Obama lied about Benghazi

[Bowfinger]

They were ready to go and were furious that they weren't sent, so maybe you can get their names and go have a debate with them about how they weren’t properly armed for the task. I mean, they are only special forces, what the fuck do they know?

Matt, you're doing it again. Of course they were eager to go, to try to help in any way they could. That is their nature, it's what they do. It doesn't mean it was a good idea, however. Given that the experts in the Pentagon apparently felt they were not well-suited to join the battle, whatever the reasoning was, it is quite likely that had they rushed in we'd have eight dead Americans instead of four.

Further, what would have happened if the Benghazi attack was only a diversion, or the first wave of a larger attack? What if terrorists then attacked the embassy in Tripoli, finding it to be inadequately defended because everyone headed to Benghazi? You'd be screaming even more loudly for the heads of "the idiots" who left it vulnerable.

The bottom line is you and all the other keyboard commandos don't have a clue as to what the best course of action would have been. You presume to denounce the real experts based on your tremendous expertise in...squat. Your assumptions and assertions are empty posturing based entirely on partisanship. You crave excuses to attack Obama, and you filter everything you see and hear through that bias, cherry-picking any scraps you find that seem to support you while ignoring everything else.

I said from the beginning that I thought the Obama administration handled the public communications poorly, and that they should have been more forthcoming. That's a criticism based on fact. But all the rest of this hysterical BS you guys have cooked up is useless noise, partisan speculation and insinuation. Most importantly, those four Americans didn't die because of the cover story spread after the fact. They died because a small army of terrorists attacked our facility in Benghazi. You are exploiting their deaths for political points, and it is truly repugnant.

 

[Matt1970]

Yet, Bush allowed Bin Laden's family members to leave the U.S.. He failed to go after Osama in Tora Bora, etc. Hardly looked like he kept that promise.

Bin Laden's family members already disowned Bin Laden. They were no more of a threat that you or I.

 

[Matt1970]

Matt, you're doing it again. Of course they were eager to go, to try to help in any way they could. That is their nature, it's what they do. It doesn't mean it was a good idea, however. Given that the experts in the Pentagon apparently felt they were not well-suited to join the battle, whatever the reasoning was, it is quite likely that had they rushed in we'd have eight dead Americans instead of four.

Further, what would have happened if the Benghazi attack was only a diversion, or the first wave of a larger attack? What if terrorists then attacked the embassy in Tripoli, finding it to be inadequately defended because everyone headed to Benghazi? You'd be screaming even more loudly for the heads of "the idiots" who left it vulnerable.

The bottom line is you and all the other keyboard commandos don't have a clue as to what the best course of action would have been. You presume to denounce the real experts based on your tremendous expertise in...squat. Your assumptions and assertions are empty posturing based entirely on partisanship. You crave excuses to attack Obama, and you filter everything you see and hear through that bias, cherry-picking any scraps you find that seem to support you while ignoring everything else.

I said from the beginning that I thought the Obama administration handled the public communications poorly, and that they should have been more forthcoming. That's a criticism based on fact. But all the rest of this hysterical BS you guys have cooked up is useless noise, partisan speculation and insinuation. Most importantly, those four Americans didn't die because of the cover story spread after the fact. They died because a small army of terrorists attacked our facility in Benghazi. You are exploiting their deaths for political points, and it is truly repugnant.

Where did it say they were "not well-suited" to join the battle? What if the Benghazi attack was only a diversion? Oh come on. You are trying to make excuses for a situation that was handled piss-poorly form the start.

 

[Bowfinger]

Where did it say they were "not well-suited" to join the battle? What if the Benghazi attack was only a diversion? Oh come on. You are trying to make excuses for a situation that was handled piss-poorly form the start.

No sweetheart, I'm accepting the Pentagon's statements on why this small group was told to remain in Tripoli to protect the embassy there. I'm deferring to the experts that actually know something. You should try it. Of course I'm not surprised you've ignored virtually everything I said to try to deflect attention from your dishonest and repugnant partisan behavior. That's what you do when challenged.

 

[Matt1970]

No sweetheart, I'm accepting the Pentagon's statements on why this small group was told to remain in Tripoli to protect the embassy there. I'm deferring to the experts that actually know something. You should try it. Of course I'm not surprised you've ignored virtually everything I said to try to deflect attention from your dishonest and repugnant partisan behavior. That's what you do when challenged.

LOL, ironic you accusing others of partisan behavior. You only accept what comes from the man with the (D) after his name.

 

[Bowfinger]

LOL, ironic you accusing others of partisan behavior. You only accept what comes from the man with the (D) after his name.

