting the military and lobbing empty rhetoric in response to their attacks on Americans abroad.

Obama is setting us up for that again. Thankfully it's almost November and we can get him out of office before he does any further damage.


A strong National Defense has nothing to do with projecting everywhere.

That power projection is what allows us to maintain our presence in the world and for the most part keep any enemy we engage at a very safe distance from our shores.

You want to bring them into our back yard for a fight.


I'm far more concerned with our debt, economy

And your concern in in the wrong place...in your very simplistic Ronluan you think we can fix the budget problem by just bring all our troops home from around the world and that's that. When in reality the military budget even with the cost of two wars is significantly less than the ever increasing cost of welfare and other entitlement bloat.

You just go for the easy...Liberal target...which is typical of Liberals and Liberaltarians.

and brothers in arms in harms way for Iraqis and Afghanis who could care less and eventually turn into Jihadists, than I am for a bunch of Muslims in caves.


I think it's a crappy religion and full of violence and backwards practices. But I am also not scared to death of it like a lot of you are, and believe that we can't take care of the wack jobs without occupying every podunk Islamic state on earth.

I'm not scared. I'm a realist. You're making the mistake of thinking that myself Ody and others telling everyone the harsh realities of Islam somehow equates to fear. When all we're doing is point out the consequences of ignoring the wolf at the door.



Get our selves energy independant and off of M.E oil.

You do realize we import more oil from Places like Canada and Mexico than we do the ME?

I guess not since you're parroting Obama/Democrat party talking points.


The day we find something better than petroleum is the day we leave those rat holes and let those idiots go back to living in Caves and drawing on walls.

Spoken like a true Libtard. You're head is jammed so far up your ass on this you've taken to chanting "No blood for oil".

wasp69
09-13-2012, 03:41 PM
You are dangerously naive.


As most isolationists today are. Col., the above was all that really needed to be said.

wasp69
09-13-2012, 03:46 PM
I think it's a crappy religion and full of violence and backwards practices. But I am also not scared to death of it like a lot of you are, and believe that we can't take care of the wack jobs without occupying every podunk Islamic state on earth.


Considering that some of us have gotten a good, up close look at islam and it's "culture", we have the luxury of perspective and applied knowledge. You, apparently don't and your ignorance shines through.

FlaGator
09-13-2012, 04:23 PM
You knew it was coming. Someone had to post it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s1MspmfEwg

Gina
09-13-2012, 06:57 PM
Of course most, if not all Muslim countries hate America and Israel for that matter, and the reasons are many. Whatever the leaders of said countries project to the populace in order to point blame away from themselves for the crappy state of affairs in said countries and taking the money from the plunder (oil profits etc)for themselves while their people live in poverty is what we get blamed for. As far as the new govts we have a lot of work ahead since we don't have the luxury of having known them for the past 30 years and anticipating what they would do about stuff.

It's not rocket science. :smile-new:

Lanie
09-13-2012, 10:19 PM
Obama's policies..his support of radical Islam in Egypt and Libya and his continued snubs to our lone ally in the region have motivated these attacks.

By doing nothing..by backing the Muslim Brotherhood...he's told the terrorists it's ok to do this without repercussions.

So yes Bridget...it IS his fault.




Clinton condemned allllllllll the attacks against the U.S. and it's citizens and embassies too...with almost the same words as Obama.

They're empty words. The terrorists know that. Hence the reason the Embassy in Egypt is under siege again today and they are burnig the American flag of our Embassy in Yemen.



Finally getting tired of the Dems Bridget? I mean after all they are the party that refuses to take the blam for anything and continue to blam a Preaident who has been out of office almost four years now for all of America's problems.

To the best of my knowledge, all Obama did was say it was wrong to create a film putting down Mohommad. He didn't encourage laws against the film. He simply expressed his opinion on the subject. He did that to discourage attacks, but it didn't work. Four arrests have been made in the attacks. Obama supports that. Probably 99.9% of liberals support that. I support that.

Obama doesn't support radical Islam. If he did, our butts might be up in the air right now.

This is a tragedy that should have brought us together, but instead you use it for your sick hatred of Obama and anything liberal.

