So What do you Lefties Claim Happened in Benghazi?

[Sallow]

heck ya, im going to shift and deflect all the way to till im told why we had to spend 3 trillion and lose 4,000 troops.


Maybe when I get some answers, ill give a flying F about Libya. Till then, I don't care. And most of American agrees, so it seems.

Why don't you ask all those big name Dems who voted for the war in Iraq.

Would you like a list to help you get started?

They got intel that was filtered through the President. They were also told that voting "no" meant they were siding with the terrorists.

Unless of course..you think the history was different.

 

[Sallow]

heck, im still trying to see if we can get answers on Iraq. Since the right has no answers for their failed cowboy attempt in Iraq. I think Libya takes a back seat.

Oh, you mean that war obama is trying to take credit for, because it was a success? Clinton wanted to take sadam out, but he ruled by the polls and that wasn't popular. Heck I would think that the enviromentalist would've demanded he be taken out, after all he did lite those oil fields on fire, which did more harm to the enviroment than we have ever done. Oh yeah I forgot liberals are hypocrites, and have short memories.

No he didn't.

The PNAC was urging that to happen. Clinton resisted. He did however bomb Iraq several times.

 

[Conservative]

No conspiracy Joe.

Just questions about the handling of this affair. Help was formed and ready to respond. If Barry had given the order then those men would be alive.

They are dead, no help came, so no order given.

Not hard to figure out.

Again, Vince Foster redux...

Eight weeks later, you guys are insisting there was a force ready to respond.

The commanding general of AFRICOM was relieved of duty for trying to respond.

Hack!

actually, he wasn't. I personally debunked that yesterday in a different thread.

 

[GuyPinestra]

heck ya, im going to shift and deflect all the way to till im told why we had to spend 3 trillion and lose 4,000 troops.


Maybe when I get some answers, ill give a flying F about Libya. Till then, I don't care. And most of American agrees, so it seems.

Why don't you ask all those big name Dems who voted for the war in Iraq.

Would you like a list to help you get started?

They got intel that was filtered through the President. They were also told that voting "no" meant they were siding with the terrorists.

Unless of course..you think the history was different.

So you're claiming that Bush fudged the intel? Really?

Here are some big name Dems and their opinions BEFORE Bush took office.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

Now, how did Bush fudge THAT intel?

 

[GuyPinestra]

Again, Vince Foster redux...

Eight weeks later, you guys are insisting there was a force ready to respond.

The commanding general of AFRICOM was relieved of duty for trying to respond.

Hack!

actually, he wasn't. I personally debunked that yesterday in a different thread.

I missed it. Care to repeat it?

 

[Nole]

Why don't you ask all those big name Dems who voted for the war in Iraq.

Would you like a list to help you get started?

I dont need your list, I am fully aware. However, what I do want to know is why the Republicans, primarily the Bush clan had a hard on for Iraq that cost the US dearly in both human lives and materials. Talk about fraud waste and abuse.

Libya is a side show.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Why don't you ask all those big name Dems who voted for the war in Iraq.

Would you like a list to help you get started?

I dont need your list, I am fully aware. However, what I do want to know is why the Republicans, primarily the Bush clan had a hard on for Iraq that cost the US dearly in both human lives and materials. Talk about fraud waste and abuse.

Libya is a side show.

I was asking that same question 10 years ago, as I never bought into the BS about Iraq.

I think there were a couple 'reasons' for it.

1.) Saddam tried to assassinate Bush Sr.

2.) Oil.

Now, let's get back on subject, Benghazi.

What did Obama know, when did he know it and what did he DO??

 

[Nole]

seriously, Libya is not even important. Really, get over it.

 

[Moonglow]

In a phone interview with FRANCE 24 from Benghazi, a fighter with the Shuhada Libya al-Hurra brigade, who declined to be named, said he witnessed the assault on the US consulate and he was sure it was a planned attack.

“They knew the embassy (consulate) very well. They came with heavy weapons and they overtook the place very fast, it was very quick. You can’t do something like that without planning,” he said.

According to the Shuhada Libya al-Hurra brigade fighter, he was unable to get near the consulate premises due to the heavy fighting Tuesday night. Instead his group of fighters were stuck a few blocks away from the by-now burning building, vainly awaiting orders from their commanders.

“It was a mess, there was very heavy fighting. I didn’t understand what was going on. The people attacking the consulate looked like Islamists, they were not at all like the fighters from my katiba (brigade). It was obvious that they had planned this before and they now had a good pretext to attack the embassy (consulate),” he said.

Mystery surrounds attack on Benghazi

Reports of a second site - which some Libyan officials have called a “safe house” - emerged days after the attack, which killed the first US ambassador in more than 30 years.