You're lying again, moron. What part of this was too hard for your tiny mind to digest:

"I said from the beginning that I thought the Obama administration handled the public communications poorly, and that they should have been more forthcoming. That's a criticism based on fact."
​

Meh. It's probably the same blind partisan denial that led you to dodge this:

"But all the rest of this hysterical BS you guys have cooked up is useless noise, partisan speculation and insinuation. Most importantly, those four Americans didn't die because of the cover story spread after the fact. They died because a small army of terrorists attacked our facility in Benghazi. You are exploiting their deaths for political points, and it is truly repugnant"
​

Hack on, tiny dancer. Bounce and prance in ignorant indignation as they tug your little strings. Who gives a damn about four dead Americans, or even America itself, when you're a puppet for the RNC. Who cares about the terrorists who actually killed those Americans when you can attack a Democrat who didn't.

 

[Angry Irishman]

Please explain how these hearings are going to fix anything. I'm serious, because I don't see it. All I see is a lot of political finger-pointing and nonsense.

The energy being put into this idiotic display on Capitol Hill should be going into securing embassies and fixing whatever red tape caused this mess to happen. The real solutions will be found within the bureaucracy and the military, not Darrell Issahole putting on a grand display. Fixing the problems has nothing whatever to do with how it was explained afterwards, or how many days someone talked about a video, or any of the other mindless gibberish.

Agree but it sure isn't going to help those poor souls now. So no effort should go into assessing who was accountable for this gross negligence?

 

[sportage]

This will backfire big time on republicans.
That is if they call Hillary up in person and in public for more interrogation.
No one purposely wanted, allowed, or failed understand the dangers in Benghazi.
If republicans keep pushing this, things are going to get heated.
The administration will unleash information the congress will not want exposed.
Suddenly the tide will turn with the outrage, if there truly is heart felt outrage, will redirect back onto the republican controlled congress as well as the previous republican administration.
Hillary and this administration will come out the victors, and republicans will eat crow.
We all know the true intention behind their attack on Hillary and Obama, and republicans are playing with fire. They will get burnt. Or more so, smoked.

 

[ivwshane]

Agree but it sure isn't going to help those poor souls now. So no effort should go into assessing who was accountable for this gross negligence?

You mean like the effort that went into the December 2012 report that investigated negligence and also made recommendations to minimize incidents like benghazi from happening again that the state department has already implemented?

You mean something like that?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Imagine if our politicians paid as much attention to issues like health care and the economy as what they give to Benghazi...

 

[Angry Irishman]

You mean like the effort that went into the December 2012 report that investigated negligence and also made recommendations to minimize incidents like benghazi from happening again that the state department has already implemented?

You mean something like that?

That's all great, but that should come second. I would think a name and organization would be tied to the buffoonery and that name and organization be held accountable. That "investigation" really was a facade. Mangers are responsible for their employees, generals are in charge of their soldiers and operations....you get the gist.

In this case I would blame Mrs. Clinton and her boss of which nothing has been acknowledged by them and no action has been taken against them...if not for outright lies then for utter and gross negligence. Nothing that happened in Libya should have came as a surprise. This wasn't the French embassy on a nice tree lined street. The Brits and others weren't so blind sided by the charged situation there and acted accordingly. Of course, they weren't running a political campaign at the time either.

Don't mistake this as GOP vs libs on my part anyway. I could care less what party affiliation was responsible...I and many others ( I like to call ourselves Americans) want to see accountability put into play...not a play on words and a distraction from that accountability.

 

[Angry Irishman]

Imagine if our politicians paid as much attention to issues like health care and the economy as what they give to Benghazi...

You mean like Obama care and Sequestration? Yea that would be great.

 

[Angry Irishman]

This will backfire big time on republicans.
That is if they call Hillary up in person and in public for more interrogation.
No one purposely wanted, allowed, or failed understand the dangers in Benghazi.
If republicans keep pushing this, things are going to get heated.
The administration will unleash information the congress will not want exposed.
Suddenly the tide will turn with the outrage, if there truly is heart felt outrage, will redirect back onto the republican controlled congress as well as the previous republican administration.
Hillary and this administration will come out the victors, and republicans will eat crow.
We all know the true intention behind their attack on Hillary and Obama, and republicans are playing with fire. They will get burnt. Or more so, smoked.

Do you have to be a security expert, a democrat or republican to understand how dangerous Libya was and still is? Do you not think a common Joe couldn't figure out that it's a dangerous place and should have appropriate security or get the hell out? The Brits, Red Cross and others sure did.

Are you a Democrat or American? What's more important to you? Participating in party shit slinging or the fact that Americans died. If Bush were still president would you have the same opinion? Think about it.

 

[TerryMathews]

Let me see if I understand you: If they weren't armed, they should have been sent into a dangerous and uncertain situation to possibly be killed in Benghazi? You feel that is a better course of action than staying in Tripoli.