It's one thing to have strong, conservative values. That's fine. However, it's wrong to use every event, every tragedy that happens to stick it to Obama and liberals. This is no better than DUers using everything including Katrina to stick it to Bush and conservatives. People are people.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is NOT the threat of communism. It's not the threat of terrorism (because oddly enough, they tend to get caught as of lately). It's not radical Islam. It's not the threat of theocracy. It's not the threat of a war on women. It's not Medicare problems.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is people from both sides hating each other with big, disgusting hatred. I'm glad that I don't have kids because I hate that our country does this to each other every few years. God bless the USA? One nation under God? We'd have to be a country which values love and not hate for that to be true.

Lanie
09-13-2012, 10:21 PM
Tell me, Bridget/Lanie/Jade, do you think this would have happened with an apology and a half assed threat under President Bush? Think we'll see anything of significance come from obama in response or will this be a replay of Carter's debacle in 1979? Keep in mind that Carter helped oust the Shah and install Kohmeni before you take it upon yourself to answer.

YESSSSSSSSS!!!!!! Are you serious? These types of zealots have been attacking people just because somebody insulted their god, Muhummad. They think Allah will save them from anything in their way. Even Bush wouldn't have struck people before an attack. I don't think he would have struck Egypt after the attack. I think he would have given them the chance to bring in the terrorists, which they did.

I was never Jade.

SaintLouieWoman
09-13-2012, 11:00 PM
To the best of my knowledge, all Obama did was say it was wrong to create a film putting down Mohommad. He didn't encourage laws against the film. He simply expressed his opinion on the subject. He did that to discourage attacks, but it didn't work. Four arrests have been made in the attacks. Obama supports that. Probably 99.9% of liberals support that. I support that.

Obama doesn't support radical Islam. If he did, our butts might be up in the air right now.

This is a tragedy that should have brought us together, but instead you use it for your sick hatred of Obama and anything liberal.

It's one thing to have strong, conservative values. That's fine. However, it's wrong to use every event, every tragedy that happens to stick it to Obama and liberals. This is no better than DUers using everything including Katrina to stick it to Bush and conservatives. People are people.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is NOT the threat of communism. It's not the threat of terrorism (because oddly enough, they tend to get caught as of lately). It's not radical Islam. It's not the threat of theocracy. It's not the threat of a war on women. It's not Medicare problems.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is people from both sides hating each other with big, disgusting hatred. I'm glad that I don't have kids because I hate that our country does this to each other every few years. God bless the USA? One nation under God? We'd have to be a country which values love and not hate for that to be true.

Lanie, the biggest problem is an administration that doesn't have the sense to post extra security around embassies after there were warnings that there was major unrest. Especially with 9-11 coming up, they should have done it That's called negligence.

Since when in the US do we have to shut up when something is so wrong? Romney didn't say that much to justify the way he was attacked. Carter says way worse stuff all the time against other presidents, including fellow Democrats.

What's so wrong is the way the liberal media puts out the very lines that you've quoted. You've swallowed their Kool-Aide, hook, line and sinker.

Bullies and terrorists do not respond well to fuzzy, well-meaning, mooshy pablum. They respond to strength. Look how long Bush kept our country and by extension, the representations of our country on foreign soil, safe. Obama took his eye off the ball. He's been too busy campaigning. For him to miss the intelligence briefings again, after the attacks, is outrageous.

There's no good defense for this. The only defense of his supporters is an offense, attacking Romney instead of the person who did not live up to his duty and responsibilities. I'd rather have Bill Clinton in the oval office with an intern, cigare, pizza box, etc than have Obama messing up the way he has, both economically and internationally.

SaintLouieWoman
09-13-2012, 11:18 PM
Of course most, if not all Muslim countries hate America and Israel for that matter, and the reasons are many. Whatever the leaders of said countries project to the populace in order to point blame away from themselves for the crappy state of affairs in said countries and taking the money from the plunder (oil profits etc)for themselves while their people live in poverty is what we get blamed for. As far as the new govts we have a lot of work ahead since we don't have the luxury of having known them for the past 30 years and anticipating what they would do about stuff.

It's not rocket science. :smile-new:
Apply these comments to our own country. Isn't this the technique used by Obama to deflect an uprising due to his abject failure with oiur economy and with keeping the US safe? He's passing the blame to the rich, Romney, you name it. Anything but looking in that mirror and honestly assessing where he went wrong. That mirror is only a vanity mirror.

Gina
09-13-2012, 11:32 PM
Four more years! (Of the blame game).