In an interview with Reuters last week, Libyan Deputy Interior Minister Wanis Al-Sharif said hours after the attack on the consulate started, US commando units arrived from the capital of Tripoli to evacuate the consulate staff from a Benghazi safe house.

"It was supposed to be a secret place and we were surprised the armed groups knew about it,” Sharif told Reuters.

Sharif’s account of a US commando unit arriving from Tripoli, as well as the deaths of two US personnel in a second Benghazi location, matches the sequence of events relayed by the Dernaa Brigade commander to Le Figaro.

If true, the reports suggest that the assault had been planned in advance by a group – or groups - with access to sensitive security information.

 

[GuyPinestra]

seriously, Libya is not even important. Really, get over it.

Dozens of Americans abandoned by the State Department, 4 of them DEAD, and you claim they are "unimportant"?

You're a SICK MOTHERFUCKER!!

 

[Moonglow]

Now let us honor the dead with a moment of silence, and stop the bickering.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Chris Stevens is the New Vince Foster.

Someone who died tragically and the right is going to make a conspiracy about this, somehow, dammit!

Maybe we need to get Ken Starr to do another 70 million dollar Panty-sniffing investigation.

Chris Stevens is the New Vince Foster.....a tragic, yet unnecessary death (based on his pleas for help well in adavnce of danger) in most eyes but a sacrificial lamb nonetheless for the Left as they require a martyr to cover for incompetence and corruption.

Most Lefties believe the root cause of Benghazi to be a YouTube video in June that resulted in a spontaneous protest gone out of hand that coincidently took place on 9-11.

 

[blastoff]

Now, c'mon, admit it. It's threads like this one when we really really miss Truthmatters. I'm sure she could have explained it all in her normal intelligent and well thought out manner.

 

[del]

Now, c'mon, admit it. It's threads like this one when we really really miss Truthmatters. I'm sure she could have explained it all in her normal intelligent and well thought out manner.

as long as you're here, we get the same brilliant insights

 

[Dreamy]

Our consulate was attacked by terrorists.

I have not been keeping up on this story as much as some. Was some YT video and its producer blamed initially?

Also questions as to why in of all places, Libya, there was no Marine detachment?

Questions about the lack of face-to-face intelligence briefings by the President for the week leading up to Sept. 11. A rather odd time to go weak on intelligence briefings?

Has there been an attempt to cover up facts and details is what I think we all want to know or should want to know.

 

[depotoo]

Why don't you ask all those big name Dems who voted for the war in Iraq.

Would you like a list to help you get started?

I dont need your list, I am fully aware. However, what I do want to know is why the Republicans, primarily the Bush clan had a hard on for Iraq that cost the US dearly in both human lives and materials. Talk about fraud waste and abuse.

Libya is a side show.

I was asking that same question 10 years ago, as I never bought into the BS about Iraq.

I think there were a couple 'reasons' for it.

1.) Saddam tried to assassinate Bush Sr.

2.) Oil.

Now, let's get back on subject, Benghazi.

What did Obama know, when did he know it and what did he DO??

tell me what oil we got from Iraq. Just so you know. We didn't. They were given control over their oil.

 

[Sallow]

Why don't you ask all those big name Dems who voted for the war in Iraq.

Would you like a list to help you get started?

They got intel that was filtered through the President. They were also told that voting "no" meant they were siding with the terrorists.

Unless of course..you think the history was different.

So you're claiming that Bush fudged the intel? Really?
Here are some big name Dems and their opinions BEFORE Bush took office.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

Now, how did Bush fudge THAT intel?

Yes..Bush absolutely fudged the Intel.

And lied in the SOTU when he said that the Iraq was using Aluminium tubing to build centrifuges.

 

[insein]

Oh please.

Your the only one talking about Foster.

Eight weeks later and your still believing that there was no force that could have been deployed?

Hell. Europe was a couple of hours away. General Hamm was willing to repond. Do you think he would send the cook??

That fight lasted seven hours. Thats seven hours to deploy assistance. It never came because stand down were the only given. It was to "risky."

If it was Casey Ryback, they'd still be alive.

 

[Richard-H]

When Conservatives agree that all foreign embassies and consulates on U.S. soil should house a battalion of marines from the guest country, and that those soldiers will be immune from prosecution for violence committed against protesting Americans, then you can question the security at Benghazi.

Otherwise, STFU!

 

[Moonglow]

Now, c'mon, admit it. It's threads like this one when we really really miss Truthmatters. I'm sure she could have explained it all in her normal intelligent and well thought out manner.

as long as you're here, we get the same brilliant insights

In fact it reminds me of the chicken chasing a bug aggressively to consume the bug.


Nothing new just a bunch of character killers trying to kill Oblama.
reasonable conversation evades them.