1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Benghazi: the coverup

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by basso, Oct 3, 2012.

  1. okierock

    okierock Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    3,132
    Likes Received:
    199
    Our wars or theirs? It's not like the middle east needs the U.S. to have wars, they have been at it for thousands of years. It really is kinda funny that we in the U.S. take any credit for war in the middle east.

    If they didn't have oil we would be perfectly happy to let them kill each other forever.

    I don't see any reason a decade of war would be any big deal to the middle east? What we should really worry about is when they stop fighting each other.
     
  2. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,807
    Likes Received:
    20,465
    Actually Muslim dissent was against the secular Saddam.

    As has been pointed out... What created far more Muslim dissent was the U.S. invading Muslim populated nations and occupying them for a decade.
     
  3. Baba Booey

    Baba Booey Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes Received:
    961
    Yeah, my jaw hit the floor when I saw that quote. There is really no reason to engage with someone like this, as they have already made up their mind no matter what is presented.

    But he'll be sure to call us the "blind" ones...
     
  4. BigDog63

    BigDog63 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,166
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    Yes, there is.
    Unfortunately, no, they don't.


    Oh, really? Motives for the September 11 attacks

    So, you're trying to claim they attacked the World Trade Center...to get back at Saddam Hussein????

    This is backed up by Muslim scholars.

    And it wasn't even just Muslims...

    So, the question is: Why were you and soooo many like you so gung ho about continuing to inflict 'unacceptable suffering' on the Iraqi people, over sanctions that were not working?

    And some think we're the clowns.....
     
  5. larsv8

    larsv8 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    21,663
    Likes Received:
    13,916
    Because the left didn't commit treason and send us into a war so the corporations they are/were CEO's of, could make a huge profit?
     
  6. Commodore

    Commodore Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2007
    Messages:
    33,571
    Likes Received:
    17,546
    keep it simple:

    1) Why were security requests from personnel in Benghazi repeatedly ignored?

    2) Why was no help sent when Americans were under attack in Benghazi?

    3) Where were Clinton/Obama during the attack and what did they do?
     
  7. okierock

    okierock Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    3,132
    Likes Received:
    199
    Treason...


    Now we are back on topic.
     
  8. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    496
    KISS, the best philosophy...

    Budget cuts.

    Because the military determined that there was not an appropriate force that could arrive at Benghazi in time to help.

    The reports say that Obama was in the Oval Office, no clue where Hilary was, likely somewhere in DC, you know, where they were supposed to be.
     
  9. Baba Booey

    Baba Booey Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2012
    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes Received:
    961
    NO NO NO!

    He is looking for different answers.
     
  10. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    We know the answer to all of these questions

    It's not our fault you don't like the answers
     
  11. BigDog63

    BigDog63 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,166
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    Ahhh, so you're not a liberal, you're just a recording of liberal talking points. Got it.
     
  12. Commodore

    Commodore Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2007
    Messages:
    33,571
    Likes Received:
    17,546
    Utter bs, this was the most dangerous place on the planet for state dept personnel to be, and Sec. Clinton made no effort to prioritize their security.

    Their requests for help went completely ignored.

    First, there was no way to know how long the attack would last.

    Second, per General Lovell who was at AFRICOM during the attack, they waited for a request for help from the State Dept. that never came.

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...tried-to-help-our-people-in-benghazi-n1832131

    So we still don't know where the people responsible for responding to attacks on our citizens were during the attack, or what they were doing.
     
  13. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    496
    I thought we were keeping it simple, apparently you just can't take your own advice.

    Moreso than Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan? I don't think so.

    Objection, speculation...

    ...as a result of budget cuts. When you take an organization with limited resources and cut their budget, you have to expect that things like security will suffer. It seems like you are arguing that Mrs. Clinton should have been clairvoyant in a way that the CIA wasn't and preemptively inserted more security at the one place in the world where there was an attack. You're welcome to expect the "ESP standard" from Democrats, but it doesn't make you look very reasonable.

    Agreed, which makes it even MORE likely that if the military had assets near enough, a rescue attempt would have been made. The military decided they couldn't reach the embassy with an appropriately sized force in time to have a positive impact. If the military went through their machinations and actually came to the conclusion that they couldn't help, I believe them.

    Yes, we are all pretty aware that help didn't come.

    I believe both that we should have tried to help and also that there was nothing we could reasonably do to help. I am certain that the military was gung-ho to help, which makes the fact that they determined they couldn't help so surprising. Sadly, we can't be in all places at all times at the drop of a hat. We don't have ODST troops that can be tasked at a moment's notice (bonus points for the first to recognize the reference) anywhere on the planet. Perhaps that could be our next military/NASA project, sure would be nice to be expanding the bounds of what we can do in space.

    They were doing their jobs. For God's sake Obama was reportedly in the Oval Office, where exactly do you believe he should have been?
     
  14. larsv8

    larsv8 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    21,663
    Likes Received:
    13,916
    Exactly.

    Lemming gonna keep on lemming in the clown show.

    Valid point = dismissed as a "liberal talking point"
     
  15. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    496
    The echo chamber, where "facts" have a liberal bias.
     
  16. mtbrays

    mtbrays Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    8,629
    Likes Received:
    8,051
    The anger at Western countries extends beyond the US and the last 10 years. Western countries helped prop up autocrats like Hosni Mubarak, the House of Saud, Saddam Hussein, etc. which turned us into the easiest possible scapegoat for countries full of uneducated, unemployed and angry young men.
     
  17. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,387
    Likes Received:
    9,304
  18. BigDog63

    BigDog63 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,166
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    Yes. Although they tend to single us out. Imams, and governments, there channel that rage from the uneducated, unemployed, and angry young men towards the U.S. in order to create more power for themselves. You think Ahmedinejad, as an example, wanted to go around talking about how his inept administration had led to all those problems? No, of course not. So, they blame the U.S. And the more we are there, the more that happens. Which is why we needed to get out of Iraq, which wasn't going to happen without a change in who was running the country there.
     
  19. larsv8

    larsv8 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    21,663
    Likes Received:
    13,916
    So let me get this straight:

    1.) President says he has a suspicion it was people looking to target Americans on 9/12

    2.) Press secretary comes out and says it was the video ad nauseum and "We certainly don't know otherwise" on 9/14

    3.) And afterwards, all parties were on the same page that it was not the video.

    4.) Since then, an email has arisen that an advisor suggested to blame the video, even though we have no idea if the email was read and / or taken into consideration.

    5.) But long before the email was ever discovered, the video idea was abandoned.

    That is what this whole clown show is about?
     
    #1239 larsv8, May 5, 2014
    Last edited: May 5, 2014
  20. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    Breibert

    *snicker*
     

Share This Page