If that doesn't keep you up at night nothing will.

wasp69
09-14-2012, 11:14 AM
YESSSSSSSSS!!!!!! Are you serious?


Considering how much terrorism and storming of embassies didn't happen after we turned our forces loose on the mohammedian savages during his tenure? Uh, yeah, I'm dead serious. Where were you during that time?



These types of zealots have been attacking people just because somebody insulted their god, Muhummad. They think Allah will save them from anything in their way.


There are none so blind as those who refuse to see or deaf as those who refuse to hear. There are also none so ignorant as those who refuse to remember or learn.

Bridget, 2001 to 2009 has to be lost time for you. That is the only rational and logical explanation for this statement.

President Bush was very clear about the position of the United States in regards to terrorism and terrorist organizations. The al-queda savages learned that first hand in Afghanistan and Iraq. If they committed an act of terrorism, then they could count on an overwhelming and disproportionate response. That and actually treating terrorism like terrorism (as opposed to treating it like a tantrum or nuisance) is why you didn't see stupid shit like this happen under President Bush. Clinton sent in the FBI, Bush sent in the USMC - there is your difference, dear, and why most of the islamokazies kept their happy asses in the desert for 8 years.

Bring in obama and the lib pacifiers bowing to these savages, throwing a non secular government and army (Egypt) under the bus in favor of muslim extremists, supporting muslim extremists in favor of Khadaffi, telling Israel to piss up a rope in favor of muslim extremists (Iran), helping them dismantle relatively stable states, sending them billions of our hard earned money during a time of record unemployment and record deficits, obama strutting around the country telling anyone that would listen that he killed bin Laden, the stupid ass apology to these animals for a you tube video that had been out for 6 months.... The only thing this "culture" understands is strength and obama has shown them weakness and apathy.

My God, girl, where is your head? Why won't you listen? Why can't you draw rational conclusions from the evidence that is right in front of you? These fiends attacked us despite the ass kissing they've been getting for 4 years. Ambassador Stevens was on the ground in Benghazi helping the "rebels" and they still killed him! Why? Because obama showed them weakness! We have an embassy in Cairo where the Marine Security Detachment was unarmed! Why? Because it was the position of the United States government to show American weakness! They don't fear us because they know obama is a weakling and an amateur.

Bridget, there is already historical precedence where a President to abandoned his ally to support an islamic extremist with the thought that if they would just be good liberals (social justice, yada yada), then all would be well. That got an embassy invaded and personnel held hostage for over a year with no retribution and no example of what happens when you invade US sovereign territory.

Put the kool aid down! Break yourself out of that idiotic liberal indoctrination and put your head in the real world! These fiends mean to kill us, they don't care how much you empathize with them or want peace!



Even Bush wouldn't have struck people before an attack. I don't think he would have struck Egypt after the attack.


No, he wouldn't have, because the "arab spring" would have never happened. But, we'll go with the fact that it did, and I'll tell you what the difference would have been: A heightened state of awareness, Marines with their weapons locked and loaded, the gathering of a mob would have had them in full battle rattle, any idiot that came over the wall to set fires or cut down the flag (an act of WAR) would have been pumped full of .223 and .50 cal ammo faster than they could yell "we are all bin Laden".

How do I know? I was on active duty from 2001-2009, I have perspective and experience.



I was never Jade.


Circa 2004-2006? Bull, and if the archives hadn't been wiped during one of the many crashes, I would be happy to cure your amnesia about Jade and WeWillSee.

wasp69
09-14-2012, 11:18 AM
The biggest threat in a few weeks is people from both sides hating each other with big, disgusting hatred. I'm glad that I don't have kids because I hate that our country does this to each other every few years. God bless the USA? One nation under God? We'd have to be a country which values love and not hate for that to be true.


You have only to look at the elected officials and "elites" from your side to find out where the "hate" comes from, dear. Don't bleat about how bad hatred is when "tolerant" liberals own it lock, stock, and barrel.

txradioguy
09-14-2012, 11:32 AM
To the best of my knowledge, all Obama did was say it was wrong to create a film putting down Mohommad. He didn't encourage laws against the film. He simply expressed his opinion on the subject. He did that to discourage attacks, but it didn't work. Four arrests have been made in the attacks. Obama supports that. Probably 99.9% of liberals support that. I support that.

