Two marines had to die b/c Obama is an idiot

We have a consulate in Libya. It's among Islam extremists so by definition it is a dangerous place to be. And Obama had just two marines guarding the place? They were killed trying to defend the place Rambo style. Thanks for looking out for our brave men Odumba.

Not sticking up for Obama here or anything, but I do believe it is the state departments job to make sure there is proper security at the embassy's, which would put the blame on Hillary Clinton. No doubt at the bidding of Obama, but the blame should lie on Hillary for following such ridiculous orders to begin with if said orders where given in the first place.
 
We have a consulate in Libya. It's among Islam extremists so by definition it is a dangerous place to be. And Obama had just two marines guarding the place? They were killed trying to defend the place Rambo style. Thanks for looking out for our brave men Odumba.

Not sticking up for Obama here or anything, but I do believe it is the state departments job to make sure there is proper security at the embassy's, which would put the blame on Hillary Clinton. No doubt at the bidding of Obama, but the blame should lie on Hillary for following such ridiculous orders to begin with if said orders where given in the first place.

It's the state departments job to directly monitor security; and I respect the case the HC may deserve more of the blame.

However, as we are in an election cycle and the commander in chief did negligently preside over these duties of security; that is why he is my focus. He had no excuse to not be more prepared for potential attacks on 9/11. And I'd add this; his response to the attack shows his disregard for putting a premium on security.
 
It's been hours and days since our last transaction and I can't comment on all of that (especially since it regards other convos)__ And btw, I haven't flipped on anything. I'm sure an idiot like you would label me a flip flopper though.

Here is the point__ Now first off; 9/11 is a very complex and debatable issue that you are trying to make uniformly synonymous to this issue and I find that just retarded. That's first off brah.

Second off__ This issue is very simple. Yes, Obama does have at the very least; over-arching responsibility for the safety of Americans around the world. We are learning of the various ways in which we knew that our interests around the world were in serious peril; and specifically, we now know that the State Department knew at least 48 hours in advance about the potential attack in Benghazi. Yet, we have learned of no extraordinary security measures being taken. And when the 3 AM phone call came, Obama slept. And before this information came out; the White House said there was no credible intelligence (a statement they can't walk back from w/o looking more foolish). That is not leadership; that is cover-up and only a partisan would claim otherwise.

-Of course 9/11 was a very complex issue. However, are you suggesting that the embassies attacks weren't?

-I didn't claim you were a flip-flopper, I suggest you go back and read any my post more carefully. I said if you were running for office you would be seen as such-because you ultimately are holding two different parties to two separate sets of standards. If "the buck stops here" with Obama-it stopped with Bush as well. Saying that 9/11 was "complex" is an attempt to cover up your basic argument against Obama (or a pathetic attempt of working out cognitive dissonance).

-If the FBI/CIA, etc. stops with Obama-as YOU stated, then it logically also stopped with Bush. That's my point. Nothing more, nothing less. No events like 9/11 or the embassy attacks are simple, or have an easy answer. Yet you quite easily and quickly point the finger at Obama, and not Bush. That's why you're not being taken seriously.

You're worried about setting a trap rather than debating the issue at hand. That much is evident.

And I 'easily point the finger' at Obama b/c he richly deserves blame. It is clear that he practiced great negligence and then engaged in a cover-up. It is also clear that he passed the buck when he blamed this on a movie when he knew damn well that it was a premeditated attack. It really makes you wonder whose side he's really even on.

You can accept sub-par leadership and clearly you're desire to deflect is indicative of that reality. But I will not accept it.

Nice attempt to deflect. First of all you didn't address any point that my post raised.

Secondly-I NEVER stated that I support Obama. I have almost 1,500 posts on USMB. I challenge you to find ONE, just ONE post where I state I will be voting/supporting for Obama.

I don't accept "sub-par leadership", not from the Democrats AND not from the Republicans.
 
^^^

I'm not especially interested in searching your 1,500 posts. If you wreen't making a partisan attack though, you shouldn't have confused this issue with the initial 9/11 attacks then. I honestly don't know what the point of your witch hunt was to dig in hopes of proving me a 'hypocrite.' But all in all you're just being lame and wasting my time by refusing the discuss the issue at hand.
 