No, you're missing his point completely. If these 4 men were not armed (think 4 UberNeumans), then how could they have been effective at reinforcing defenses at Tripoli?

It's a logical fallacy to assume they were unarmed in their mission was base defense.

 

[TerryMathews]

I'm operating under the fact that they were told to stay in tripoli because it was the better, smarter choice.

Yes. Do you recognize that they weren't the only ones defending Tripoli?

 

[ivwshane]

That's all great, but that should come second. I would think a name and organization would be tied to the buffoonery and that name and organization be held accountable. That "investigation" really was a facade. Mangers are responsible for their employees, generals are in charge of their soldiers and operations....you get the gist.

In this case I would blame Mrs. Clinton and her boss of which nothing has been acknowledged by them and no action has been taken against them...if not for outright lies then for utter and gross negligence. Nothing that happened in Libya should have came as a surprise. This wasn't the French embassy on a nice tree lined street. The Brits and others weren't so blind sided by the charged situation there and acted accordingly. Of course, they weren't running a political campaign at the time either.

Don't mistake this as GOP vs libs on my part anyway. I could care less what party affiliation was responsible...I and many others ( I like to call ourselves Americans) want to see accountability put into play...not a play on words and a distraction from that accountability.

Lol you asked for accountability I showed you that there has already been accountability and your response is, "the investigation was really a facade". Are you serious?

Please do tell us exactly why and how the investigation was a facade.


Lol you would go after Clinton? Of course you would because you are a partisan hack!

Give me a fucking break! Did you even read the report?

 

[ivwshane]

Yes. Do you recognize that they weren't the only ones defending Tripoli?

And...

 

[Angry Irishman]

Lol you asked for accountability I showed you that there has already been accountability and your response is, "the investigation was really a facade". Are you serious?

Please do tell us exactly why and how the investigation was a facade.


Lol you would go after Clinton? Of course you would because you are a partisan hack!

Give me a fucking break! Did you even read the report?

I really don't need to read the report especially if that is your definition of accountability...are you serious? If it was so conclusive why all the doubts from both sides and the secrecy? It was a facade simply because to this day no one has been held accountable...period. You make acquisitions about me that are quite factually wrong. I would want a republican Sec of State or President held accountable for the same negligence. It was and still remains a facade. There can be 100 investigations, if there is no accountability what's the point and where is the justice?

These are elected officials charged with very specific and important duties. It's already been shown if said individuals aren't forecasting dangers and acting appropriately people die. No big deal though; it's all just wrapped up with a report.🙄

 

[ivwshane]

I really don't need to read the report. If it was so conclusive why all the doubts from both sides and the secrecy? It was a facade simply because to this day no one has been held accountable...period. You make acquisitions about me that are quite factually wrong. I would want a republican Sec of State or President held accountable for the same negligence. It was and still remains a facade. There can be 100 investigations, if there is no accountability what's the point and where is the justice?

These are elected officials charged with very specific and important duties. It's already been shown if said individuals aren't forecasting dangers and acting appropriately people die. No big deal though; we'll just wrap it up with a report.🙄

Of course you don't need to read the report! That might burst the bubble you are living in!

You clearly aren't interested in the truth and are simply looking to hang someone you don't like.


Most people would look at someone who says the report is a facade but admits to not reading the report as an idiot. You seem to fully embrace that and wear your ignorance on your sleeve like a flag pin on a lapel, like its some kind of badge of honor or a symbol of your patriotism.

 

[Angry Irishman]

Of course you don't need to read the report! That might burst the bubble you are living in!

You clearly aren't interested in the truth and are simply looking to hang someone you don't like.


Most people would look at someone who says the report is a facade but admits to not reading the report as an idiot. You seem to fully embrace that and wear your ignorance on your sleeve like a flag pin on a lapel, like its some kind of badge of honor or a symbol of your patriotism.

Sorry to burst your bubble and not fit into the category of partisan hack you've accused me of being. I'm 100% confident that the report is just a stack of paper...no accountability = no real investigation. Also, most people would look at someone who believes such a facade of a report as a fool or naive or the guy who wrote it.

You also make a lot of assumptions and continue to be at best rude and insulting but it's not changing my position or the fact that Americans died due to negligence. You haven't made one comment or provided one smidgen of fact to counter this one simple truth....NO ONE has been held personally accountable. That's it, simple.

If I don't perform as a manger, I'm fired. If a soldier gets his/her folks hurt or killed due to negligence....their fired or worse. Do you think the position of POTUS or SECSTATE are any less liable for negligence on an international level?

One last comment, you have no right to question or judge my patriotism. You know nothing about me. For that, you should be ashamed.