And that has exactly what to do with my response? Oh yeah that's right...nothing. Obama set this in motion long before their fake excuse of a movie that no one can seem to find came to light. His speech in Cairo...his support of the overthrow of the governments in Egypt and Libya...his blatant and obvious dislike of Israel while still continuing to offer an open hand to Iran. Pulling troops out of Iraq early...and now trying to pull us out of Afghanistan before it's stable. All of these things told the Muslim extremists it was ok to pull the coordinated attack that they did on 9/11...and the day they decided to attack our embassies was no mistake either. If anything it's a reaction to Obama constantly spiking the football and telling the world that he killed Obama.

All you have to do is read what the terrorists were chanting outside the gates to know that this had nothing to do with some stupid movie that might or might not exist.

Why should Obama have to apologize? Where are the apologies to other religions when Hollywood actually does make a movie that offends Christians everywhere?

All Obama did yesterday was channel Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and toss out a lot of passionless empty words that do nothing more than make our enemies laugh.

I'd give anything for Obama to have had the same passion and fire in what he said as he did when he was out stirring the rabble with his "you didn't build that". He shows more pasison attacking the TEA Party than he did talking about attacks on AMericans by radical Islam.


Obama doesn't support radical Islam. If he did, our butts might be up in the air right now.

He does and they are.

WTF do you think the Muslim Brotherhood is? IT'S RADICAL ISLAM!!! And Obama has given it his full support twice int he last year.

This is a tragedy that should have brought us together, but instead you use it for your sick hatred of Obama and anything liberal.


It's one thing to have strong, conservative values. That's fine. However, it's wrong to use every event, every tragedy that happens to stick it to Obama and liberals. This is no better than DUers using everything including Katrina to stick it to Bush and conservatives. People are people.

You mean it's only wrong if Conservatives/Republicans do it right? I mean that must be the case since Obama himself used an event in Iraq to attack Bush. Kerry did the same thing in 2004.

Hell Reagan used the hostage crisis and the Soviets in Afghanistan like a club to hammer Jimmy Carter in 1980.

There's nothing wrong with what Romney did. It's happened almost as long as we've had a Presidential election in this country.

You and the rest of the Libtards are only crying about this because on 9/11 Romney came off appearing more like the President than Obama did.


The biggest threat in a few weeks is NOT the threat of communism. It's not the threat of terrorism (because oddly enough, they tend to get caught as of lately). It's not radical Islam. It's not the threat of theocracy. It's not the threat of a war on women. It's not Medicare problems.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is people from both sides hating each other with big, disgusting hatred. I'm glad that I don't have kids because I hate that our country does this to each other every few years. God bless the USA? One nation under God? We'd have to be a country which values love and not hate for that to be true.

Biggest pile of bullshit from you I've seen in awhile. Right there you highlighted a complete and lack of knowledge of what really threatens this country.

It's even dumber than Michelle saying that obesity is the greatest to national security this country faces.

Congratulations. You've now confirmed you're a moron.

TVDOC
09-14-2012, 12:16 PM
Considering how much terrorism and storming of embassies didn't happen after we turned our forces loose on the mohammedian savages during his tenure? Uh, yeah, I'm dead serious. Where were you during that time?



There are none so blind as those who refuse to see or deaf as those who refuse to hear. There are also none so ignorant as those who refuse to remember or learn.

Bridget, 2001 to 2009 has to be lost time for you. That is the only rational and logical explanation for this statement.

President Bush was very clear about the position of the United States in regards to terrorism and terrorist organizations. The al-queda savages learned that first hand in Afghanistan and Iraq. If they committed an act of terrorism, then they could count on an overwhelming and disproportionate response. That and actually treating terrorism like terrorism (as opposed to treating it like a tantrum or nuisance) is why you didn't see stupid shit like this happen under President Bush. Clinton sent in the FBI, Bush sent in the USMC - there is your difference, dear, and why most of the islamokazies kept their happy asses in the desert for 8 years.

<snip>

.

Bravo! Good analysis......

Having lived and worked in the Middle East for a number of years, I can also say with some experience that what liberals will never understand is the fact that western-style democratic governments are never going to exist in most middle eastern countries.