I can't wait until Obama is defeated.
But by who?

If you think Romney would be a better President either you don't belong to the middle class or you are a brainwashed right-wing partisan.

I voted for Obama because the alternative was McCain. And while Obama has been a continuing disappointment in relation to his glowing promises, I believe he's done a much better job than McCain would have done. Because McCain is a Republican and the Republican Party is owned lock, stock, and barrel by the corporatocracy, which is determined to incrementally restore the Robber Baron era.

I will hold my nose and vote for Obama again, not because I think he's a good President, because he isn't, but mainly because it's critically important to prevent greater Republican dominance of the Supreme Court and other components of government. Briefly stated, Obama is the lesser of two evils -- unless one happens to belong to the financially elite ruling class.
 
romney-opp-5.jpg
 
We have a consulate in Libya. It's among Islam extremists so by definition it is a dangerous place to be. And Obama had just two marines guarding the place? They were killed trying to defend the place Rambo style. Thanks for looking out for our brave men Odumba.

Hey stupid.................the main embassy was in Tripoli where they DO have Marines.

Benghazi is an outpost of the main embassy, and no, it wasn't guarded by Marines, it was guarded by a security detail, of which 2 former SEALs turned security consultants were killed, and third death other than the ambassador was former Air Force who was an IT (computer) technician who was sent to Benghazi on temporary duty.

Might wanna check out some actual facts before going off half cocked like Mittens did.
 
We have a consulate in Libya. It's among Islam extremists so by definition it is a dangerous place to be. And Obama had just two marines guarding the place? They were killed trying to defend the place Rambo style. Thanks for looking out for our brave men Odumba.

Hey stupid.................the main embassy was in Tripoli where they DO have Marines.

Benghazi is an outpost of the main embassy, and no, it wasn't guarded by Marines, it was guarded by a security detail, of which 2 former SEALs turned security consultants were killed, and third death other than the ambassador was former Air Force who was an IT (computer) technician who was sent to Benghazi on temporary duty.

Might wanna check out some actual facts before going off half cocked like Mittens did.

If you're gonna call me stupid then at least don't be stupid yourself. At what point did I call the consulate the embassy? IDIOT.
 
Good thing there wasn't an entire platoon guarding the place.
Imagine all the threads calling the President of the United States
an Idiot for having an entire platoon guarding a house in Libya.
 
^^^

I'm not especially interested in searching your 1,500 posts. If you wreen't making a partisan attack though, you shouldn't have confused this issue with the initial 9/11 attacks then. I honestly don't know what the point of your witch hunt was to dig in hopes of proving me a 'hypocrite.' But all in all you're just being lame and wasting my time by refusing the discuss the issue at hand.

I discussed the issue at hand. You're blaming Obama for the killings at the embassies. Your main basis of argument is that the buck stops with him. Then when it comes to 9/11, you change your beliefs that the president is the ultimate authority under W's watch.

If I'm making a "partisan attack". If I was, I'm sure it would be fairly easy for you to cite anywhere in my posts where I am attacking the Republicans, or defending the Democrats.

All I've said in this thread is that you're holding two different parties to two different standards. And THAT'S being partisan. You can make up all of the excuses you want-but at the end of the day, that's all they are.
 
I will hold my nose and vote for Obama again

Please__ You'll stroke your cock while you tell us to vote for Obama.
If that's the best you can do your stupid ad hominems aren't worth the time and space they occupy. So off you go to my ignore list with the rest of the schoolyard shit-slingers.

Please__ Again. You were laying it on thick; telling us about how Obama was great for the middle class. Is that why 40 percent of family savings are gone? Is that why Obama did regulate it so money was lent to the middle class when he did his bailouts? Is that why more people dropped into poverty? I could've explained this to you; but it was obvious you were being a partisan hack.

You know damn well you ain't gonna hold your nose and vote for Obama. You're gonna hold it up and embrace his failure. He promised and he delivered in no sense of the word a-hole.
 

Forum List

Back
Top