 

[ivwshane]

Sorry to burst your bubble and not fit into the category of partisan hack you've accused me of being. I'm 100% confident that the report is just a stack of paper...no accountability = no real investigation. Also, most people would look at someone who believes such a facade of a report as a fool or naive or the guy who wrote it.

You also make a lot of assumptions and continue to be at best rude and insulting but it's not changing my position or the fact that Americans died due to negligence. You haven't made one comment or provided one smidgen of fact to counter this one simple truth....NO ONE has been held personally accountable. That's it, simple.

If I don't perform as a manger, I'm fired. If a soldier gets his/her folks hurt or killed due to negligence....their fired or worse. Do you think the position of POTUS or SECSTATE are any less liable for negligence on an international level?

One last comment, you have no right to question or judge my patriotism. You know nothing about me. For that, you should be ashamed.

I'm ashamed you continue to call into question the validity of the report and the supposed lack of accountability without having read it.

No one questioned your patriotism, I questioned your motives and I question your intelligence. You claim I have provided any facts, the facts are in the fucking report you refuse to read. What facts have you provided?

Has is one held accountable if no gross negligence is found? You are quick to point the finger at Clinton but what is the basis for that? Because your gut days she should be held responsible? Responsible for what?

You are like a dog chasing his tail, you are going in circles getting no where fast.

 

[HomerJS]

I'm ashamed you continue to call into question the validity of the report and the supposed lack of accountability without having read it.

No one questioned your patriotism, I questioned your motives and I question your intelligence. You claim I have provided any facts, the facts are in the fucking report you refuse to read. What facts have you provided?

Has is one held accountable if no gross negligence is found? You are quick to point the finger at Clinton but what is the basis for that? Because your gut days she should be held responsible? Responsible for what?

You are like a dog chasing his tail, you are going in circles getting no where fast.

But that's the M.O. of the right. Blind willful ignorance. "I don't care what a bi-partisan report says, I just want to get him"

 

[Londo_Jowo]

But that's the M.O. of the right. Blind willful ignorance. "I don't care what a bi-partisan report says, I just want to get him"

Or the MO of the left when a Republican in power.

 

[Angry Irishman]

I'm ashamed you continue to call into question the validity of the report and the supposed lack of accountability without having read it.

No one questioned your patriotism, I questioned your motives and I question your intelligence. You claim I have provided any facts, the facts are in the fucking report you refuse to read. What facts have you provided?

Has is one held accountable if no gross negligence is found? You are quick to point the finger at Clinton but what is the basis for that? Because your gut days she should be held responsible? Responsible for what?

You are like a dog chasing his tail, you are going in circles getting no where fast.

You are omitting one important other fact. Why is it that the Brits, the Red Cross and others made the correct decision to leave? You seem to think this all happened just out of the blue. It doesn't take a security expert to plan for the worst in a charged situation that was and still remains in Libya. It's funny how priorities get all mixed up and attention gets diverted when one is running in an election. I'm telling you I'd read the report and it would make no difference....it's an insult to anyone's intelligence, a waste of time. The fact that Americans are dead given the situation at the time equates to negligence...report's findings or not. Is it OK with you if I draw my own conclusions? you can do what ever the hell you want...I don't care and I sure don't have to satisfy your desire to change my position.

You are beginning to sound like a parrot who repeats what its heard or in this case read...your mimic is a fucking empty report. My motive or more appropriately wish is to have the truth or an acknowledgment of negligence presented to the American public and those poor souls families. You equate my resistance to your rational and acceptance of this report as a lack of or diminished intelligence on my part...who's acting unintelligent now? If anything your being way too trusting and quite frankly naive.

Why would I not point a finger at CLinton. Was she not Sec of State? Is she and her boss not ultimately responsible for the incident playing out the way it did? Again, this violence didn't happen just as coincidence or out of the blue.

You continue to worry more about defending those who are supposedly here to serve the American public instead of wanting what the majority of Americans want...real answers and real accountability. With these appointments come responsibility. With these jobs comes the potential of one being held accountable if one make bad calls.... that hasn't happened with a published report or otherwise....not yet.

You do in fact question my patriotism by making the previous statements. I've given much for this country and still realize and demand that this government is for the people...not the other way around.

Please don't bother to respond...I really don't want to hear it. You're not interested in a discussion as everything has to be a debate with you. If it doesn't go as you wish you continue to resort to insults.

 

[Angry Irishman]

But that's the M.O. of the right. Blind willful ignorance. "I don't care what a bi-partisan report says, I just want to get him"

One simple question...are you an American or a Democrat? It's really hard to tell what you consider to be the most important.

I'm far from being "of the right" despite your internet forum opinion. forgive me if I choose to believe "he" or "she" should be held accountable and not given a pass because of the findings of a government report. I suppose I'm getting old and stick to out of date notions of such things. I'm funny like that.