GWB understood that some countries (Egypt, Libya, and sub-saharan African, just to name a few) are essentially ungovernable except by a "strong-man" that has the resources and ruthlessness to keep the savages in check, and perserve his own (and Americas) interests.

These governments are going to:

.....Oppress portions of their populations

.....Keep ignorant people in poverty

.....Steal the fruits of their nations resources

.....Kill and imprison dissidents

Tough shit.....

With all of this in mind........the key questions are: Does this situation suit America's interests? Does backing a dictator provide security to ourselves and our allies? Even if brutal, does such a government bring stability to a critical area economiically for the US? Is access to essential resources for the rest of the world protected, as well as the methology and routes to transport those resources? Is the US able to secure military logistical cooperation from these governments, in order to project power elsewhere?

Everything else is "window dressing"......

If the answer to these questions is "yes", then logically and realistically America is far better off supporting a tyrant than "leading from behind", and allowing these ungovernable countries descend into anarchy and emerge as a threat to our interests as our current president seems to think is the correct foreign policy path.

Even the liberal icon, FDR understood this principle.......it was a better choice to crawl into bed with "Crazy Joe" Stalin, than to lose (or prolong) the war in Europe......American service members lives would be saved....

We need a president who's response to the situation two days ago in Cairo and Libya would be.......the protestors would be too busy burying the bodies to return......

In foreign policy, it's far, far better for America to be feared than respected/loved...........when it comes to Islam even Thomas Jefferson understood this basic truth......why Obama refuses to accept the obvious historical lessons defies the imagination......

....."The devil that you know is always better than the one that you don't........"

doc

ABC in Georgia
09-14-2012, 04:50 PM
Just got home from errands today in time to watch the ceremony at Andrews AF Base.

Brought a lump to my throat, and a feeling of profound,uncontrollable,outrage at all the violence being perpetuated by these monstrous savages, now in 18 (?) countries.

Made me feel rather hopless (not quite the word I want) ... until I finally thought of the saying, "God works in mysterious ways."

Perhaps because of this, the tide will turn against Obama, even by the most surprising of his supporters, and something good may yet become of this horror taking place in the ME and North Africa.

Romney, could still win the presidency, despite the best efforts of the dishonest folks working for Obama.

It would be so wonderful to have an intelligent, God-fearing, America-loving, man who respects our Constitution, in office.

Wow! Nothing like baring my soul and wearing my heart on my sleeve, huh? ...:smile-new:

~ ABC :Flag2:

Edited to add: If this situation should escalate, in the future and become almost unthinkable, it would be far better to have a Pres. Romney in charge, rather than this poor excuse for a president.!!!

Hawkgirl
09-14-2012, 05:55 PM
America is a paper tiger. -OBL

I miss peace through strength.

Nearly 25 years ago, Libya killed Americans. Reagan bombed Ghadafi's house and killled his family. We havent' heard a peep from them till now. Appeasement doesn't work with these savages. Only under the threat of attack can we keep them at bay. It's ugly, but it's the truth.

Hawkgirl
09-14-2012, 06:01 PM
Lanie, the biggest problem is an administration that doesn't have the sense to post extra security around embassies after there were warnings that there was major unrest. Especially with 9-11 coming up, they should have done it That's called negligence.

.

Not only that, and that is a BIG thing, he hadn't received a security breifing since September 5th! He didn't even have the sense to get one on the 10th or 11th on the Anniversary of this biggest assault ever perpetrated against this country. The White House released a statement saying Obama is the biggest Intelligence "swallower" this country has ever had, and that he didn't need no stinkin' briefing...(I ad-libbed, clearly). The Messiah is too smart to keep current on security briefings. Bush1 and Bush2 received them daily. Even the first Bush who was the director of the CIA, demanded a daily briefing of security...but our dear community organizer knows everything.

Seriously, if you can't even trust a President in national security, how can you trust him on anything else? Without national security, the economy doesn't even matter, and we all know what he's done to the economy.

Hawkgirl
09-14-2012, 06:04 PM
So, everything is Obama's fault now?

I'll put it simply so even you can understand it. He was NEGLIGENT. As far as I'm concerned, he was COMPLICIT. He is a danger to this country and I'm not overstating it.

Molon Labe
09-14-2012, 06:17 PM
Molon, you keep trucking out this quote, and I keep demolishing it:


In the long run, we're not safer because we’re still operating on the assumption that we’re hated because of our freedoms, when in fact we’re hated because of our actions in the Islamic world. There’s our military presence in Islamic countries, the perception that we control the Muslim world’s oil production, our support for Israel and for countries that oppress Muslims such as China, Russia, and India, and our own support for Arab tyrannies."

If this were true, then we would not have had to fight the Barbary Pirate Wars. If this were true, then the Danish Mohammed cartoons wouldn't have led to hundreds of deaths (Denmark has never been a military, much less a colonial, power). If it were true, then Obama's policies of mollifying Muslims would have prevented this violence. This quote is just self-serving crap from the State Department, which argues that if we simply did what the permanent bureaucracy told us to do, then everything would be just fine in the world, but, as always, when we do what they tell us to do, we end up with situations like this. Bill Clinton spent the 90s throwing money at Afghanistan, but they still harbored Bin Laden. We've spent decades providing the Saudis with the technical expertise to extract oil, for which we then pay through the nose, but they still bankroll radicalism. Obama has done everything short of grovelling before Ahmedinejad, and Iran continues to slap away his hand whenever he offers it.

You are dangerously naive.

Yes, I know...you're a legend in your own mind Ody.

I consistantly call for a little more restraint when frolicking around the globe and I'm "isolationist". :rolleyes:

So you think we aren't involved around the globe enough?

Who is bankrolling radicalism? You might want to look again at who funded the Mujahadeen in the 80's and trained them, and who just spent a cool couple hundred million buying playtoys and expertise for our little buddies in Libya.

I'm naive?

Good f'n grief.

Rockntractor
09-14-2012, 06:59 PM
I'm "isolationist".
I'm naive?

Good f'n grief. Now there you go.
Admission is the First Step to Recovery.

Hawkgirl
09-14-2012, 07:05 PM
Now there you go.
Admission is the First Step to Recovery.

I think he may still be in the Denial stage.

ABC in Georgia
09-14-2012, 07:08 PM
Now there you go.
Admission is the First Step to Recovery.

Wow! ...

Quick-Draw McGraw ... I mean McRock! ... :biggrin-new:

~ ABC

ABC in Georgia
09-14-2012, 07:12 PM
Oops! Self-delete!

Double post! Sorry, didn't think it posted first time!

Odysseus
09-15-2012, 10:39 AM
Not only that, and that is a BIG thing, he hadn't received a security breifing since September 5th! He didn't even have the sense to get one on the 10th or 11th on the Anniversary of this biggest assault ever perpetrated against this country. The White House released a statement saying Obama is the biggest Intelligence "swallower" this country has ever had, and that he didn't need no stinkin' briefing...(I ad-libbed, clearly). The Messiah is too smart to keep current on security briefings. Bush1 and Bush2 received them daily. Even the first Bush who was the director of the CIA, demanded a daily briefing of security...but our dear community organizer knows everything.

Seriously, if you can't even trust a President in national security, how can you trust him on anything else? Without national security, the economy doesn't even matter, and we all know what he's done to the economy.

The security of the United States is the primary responsibility of the president.
Failing in that responsibilty would be damning under any circumstances, but refusing to even engage with the security experts is criminal negligence.

Yes, I know...you're a legend in your own mind Ody.

I consistantly call for a little more restraint when frolicking around the globe and I'm "isolationist". :rolleyes:

So you think we aren't involved around the globe enough?

Who is bankrolling radicalism? You might want to look again at who funded the Mujahadeen in the 80's and trained them, and who just spent a cool couple hundred million buying playtoys and expertise for our little buddies in Libya.

I'm naive?

Good f'n grief.

Naïve and ill-informed, yes. We didn't bankroll radicals. The mujahedeen were not the Taliban, which formed after the war ended. There are actually three groups that claim the name, the Mullah Omar faction, which never had US backing, the Haqqani faction, which is basically a local mafian and the Pakistani Taliban, which was formed by the ISI as a means of establishing Pakistani control of Afghanistan. None of these were bankrolled by us, and al Qaeda was formed because Bin Laden thought that the Mujahedeen who took our aid were sellouts who were dealing with hated infidels. Our allies were what became known as the Northern Alliance, which opposed the Taliban.

Your basic knowlege of the history of the conflict is flawed and incomplete. You are applying libertarian talking points to tribal and religious conflicts, which is like trying to do brain surgery with a sledgehammer. That is why I, and everyone else here who has firsthand knowledge of the region, think that you are naïve.


And now, because they continue to provide the best analysis of the situation, here's last night's Nightwath:


Anti-US protests: A compilation of reporting from news services shows there were anti-American protests and demonstrations in more than 22 countries and territories. Reporting from Islamic states in Africa has been slow, and might increase the final tally. Burnings of American flags occurred from Morocco to Indonesia, including Kashmir in India and Niger, in northern Africa. Only Turkey and Saudi Arabia experienced no significant disorders. Turkey is not an Arab country and Saudi Arabia imposed security restrictions so tight that no demonstrations were permitted. This was a spasm of anti-American sentiment unlike any since the attack at the Ka'aba in 1979 in Mecca. That was the year the US Embassy was burned in Islamabad and the last time a US Ambassador was assassinated, in Kabul, Afghanistan. The most sensational attacks occurred in Tunisia, Sudan and Lebanon. In Tunis, the US Embassy compound was breached and a US school was burned. A US employee told the media that he never thought that Tunisian security and police would walk away and allow the demonstrators to break into the US Embassy compound.

In Sudan the US, German and British embassies in Khartoum were attacked. The German Embassy was breached and burned. In Tripoli, Lebanon, two US fast food restaurants were torched. In Beirut, one person was killed and 25 wounded in clashes near the US Embassy. Eighteen of the wounded were Lebanese policemen. In Egypt, demonstrations continued for a fourth day in Cairo. They also occurred in Alexandria for the first time. In Sinai, Bedouin militants attacked a UN peacekeepers' camp in the name of protesting the anti-Muslim video.

In Afghanistan, a large demonstration occurred in Jalalabad, near the border with Pakistan. Protestors burned President Obama in effigy. Demonstrations also occurred in Kabul, but were not reported in mainstream press. In Iraq, non-violent protests occurred in Baghdad, Hilla, Kufa, Samarra and Tikrit. In Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei continued to stoke anti-American sentiment in Tehran. It was echoed in Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, Palestine and Yemen. In Pakistan, anti-American demonstrations occurred in multiple cities, but no clashes have been reported. In India, Muslim anti-American militants demonstrated in Kashmir and in Chennai.

Anti-American demonstrations also occurred in Jakarta, Indonesia; Somalia; Jordan; London; Oman and Bangladesh, for a second day.

Comment: One difference from past eruptions of Islamic ire is that in some Arab countries demonstrators not only denounced the US and Israel, they also denounced President Obama by name, calling for his death. This is the first time that anti-American sentiment was personified. Readers need to know that these protests were uniformly anti-American. Equally significant is that local security forces were prone to not oppose the demonstrators in multiple cases. Four US diplomatic facilities have been breached, if not burned. All occurred in states touched by the so-called Arab Spring - Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen. In earlier times, Muslim preachers insisted that democracy was not consistent with Islam. They denounced it. The great change in the past two years is that Imams, encouraged by Turkey's Prime Minister Erdogan, have come to understand that democracy may be rationalized with ultra-conservative Islam as a pathway to a caliphate, by choice of the voters. To paraphrase Erdogan, democracy is a station stop, not a political end-state in itself. Even conservative Imams now seem to understand Erdogan's wisdom. Islamists, Salafists and the Muslim Brotherhood are using elections to advance their objective of creating Islamic governments in the Arab Spring states. Islamic monarchies will be the next targets after the Islamic democracies consolidate power, provided they can. After that, Israel is the target.

US-Libya: Update: The British news outlet, The Independent, today published a detailed list of the extent of the security disaster in Benghazi, which goes beyond the tragic murders. According to The Independent, laptops were stolen that contain lists of Libyans who cooperate with the Americans, classified papers were taken and classified data was compromised. NightWatch cannot corroborate the statements in the article in The Independent. However, NightWatch can attest that anytime a sensitive US facility or asset is seized, secrets are compromised. An organized and carefully planned penetration of any diplomatic facility anywhere could afford a disciplined attacker access to sensitive information that jeopardizes far more lives than the four Americans killed this week. Finally, for the record, Readers should know that the authoritative source for information on the security arrangements at US embassies around the world is the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security.

End of NightWatch for 14 September. NightWatch is brought to you by Kforce Government Solutions, Inc. (KGS)